That hit hasn't been legal under any rule set for as long as he's been alive. They play under NCAA rules in Texas HS so this is a definite targeting foul which has been in place for 6 or 7 years. That comes with an automatic ejection. In NFHS it's a foul for an illegal blind side block the past 2 years. It's also targeting under HS rules which is about 3-4 years old. Prior to that it was a foul for spearing because he used the crown of his helmet to initiate contact on an opponent. NFHS is not an automatic ejection but could be if the official determined it was flagrant and the opponent was defenseless. I think that would definitely be supported here. This was a viscous, violent hit against a defenseless player. I hope this isn't the type of block he initiates with the Bison.
Yeah, if we want to save this sport that we love so much, we need to stop glorifying plays like this. Yeah, I know, I like a good hard (legal) hit like anyone else but this type of violent, defenseless situation just doesn't have a place in the sport anymore, at least if we want moms to let their boys play in the future. I know that there are always those that complain about the pussification of the sport but the hard truth is that the longer we wait to adjust the game, the more chance there is to lose it entirely...or at least to something less recognizable. As a youth football coach, we're doing everything that we can to limit this type of contact.
Flame on...
Tony - feel free to delete or disengage this post if you'd like. I'd hate to completely ruin the young man's celebratory verbal thread.
Insert something clever here...
I dont see how the the player in pursuit is defenseless. If he wouldnt have been blocked he would have made the tackle. Its not like he was 10 yards away and not involved in the play which would have been a meaningless hit. The only thing I can see possibly wrong is he hit him too high according to todays rules. To me it was a good block. When in pusuit remember the old adage--keep your head on a swivel.
If we concentrated on the really important stuff in life, there'd be a shortage of fishing poles"
When you play football, you gotta like the taste of blood, And 50 percent of the time, it's your blood.
It is characteristic of the unlearned that they are forever proposing something which is old, and because it has recently come to their own attention, supposing it to be new.
"The best way to get the right answer on the internet is not to ask a question; it's to post the wrong answer."
Don't use the dictionary definition of defenseless. The rules specifically define it. If someone's attention is away from where the contact is coming, they are defenseless. In NCAA, technically the passer is defenseless for the remainder of the play after a change of possession. You can still block them, but personal fouls that reference a defenseless player apply to them. In this case the defender is running toward the sideline, but all of his attention is in the direction of the runner. The blocker knows this and is taking full advantage of that by blowing them up like this. There are several other ways he could have made this block and taken the defender out of the play. His intent here was to take him out of the game. Initiating hits with the crown of your helmet are more about protecting the blocker rather than the blockee. You are taking a direct hit to the brain and you could dangerously compress your spinal column.
I haven't gone back to look at the video, but I don't believe this was DJ using this in a promotional video. Wasn't it a local news station social media post? I'm just as critical on the officials if they didn't flag this as I am on him or making this block. They don't get much easier than this.
I'm sure it's illegal by rule now......but in terms of how I've understood the game there was nothing dirty about that hit at all. The guy was in position to make the tackle and was hit hard from the side. The way I was taught the game we even had a play designed where a WR would come in from the side to crack back on a LB and as long as your head was on the front side of the defender, a penalty wasn't called. As defenders we were taught it was your fault if you didn't keep your head on a swivel.
This was just a good football play IMO.
In terms of losing the game we love, from my perspective, it's already largely happened and I don't watch nearly much as I used to because of it.
Get your BB tickets now!!!
Whether legal or not, many of the parents that I talk to in Oregon, Michigan, and North Dakota (places I've lived and where I visit with some regularity with people that know about my youth coaching experience) are turned off from the sport from seeing that intense level of violent contact. It doesn't matter whether or not it is technically legal to a concerned mom when she sees it. Unfortunately, I just don't think that it ought to be coveted anymore.
Insert something clever here...
I can't imagine there was ever a time where a blocker could lower his head to hit an opponent in the head with the crown of his helmet regardless of whether or not he saw it coming. I wasn't officiating when you played, but if you got that information from your coaches there is a chance it wasn't correct. I hear coaches and players say today you can't have a block in the back if you get your head in front of the defender which has nothing to do with the rule.
With all the head injury issues rules makers have become much smarter on blind side hits, especially blow up hits. Not only could they cause head injuries on the hit or the defender's head hitting the turf. But blows to the body can cause internal organ injury. We had a milder hit of a kid on a similar play a few years ago. Luckily the trainers recognized something wasn't right so they took him to the hospital. It may have saved his life as his spleen had split in half. He was in the hospital for 8 days!
It is very easy for a blocker to take a defender out of the play on plays like this without jeopardizing taking him out of the game or more. Football is already a collision sport that is violent. Unnecessary violence should be removed when possible. Or we will lose this game entirely.