Bill Polian says NFL non hitting practices are not good

[Rebel10]

He said on ESPN that hey are causing more season ending injuries. Also he said that they are not getting players ready for the game.

[blackoutpony]

Couldn't agree more

[Lefty]

There are a hell of a lot of coaches and GMs who think they are good. It's OK to have more than one school of thought.

[Rebel10]

There are a hell of a lot of coaches and GMs who think they are good. It's OK to have more than one school of thought.

I haven't read any article saying a GM or coach think it's good. Were you making that up as an emotional response as a hard care JJ support or can you cite some articles to back up your statement?

[Grant Carter]

There are a hell of a lot of coaches and GMs who think they are good. It's OK to have more than one school of thought.

I haven't read any article saying a GM or coach think it's good. Were you making that up as an emotional response as a hard care JJ support or can you cite some articles to back up your statement?

If polian is commenting on the impacts of teams practicing without hitting then it is implicit in the statement that teams are practicing without hitting. If teams are practicing without hitting then it is a safe bet that their coaches and GMs like practicing without hitting.

If you disagree, please explain how we should interpret polian's comment if no teams are practicing without hitting. How could he be seeing the negative effects if it is not happening?

[blackoutpony]

There are a hell of a lot of coaches and GMs who think they are good. It's OK to have more than one school of thought.

I haven't read any article saying a GM or coach think it's good. Were you making that up as an emotional response as a hard care JJ support or can you cite some articles to back up your statement?

If polian is commenting on the impacts of teams practicing without hitting then it is implicit in the statement that teams are practicing without hitting. If teams are practicing without hitting then it is a safe bet that their coaches and GMs like practicing without hitting.

If you disagree, please explain how we should interpret polian's comment if no teams are practicing without hitting. How could he be seeing the negative effects if it is not happening?

The new CBA limits the amount of hitting that teams can do. They don't have a say in it

[Rayburn]

The new CBA limits the amount of hitting that teams can do. They don't have a say in it

Right. it's not that the coaches and GMs like it, its the fear of concussions that has prompted this policy.

[Mexmustang]

Help me understand, when SMU practices and everyone has their pads on the only restriction is not to take player to the ground? They are not going at 75% speed, but going full speed, just not taking a receiver's head off when they come across the middle or forcing a ball carrier down to the ground. What am I missing? Driving through on the tackles? Looks an awful like "contact" to me.

[mrydel]

Help me understand, when SMU practices and everyone has their pads on the only restriction is not to take player to the ground? They are not going at 75% speed, but going full speed, just not taking a receiver's head off when they come across the middle or forcing a ball carrier down to the ground. What am I missing? Driving through on the tackles? Looks an awful like "contact" to me.

Then obviously you have never played the game. If you are going full speed to a runner in practice and hit that runner but do not take him down, what has to be done? You have to start to slow up in order not to drive through him. So yes they are playing at less than full speed. Maybe not 75% but even 90% puts you in bad position. Not only does that not prepare you properly for full speed in the game which leads to missed tackles and bad angles, but it sets you up for injury by not being in the right place when you need to be during a game because you could very likely playing against players that have been practicing at full speed and have that extra half step on you.

[Mexmustang]

First, I did play--just wasn't very good.

Second, the line is hitting just as hard and just as fast. But, what Bill Polian was talking about was 'non-hitting' practices--those sound more like "walk throughs" in shorts, rather than contact without taking someone down.

There was always some High School Harry trying to play in the Rose Bowl in those practices, as one of those human tackling dummies, it didn't seem like 75%.

[mrydel]

I am just a firm believer in full contact in the spring, in the 2 a days, and one day a week during the season at least until the second half of the season. I do not advocate a lot of it but rather enough to prepare the players for game conditions. I certainly do not have any problem with putting a "do not hit" jersey on the QB or any player that is slightly injured but still practicing, or a good player with no back up.

Most every coach will tell you that the most progress made during a season is between the first and second game. That has a lot to do with the adjustments that are made in game speed from practice speed. Those that have gone full speed during practice will be just that much more ahead.

[PonySnob]

Most every coach will tell you that the most progress made during a season is between the first and second game. That has a lot to do with the adjustments that are made in game speed from practice speed. Those that have gone full speed during practice will be just that much more ahead.

Hello Montana St!!!

[Mexmustang]

Really not taking sides here. We had full contact scrimmage 3x's a week--which was counter productive. We never had you "couldn't take a player down". It seems different from half speed and far different from half speed--i never even heard of 75% speed. Non-contact is neither-it means no contact, period. I will say this. In the past several years we were paper thin in depth- every starter had no replacement. I believe our bowl record reflects that-- when we had time to heal we were a pretty good football team.

[Mexmustang]

Sorry about my text--i am sitting in a bar in Idaho Falls waiting for the annual duck race to begin. You buy a plastic duck or a six pack and win a truck, extra. I was just on a three day float/fishing down the Snake River.

It seems a good bet win win against Tech and then lose to Montana State. They are good and this is their Super Bowl. Most fans here are Boise St., BYU or Montana State.

May the best duck win

[Rich K]

Sorry about my text--i am sitting in a bar in Idaho Falls waiting for the annual duck race to begin. You buy a plastic duck or a six pack and win a truck, extra. I was just on a three day float/fishing down the Snake River.

It seems a good bet win win against Tech and then lose to Montana State. They are good and this is their Super Bowl. Most fans here are Boise St., BYU or Montana State.

May the best duck win

I'm glad you mentioned you are sitting in a bar as I don't think you would have any problem finding people to take your bet, especially if you parlay it! SMU over Tech and then MSU over SMU, if I was a wagering man I'd bet against that! I disagree that this is MSU's Super Bowl, hopefully that game will be in Frisco Texas in January 2014. Also the Cat/Griz game is much more important than this game. It is kind of sad that you're sitting in a bar just down the road from Big Sky Conference member Idaho State and didn't notice any fans, they are going through some hard times these days.