Thread: Brady Wants Rules Change to Protect Receivers Like Quarterbacks

"Quarterbacks get their legs protected. Defensive linemen get their legs protected. Linebackers get their legs protected. I don't see why a defenseless receiver shouldn't get his legs protected as well."

The topic was brought up to Brady in the context of a quarterback's responsibility to not put his pass-catchers in dangerous situations from an injury perspective. Brady had not been asked specifically about possible rule changes to protect defenseless receivers.
http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/14...tect-receivers

Asked about leading his receivers into tackles (a valid question given how fast he goes through WRs,) Brady suggested changing the rule to make those receivers immune to tackles. Meanwhile, somewhere, Earl Campbell sits in the wheelchair he's needed since his 40s, thinking, This is a bunch of BS right here....

This is because Brady sits down when he pees. See kids...females can make it in the NFL.

The good news is that after the NFLs finishes this transition to a handball league we can re-sign Plummer and stage international matches. Norways womens team won gold at the 2012 Olympics; maybe Brady can change citizenship and play for them. Though the fact his wife's the "tough" model in that family suggests it's not a gender issue.

Flag football

every time he gets hit he looks at the refs, like are you going to call that?

Completely shocked look when they dont.

Guy is like the Kobe of the NFL. But i actually have more respect for Kobe and he raped a chick.

SHould be pretty easy to tackle someone then. Can't hit them high, can't him them low. Seems fair.

But you all missed Brady's fine print - he only wants the rule to apply to the NE receivers.

"Make 'em wear a dress." - Jack Lambert.

So how exactly would you tackle a WR? A 6" portion of their midsection?

Originally Posted by chazoe60

So how exactly would you tackle a WR? A 6" portion of their midsection?

Idk. I'd say some of them are bigger than 6, some smaller.

Originally Posted by Dapper Dan

Idk. I'd say some of them are bigger than 6, some smaller.

Kick em in the Jimmy!

And fans wonder why the NFL is getting waterdowned with penalties. Everytime something doesn't go a player's way, they scream for rule changes.

Just take the defense off the field and let offenses run back and forth and see who can score the most.


Or even better...shut the front ******* door ya little bitch.

Don't throw it to a WR who's in place to get hit during or shortly after the catch.

Originally Posted by Ravage!!!

SHould be pretty easy to tackle someone then. Can't hit them high, can't him them low. Seems fair.

Brady actually made a valid point right after the Gronk hit, noting that he didn't think it was dirty, just an uintended consequence of rules against hitting receivers high; many DBs and LBs have been saying that ever since the defenseless player rule was added. But no, the solution isn't to just ban hitting them AT ALL as has largely been done for QBs: Just ban head shots and enforce the spearing ban. That's unlikely though; knees aren't costing the NFL a billion dollars and the next generation of players, but CTE is.

Irony: Tackling below the knees WAS illegal when the NFL was founded; wonder why that was....

Originally Posted by GEM

Just take the defense off the field and let offenses run back and forth and see who can score the most.

Seems to be the plan: Basketball scores are good for ratings, as is less talented teams beating more talented ones by throwing up a Hail Mary and waiting for a flag (not that's happened a lot recently, or even within the last 24 hours.)

Originally Posted by Dapper Dan

Don't throw it to a WR who's in place to get hit during or shortly after the catch.

That's evidently what the reporter who asked the question thought, but Brady seems to feel the presence and/or absence of rules—NOT Tom Terrific—got Gronk hurt.