Jerry Jones was in a rush Sunday afternoon, which almost always seems to be the case for the Dallas Cowboys owner. This time, hot tea in hand, he was eager to get on with the discussion during one of the committee meetings held in advance of the full-fledged NFL meetings that start today at the plush Arizona Biltmore.
It was the health and safety advisory committee. Jones peeked into room and saw San Francisco 49ers owner John York sitting at a conference table.
"Yup," Jones said. "Right room."
York is chairman of the committee. I asked Jones if he heard how his former star, Emmitt Smith, bashed the proposed rule that would prevent players from using the crown of their helmet in the open field. He did.
"This rule wouldn't apply to Emmitt," Jones said. "He was never the type to use his head or neck. We studied some of Emmitt's runs as part of this. He probably doesn't understand that we aren't trying to do anything that would have changed the way he played."
It isn't being perceived that way. The rule seems to be aimed at running backs, and the disapproval from them is getting louder by the minute. Matt Forte, the Chicago Bears running back, tweeted that "it might be the most absurd suggestion for a rule change that I've ever heard."
Jerome Bettis, the probable future Hall of Fame back known as "The Bus," told USA TODAY Sports, "The problem is that you lower your head when you lower your shoulder. That's how you protect yourself. If you run exposed, you're going to get hurt."
Smith, the NFL's all-time leading rusher, told Dallas radio station 105.3 The Fan that it sounds like the proposed rule is made up by people who never played the game. "If I'm a running back and I'm running into a linebacker, you're telling me I have to keep my head up so he can take my chin off?" Smith said. "You've absolutely lost your mind."
The rules-making competition committee is proposing the rule, which needs 24 votes from owners for passage. Jones thinks it will pass. But this is another hot-button issue that illustrates the growing pains of a league trying to change the culture while improving safety.
It's quite a pickle. The league gets criticized for not doing a better job of protecting defensive players with the same vigor it has for quarterbacks and receivers. But as soon as a rule is proposed to protect defenders (in addition to another proposal that would eliminate the type of peel-back block that left Houston Texans linebacker Brian Cushing with a torn anterior cruciate ligament), the NFL is criticized by offensive-minded players or ex-players.
At the same time, the league must be sensitive to fears about the effects of head injuries as more research emerges about the long-term impact of concussions.
And then there's the massive class-action lawsuit staring the league in the face, brought by more than 4,000 former players who allege the NFL was negligent by not warning them of the dangers and ramifications of head injuries.
In this environment, the NFL has to be proactive. In addition to its stated mission to better protect players, the league is pressured to protect itself in the legal arena and in the court of public opinion, which is essential to the popularity of the sport.
Cincinnati Bengals coach Marvin Lewis, a member of the competition committee, said the proposed rule emphasizes what players are taught at a young age -- to keep their heads up, to see what they hit.
Rich McKay, the
Atlanta Falcons president who is chairman of the competition committee, said discussion about the rule was inspired by doctors who maintained through research that injuries outside the tackle box could be reduced.
"We are looking for the obvious foul where the player decides to lower his head and deliver a forcible hit with the top crown of his helmet," McKay said. "We are focused on the open field. That is why we moved it outside of the tackle box."
Outside the tackle box, but inside the debate room.
"I applaud trying to make the game safer," Bettis said. "But at some point, the game's got to be the game."
