STILLBUSTER
Well-Known Member
As you prolly know, in response to the concussion epidemic and the emphasis on targeting calls, a couple tackling techniques have evolved (actually, been reintroduced) as dramatic improvements in safety to both the tackler and the ball carrier, while still preserving the essence of tackle football.
The NFL "heads up" technique involves breaking yourself down, squaring up on the ball carrier and driving up / through the upper body with your arms -- sort of like an aggressive bear hug. The Seahawks "Hawk" technique emphasizes head to the side, driving the shoulder through the waist / thighs of the ball carrier and rolling him to the ground - basically, rugby-style tackling.
Game after game this season, as I watch so many missed / shedded tackles at so many positions, I wonder if it might be due to the guys transitioning to these "new" techniques?
For example, how often do we see Bower, Niemann and, especially, Snyder initiate contact with a solid pop, only to roll off the ball carriers legs or bounce off due to failure to wrap and secure? It seems to me there are also an unusually high number of yards after contact. These "issues" would all be consistent with a rugby-style tackling attempt. Thing is, in rugby, yards after contact are no big deal, while in football - where down and distance are in play - they decide a game.
As for the "heads up" technique. This might explain why it looks like guys are hesitant before making contact -- they're going into a breakdown / square up while the ball carrier is still running full-steam ahead -- giving the appearance that they are "letting" the ball carrier initiate contact rather than attacking. Because the point of contact is higher on the body, this might also explain Jewell's "targeting" calls, well, at least in the Wisconsin game (the first one was just a cheap shot). Again, yards after contact are much more likely. Who hasn't been taught to NOT tackle high or you'll get trucked?
Regardless, it seems that both techniques require powerful upper body strength coupled with much more precise leverage to successfully stop the ball carrier. I'm not so sure that Iowa has those physical attributes at the OLB's and Safeties, where we've seen so many "whiffs". Not to mention, today's RB's are just too powerful, especially behind speed and agility, that these techniques are just inherently less effective without proper execution.
I know I've been guilty of knee-jerk criticism of the entire defense's tackling "issues". Not trying to excuse all but a wondering if maybe this explains some of the prevalence of it?
One step further, the game will be expected to continue to evolve toward better, safer techniques. Given the inherent advantage the ball carrier has and the inevitable yards after contact by sheer inertia, I wonder if at some point the downs might be reduced to 3 or the distance increased to 15?
The NFL "heads up" technique involves breaking yourself down, squaring up on the ball carrier and driving up / through the upper body with your arms -- sort of like an aggressive bear hug. The Seahawks "Hawk" technique emphasizes head to the side, driving the shoulder through the waist / thighs of the ball carrier and rolling him to the ground - basically, rugby-style tackling.
Game after game this season, as I watch so many missed / shedded tackles at so many positions, I wonder if it might be due to the guys transitioning to these "new" techniques?
For example, how often do we see Bower, Niemann and, especially, Snyder initiate contact with a solid pop, only to roll off the ball carriers legs or bounce off due to failure to wrap and secure? It seems to me there are also an unusually high number of yards after contact. These "issues" would all be consistent with a rugby-style tackling attempt. Thing is, in rugby, yards after contact are no big deal, while in football - where down and distance are in play - they decide a game.
As for the "heads up" technique. This might explain why it looks like guys are hesitant before making contact -- they're going into a breakdown / square up while the ball carrier is still running full-steam ahead -- giving the appearance that they are "letting" the ball carrier initiate contact rather than attacking. Because the point of contact is higher on the body, this might also explain Jewell's "targeting" calls, well, at least in the Wisconsin game (the first one was just a cheap shot). Again, yards after contact are much more likely. Who hasn't been taught to NOT tackle high or you'll get trucked?
Regardless, it seems that both techniques require powerful upper body strength coupled with much more precise leverage to successfully stop the ball carrier. I'm not so sure that Iowa has those physical attributes at the OLB's and Safeties, where we've seen so many "whiffs". Not to mention, today's RB's are just too powerful, especially behind speed and agility, that these techniques are just inherently less effective without proper execution.
I know I've been guilty of knee-jerk criticism of the entire defense's tackling "issues". Not trying to excuse all but a wondering if maybe this explains some of the prevalence of it?
One step further, the game will be expected to continue to evolve toward better, safer techniques. Given the inherent advantage the ball carrier has and the inevitable yards after contact by sheer inertia, I wonder if at some point the downs might be reduced to 3 or the distance increased to 15?
