• The Cycling News forum is looking to add some volunteer moderators with Red Rick's recent retirement. If you're interested in helping keep our discussions on track, send a direct message to @SHaines here on the forum, or use the Contact Us form to message the Community Team.

    In the meanwhile, please use the Report option if you see a post that doesn't fit within the forum rules.

    Thanks!

National Football League

Page 325 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Re:

King Boonen said:
This is a second warning:

Please keep all political/protest discussion in the appropriate politics thread, or at least out of this thread. I've just removed a couple of posts, we don't want to have to take further action.
I might be guilty so just for clarification:
-No posting about Trump or the reaction to him...check, got that.
-Can we still post about CK, or others here like we have for a yearish? Or MB recently?
-Or ZERO discussion about the topic?
Thanks!
 
Re: Re:

jmdirt said:
King Boonen said:
This is a second warning:

Please keep all political/protest discussion in the appropriate politics thread, or at least out of this thread. I've just removed a couple of posts, we don't want to have to take further action.
I might be guilty so just for clarification:
-No posting about Trump or the reaction to him...check, got that.
-Can we still post about CK, or others here like we have for a yearish? Or MB recently?
-Or ZERO discussion about the topic?
Thanks!
You may have been posting about CK for the past year without issue but since Donald Trump decided to involve himself in the matter it has become a much broader subject with very emotional feelings and opinions from both sides, making it a political topic to be commented on in the politics thread.

You guys can even create a new thread based on "NFL Players Taking a Knee" if you don't want to talk about it in the politics thread. The only problem with making a new thread is when the NBA kicks off in a couple weeks the NBA players are going to be doing the same thing.

The point I'm trying to make is that CK and MB comments are more than just the NFL, and it's entirely beyond the scope of this discussion thread.
 
After a drubbing at the hands of a very solid Denver defense, Dallas earned a hard fought win against the Cardinals, although it looked early on that they would be outpowered. The rush defense was very solid and the pass rush more effective than in recent times (Sean Lee and DeMarcus Lawrence had very good games). Elliot wasn't flying, but broke free a couple of times. Butler looks like he's now the go to guy for big plays, although the Bryant touchdown was crazy. I wasn't convinced it was a TD, but he caught the ball a dozen yards out with about half the Cardinals defense immediately between him and the goal-line.
 
Re: Re:

movingtarget said:
Archibald said:
movingtarget said:
49ers Rams game was entertaining. Horrible start to the game by Hoyer but he had a good second half. Goff seems to be moving in the right direction. Donald had a huge game for the Rams and Hyde was also good for the 49ers. 49ers defense seemed to be tired after the short turnaround re the Seattle game.
haven't been able to see the highlights yet, but 49ers appeared to finish strongly with a few scores towards the end - not sure if there was a chance they'd pinch it, though... They were down 41-26 at one point.
Rams now highest scoring offense of the league, which I wouldn't have expected at all
Rams Seahawks in 2 weeks will be very interesting

If you watch the full game or the last quarter re youtube you will see that the 49ers certainly did have a chance. A call by the refs killed their chance. One of those line ball decisions that tend to impact games. Entertaining game.
caught the 12min highlights - would love to have caught the whole thing.
That bomb and catch by watkins was impressive! Followed shortly by the SF one of a similar distance - can't remember the player's name...
No sign of any call or situation that killed the game, though
 
Re: Re:

Archibald said:
movingtarget said:
Archibald said:
movingtarget said:
49ers Rams game was entertaining. Horrible start to the game by Hoyer but he had a good second half. Goff seems to be moving in the right direction. Donald had a huge game for the Rams and Hyde was also good for the 49ers. 49ers defense seemed to be tired after the short turnaround re the Seattle game.
haven't been able to see the highlights yet, but 49ers appeared to finish strongly with a few scores towards the end - not sure if there was a chance they'd pinch it, though... They were down 41-26 at one point.
Rams now highest scoring offense of the league, which I wouldn't have expected at all
Rams Seahawks in 2 weeks will be very interesting

If you watch the full game or the last quarter re youtube you will see that the 49ers certainly did have a chance. A call by the refs killed their chance. One of those line ball decisions that tend to impact games. Entertaining game.
caught the 12min highlights - would love to have caught the whole thing.
That bomb and catch by watkins was impressive! Followed shortly by the SF one of a similar distance - can't remember the player's name...
No sign of any call or situation that killed the game, though

49ers receiver Taylor was called for pushing off the defender in the last few minutes. He caught the ball and the 49ers were in good position at first down but it was called back. There seemed to be nothing in it on multiple replays and the defender didn't react to the refs so it seems many people thought it was a tough call. But such is the NFL. Still the best game I have see this season just for the offense and entertainment. Garcon was the 49er who caught the long ball from Hoyer. Watkins, Gurley and Donald were outstanding for the Rams and Hyde and Garcon were also very good for the 49ers. Very good game for Goff as well.
 
How do they determine if "ratings are down" for NFL or any program/show? I don't have cable so they don't know what I'm watching, and even if you have cable do they know what you're watching? Unless its pay-per-view what do they use to calculate viewership? If its the little mailer cards, that's about as accurate/valid as me just making a random guess.

Anyway, the game tomorrow has potential to be good.

Interesting?
http://www.espn.com/blog/carolina-panthers/post/_/id/27367/how-a-200-device-is-providing-hope-in-reducing-brain-injury
 
Re:

jmdirt said:
How do they determine if "ratings are down" for NFL or any program/show? I don't have cable so they don't know what I'm watching, and even if you have cable do they know what you're watching? Unless its pay-per-view what do they use to calculate viewership? If its the little mailer cards, that's about as accurate/valid as me just making a random guess.

Anyway, the game tomorrow has potential to be good.

Interesting?
http://www.espn.com/blog/carolina-panthers/post/_/id/27367/how-a-200-device-is-providing-hope-in-reducing-brain-injury

Obviously stadium attendance is easy to count plus the NFL subscription packages. This link may help for TV ratings :

http://query.email.onesearch.org/Click?query=how%20are%20TV%20viewer%20ratings%20calculated%20%3F&type=other&i_id=email_4.0.16&uid=c763506c-7f19-5029-84c7-28188b40e525&sid=3614ef06-4cb9-419c-8ef8-06f368b65329&uc=20170604&local=0&dhn=Hard%20coded%21&paid=false&cid=21db9d46-1f61-457f-a7b2-85499b136ab3&position=12&provider=yahoo&page=&url=aHR0cHM6Ly9tZWRpdW0uY29tL2F1dG9ub21vdXMveW91LWxpa2VseS1oYXZlLW5vLWlkZWEtaG93LXR2LXJhdGluZ3Mtd29yay1hLWxvdC1tb3JlLXBlb3BsZS1hcmUtd2F0Y2hpbmctdGhhbi15b3UtdGhpbmstMTUyZTUxNjU3YTU=

Not very accurate in other words.
 
Jul 4, 2009
9,666
0
0
Visit site
....a sea-change in the Merikan sports culture ?....the question is are the drops in NFL ratings and ESPN audience related.....

The biggest business story in American sports this fall isn’t the declining NFL ratings or anything that’s happening on the field, court, or ice, it’s the collapse in ESPN subscribers, which reflect a larger trend in the collapse of cable subscribers in general.

Yesterday Nielsen announced its subscriber numbers for November 2016 and those numbers were the worst in the history of ESPN’s existence as a cable company — the worldwide leader in sports lost 621,000 cable subscribers. That’s the most subscribers ESPN has ever lost in a month according to Nielsen estimates and it represents a terrifying and troubling trend for the company, an acceleration of subscriber loss that represents a doubling of the average losses over the past couple of years, when ESPN has been losing in the neighborhood of 300,000 subscribers a month

https://www.outkickthecoverage.com/espn-loses-621-000-subscribers-worst-month-in-company-history-102916/

Cheers
 
Re: Re:

movingtarget said:
jmdirt said:
How do they determine if "ratings are down" for NFL or any program/show? I don't have cable so they don't know what I'm watching, and even if you have cable do they know what you're watching? Unless its pay-per-view what do they use to calculate viewership? If its the little mailer cards, that's about as accurate/valid as me just making a random guess.

Anyway, the game tomorrow has potential to be good.

Interesting?
http://www.espn.com/blog/carolina-panthers/post/_/id/27367/how-a-200-device-is-providing-hope-in-reducing-brain-injury

Obviously stadium attendance is easy to count plus the NFL subscription packages. This link may help for TV ratings :

http://query.email.onesearch.org/Click?query=how%20are%20TV%20viewer%20ratings%20calculated%20%3F&type=other&i_id=email_4.0.16&uid=c763506c-7f19-5029-84c7-28188b40e525&sid=3614ef06-4cb9-419c-8ef8-06f368b65329&uc=20170604&local=0&dhn=Hard%20coded%21&paid=false&cid=21db9d46-1f61-457f-a7b2-85499b136ab3&position=12&provider=yahoo&page=&url=aHR0cHM6Ly9tZWRpdW0uY29tL2F1dG9ub21vdXMveW91LWxpa2VseS1oYXZlLW5vLWlkZWEtaG93LXR2LXJhdGluZ3Mtd29yay1hLWxvdC1tb3JlLXBlb3BsZS1hcmUtd2F0Y2hpbmctdGhhbi15b3UtdGhpbmstMTUyZTUxNjU3YTU=

Not very accurate in other words.
That article makes TV rating even less valid and more useless/meaningless than I thought they were.
 
I'm very curious to see how KB and other mods react to this discussion of plummeting ratings/viewers. It sure seems political to me, and if that isn't obvious to everyone now, it certainly will be if/when a serious boycott of NFL games over the kneeling issue comes to pass. Likewise, in the basketball thread, I started a discussion about the FBI sting of basketball programs at several universities. That is a political story, and if that's not obvious, it will be when criminal proceedings begin.

I understand that the mods don't want opinions about Trump flying through sports threads, but politics and sports are rather heavily intertwined, so I'm not really sure how a line can be drawn. Here's an example that will probably never happen, but illustrates how difficult it could be to try to separate them. Suppose Trump managed to twist an owner's arm so that a key player on some team was cut. Obviously, you would have to allow discussion of the impact of that loss on that team, where the player might go next, and so on. But would you really try to steer this discussion clear of all mention of why the player was no longer on that team? If expression of a political opinion becomes a relevant factor in whether a player will remain on a team, how can we speculate on the future strength of teams without bringing politics into the discussion?

If this all sounds fanciful: One poll reports that 44% of respondents believe there should be “consequences” for the kneelers. What consequences? Just 4% of the 44% didn’t know or weren’t specific, but the other 40% said either fine them, suspend them or cut them.
 
Re:

Merckx index said:
I'm very curious to see how KB and other mods react to this discussion of plummeting ratings/viewers. It sure seems political to me, and if that isn't obvious to everyone now, it certainly will be if/when a serious boycott of NFL games over the kneeling issue comes to pass. Likewise, in the basketball thread, I started a discussion about the FBI sting of basketball programs at several universities. That is a political story, and if that's not obvious, it will be when criminal proceedings begin.

I understand that the mods don't want opinions about Trump flying through sports threads, but politics and sports are rather heavily intertwined, so I'm not really sure how a line can be drawn. Here's an example that will probably never happen, but illustrates how difficult it could be to try to separate them. Suppose Trump managed to twist an owner's arm so that a key player on some team was cut. Obviously, you would have to allow discussion of the impact of that loss on that team, where the player might go next, and so on. But would you really try to steer this discussion clear of all mention of why the player was no longer on that team? If expression of a political opinion becomes a relevant factor in whether a player will remain on a team, how can we speculate on the future strength of teams without bringing politics into the discussion?
Seems like you're trying to split hairs here.

I'm not going to spend much time on this because I'll never make everyone happy but I think you understood why we (mods) made the decision to keep politics out of the NFL thread. Yes, sports and politics inevitably mix and there's a line that has to be drawn to keep conversations flowing in the intended direction of a topic. For the "sports" threads the line was drawn when Trump entered the equation. I think it was a clear line and trying to predict where conversations are headed is doing nothing but creating a problem where a problem doesn't lay (yet).

If we get to that bridge, we'll cross it when it happens but for now let the conversation flow without being overly encumbered by moderation.
 
NFL (Oak vs Was) was still the #1 TV show for the week of September 18-24. And ESPN was the #1 cable network.

I have noticed that the streaming services that broadcast sports are marketing their products more during the games. So, more people could be choosing a different route to watching the game than traditional cable. Amazon Prime is airing the Packers game tonight and even Facebook live has been showing some of the UEFA games in the US.
 
Orthopedic surgeon Dr. David Chao doesn't think Andrew Luck will be ready to play until November:

https://horseshoeheroes.com/2017/09/27/orthopedic-surgeon-believes-andrew-luck-wont-return-november/

It's a strange situation with Luck. He supposedly tore the labrum in his right shoulder during the early part of the season in 2015 missing 2 games. Then he sustained a lacerated kidney in week #9 against Denver and was done for the season because of that injury. However, in the off season he didn’t have any surgery for the shoulder, instead opting for rehab.

He played the entire season in 2016 on the bad shoulder and produced some impressive stats with his second best season statistically setting career highs in yards per attempt (7.8) and completion percentage (.635).

He had labrum surgery in Jan of this year and after 7 months of the best rehab avaible to pro athletes, he may not play until November. Not good...may have not been a very successful surgery or a problem with the rehab phase.
 
Nomad said:
Orthopedic surgeon Dr. David Chao doesn't think Andrew Luck will be ready to play until November:

https://horseshoeheroes.com/2017/09/27/orthopedic-surgeon-believes-andrew-luck-wont-return-november/

It's a strange situation with Luck. He supposedly tore the labrum in his right shoulder during the early part of the season in 2015 missing 2 games. Then he sustained a lacerated kidney in week #9 against Denver and was done for the season because of that injury. However, in the off season he didn’t have any surgery for the shoulder, instead opting for rehab.

He played the entire season in 2016 on the bad shoulder and produced some impressive stats with his second best season statistically setting career highs in yards per attempt (7.8) and completion percentage (.635).

He had labrum surgery in Jan of this year and after 7 months of the best rehab avaible to pro athletes, he may not play until November. Not good...may have not been a very successful surgery or a problem with the rehab phase.

I wonder if the Colts have finally realized that they need much better protection for their QB. Some critics actually think the Colts have already derailed Luck's career.
 
Re:

Catwhoorg said:
The NFL needs a better ejection policy.


The hit on Adams should be punished by both immediate ejection and a fine and suspension.

That was blatant and unnecessary against a wrapped up completely defenseless player.
The ejection policy leaves too much of the discretion in the hands of the officials on the field. When all of those 4.5 guys are flying around its tough. In a case like last night, the booth should look at it, and then call the ref and inform him of what to do.

My first five thoughts were about Adams, but then I thought it looked like a dirty hit. Honestly Adams is lucky that the hit wasn't a few inches lower. I think that Trev will get fined, but I'm not sure that they will suspend him. I hope that Adams is OK, and can return soon.

Side note: did you see his helmet deform to absorb the impact?
 
Re: Re:

jmdirt said:
Catwhoorg said:
The NFL needs a better ejection policy.


The hit on Adams should be punished by both immediate ejection and a fine and suspension.

That was blatant and unnecessary against a wrapped up completely defenseless player.
The ejection policy leaves too much of the discretion in the hands of the officials on the field. When all of those 4.5 guys are flying around its tough. In a case like last night, the booth should look at it, and then call the ref and inform him of what to do.

My first five thoughts were about Adams, but then I thought it looked like a dirty hit. Honestly Adams is lucky that the hit wasn't a few inches lower. I think that Trev will get fined, but I'm not sure that they will suspend him. I hope that Adams is OK, and can return soon.

Side note: did you see his helmet deform to absorb the impact?
Agree with the Catwhoorg, and that it is a tough decision, but it shouldn't be a difficult decision. Hits to the neck/head area should result in automatic ejection and suspension (at least NCAA does that), regardless of intent. Trevathan may not have intended to hit Adams head, but the technique he used to tackle him precluded it.

So, tackling technique. Teach the correct tackling technique! It is obvious that Trevathan was aiming for the uppper torso area, the OLD school method - aiming for the breastplate, or the numbers. Fact is, tacklers tend to rise up a bit during the tackle, and in this Trevathan case the ball carrier was dropping down. So the end result if Trevathan was aiming for the numbers - as per old school technique - where do you think he is going to make contact? The neck/head area. Latest tackling technique, which is not really all that new, teaches "eyes to the thighs". In other words, tacklers should be taught and drilled on aiming for the thighs. Then when the tendency for rising during the tackle occurs, where will the tackler likely make contact? The mid-section. Trevathan was clearly not aiming for the thighs.

I'll go further. It is incumbent on players to tackle correctly, but it should be incumbent on coaches to teach correctly. Maybe coaches should be fined in addition. Or maybe players must attend a clinic to demonstrate they know the technique the League should be enforcing. An analogy, in NASCAR and thunderboats, the vehicles all have safety criteria that must be met. Why not make players demonstrate they can tackle correctly? Standardize it in other words. As for coaches, TSDOP - Teach it, Show it, Do it, Observe it, Praise it. Probably not enough of that going on.
 
Jul 4, 2009
9,666
0
0
Visit site
Re: Re:

on3m@n@rmy said:
jmdirt said:
Catwhoorg said:
The NFL needs a better ejection policy.


The hit on Adams should be punished by both immediate ejection and a fine and suspension.

That was blatant and unnecessary against a wrapped up completely defenseless player.
The ejection policy leaves too much of the discretion in the hands of the officials on the field. When all of those 4.5 guys are flying around its tough. In a case like last night, the booth should look at it, and then call the ref and inform him of what to do.

My first five thoughts were about Adams, but then I thought it looked like a dirty hit. Honestly Adams is lucky that the hit wasn't a few inches lower. I think that Trev will get fined, but I'm not sure that they will suspend him. I hope that Adams is OK, and can return soon.

Side note: did you see his helmet deform to absorb the impact?
Agree with the Catwhoorg, and that it is a tough decision, but it shouldn't be a difficult decision. Hits to the neck/head area should result in automatic ejection and suspension (at least NCAA does that), regardless of intent. Trevathan may not have intended to hit Adams head, but the technique he used to tackle him precluded it.

So, tackling technique. Teach the correct tackling technique! It is obvious that Trevathan was aiming for the uppper torso area, the OLD school method - aiming for the breastplate, or the numbers. Fact is, tacklers tend to rise up a bit during the tackle, and in this Trevathan case the ball carrier was dropping down. So the end result if Trevathan was aiming for the numbers - as per old school technique - where do you think he is going to make contact? The neck/head area. Latest tackling technique, which is not really all that new, teaches "eyes to the thighs". In other words, tacklers should be taught and drilled on aiming for the thighs. Then when the tendency for rising during the tackle occurs, where will the tackler likely make contact? The mid-section. Trevathan was clearly not aiming for the thighs.

I'll go further. It is incumbent on players to tackle correctly, but it should be incumbent on coaches to teach correctly. Maybe coaches should be fined in addition. Or maybe players must attend a clinic to demonstrate they know the technique the League should be enforcing. An analogy, in NASCAR and thunderboats, the vehicles all have safety criteria that must be met. Why not make players demonstrate they can tackle correctly? Standardize it in other words. As for coaches, TSDOP - Teach it, Show it, Do it, Observe it, Praise it. Probably not enough of that going on.

....yep, looks good on paper....but here is the thing ( and yeah we were taught both techniques ) it depends who you are hitting ( do remember that tackling involves a hitter and a hittee... this is the hitter perspective from the defensive backfield )....so if you are hitting some spindly wide receiver going low is great, but going low also risks blowing out his knees, and besides you would like to hit him high to try to separate him from the ball ....now if you are trying to bring down that fullback load tearing out of the backfield, going low risks getting a knee to your head, which is real ideal to produce one wicked "bellringer".....

....bottom line, no easy solutions....and the situation is so fast and so fluid, all you can hope for is a nice simple stop with some pop....you don't want to get hurt and he may think twice about going in your area again....and if you have your mind on hurting people that is easy to do with either technique ( especially if you have the size and speed to produce some good MxV ...knee or head, it don't matter if you hit it hard enough ...they are gonna get carried off the field...)....

...funny thing my time on the field was cut short by the low type of hit you call New School( it damaged a knee ) ( btw played both ways, free safety on one side of the ball, split end on the other....so had it coming and going...)....

....I think it has more to do with motivation than anything else...like if the other guys don't want to play nice, you make them pay often happens....and it can get real unpretty real fast....its a violent game even at the best of times....bottom line would never play it if I knew then what I knew when I left....

Cheers
 
Yep. All good points there blutto. OFC players all live with understanding that the next play could be their last due to injury. But knowing what we know now about head trauma/CTE, as a player I'd rather lose my career due to knee injury (& I did) than concussion. The concussion scenario is a scary one. With a knee you know what it is and can rehab. With head injury, serious acute or chronic, we really don't know what to expect or when exactly to expect it. Can live without knees. Not so well without the head.
 
Re: Re:

blutto said:
on3m@n@rmy said:
jmdirt said:
Catwhoorg said:
The NFL needs a better ejection policy.


The hit on Adams should be punished by both immediate ejection and a fine and suspension.

That was blatant and unnecessary against a wrapped up completely defenseless player.
The ejection policy leaves too much of the discretion in the hands of the officials on the field. When all of those 4.5 guys are flying around its tough. In a case like last night, the booth should look at it, and then call the ref and inform him of what to do.

My first five thoughts were about Adams, but then I thought it looked like a dirty hit. Honestly Adams is lucky that the hit wasn't a few inches lower. I think that Trev will get fined, but I'm not sure that they will suspend him. I hope that Adams is OK, and can return soon.

Side note: did you see his helmet deform to absorb the impact?
Agree with the Catwhoorg, and that it is a tough decision, but it shouldn't be a difficult decision. Hits to the neck/head area should result in automatic ejection and suspension (at least NCAA does that), regardless of intent. Trevathan may not have intended to hit Adams head, but the technique he used to tackle him precluded it.

So, tackling technique. Teach the correct tackling technique! It is obvious that Trevathan was aiming for the uppper torso area, the OLD school method - aiming for the breastplate, or the numbers. Fact is, tacklers tend to rise up a bit during the tackle, and in this Trevathan case the ball carrier was dropping down. So the end result if Trevathan was aiming for the numbers - as per old school technique - where do you think he is going to make contact? The neck/head area. Latest tackling technique, which is not really all that new, teaches "eyes to the thighs". In other words, tacklers should be taught and drilled on aiming for the thighs. Then when the tendency for rising during the tackle occurs, where will the tackler likely make contact? The mid-section. Trevathan was clearly not aiming for the thighs.

I'll go further. It is incumbent on players to tackle correctly, but it should be incumbent on coaches to teach correctly. Maybe coaches should be fined in addition. Or maybe players must attend a clinic to demonstrate they know the technique the League should be enforcing. An analogy, in NASCAR and thunderboats, the vehicles all have safety criteria that must be met. Why not make players demonstrate they can tackle correctly? Standardize it in other words. As for coaches, TSDOP - Teach it, Show it, Do it, Observe it, Praise it. Probably not enough of that going on.

....yep, looks good on paper....but here is the thing ( and yeah we were taught both techniques ) it depends who you are hitting ( do remember that tackling involves a hitter and a hittee... this is the hitter perspective from the defensive backfield )....so if you are hitting some spindly wide receiver going low is great, but going low also risks blowing out his knees, and besides you would like to hit him high to try to separate him from the ball ....now if you are trying to bring down that fullback load tearing out of the backfield, going low risks getting a knee to your head, which is real ideal to produce one wicked "bellringer".....

....bottom line, no easy solutions....and the situation is so fast and so fluid, all you can hope for is a nice simple stop with some pop....you don't want to get hurt and he may think twice about going in your area again....and if you have your mind on hurting people that is easy to do with either technique ( especially if you have the size and speed to produce some good MxV ...knee or head, it don't matter if you hit it hard enough ...they are gonna get carried off the field...)....

...funny thing my time on the field was cut short by the low type of hit you call New School( it damaged a knee ) ( btw played both ways, free safety on one side of the ball, split end on the other....so had it coming and going...)....

....I think it has more to do with motivation than anything else...like if the other guys don't want to play nice, you make them pay often happens....and it can get real unpretty real fast....its a violent game even at the best of times....bottom line would never play it if I knew then what I knew when I left....

Cheers

Yeah those chop tackles around the ankles or tackles from behind when the QB is unsighted often do more damage because they are unexpected. In body contact sports there is only so much they can do. If a player is already committed to a tackle there shouldn't be a penalty but if the hit is not only high but late there should be suspensions like there is in sports like Rugby Union and Rugby League. Any hits above the shoulders were outlawed in Rugby League years ago but if a player falls into a another player and is hit in the head as is sometimes seen there is usually no penalty. Most serious injuries in League and Union seem not to come from one on one hits, it's usually a collapsed scrum or ruck where a player gets his neck damaged or a gang tackle where a player is lifted off the ground and falls on his head or neck. Those tackles have also now been banned. Of course there are no helmets either in those sports although some players wear headgear which is light and probably doesn't absorb much impact. Concussions more often than not come from a player running into a knee or a hip or having their head hit the ground.