NFL owners will consider the length of hair.....

[Gary]

NFL owners will consider the length of hair flowing from helmets



http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/news?slug=ap-nfl-hair&prov=ap&type=lgns

NEW YORK (AP)—Troy Polamalu might not have to worry about getting tackled again by his hair.
At their meetings in Palm Beach, Fla., next week, NFL owners will consider a proposal to ban players from having hair flow from their helmets below their names on the back of their jerseys.
That might affect Polamalu’s image, but help him on the field. Two seasons ago, the Pittsburgh safety with the long ponytail had his hair grabbed by Kansas City’s Larry Johnson and was thrown to the turf after an interception against the Chiefs.

The rule banning long hair on the field was proposed by Kansas City. It does not require players to get haircuts, but does “require them to tuck it up inside their helmets,” said Atlanta president Rich McKay, chairman of the league’s competition committee.

Polamalu is the best known of the players, most of them defensive backs, with hair flowing outside their helmets. Others include cornerbacks Al Harris of Green Bay and Mike McKenzie of New Orleans.
Because the rule was proposed by a team, the competition committee did not take a position on it. It will be discussed Monday with a package of other rules.

 

[Gary]

Doesn't the Samoan strength come from their hair supposedly? I don't personally know any Samoan, but I have heard they keep their hair long because they get their strength from their hair. Am I right in thinking this? And if it infringes on their beliefs I don't think we should force them to cut their hair.

 

[uolj]

And if it infringes on their beliefs I don't think we should force them to cut their hair.

It does not require players to get haircuts

 

[SLAB]

Thats just stupid.

And thats all I have to say about that.

 

[C Diddy]

I think this is ridiculous. There shouldn't be any rule governing what a player does with his hair. Players know the risk. Long hair means you may get pulled down by it. I think that's fair.

However, on ESPN, one writer is postulating that we shouldn't enforce a hair length rule, but should instead rescind the rule allowing players to tackle someone by their hair. I think that is even dumber.

So, if safety is the real issue in this debate, I'd rather the players tuck their hair in then make it a 15 yard penalty for hair tackles.

 

[pdxKingsFan]

I hate the long hair so I really don't care one way or the other. But it amazes me that this is a priority this offseason.

 

[Variant]

I'm not sure that it's a priority per say, just one of many things that have come up and will be dealt with. Just so happens someone decided to write an article about it.

While they'd never do it, I'm pretty sure the players would take care of the hair thing themselves if the league let people tackle someone by it.

 

[pdxKingsFan]

Actually there was a tackle or two in the last season where the hair was involved and I believe that is part of the reason for this. I believe it is legal, but I'm not going to check the rule book on that.

 

[C Diddy]

I'm not sure that it's a priority per say, just one of many things that have come up and will be dealt with. Just so happens someone decided to write an article about it.

While they'd never do it, I'm pretty sure the players would take care of the hair thing themselves if the league let people tackle someone by it.

Hair tackles are legal. Its part of the uniform. Just about every article talking about this potential rule change mentions that.

 

[Ryle]

Hair tackles are legal. Its part of the uniform. Just about every article talking about this potential rule change mentions that.

I'm pretty sure it's a penalty. I know someone got flagged awhile back when they pulled Ricky Williams' hair to bring him down.

 

[uolj]

Apparently it was proposed to enforce proper dress code: http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=3323895

If that's the only issue, then .