Is the big hit worth the risk of the flag?

I say, "yes." I'd rather have Whitner or any other player make a big, legal hit (like Whitner's hit Monday night) and risk the flag because it seems to set the tone. Our biggest strength (and that of SEA & AZ, for that matter) is the big, physical defense that intimidates offenses. I think we should keep being physical. I don't want the head shots or illegal hits, but the big ones like the one from Monday night should continue to be part of our identity. Thoughts?

Yes. It gives the other team something to think about. Nobody wants to get blown up, and this is when you see guys start to alligator arm and play scared.

It doesn't set a tone. You see how soft Whitner's hit was on Jackson when he scored. I think Whitner would have tried to lay him out again if it weren't for the penalty he already recieved. It's not like ATL layed down after that hit. What they need is for the refs to figure out what a legal big hit is vs an illegal big hit. But I think they are being told to flag everything.

see Aaron Hernandez in the '12 game.

next play:

Originally posted by lamontb:
It doesn't set a tone. You see how soft Whitner's hit was on Jackson when he scored. I think Whitner would have tried to lay him out again if it weren't for the penalty he already recieved. It's not like ATL layed down after that hit. What they need is for the refs to figure out what a legal big hit is vs an illegal big hit. But I think they are being told to flag everything.

i don't think whitner went soft on the TD. it was just an angle issue, i am not sure anyone makes that tackle on steven jackson.

No!! Wrap up!

Originally posted by 808niner4lyphe:
No!! Wrap up!

This. I really wish the nfl wouldn't flag big hits but they're going to from here on out-even if the hits are legal. SMH. It's better to just wrap up and use fundamental tackling.

Yes. The key is knowing when to go for the big hit, or the wrap up tackle. Whitner should have tried to wrap up Jackson on the TD run, but he absolutely made the right decision by laying him out on the previous play.

Whitner's hit on Jackson was perfect. Unfortunate that it was called a penalty. He could make the same hit next week and not be penalized. It's completely subjective with each ref crew. No consistency whatsoever.

I'll take my chances and keep telling Whitner to lay people out, because those hits are tone setters and can lead to drops, fumbles, limited YAC, alligator arms..etc.

Originally posted by SofaKing:
Yes. The key is knowing when to go for the big hit, or the wrap up tackle. Whitner should have tried to wrap up Jackson on the TD run, but he absolutely made the right play by laying him out on the previous play.

Whitner's hit on Jackson was perfect. Unfortunate that it was called a penalty. He could make the same hit next week and not be penalized. It's completely subjective with each ref crew. No consistency whatsoever.

I'll take my chances and keep telling Whitner to lay people out, because those hits are tone setters and can lead to drops, fumbles, limited YAC, alligator arms..etc.

This. I say take it to them.

Depends on the situation.

If it helps the opposition continue a drive or sets them up for a score than NO!

Winning is the Most important thing.

Worth it. NFL needs to compromise. Offensive players need something to thing about. Remember that hit by Whitner on Pierre in the playoffs a couple years ago. Come on, after that it was like over, sort of.

It's a clear advantage when you can mess with the minds of your opponents. The WeakHawks attribute Kam Chancellor's intimidation tactics (mainly the BIG HIT!) as a big reason for the success of their secondary.

No, everyone should just make half hearted dives at players legs like Eric Reid does.