Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Pro Quality. Fan Perspective.
Login-facebook
Around SBN: This Week in GIFs: Olympics Edition

Chris Owusu - why does this keep happening?

Editor's Note: I'm moving this to the front page because it's a hot topic of discussion and I thought this was a very measured take. Thanks, RickySteals. Please leave your own thoughts in the comments. 

I have to admit, I cringe a bit every time Owusu takes a hit after a catch - it sure seems like he has a knack for being involved in the kind of hit we say yesterday at OSU. That hit may well have ended his career (at the very least, he should talk to doctors and think long and hard about his future).

I think it is worth asking - why does this keep happening to Owusu? Is it bad luck, or something else?

Star-divide

It is far too simple to say it is any one factor - I think there are several at play here... however, there are some things we can identify as contributors.

  1. Bad luck - Some of it has to be bad luck.
  2. Owusu's style of play - Owusu is a fast player, especially over the first yard or so. It sure seems to me that he also has a tendency to catch the ball while turning up field to run (something that may also contribute to some of his drops over the years). When he makes a move like that and attempts to accelerate, he does lower his head a bit which puts it out in front of him, making it more likely that defenders playing for the big hit will end up getting his head. He is also so fast in making that move that defenders may not have a chance to react in time.
  3. Owusu's reputation - If I'm a defensive coordinator and I'm looking for a weakness in his game, I think one that stands out is this: If you hit him hard, he seems more likely to drop a pass. I think that has to be part of the game plan against him.

    These two factors are both a part of Owusu's game, but I think the following item is the one that explains a lot of what we've seen, especially in the last two weeks:

  4. The league's handling of helmet-to-helmet hits - In the last two weeks we have seen Owusu get hit in the head and both hits resulted in "controversial" penalties. I use the quotes because there should be no controversy. As the rules are written, both of the hits should've resulted in penalties. However, there have been three flagrant hits to the heads of Stanford players dating back to last season's Oregon game that didn't draw penalties and (in one case) possibly affected the outcome of a game.

What does all of this add up to? Well, we have a player with a playing style that puts his head out in front and a reputation for dropping the ball when hit hard. We also have a league that has created an environment where a hard hit that happens to drill the player in the head isn't going to draw a penalty. If you knock the guy out, he may cough up a ball that you can potentially use to change a game, with little odds of repercussions. Throw a little bad luck into this situation and I think it was only a matter of time before Owusu got hit again.

Now in the last couple of weeks we've seen a change. The helmet-to-helmet hits are finally drawing penalties (and suspensions). Hopefully coaching staffs take note and start coaching kids on how to hit hard without hitting heads. Unfortunately, I think this change is too late for Owusu. I sure hope in the end he is okay... 

What do you guys think - is there anything going on here besides bad luck?

Poll
What do you think? What factor is most responsible for all of the hits to the head?
Bad luck, plain and simple.
21 votes
Owusu's style of play and reputation
40 votes
The league's uneven enforcement
12 votes
All of the above
58 votes
Something else
9 votes

140 votes | Poll has closed

Tweet Comment 80 comments  |  0 recs  | 

Do you like this story?

Around SB Nation

Who Will Be 2012's Marques Colston or Donald Driver?

Nov 2011 from Mocking The Draft - 15 comments

Q&A; With The Daily Axe

Nov 2011 from Building The Dam - 1 comment

Comments

Display:

I voted All of the Above

I think it’s a sprinkling of everything, but If I had to pick a single factor, I’d probably go with bad luck. Owusu runs a lot of routes that leave him susceptible to these types of hits. He certainly appeared to dip his head on yesterday’s hit, but don’t other receivers? That seems like a natural thing to do when you’re turning around and getting ready to charge up field. I guess I’ll pay attention during today’s NFL games.

Like a lot of you have pointed out, the way the rule is written, there is NO QUESTION that a penalty should have been called on the play.

by Scott Allen on Nov 6, 2025 11:59 AM PST reply actions  

Despite my attempt to be measured about this...

The more I think about it, the more the uneven application of the rule in the past seems like a factor here. The message sent by the league’s officials in the past was that it was open season with no repercussions. Heck, even if the league had issued suspensions after the fact, that would’ve made a difference.

Don’t forget - Owusu’s first concussion was the play that turned the tide in the Oregon game last year. The fact that no flag was thrown during the game and no suspension issued after it sent a clear message. Better to take the chance and hit someone in the head in a big game. The odds are you will get away with it, and the benefits can be huge.

That set the stage - and since Stanford is so highly ranked this year, every one of their games is a big game. Although Owusu is the most obvious case, don’t forget that Fleener also took a cheap shot.

I’m glad the enforcement has finally caught up with the rule, as I said above, it is just unfortunate that this change has come so late in the game…

by RickeySteals on Nov 6, 2025 1:24 PM PST up reply actions  

I think that should read "Bad Luck"

Andrew Luck has a tendency to throw to him in bad situations too. That throw against USC should never have been made. Owusu had no chance to catch it and he led him right into a streaking safety, and that’s not the only time I’ve seen him do it too.

I really hope Shaw does the right thing and doesn’t let Owusu play (not for selfish reasons of course) but with 3 concussions in 4 weeks he’s only one bad hit away from never walking onto the field again.

"the putz from that UO blog, Matt Daddy" - Steve Tannen
The Daily Faberian

by Matt Daddy on Nov 6, 2025 1:46 PM PST reply actions  

Owusu has a tendency to drop his head just before getting hit.

Otherwise he’d take those hits on the pads. In combination with the observations above, this helps explain things to an extent.

Ducks GOOOOD. Fuskies BAAAAAD.

by BigGreenWreckingMachine on Nov 6, 2025 2:15 PM PST reply actions  

Kinda...

but when you watch enough of his plays, it isn’t that he’s lowering his head… more like he’s already headed upfield and is starting to accelerate. His first step downfield after the catch is really quick - so much so that I think defenders can’t react in time (and as I mention above it is sometimes so quick that it messes with his ability to actually complete the catch). I don’t know how you coach that out of him - especially since the onus is on the defensive player to avoid hitting the head.

Still (and this was part of my point) - that (or Luck’s choice to throw to him as Matt Daddy believes) alone isn’t enough to cause the problem. If defenders weren’t trying to deck him with every hit (as opposed to someone like Whalen where they just try to bring him down) it would lower the risk. The funny thing about that is - it really isn’t the smart play in the first place. Sure, you have a chance to pop the ball out, but DBs committing to the big hit like that has been a huge contributor to his yards after the catch… when he sees it coming he is really good at avoiding it, which is why they ran so many quick outs to him over the course of the season.

by RickeySteals on Nov 6, 2025 3:21 PM PST up reply actions  

Owusu isn't that quick as far as Pac-12 receivers go.

There are plenty of much faster receivers in the Pac than Chris. Many of them have several more catches than he does. Most of them catch passes all over the field, including over the middle and in traffic. I have to discount the notion that this is a result of Owusu being abnormally quick, especially from the perspective of Pac-12 cornerbacks who defend as-fast or faster wide receivers almost every week. What is it that Owusu does that differentiates him from those players? He puts his head down just prior to contact. Look at the vids again, it couldn’t be clearer.

Ducks GOOOOD. Fuskies BAAAAAD.

by BigGreenWreckingMachine on Nov 6, 2025 3:54 PM PST up reply actions  

Lotsa fast receivers, you're right...

and some are absolutely faster than Owusu… but most of them catch then turn. I guess it is bad fundamentals, but Owusu tends to be turning as he makes the catch, and he definitely tends to lower his head as part of his first step. On the other hand, Owusu is pretty tall - there is plenty of room below his head to get in there and wrap him up even when he ducks down a bit. If you really want to force a fumble, that is what you should be aiming for anyway, since that is where the ball is…

All of this doesn’t really matter anyway though - it is up to the defensive player to make a legal tackle… and the tackles that have knocked Owusu out haven’t been legal. If Owusu’s head duck is so obvious, the defensive players he faces should be coached that you need to get low on him or you could draw a serious penalty and/or even a suspension. Except that the league’s uneven enforcement of the rules has meant that the threat of a penalty wasn’t there for a major chunk of the season.

by RickeySteals on Nov 6, 2025 4:19 PM PST up reply actions  

I'm simply saying there's a reason this happens to Owusu so often.

And yes, it’s possible that opponents should be coached to be more mindful of Owusu’s tendencies. What I really feel, though, is that Chris should quietly retire from football, get his Stanford degree, and go on to what will be a fulfilling life while he still can. His chances of developing early-onset dementia are already greatly increased at this point. He has a bright future with or without football.

Ducks GOOOOD. Fuskies BAAAAAD.

by BigGreenWreckingMachine on Nov 6, 2025 9:30 PM PST up reply actions   1 recs

Increased exposure?

I’d add this point:

Owusu has a rep as a big play receiver, so he draws a lot of defensive attention, but it’s my impression (no stats to back this up, so maybe I’m totally off-base) that he’s become essentially a possession receiver, catching the ball on short routes with the hope that he can get loose and spring it for a big gain.

Whether due to his history of drops, lack of separation (he’s fast for a Stanford WR), or because he doesn’t fight for balls the way, say, Baldwin or (Ryan) Whalen did last year, he’s not getting (or at least catching) the ball on the long routes that you’d think the speed guy would be running, where he’d be most likely in single coverage and less likely to get clocked by a DB or safety. Instead, he’s catching the ball where there are a lot of defenders nearby.

Obviously he’s not the only player catching short passes, but this may be part of why he’s taking bad hits more frequently of late.

by Cardinal&Orange; on Nov 6, 2025 8:43 PM PST reply actions  

I'm sorry, but the below quote is ridiculous.
If Owusu’s head duck is so obvious, the defensive players he faces should be coached that you need to get low on him or you could draw a serious penalty and/or even a suspension.

This just smacks of the perspective of someone who has never made a tackle in his life.

Poyer didn’t lead with his head, Owusu dipped into the contact, rather similarly to how Javes Lewis smoked him at Autzen the year before after Owusu lost his balance upon initial contact and again, didn’t keep his helmet up as he fell. As a defender, just like Poyer did, you square up to blast a guy with your shoulder, keep your helmet up to protect your own spine, wrap up, and leg drive him to the ground. However, the textbook tackle is not always possible. Nevertheless, this new interpretation of the targeting rule is preposterous when the offensive player is turning himself into the target.g

When a ball carrier dips into contact with his head and upfield shoulder, it is unsurprising if he takes the head shot.

Neither Lewis the year before, nor Poyer this year, targeted Owusu’s head, which implies an intent to injure via delivering an intentional head shot. These were both accidental plays, and not really preventable upon the part of the defenders. Chris runs into contact using poor personal safety technique and has now twice been KO’d under rather routine football circumstances.

Both of Owusu’s KO’s have one thing in common—himself.

There can be no “blaming the victim,” as I read someone say on The Cardboard, if the guy is a victim of his own poor football running technique.

Roses Ain't Orange!

by Canard on Nov 6, 2025 9:11 PM PST reply actions  

Thanks for the tackling demonstration

But the plays are still illegal because the hits resulted in helmet to helmet contact. End of story. The rules don’t care how the helmet to helmet contact occurred; the defensive player making the hit is always at fault of that type of contact happens.

by CardiGrl on Nov 6, 2025 9:16 PM PST up reply actions  

And the critics of this stupid rule are correct

when they say this interpretation is robbing the game of its physicality.

Helmet to helmet collisions occur on every play somewhere on the field. People lose their balance and others, like Owusu, run the ball without basic regard for their own physical safety.

From day one of helmeted football as a defender the mantra is to keep your head up and put your facemask into the tackle to minimize one’s chances of accidental paralysis. Now, no matter what the positional posture of the ball carrier, the defender cannot even incidentally hit him in the head, with the helmet, the shoulder pad, the elbow, or the knee apparently or he risks a personal foul.

The stripping away of intent in this rule is a poor answer to the concussion problem if there is not also an attendant rule that a ball carrier must not endanger himself by dipping his head and shoulder, which BTW, would also be a ridiculous rule change.

If the NCAA rules committee wants flag football they should just go ahead and get down to brass tacks on that, because as things stand, they are ruining tackle football.

Roses Ain't Orange!

by Canard on Nov 6, 2025 9:28 PM PST up reply actions   1 recs

Those that argue that this is robbing the game of its physicality are probably somewhat right...

… but there’s the flip side of that argument to consider. That physicality is causing lasting, life-altering damage to the players. If you want to make the argument that these rules should be relaxed in the pros because the athletes are getting paid, and the potential reward is commensurate with the risks, I think you would have a point (although I would disagree).

In college though? Where football is nominally supposed to be just a part of an education? I’m sorry but I think they need to do whatever it takes to get those hits out of the game.

by RickeySteals on Nov 6, 2025 9:34 PM PST up reply actions  

I think the onus needs to be partly on the offensive players (via coaching) and that common sense needs to be applied in general.

Players like Marquess Wilson, Jeff Maehl, Robert Woods, etc don’t take these hits because they present their shoulders or sides to the defenders. Last year Maehl caught 77 passes, the bulk of them in traffic and/or over the middle, and never once got hit in the head.

Ducks GOOOOD. Fuskies BAAAAAD.

by BigGreenWreckingMachine on Nov 6, 2025 9:39 PM PST up reply actions  

I hate playing this card, but have you ever played football?

You will never eliminate incidental above the shoulders contact between players running full speed towards one another amidst 20 other players presenting an obstacle course.

Intent needs to be part of the rule and should be subject to video review. This way you can penalize and later suspend those who are hitting that way intentionally, (and intent to lead with the head or target the other player’s head with a shoulder is pretty easy to spot on review), all other such contact incidentally made should not be penalized on the field or retrospectively.

And say what you will, there was no discernible intent on Poyer’s part to ring Owusu’s bell.

Roses Ain't Orange!

by Canard on Nov 6, 2025 9:46 PM PST up reply actions  

Incidental contact is one thing...

In Poyer’s case I wouldn’t call it intentional, but I also wouldn’t call it incidental. He needs to be able to maintain enough body control to make a legal tackle. It is one thing if he makes a cut and out of nowhere he bumps Owusu in the head. It is another thing entirely if he takes a run at the guy, has multiple approaches he could take to bring him down, and still knocks heads with him. Instead of going for the big hit in a situation that he couldn’t control, he could’ve gone for the tackle. He didn’t. He instinctively chose the wrong approach. Watch the way the best defensive players in the NFL approach these opportunities - they know when to go for the hit and when to just bring the guy down. If you can’t make that distinction, I think the rules should push you toward the safer option.

I haven’t played football at a seriously competitive level but I’ve played enough other sports to know that it isn’t always about intent. Sometimes it has to be about control as well - if you can’t control your approach enough to avoid certain types of contact (especially when that contact is dangerous) then you’re going to draw a foul. That is true in soccer, basketball (hell, even baseball, after a fashion) and I think in this case it should also be true in college football.

by RickeySteals on Nov 6, 2025 10:00 PM PST up reply actions  

That's the problem

It’s easy to say “he needs to maintain body control etc” but unless you’ve played the game you don’t understand how those words are somewhat meaningless.

Ducks GOOOOD. Fuskies BAAAAAD.

by BigGreenWreckingMachine on Nov 6, 2025 10:03 PM PST up reply actions  

I haven't played football, but I've played other sports at pretty high level

… and I’ve actually accidentally delivered a couple of concussions with my own bare head…

I do know enough to know that when my brain wrote checks my body couldn’t cash that people ended up getting hurt. Watch a few 49ers games this year. They are a brutally physical team who have actually left an awful lot of injured players in their wake… but (for the most part) they know how to do it without delivering hits that end up knocking heads

I don’t think its too much to ask that the game changes to adapt to what we now know about how our bodies operate. Maybe the coaching from a young age needs to change, to emphasize knowing the difference between an opportunity to deliver a hit and a risky situation that could cause injury.

by RickeySteals on Nov 6, 2025 10:09 PM PST up reply actions  

Then we should just be done with it and issue red cards

because that isn’t football.

Expecting repeatedly perfect body control by guys sprinting to hit other guys is wholly unrealistic.

It’s enough to say “Don’t use your helmet as a weapon. Don’t target or hit defenseless offensive players above the shoulders. Don’t launch off of your feet to hit a player with either your helmet or shoulder in the open field.”

To ask that the defenders avoid even incidental contact with an offensive player’s head under every circumstance is simply ridiculous.

Roses Ain't Orange!

by Canard on Nov 6, 2025 10:07 PM PST up reply actions  

I'm not saying you need to avoid incidental contact...

… I am saying you need to avoid a) intentional contact and b) contact that happens because you chose the wrong approach when trying to bring a player down.

Football will always be physical, there’s no getting around that… but somehow the rules need to emphasize a game that is both physical but also avoids causing early-onset Alzheimer’s.

by RickeySteals on Nov 6, 2025 10:12 PM PST up reply actions  

Well then, a concurrent rule change should be that a ballcarrier

can no longer lower their head and shoulder either in anticipation of, or to initiate, contact with the defender.

After all, we can’t have the offensive player screwing with the defensive player’s split second judgement of where and when he shall attempt to hit him.

Like I said, just such a notion is as preposterous as the one defenders currently operate under in the Pac-12.

Roses Ain't Orange!

by Canard on Nov 6, 2025 10:33 PM PST up reply actions  

Honestly...

I think it is a targeted compromise. Pac-12 refs are so bad they can barely enforce the rules as they are written now. Yes, the new rules give most of the advantage to the offensive players, and in a perfect world you could draw up rules that even things out. But at least the rules as they exist today are written clearly enough that a ref (even one as bad as a Pac-12 ref) can understand them. In theory…

by RickeySteals on Nov 6, 2025 10:37 PM PST up reply actions  

Yeah, that too.

It’s going to take years for Scott’s new Czar of Referees or whatever to untangle the mess allowed to fester under Tom “Does He Have A Pulse?” Hansen.

Ducks GOOOOD. Fuskies BAAAAAD.

by BigGreenWreckingMachine on Nov 6, 2025 10:39 PM PST up reply actions  

Most receivers and ALL running back "know how to get hit."

Yes, accidents do happen, and there are some dirty players (Taylor Mays) and others who hit high too often (TJ MacDonald), but BOTH sides need coaching to avoid this.

Ducks GOOOOD. Fuskies BAAAAAD.

by BigGreenWreckingMachine on Nov 6, 2025 10:38 PM PST up reply actions  

"Wrong approach?"

It’s a game of angles. “The wrong approach” means missing the tackle entirely. If you mean “type of tacke,” in this day and age, given how big and strong even receivers are, leg-tackling is often the wrong approach.

Ducks GOOOOD. Fuskies BAAAAAD.

by BigGreenWreckingMachine on Nov 6, 2025 10:36 PM PST up reply actions  

Incorrect.

There’s is a very specific difference between “targeting” and “contact above the shoulders.” And assigning “fault” to the defender in every instance is ludicrous and is rightly derided as such. Offensive players, and very much so including Chris Owusu, need to be coached NOT lead with their head into contact. People look at these incidents with the benefit of slow motion playback from many angles. On the field, things happen faster than I can type thisfast. The idea that a defensive player can adjust his trajectory at full speed in milliseconds is unreasonable at best.

Ducks GOOOOD. Fuskies BAAAAAD.

by BigGreenWreckingMachine on Nov 6, 2025 9:35 PM PST up reply actions  

But that's not the rule

As it stands, the rule is that the onus is on the defensive tackler to ensure that they do not make contact with the head or neck. Whether or not the contact is incidental or purposeful is not a determining factor in deciding whether a foul has occurred (but it does play a role in whether or not a player is ejected).

People can argue that the rule is bad or wrong or whatever, but the rule is written such that the tackler is responsible for not hitting the head, even if the ball carrier has lowered their head.

by RedOscar on Nov 6, 2025 10:01 PM PST up reply actions  

What I meant is that "targeting" can result in being thrown out of a game,

and even suspension. Incidental contact is still a PF penalty, certainly. But the point is, players need to be coached on how to protect themselves as well. I have to reiterate the point that Owusu has been taken out of games several times, and taken to the hospital at least twice if not three times, due to these hits. So again, we have to ask why one particular player keeps having this happen? He’s never been among the conference leaders in receptions, so it can’t be a matter of percentage. He doesn’t take risks other players won’t, so it’s not a case of high-risk behavior as a player. What is it that makes Chris Owusu so susceptible to receiving hits to the head? It can’t simply be “back luck,” can it?

Ducks GOOOOD. Fuskies BAAAAAD.

by BigGreenWreckingMachine on Nov 6, 2025 10:10 PM PST up reply actions  

I said it at the top here...

it isn’t any one thing… if Owusu changed his playing style it I think it is likely that he would lower his chances of getting hit in the head. However, there are additional factors at play:

a) his reputation as someone who fumbles when hit hard leads more defensive players to try to hit him hard over just bringing him down.
b) the league let three rather egregious helmet-to-helmet hits against Stanford players (and probably players on other teams too, for all I know) slide up until last week, sending a message that those kinds of hits would be allowed, despite the letter of the rulebook.

I don’t think any one thing answers your last, but I think that all three put together created a situation where the odds of another helmet-to-helmet hit were greater than usual…

by RickeySteals on Nov 6, 2025 10:22 PM PST up reply actions  

And just to be clear

Poyer did lower his head when he went in for the tackle. Not sure if he was targeting Owusu’s head, or just getting in for the big hit, but I think the video shows that pretty clearly.

by CardiGrl on Nov 6, 2025 9:21 PM PST up reply actions  

If two players are bracing for what appears to be an inevitable collision

And they incidentally make helmet to helmet contact, how was the defender to anticipate his counterpart’s move and avoid a subjective penalty?

I’ll tell you right now that if Owusu hadn’t have crumpled to the turf in a heap that flag never gets thrown. The collision was simply not violent enough to knock out a neurologically healthy player.

Roses Ain't Orange!

by Canard on Nov 6, 2025 9:32 PM PST up reply actions  

That is purely speculative.

You’d be surprised at how mild a collision can cause a concussion. That being said, a great many of us over at ATQ were flabbergasted that Owusu was on the field after the hit he took from McDonald, given his prior history. If he’s on the field next Saturday, I will have lost all respect for Coach Shaw. Regardless of being “cleared” by medical staff or how badly Chris might want to play, someone needs to say "sorry son, but you’re going to sit this one out.

Ducks GOOOOD. Fuskies BAAAAAD.

by BigGreenWreckingMachine on Nov 6, 2025 9:51 PM PST up reply actions  

I’m sorry, but its ridiculous to suggest that a football coach should overrule a medical doctor on a matter of health. That said, I’m quite confident Owusu won’t be cleared for next week’s game.

long live the jd.

by jksnake99 on Nov 6, 2025 9:58 PM PST up reply actions  

Have you read the report that finally forced the NFL to address the issue?

You would make no such assertion if you had. Owusu is already at drastically increased risk of developing early-onset dementia.

Ducks GOOOOD. Fuskies BAAAAAD.

by BigGreenWreckingMachine on Nov 6, 2025 10:13 PM PST up reply actions  

I haven’t read the report, but I’m pretty confident the doctors advising the Stanford coaches on this have.

long live the jd.

by jksnake99 on Nov 6, 2025 10:17 PM PST up reply actions  

Those doctors use standard tests that only "confirm" the state of his brain at the immediate time.

And coaches tend to ask only one question: Can he play? Not “should” he play. That was yet another finding of the NFL report. Players and coaches tend to only be interested in the now. Steve Young, Chris Miller, and Troy Aikman all retired early because they were afraid of the effects of the several concussions they received, and rightly so.

Ducks GOOOOD. Fuskies BAAAAAD.

by BigGreenWreckingMachine on Nov 6, 2025 10:21 PM PST up reply actions  

Believe me...

… the docs at Stanford go well beyond your usual concussion tests. Owusu was actually one of several players wearing a special mouthguard that measures the force of impact on hits as a part of a study to determine just how much damage is being done.

They knew exactly what kind of hits he has been taking all season long, and with that level of data they would’ve absolutely know if he was at a greater than normal risk for a concussion this week (as opposed to a previous week).

by RickeySteals on Nov 6, 2025 10:24 PM PST up reply actions  

And yet one week after his last hit to the head,

there he is on a stretcher. If this happens to him again, I will literally be sick to my stomach. Someone needs to say “enough” for him if he won’t do it himself.

Ducks GOOOOD. Fuskies BAAAAAD.

by BigGreenWreckingMachine on Nov 6, 2025 10:28 PM PST up reply actions  

I agree with that wholeheartedly

… but apparently the hit in the USC game was nowhere near as violent as the one he took a few weeks back against WSU. Clearly there is more to learn, but based on what they know now, if there had been a sign in the data that he was at increased risk this week, I doubt he would’ve played.

by RickeySteals on Nov 6, 2025 10:32 PM PST up reply actions  

Most definitely...

… but in the game of football, a huge percentage of players have had a previous concussion, whether they know it or not. The question is whether someone’s brain can handle the next hit, and I think that’s the type of question the study they’re doing is trying to answer. Docs can only go on what they know now though, and that body of knowledge must not’ve been enough to rule Owusu out of the game.

by RickeySteals on Nov 6, 2025 10:48 PM PST up reply actions  

And Owusu has 2 for sure, now possibly three.

Plus at least 2 more instances of being taken out of games due to hits to the head, including @ USC a week ago.

Ducks GOOOOD. Fuskies BAAAAAD.

by BigGreenWreckingMachine on Nov 6, 2025 10:59 PM PST up reply actions  

3... he definitely has 3...

According to my neurologist wife, if you get knocked out, that’s a concussion… no grey area there at all.

Like you I hope he has the good sense to retire (or at least take a long break from the game) after this last one.

by RickeySteals on Nov 6, 2025 11:03 PM PST up reply actions  

Didn't want to get ahead of the "official" word,

especially since I wasn’t sure he was knocked cold, however much it seemed so.

Ducks GOOOOD. Fuskies BAAAAAD.

by BigGreenWreckingMachine on Nov 6, 2025 11:19 PM PST up reply actions  

Yeah, maybe I'm jumping the gun myself...

but I thought I read somewhere that he was indeed knocked out… hard to believe they’d go get the ambulance if he wasn’t… at any rate, your (and my) point still stands. The guy should think long and hard before he steps on the football field again.

by RickeySteals on Nov 6, 2025 11:33 PM PST up reply actions  

Again, Its totally fine to disagree with the rule (there are plenty of rules in sports I disagree with), but as written, helmet to helmet contact is a penalty regardless of intent.

long live the jd.

by jksnake99 on Nov 6, 2025 9:56 PM PST up reply actions  

Yes, and critics who've played football think it's the dumbest rule going.

Because it disregards the reality of playing the game. It’s a classic rule making SNAFU made by those who’ve never played at a seriously competitive level, or at best haven’t done so in decades.

Roses Ain't Orange!

by Canard on Nov 6, 2025 10:00 PM PST up reply actions  

I’ve never played football, but I’m of the belief that when we find out that a sport causes worse brain damage than we previously thought, rules should be put in place to make the game safer, even if it changes the game or even makes it worse. Especially when we are dealing with college kids.

I respect your perspective on this matter though.

long live the jd.

by jksnake99 on Nov 6, 2025 10:04 PM PST up reply actions  

And I respect that concussions are a problematic part of the sport

that need to be addressed.

However, putting the onus entirely on the defensive players is not going to prove a useful approach.

The most egregiously bad calls on this rule interpretation haven’t even occurred yet, and as things stand, this rule could wreck your national title aspirations if your team is on the wrong end of it Saturday at a most inopportune moment.

And a rule that is so subjectively called with such large ramifications, (PF and possible ejection or prospective suspension), is not good for the sport.

Roses Ain't Orange!

by Canard on Nov 6, 2025 10:20 PM PST up reply actions  

Fair.

long live the jd.

by jksnake99 on Nov 6, 2025 10:23 PM PST up reply actions  

Except they didn't flag him for helmet to helmet contact

The call was targeting above the shoulders, which is total BS since he was targeting the ball. The only reason he hit him in the head was because Owosu ducked his head.

It's true, I am a closet Utah fan. And an incredibly biased one at that.

by ConnorOSU on Nov 6, 2025 10:16 PM PST up reply actions  

Yes, I know that little blows can lead to dingers

But Owusu was not just concussed, he was KTFO. That was not a “lights out” type of hit. You can bet some collision just like it happened in every D-1 league over the weekend. No one else save for Owusu had to get evaluated on the Glasgow Coma Scale in an ambulance.

Roses Ain't Orange!

by Canard on Nov 6, 2025 9:58 PM PST reply actions  

Are you 100% certain of the facts?

Are you expert enough in the field to say with complete certainty that the hit Owusu hit would not have the same effect on any other player? Unless an expert does a study and produces that result, I have to take your assertion as speculative.

Ducks GOOOOD. Fuskies BAAAAAD.

by BigGreenWreckingMachine on Nov 6, 2025 10:17 PM PST up reply actions  

Of course it as speculative.

It’s also a rather common sense notion that Owusu was more susceptible to this type of hit than a player without a seriously neurological health history.

Roses Ain't Orange!

by Canard on Nov 6, 2025 10:25 PM PST up reply actions  

Now THAT is fact.

And it’s why I would rather see him retire and take his degree (especially considering that he’s not an especially promising pro prospect anyway).

Ducks GOOOOD. Fuskies BAAAAAD.

by BigGreenWreckingMachine on Nov 6, 2025 10:30 PM PST up reply actions  

I'm sorry, but this is just stupid

“If Owusu’s head duck is so obvious, the defensive players he faces should be coached that you need to get low on him or you could draw a serious penalty and/or even a suspension.”

Players aren’t going to re-learn everything they have been taught just because one player has poor running technique. Like Canard said, the only person that can be blamed here is Owusu. He is a great receiver, and I am glad he is alright, but eventually you are going to have to take some responsibility for what’s going on.

It's true, I am a closet Utah fan. And an incredibly biased one at that.

by ConnorOSU on Nov 6, 2025 10:22 PM PST reply actions  

Let's just all blame Ronnie Lott.

He’s the progenitor of the “jacked-him-up” hit. All the defenders who tackle high and “through the player” rather than wrap up can be traced to Lott. That’s why he’s so revered by so many. It’s why every big-hitting defensive back instantly brings a reference to Lott over a decade after he retired. And he’s from USC, so it’s easy to blame him by default.

Ducks GOOOOD. Fuskies BAAAAAD.

by BigGreenWreckingMachine on Nov 6, 2025 10:26 PM PST reply actions  

Personally, I'd blame Jack Tatum

And someone older than me would blame someone who played even earlier.

Roses Ain't Orange!

by Canard on Nov 6, 2025 10:28 PM PST up reply actions  

What I mean is that Lott, and his style, is what the "kids" emulate.

Just like Michael Jordan influenced kids a generation later to pound the rock and break down a defender, turning a team game into a boring slog, Lott’s influence resonates to this day.

Ducks GOOOOD. Fuskies BAAAAAD.

by BigGreenWreckingMachine on Nov 6, 2025 10:34 PM PST up reply actions  

So confused

Why are all these Oregon fans so adament about this? Their stake in this argument makes no sense, really. I would have expected to see some more OSU fans speaking up.

Also, for those of you who think the helmet to helmet rule is destroying the physicality of football (a la Brock Huard, who, let’s be honest, I wouldn’t want to be associated with, but I digress), why are you so insistent that Owusu should retire from football? I think most of us agree he shouldn’t play again, and that these types of hits are dangerous for players. So why wouldn’t you support the imposition of a rule that attempts to curb these types of hits? I guess I’m not understanding clearly how two seeming diametrically opposed arguments can be made in the same message board. Am I missing something here?

by CardiGrl on Nov 7, 2025 6:41 AM PST reply actions  

For one

There have already been declarations from some quarters of the Cardinal fanbase that we only won last year’s game against Stanford because Javes Lewis leveled Chris Owusu, “illegally,” despite the inconvenient facts that Lewis was not targeting Owusu’s head nor was the rule being interpreted in such a ticky-tack manner as it is this year. There was nothing illegal about that hit last year.

Secondly, we all have watched our team play for the highest of stakes over much of the past decade. Frankly, this “automatic crime” of hitting an offensive player in the head, no matter the circumstances of its happening, is a bad rule that alters the entire course of ball games when it goes down like it did against OSU last Saturday.

You don’t see many OSU fans arguing about it for two reasons. Foremost, they were never going to win that game anyway. They also don’t have very many internet fans in Beaver Nation who are imbued with much ardor for this year’s team.

That said, we Ducks fans can take sympathy with what happened to their team last Saturday in that the circumstances of the play were eerily similar to the one that we obviously benefitted from a year ago. To think that because Owusu has a seemingly isolated issue with keeping his head up into contact that PF flags get thrown on what has classically been a clean hit, and a return for a TD called back that did amount to a 10 point swing, is appalling.

Perhaps instead of fundamentally altering the nature of the game through trying to micromanage the hitting in the course of play, the conference should require much longer mandatory sits for players who’ve been knocked out.

Lest you think this is totally self serving, last year at WSU, one of our key players, Kenyon Barner, was knocked out cold on a KO return, fumbled the ball to WSU, (who went on to score a short field TD), and eventually he was hospitalized for the weekend. We didn’t see him again for at least three weeks, and then not in the return game until bowl season.

Despite him having been hit in the head, no one, absolutely no one has called what happened to him an illegal hit—either then or since.

Roses Ain't Orange!

by Canard on Nov 7, 2025 7:51 AM PST reply actions  

To your first point...

I think Oregon probably would’ve won last year despite that hit, which yes, I do think was illegal. On the other hand, I think it would’ve been a far more entertaining game at the end had that hit been flagged (or had it not happened that way in the first place).

Part of what irks me about the whole issue around when the flags get thrown is that it isn’t limited to just Owusu. Coby Fleener was also knocked out of a game on a (clearly illegal, but not flagged) hit earlier this year. I suspect (and I’d bet that Oregon experiences this too) that teams end up trying to hit extra hard against Stanford because they are so keyed up for a big game. I don’t think there’s a perfect solution to the problem, but to me, four helmet-to-helmet hits that knock players out of the game within the span of seven games seems ridiculous.

I do think you might be right that longer sits are required for players who’ve been knocked out, regardless of what the rulebook says about what happens in game. Ultimately the solution is going to have to be a combination of factors, whether it is rule changes, different/better medical approaches and possibly a change to the way the defenses approach the game.

by RickeySteals on Nov 7, 2025 9:39 AM PST up reply actions  

Good points

Now I understand Oregon’s dog in the fight. Except that I can’t see how this is not an illegal hit, within every interpretation of the current rule. I think most people (save some of you die hard Ducks fans) agree that it was an illegal hit (un)fair and square. I’d also point out that there’s no “automatic crime” when someone is hit in the head—only when he’s hit in the head by another “helmet, elbow, forearm, or shoulder.” It seems to me this is the same idea behind the facemask rule, and yet no one is complaining about that. What concerns me more is that many people—Brock Huard included—still don’t believe the damage that hits to the head can cause players, and would rather see a sort of gladiator match than protect these kids’ safety.

by CardiGrl on Nov 7, 2025 11:03 AM PST up reply actions  

Simple answer - a previously concussed person is much more likely to suffer another

“Neurologists say once a person suffers a concussion, he is as much as four times more likely to sustain a second one. Moreover, after several concussions, it takes less of a blow to cause the injury and requires more time to recover.”

http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/subjects/f/football/head_injuries/index.html

If you want to avoid concussions there are two things you can do. One, make it a 15 yard penalty for a defensive player to leave both feet in order to make a tackle, whether the play results in a head to head hit or not. I think this the rule in rugby. It would avoid most head to head collisions in the secondary, but wouldn’t affect the head to head collision at the LoS. Two, you can take off the helmets, or replace plastic shell helmets with simple padded or leather helmets. It’ll force people to be careful about where they put their heads.

Obviously people will complain that this changes the game and forces defenders to relearn how they tackle. But isn’t that the point?

Don't Panic.

by 4.0 Point Stance on Nov 7, 2025 10:26 AM PST reply actions  

Your statement is why I am so adamant about this topic
I think Oregon probably would’ve won last year despite that hit, which yes, I do think was illegal.

In SU v. UO last year Owusu was thrown a pass in the right flat. He headed upfield. He was tripped up by a lunging arm tackle. He fell forward as Strong Safety Lewis was already committed to hitting the previously upright runner in the waist/leg area. Instead, his shoulder pad catches the stumbling Owusu on the head and KOs him.

For the vast majority of football history, including 2010, that was not a penalty as there was no intent to strike the player in the head, it was just happenstance.

To call such a tackle illegal is basically to say you no longer want to watch tackle football because the risk inherent in playing it is too much for you to bear any longer. These hits will continue to be seen despite everyone’s re-education and good intentions because the field is chaotic, full speed, and stuff happens.

Time for two handed touch, which could still result in a player losing his balance and striking another in the head without intent on the part of either player. Really, what would be the difference anymore?

Let’s just disband NCAA football and make everyone field a “men’s” soccer team already.

The head hit rule as being done by the Pac-12 is just ridiculous. Even in baseball there are judgement calls based on intent. If a pitcher errantly lets one fly that strikes a player in the helmet, he is not ejected, either on the spot, nor is he suspended retrospectively.

If he is throwing chin music regularly, he’ll be warned, or already have a reputation, and if he then strikes a batter in the head, he will be ejected and subject to additional league or conference discipline.

That sort of common sense is missing from the Pac-12’s take on this rule right now. Casey Locker’s and TJ McDonald’s hits are being treated the same as Poyer’s and that is a ludicrous result.

Roses Ain't Orange!

by Canard on Nov 7, 2025 11:03 AM PST reply actions  

Ok, let's put this in perspective

This happens maybe once a game—if that—for every college football game played each week. To say that enforcing this already-set rule (that all football programs in the NCAA have to agree to, no?) would turn the game into touch football is overboard. I don’t believe it’s a big enough part of the game to turn college football into two handed touch. The problem is that there’s a much higher chance of grave injury to the player when one of these hits occurs that it makes sense to protect the players by enforcing it regardless of intent, and then factoring intent in later to determine additional penalties, a la McDonald.

by CardiGrl on Nov 7, 2025 11:10 AM PST up reply actions  

but lets take the Poyer play as an example

why should Poyer take a penalty when the play was the result of Owusu’s bad fundamentals?

We don’t want to see players get hurt, but Poyer made a play that became illegal not because of anything Poyer did, but because Owusu has poor technique and led himself into the contact.

--Dave

Addicted to Quack, your friendly, neighborhood Oregon Ducks blog

by David Piper on Nov 7, 2025 11:37 AM PST up reply actions  

Absolving Poyer of any fault is a bit much...

instead of going for the sure tackle on a play that probably warranted it, he went for the big hit. I may be willing to admit that both players contributed to the eventual outcome, but you can’t lay the blame 100% on Owusu. The rules currently require the defensive player to take responsibility for the outcome, thus Poyer draws the flag.

by RickeySteals on Nov 7, 2025 11:41 AM PST up reply actions  

You keep up your defense of an indefensible rule

I guarantee at some point it is going to bite your team in the ass. You’d better not change your tune.

And no, “men’s” soccer is not physical compared to football. In this country, the toughest soccer player going is the placekicker on a football squad.

Roses Ain't Orange!

by Canard on Nov 7, 2025 11:44 AM PST up reply actions  

Not compared to football...

… but if you’re looking for a sport where the rules explicitly ban physical contact, I’d say basketball is a better bet…

Now, if Stanford get bitten by this rule, I have no problem with it. The brains of a group of young men who are supposed to be students (and who should have their entire lives ahead of them) should absolutely take priority over winning/losing and/or some sense of the purity of a game.

by RickeySteals on Nov 7, 2025 11:50 AM PST up reply actions  

If that concern for player safety is your paramount concern

Then this blog should have some pointed questions for HC Shaw and his medical staff to mull over, no?

Roses Ain't Orange!

by Canard on Nov 7, 2025 1:24 PM PST up reply actions  

Yes.

In my non-medical opinion, I don’t think Owusu should return. But it’s too late for him. I (and I think RickeySteals) are more concerned with how to prevent this from happen to all other college football players in the future.

by CardiGrl on Nov 7, 2025 2:01 PM PST up reply actions  

A promise

I pledge not to cry foul if and when Delano Howell is flagged for a similar hit, though some might argue that’s unlikely to happen because Howell will never play against a receiver who dips his head before contact like Chris Owusu. I respectfully disagree that that’s the main reason Owusu has suffered three concussions in the last 13 months or that his tendency to dip his head is all that unique.

by Scott Allen on Nov 7, 2025 11:55 AM PST up reply actions  

Taking the argument into hyperbole...

… doesn’t help your case much. Comparing football to men’s soccer doesn’t help much either - whether you realize it or not, it is a really physical game. Maybe you’d have a point with basketball, but even then…

When you watched that play you saw an unavoidable hit. When I watched it I saw a safety looking to deliver as big of a blow as he could (regardless of whether he actually made the tackle or not). We’re wearing different colored glasses when we watch that play. You and I disagree about whether that was a legal hit. That’s fine - it is in the past and there’s nothing either of us can do to change the outcome.

To your point - these hits happen. The purpose of the penalties is to incentivize defensive players to play in a way that reduces the likelihood of them. You can argue that the rules need to change to also incentivize offensive players to avoid clear cut situations where they could get hurt, and you may have a valid argument. That’s not the state of the game right now though, and I think it will be difficult to make that kind of rule change without some sort of magical event that replaces the current Pac-12 officiating lineup with refs that are actually capable of enforcing rules with that kind of nuance (as opposed to the crews we have now, who struggle with enforcing the rules as they are currently written).

by RickeySteals on Nov 7, 2025 11:38 AM PST up reply actions  

Bravo.

As a lawyer, I appreciate your well-reasoned argument and fully agree with it. Case closed? ;-)

by CardiGrl on Nov 7, 2025 12:01 PM PST up reply actions  

Yes, let's "laywer up" football.

That will make it all better.

Roses Ain't Orange!

by Canard on Nov 7, 2025 1:21 PM PST up reply actions  

Just shorthanding a point. . . .

Just as too many laws, even if well meant, can turn a liberty loving people into a legally shackled laughingstock, eventually, too many nitpicking rules will entirely twist football into something rather unrecognizeable as such.

Roses Ain't Orange!

by Canard on Nov 7, 2025 2:37 PM PST up reply actions  

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

Welcome to the SB Nation blog about the Stanford Cardinal.

FanPosts

Community blog posts and discussion.

Recent FanPosts

Bc_logo_257x257_small
The Pac 12 Network(s) Are Coming

+ New FanPost All FanPosts >


Managers

Tree_small Scott Allen

Authors

Stanford_block_s_small RedOscar