Would King Henry still be the King before the "can't lead with helmet" rule?

It’s an interesting discussion because if you look back when Chris Brown was our guy after Eddie, his main criticism was that he ran “tall”. Both Henry and Brown were 6’ 3”. Brown had a reputation for being injury prone, but if you look at Henry, he really doesn’t tuck his shoulder much at all, so they should be taking the same type of “hits”.

this is a very good observation, and I wonder if 10 years ago, if Henry would have the same success.

 

Valid question but not to underestimate Henry, he has the best stiff arm I’ve ever seen. Not just recent history, ever, all time,
His speed makes me think he would have run upright more anyway and still use the arm to push people away.

 

You can hit runners in the legs.

I think players do it a little less because everyone leaps these days.

 

If they went for his legs he would just stiff leg them!

Henry could still do more on one leg than most RBs can do on two

.

 

You can lead with the head if you go low and the runner isn’t defenseless. You’ll likely get kneed in the head and receive the worst of it, but it’s legal.

 

Ya I was taught in Highschool to put my helmet on the ball if I could, not spearing more the facemask, grab the legs and drive through and wrap'em up.

 

Yea but Chris Brown was only 219lbs and ran like he was serving pizza

Henry is 247 and has insane top end speed and reach.

 

Players "lead with their helmet" at the legs all the time. The only time that ever really gets called is if they spear a guy helmet to helmet without even attempting to wrap up/tackle.

Henry runs upright because he's a big dude with speed. He could lower his shoulder more, but that takes away the chance of bouncing and outrunning everyone on the field. It works, so no complaints here.