So I'm writing this essay about how the new NFL rule is bad and it's giving the QB to much protection. There have been plays were DE have had the QB wrapped up, but let him go because of the new rule. It's stupid. Could you guys help me get evidence or some sort of fact, cause its a tough one.

Cuz the media likes offense, what happended to the Defense! Personally I would rather see a sack then a touchdown, but not with that protect the quarterback bullcrap.

yes

I don't know if you are able to use quotes in your essay, but that would by my tactic. Maybe quote some of the players or articles talking about the Titans game (I think it was the Giants) from espn.com. But at the same time, you have to consider the valid reason that these rules exist, which is that it is more fun to watch the good quarterbacks, and if you don't protect them, then you're going to end up watching tons of backup quarterbacks by the end of the season.

yeah, it is like play with little kids(QB) cant hit them.

i remember roger staubach getting sandwiched between
two defensive linemen,enduring a hit that today would get a player fined.the result,roger lied motionless, helped
off the field and forced to retire the next week.with the exception of a few quarterbacks,most today are outweighed by as much as 75 pounds by their pursuing
linebackers.with less protective equipment so as to not
hamper mobility,they cannot endure the blind side hits
that happen every sunday.it is the same reason that
kickers are protected.if you think that only the q-back is protected then look at hits to recievers on the sideline and how penalties are assesed for late hits.all are designed to protect nfl players from themselves because
they are up to 25% stronger than they were 30 years ago.

I can see a little protection for the QBs ,but this is getting out of control.Same for the punter.

with out the rule teams would try to permanently hurt the QB . take him out for good , the QB runs the offense so they would be lost with out him and the game would suck