THE_IRON_...KENYAN?
Banned deucer.
no its not
-
Welcome to Smogon! Take a moment to read the Introduction to Smogon for a run-down on everything Smogon, and make sure you take some time to read the global rules.
-
Congrats to the winners of the 2023 Smog Awards!
The Everything NFL Thread: 2011-2012 Season (plus free agency I guess)
- Thread starter WaterBomb
- Start date
- Status
TheValkyries
proudly reppin' 2 superbowl wins since DEFLATEGATE
The Slide Rule doesn't only apply to QB's though as all of you seem to (rather stupidly) think. Personally, I don't like seeing any player taking a hit that could critically damage their body. If a player doesn't want to take a hit, then they should be allowed to declare themselves down, and hitting anyone doing so SHOULD be a personal foul, since it does exactly what the person sliding was trying to avoid. It's not pussy shit to try and avoid hits... especially lunge hits like the one London Fletcher tried to do.
Ben Roethlisberger I think I've seen slide once or twice, but he also puts himself out there for hits frequently too. In any case I don't think anyone is dumb enough to question his toughness.
Fitzpatrick is unafraid to slide because his beard will protect him.
Seriously though, what a baller. Fitzmagic!
Fitzpatrick is unafraid to slide because his beard will protect him.
Seriously though, what a baller. Fitzmagic!
Since you won't take my word for it,
I know you're just defending the flag because you don't want Brady getting hurt, but this whole protecting the quarterback thing has gone way too far.
ESPN's John Clayton said:
If Brady wants to fucking slide and declare himself down, there's nothing stopping him. The part that is incredibly irksome is that he slid AFTER the defender began his tackle, AFTER the point where the defender had NO CHOICE but to hit him, and got a flag for it.Mike Pereira said:
I know you're just defending the flag because you don't want Brady getting hurt, but this whole protecting the quarterback thing has gone way too far.
spoken like a true patriots fan
Getting to a 59 yard field goal is not putting your team in position for a field goal unless you have Sebastian Janikowski on your team.
No, I do not.
I feel like the reason Soprano was fired was because the Dolphins, formerly the #1 winning organization of all time (since the first Super Bowl) are desperate to keep fans believing in the team at this point. He was actually getting some pretty good results, just inconsistent at this point.
DM come on Grossman fucking sucks. He just throws it throws it throws it; sure he gets some good weeks, but he gets many more bad weeks. I think he actually does deserve a starting job on a team that is desperate any given season, one that just has no other options, but he is basically putting up Jake Plummer numbers despite quarterbacks having more gifts to them than ever (so I would say worse than a Jake Plummer type).
The hit on Brady was completely fair, Brady was way too late. There were more ridiculously bad calls this weekend than most weekends this season. I have a bad memory so I am forgetting the others (I watch Red Zone so too much gets thrown at me to remember).
Dunno if this has been shared already but it's so good it should be posted twice.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zMK9FKMG3Nc&feature=share
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zMK9FKMG3Nc&feature=share
Yeah, I know you don't bro. Just messing with you haha.
I agree the Dolphins back in the early 1970's they were a fearsome team, Don Shula my favorite HOF coach of all time. Also, the fans in Miami are very hard to please, if the Dolphins aren't winning the seats will be empty. It's basically Miami Heat basketball down there, football has lost its swagger. That's the price you pay for not drafting a good quality franchise Quarterback, I still wish we ended up with Drew Brees in 2005. :(
I'm gonna miss Sparano for some reason, he looked like a Dolphins coach. Too bad he didn't fit the part.
the timing of the sparano firing was perfect, and in fact this is what the dolphins brass had been waiting for since probably...october? waiting for the dolphins to lose "big" so the firing would be "called for".
think about it. when was the last time a coach was fired midseason after a victory???? or even a really close loss???????? and that's all miami has been doing since the loss to the jets, either winning or losing right at the end of games (giants, cowboys, god's team). sparano was just prolonging the inevitable, i am sure that had miami lost an earlier game by a two-touchdown margin then he would have been gone by now. in the highly unlikely event that miami had continued to win or lose games in the 4th quarter for the rest of the year, he still would have been fired at the first opportunity. turns out the philly game was that opportunity. and as ratcheesy said, the earlier you look for a coach the better off you are.
think about it. when was the last time a coach was fired midseason after a victory???? or even a really close loss???????? and that's all miami has been doing since the loss to the jets, either winning or losing right at the end of games (giants, cowboys, god's team). sparano was just prolonging the inevitable, i am sure that had miami lost an earlier game by a two-touchdown margin then he would have been gone by now. in the highly unlikely event that miami had continued to win or lose games in the 4th quarter for the rest of the year, he still would have been fired at the first opportunity. turns out the philly game was that opportunity. and as ratcheesy said, the earlier you look for a coach the better off you are.
TheValkyries
proudly reppin' 2 superbowl wins since DEFLATEGATE
I don't give a shit about Brady getting hurt, I'm calling you, and anyone out on saying some of the stupidest line of utter tripe I've heard in some time, even if it's from the talking heads at ESPN (Which have proven time and time again they don't understand NFL rules to the fullest). You don't start a tackle by leaving the ground. Period. End of discussion. If you do, you're trying to cause damage to the runner, not tackle. If the coaches coached him right, Fletcher would not have left the ground and would've been in control enough that he would've downed Brady where he slid, with no penalty called. Instead, he tried to take Brady out of the game, and gets the proper 15 yards called on him for being an idiot. If I were an Offensive Coordinator, I would tell my runners to slide all the time if they were to be hit like that because that's an easy 15 every time (News Flash: They probably already do).
Also, there is none of this bullshit where a runner can start a slide too late. There is no time frame for when one can slide or not. This is all misinformation because people want something to complain about because they either don't like Brady or don't like rules that protect players from hits or both. This is idiotic bile and people legitimately just don't understand football if they think it was a clean hit, and a bad penalty call.
You're damn right it's spoken like it's a true Patriots fan.
People forget how little it takes.
lol okay valkyries. usually i find your posts to be an interesting counterpoint in most discussions, but this is pretty ridiculous. what you are basically saying is that you believe defenders should not have the ability to leave the ground at ANY time during a tackle. football is a violent fucking game. i am in favor of protecting players with correctly implemented rules (ie we need fucking instant replay so this brady sliding thing doesn't happen). but lunging is a PERFECTLY CLEAN HIT as long as heads don't make contact and the player isn't defenseless. which brings me to your video "evidence" supporting your argument.
the tatum clip has nothing to do with this tom brady example. absolutely nothing. classic straw man bullshit. that hit would be absolutely illegal in today's NFL in TWO different ways. hitting a defenseless receiver and helmet to helmet. yes, that was tragic but the NFL has addressed hits like those, along with roughing passers and kickers who are also deemed to be "defenseless". but this case involves a TYPICAL RUNNER as you have so clearly stated, which is NOT DEFENSELESS because they can fucking MOVE AND RUN. to extend these kinds of regulations to TYPICAL RUNNERS, whether they be running backs, receivers after they have established themselves with the ball, or QUARTERBACKS, is simply going too far, in my humble opinion.
regardless, this isn't even the heart of the problem with the tom brady slide, because FLETCHER STARTED HIS TACKLE BEFORE BRADY STARTED SLIDING. you are right, there is no specific time span where a runner can or cannot start a slide too late... except when it comes to flagging the defender for VIOLATING the rules that state the sliding player has "given up his right to advance the ball". and you CANNOT flag a player for violating that rule when he starts the tackle before the ball carrier starts to slide. except that's what happened here. it's absolutely moronic and you are using the "lunging tackles" issue to try to defend the flag, which was uncalled for because LUNGING TACKLES ARE LEGAL ON ESTABLISHED BALL CARRIERS (as long as they don't lead with the head or make contact with the ball carrier's head). you can disagree with lunging tackles all you want, but it's legal. as it should be. you can argue that ball carriers that have slid to the ground are now 'defenseless' and 'down' but brady isn't even on the GROUND when fletcher makes contact. because, once again, fletcher started his tackle before brady slid. NOT ONLY THAT, but fletcher does one of the most HARMLESS fucking "lunges" i've ever seen, if you can even call it a lunge. he leaves the ground for LITERALLY A SPLIT SECOND.
watch the video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Iv1f37dVNZ8
holy shit. this flag is even more of a joke than i thought now that i've rewatched it a few times. this is NOTHING like the stuff that, say, ryan clark does when he lunges at players. which is often, but not always, deemed a legal, clean hit. brady starts sliding AS SOON AS he realizes fletcher is about to tackle him. so brady is reacting to what fletcher is trying to do and trying to protect himself by sliding feet first instead of barging in, shoulder first. which is perfectly fine, but if you expect fletcher to lay down and not even ATTEMPT to hit brady (who is REACTING to fletcher's obvious motion to attempt a tackle) then you "legitimately do not understand" how defenders play in the national goddamn football league.
by the way, in case you are wondering, one of the main reasons why people hate brady is because he LITERALLY fucking APPLAUDS shitty fucking calls like this, as you can see in the clip. you can try and draw shitty flags if you want, but don't be a (BAN ME PLEASE) when you actually get the calls.
tl;dr, the call was god awful and your reasons for supporting it are absolutely shit.
the tatum clip has nothing to do with this tom brady example. absolutely nothing. classic straw man bullshit. that hit would be absolutely illegal in today's NFL in TWO different ways. hitting a defenseless receiver and helmet to helmet. yes, that was tragic but the NFL has addressed hits like those, along with roughing passers and kickers who are also deemed to be "defenseless". but this case involves a TYPICAL RUNNER as you have so clearly stated, which is NOT DEFENSELESS because they can fucking MOVE AND RUN. to extend these kinds of regulations to TYPICAL RUNNERS, whether they be running backs, receivers after they have established themselves with the ball, or QUARTERBACKS, is simply going too far, in my humble opinion.
regardless, this isn't even the heart of the problem with the tom brady slide, because FLETCHER STARTED HIS TACKLE BEFORE BRADY STARTED SLIDING. you are right, there is no specific time span where a runner can or cannot start a slide too late... except when it comes to flagging the defender for VIOLATING the rules that state the sliding player has "given up his right to advance the ball". and you CANNOT flag a player for violating that rule when he starts the tackle before the ball carrier starts to slide. except that's what happened here. it's absolutely moronic and you are using the "lunging tackles" issue to try to defend the flag, which was uncalled for because LUNGING TACKLES ARE LEGAL ON ESTABLISHED BALL CARRIERS (as long as they don't lead with the head or make contact with the ball carrier's head). you can disagree with lunging tackles all you want, but it's legal. as it should be. you can argue that ball carriers that have slid to the ground are now 'defenseless' and 'down' but brady isn't even on the GROUND when fletcher makes contact. because, once again, fletcher started his tackle before brady slid. NOT ONLY THAT, but fletcher does one of the most HARMLESS fucking "lunges" i've ever seen, if you can even call it a lunge. he leaves the ground for LITERALLY A SPLIT SECOND.
watch the video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Iv1f37dVNZ8
holy shit. this flag is even more of a joke than i thought now that i've rewatched it a few times. this is NOTHING like the stuff that, say, ryan clark does when he lunges at players. which is often, but not always, deemed a legal, clean hit. brady starts sliding AS SOON AS he realizes fletcher is about to tackle him. so brady is reacting to what fletcher is trying to do and trying to protect himself by sliding feet first instead of barging in, shoulder first. which is perfectly fine, but if you expect fletcher to lay down and not even ATTEMPT to hit brady (who is REACTING to fletcher's obvious motion to attempt a tackle) then you "legitimately do not understand" how defenders play in the national goddamn football league.
by the way, in case you are wondering, one of the main reasons why people hate brady is because he LITERALLY fucking APPLAUDS shitty fucking calls like this, as you can see in the clip. you can try and draw shitty flags if you want, but don't be a (BAN ME PLEASE) when you actually get the calls.
tl;dr, the call was god awful and your reasons for supporting it are absolutely shit.
Slo-mo says that, intuitively, it should've been a non-call. Real-time viewing makes it look like a pretty nasty hit, so in the interest of protecting quarterbacks, I understand a knee-jerk flag popping out (even though it probably just looked worse than it should've because Brady pretty clearly slid too late into a low tackle!) However, I'm unclear on the rules of sliding and the timing necessary for a hit to be considered illegal, so afaik, the flag could very well have been perfectly in accordance with the rules. That would make the call acceptable, but the rule bogus.
Also, didn't Brady himself agree that the hit was clean?
Also, didn't Brady himself agree that the hit was clean?
TheValkyries
proudly reppin' 2 superbowl wins since DEFLATEGATE
A) The video is to remind people how unremarkable a hit has to be to cause the most sever types of damage. We see 10 hits like that a year, and yes they are fully illegal, but they still fucking happen.lol okay valkyries. usually i find your posts to be an interesting counterpoint in most discussions, but this is pretty ridiculous. what you are basically saying is that you believe defenders should not have the ability to leave the ground at ANY time during a tackle. football is a violent fucking game. i am in favor of protecting players with correctly implemented rules (ie we need fucking instant replay so this brady sliding thing doesn't happen). but lunging is a PERFECTLY CLEAN HIT as long as heads don't make contact and the player isn't defenseless. which brings me to your video "evidence" supporting your argument.
the tatum clip has nothing to do with this tom brady example. absolutely nothing. classic straw man bullshit. that hit would be absolutely illegal in today's NFL in TWO different ways. hitting a defenseless receiver and helmet to helmet. yes, that was tragic but the NFL has addressed hits like those, along with roughing passers and kickers who are also deemed to be "defenseless". but this case involves a TYPICAL RUNNER as you have so clearly stated, which is NOT DEFENSELESS because they can fucking MOVE AND RUN. to extend these kinds of regulations to TYPICAL RUNNERS, whether they be running backs, receivers after they have established themselves with the ball, or QUARTERBACKS, is simply going too far, in my humble opinion.
regardless, this isn't even the heart of the problem with the tom brady slide, because FLETCHER STARTED HIS TACKLE BEFORE BRADY STARTED SLIDING. you are right, there is no specific time span where a runner can or cannot start a slide too late... except when it comes to flagging the defender for VIOLATING the rules that state the sliding player has "given up his right to advance the ball". and you CANNOT flag a player for violating that rule when he starts the tackle before the ball carrier starts to slide. except that's what happened here. it's absolutely moronic and you are using the "lunging tackles" issue to try to defend the flag, which was uncalled for because LUNGING TACKLES ARE LEGAL ON ESTABLISHED BALL CARRIERS (as long as they don't lead with the head or make contact with the ball carrier's head). you can disagree with lunging tackles all you want, but it's legal. as it should be. you can argue that ball carriers that have slid to the ground are now 'defenseless' and 'down' but brady isn't even on the GROUND when fletcher makes contact. because, once again, fletcher started his tackle before brady slid. NOT ONLY THAT, but fletcher does one of the most HARMLESS fucking "lunges" i've ever seen, if you can even call it a lunge. he leaves the ground for LITERALLY A SPLIT SECOND.
watch the video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Iv1f37dVNZ8
holy shit. this flag is even more of a joke than i thought now that i've rewatched it a few times. this is NOTHING like the stuff that, say, ryan clark does when he lunges at players. which is often, but not always, deemed a legal, clean hit. brady starts sliding AS SOON AS he realizes fletcher is about to tackle him. so brady is reacting to what fletcher is trying to do and trying to protect himself by sliding feet first instead of barging in, shoulder first. which is perfectly fine, but if you expect fletcher to lay down and not even ATTEMPT to hit brady (who is REACTING to fletcher's obvious motion to attempt a tackle) then you "legitimately do not understand" how defenders play in the national goddamn football league.
by the way, in case you are wondering, one of the main reasons why people hate brady is because he LITERALLY fucking APPLAUDS shitty fucking calls like this, as you can see in the clip. you can try and draw shitty flags if you want, but don't be a (BAN ME PLEASE) when you actually get the calls.
tl;dr, the call was god awful and your reasons for supporting it are absolutely shit.
B) Lunging CAN be a perfectly clean hit. But when you lunge at a player and they slide, it'll be pretty fucking hard not to hit them in an area that can cause serious problems.
C) Correct tackling doesn't leave you aerially horizontal. I'm not saying feet should never leave the ground in a tackle, I'm just saying lunge hits are really rather stupid and shouldn't be defensed as something that is coached. They are terrible hits that are inconsistent, can cause extreme damage, and also can easily force the ref to pull the flag for 15 yards if they lunge at someone who slides.
D) I'm not saying the flag was okay because London Fletcher lunged. I'm saying the flag is okay because Brady was hit while he was sliding which is a 15 yard penalty. The reason he was hit is because London Fletcher lunged at him before he slid. If London attempted a proper tackle there would've been no penalty on the play. Mainly I'm trying to say that the lunge tackle is a really stupid tactic and shouldn't be seen as something that exempts someone from getting flagged for hitting a player who was sliding. That's just back-asswards.
Yes he did. Tell me you're watching the same video? He left his feet right before he hit Brady.
Also, this seems to be a misunderstanding... I'm not saying lunge hits are bad, unclean hits, I'm saying they're risky hits. I don't deny the hit was clean, other than the fact that it was on a sliding player. If Brady didn't slide, the hit would've been fine. The core problem here is that if you hit a sliding player, then it's a penalty, even if you couldn't stop yourself. The inability to control how the player you lunge tackle at stands doesn't exempt you from NFL rules.
I for one think it would be a wonderful addition to NFL games, because as Valkryies clearly thinks anyone who slides and gets hit immediately afterwards deserves a free 15 yards.
Well fuck, I was just being sarcastic. Good to know.
"Correct tackling"? Any legal hit is a "correct tackle," so long as the player is not defenseless (aka he's a runner) and the blow is not to the helmet, or against any other similar rule (that's why they call it "legal!"). Fletcher's lunge was a "correct tackle."
Fletcher's feet on the ground before the "lunge," Fletcher's feet on the ground when he makes contact. If you're confused about the second pic, his right foot is coming down to the ground while the left is coming off of the ground. Pardon the quality, youtube vids don't screencap well!
Was reading TMQ earlier and he pretty much voiced the same opinion as everyone else I've heard about the subject, but went on to add something I hadn't noticed (too busy watching Falcons-Panthers):
I have one more question to ask, though. When a runner slides, where do the officials mark the ball? According to the rules, they mark the ball at the spot where the player "gives himself up;" this is always the spot where they make contact with the ground on their slide, NOT at the initiation of the slide! How can they mark the ball at that point, yet penalize anyone who hits the runner before they reach the ground on their slide? Seems like that would be a double standard! If they don't consider the ball to be downed until the player reaches the ground on his slide, then clearly they must think he hasn't given himself up yet, so clearly any hit on him is legal in that regard (not counting helmet-to-helmet etc.)TMQ said:
People who understand football: Jeff Triplette, TheValkryies
I know this is exactly what they did, but I really hate that line of thinking. If you wanted to fire him when he was 0-7 or when he was 1-7, why wait until the next time he loses? More time to look for a coach, more time to give the interim coach a shot at proving something... It just seems silly to wait for them to lose just because you want it to be "called for" if you ask me :x
i agree, i think it's kinda shitty that it was basically saying "yeah, it's nice that you won/barely lost all those games and you rallied an 0-7 team to go on a pretty good streak... but it's been time for you to go for a while now." but that's the reality of it i guess. the media would give the organization too much shit about firing a coach after a win, which i pretty much agree with...
WOW
The timing of this is absurdly bad. They want to suspend Harrison just before the 49ers game, and Woodley might already be out. I really don't see how this hit warranted a suspension, it wasn't even that bad. Colt McCoy tucked and started running, making him a runner, then decides to pussy flip the ball at the last second when Harrison had no time to pull up. League just fucking screwed the Steelers for their biggest game of the year. Fuck you league.
The timing of this is absurdly bad. They want to suspend Harrison just before the 49ers game, and Woodley might already be out. I really don't see how this hit warranted a suspension, it wasn't even that bad. Colt McCoy tucked and started running, making him a runner, then decides to pussy flip the ball at the last second when Harrison had no time to pull up. League just fucking screwed the Steelers for their biggest game of the year. Fuck you league.
it warranted a suspension because of harrisons past ... time and time again hes done this over and over and what gets me is he always gets defensive like a bitch and says "well i dont see what i did wrong". he wasnt suspended for the hit, he was suspended to make the message clear for him because otherwise, hes never going to learn
why would you want this thug to continue and risk hurting your leagues most valuable players...you can look at the nhl right now with crosby. harrison is a thug through and through and this was pretty much a "no enough is enough" suspension
good riddance, and i dont just say that as a ravens fan... harrison is simply a pure thug
edit: just to make it clear, it definitely was an illegal hit, just for the helmet to helmet and certainly deserved a 15 yd flag..but i think the reason the league had pushed it so hard was because of the force used on a qb, even if he was "running". i dont really think it matters regardless
why would you want this thug to continue and risk hurting your leagues most valuable players...you can look at the nhl right now with crosby. harrison is a thug through and through and this was pretty much a "no enough is enough" suspension
good riddance, and i dont just say that as a ravens fan... harrison is simply a pure thug
edit: just to make it clear, it definitely was an illegal hit, just for the helmet to helmet and certainly deserved a 15 yd flag..but i think the reason the league had pushed it so hard was because of the force used on a qb, even if he was "running". i dont really think it matters regardless
Roger Goodell is a fucking pushover when it's come to suspensions in the past, so he had to do something to show players that he's serious about repeat offenders.
The hit definitely warranted a flag (regardless of the fact that McCoy threw it, Harrison hit him high) but I'm not sure whether or not it warranted a suspension. The fact of the matter is that it was basically a power play by Goodell to show everyone that he means business, in the hopes that players might be more careful.
I think if Harrison would would begin to show some regret for making these hits (whether if he's just acting or whether it's legitimate) the league might go easier on him in the future, but at this point he's a repeat offender that has never (or rarely, I can't recall an exception) apologized for his blatantly illegal hits.
The hit definitely warranted a flag (regardless of the fact that McCoy threw it, Harrison hit him high) but I'm not sure whether or not it warranted a suspension. The fact of the matter is that it was basically a power play by Goodell to show everyone that he means business, in the hopes that players might be more careful.
I think if Harrison would would begin to show some regret for making these hits (whether if he's just acting or whether it's legitimate) the league might go easier on him in the future, but at this point he's a repeat offender that has never (or rarely, I can't recall an exception) apologized for his blatantly illegal hits.
TheValkyries
proudly reppin' 2 superbowl wins since DEFLATEGATE
Any advantage one can get, one should take.
A correct tackle does not involve losing control of one's body. If you had to lose control of yourself to tackle someone, a quick running back will destroy you every single time, as he'll just side-step the tackle and run right by you. Fletcher made a stupid play with a poor tackling attempt, and paid for it.
He is horizontal to the ground, with no control over his body, and will go to where he targeted. But this does not matter, as this is not about the fact that he lunged, but about the fact that he got penalized for 15 yards because he hit a sliding player. Your whole point is that he had no control over his body, and mine is that it doesn't change the NFL rule because he chose to try a tackle that way.
But you ARE allowed to hit QB's, you're just not allowed to go full-tilt like an idiot at every person that runs by you with the ball. You will get blown away by any decent runner for what Fletcher did, and will get penalized for hitting a sliding player for anyone with the wherewithal to slide into the hit. The second run Brady pulled on that drive, he ran right by a guy who literally stood still with indecision. He didn't even attempt to square up and tackle Brady, which would've resulted in an entirely legal play! Something you continuously fail to understand. You can tackle someone without provoking a penalty by sliding into your hit! I'll give you hint: it involves not losing control of your body.
You can penalize a person for trying to hit someone in the process of sliding, as the rule states.How did you even think that was a rational question? You can't hit someone in the process of sliding, and they place the ball where the player hits the ground at the end of the slide. While this could create interesting circumstances where a runner could try and fly 10 yards forward whilst sliding, it's not a double standard, it's just the rule as it is now. If you want to complain that the rule should be changed, BY ALL MEANS GO FOR IT. But so far, you've only said that the penalty should not have been called, when in fact, it should have, because it was a direct violation of the rules. There literally cannot be argument about that fact.
Triplette called forearm to the head, which didn't happen at all. So apparently, the list of people who understand Football is just me. I'm willing to accept this, because despite all the complaining, I know the rule, and I know I'm right.
Definitely a poor move by the Dolphins management with the timing. Give him until the end of the season. Going 4-2 in your last 6 games isn't a reason to cut ties with a coach.
Three straight losing seasons is unacceptable for an organization like the Miami Dolphins.
2008-2011 R.I.P. Tony Sparano.
2008-2011 R.I.P. Tony Sparano.
To be fair, this was also Harrison's first...what, illegal hit all season, so a suspension isn't warranted I think even given his past, as to me it seems like he's at least tried to clean up his act, he isn't doing it back to back like last season. I'd just toss him another big fine he's used to paying with the threat of a suspension for the next hit given his past.
Oh I am perfectly accepting of the fact that the hit was illegal, and I even would have been ok with a large fine for it. But the hit wasn't even that egregious, and McCoy left the pocket and became a runner. I think what sends me over the edge is the timing of the suspension, with the league forcing him to miss the 49ers game that could have playoff implications. If Goodell wants to use someone as an example, he should at least do so on a more blatant foul, not the one Harrison got. This was also his first offense of the season, so jumping straight to a suspension is unnecessary. If we lose the 49ers game because we can't get pressure on Alex Smith I will be livid.
You make it sound like it's not hard to get pressure on Smith, Cardinals did it somehow >.>
I dunno, even I'm not so tempted to pick the Niners this week in the predictions thread, just simply because the offense is not there and they're going up against another strong defensive team that unlike the Ravens, can put points up when needed. Dunno if we even have Willis back...
Also for what it's worth, even Brady the bitch thinks the hit was clean:
http://www.nfl.com/news/story/09000...l-on-fletchers-hit?module=HP11_content_stream
I dunno, even I'm not so tempted to pick the Niners this week in the predictions thread, just simply because the offense is not there and they're going up against another strong defensive team that unlike the Ravens, can put points up when needed. Dunno if we even have Willis back...
Also for what it's worth, even Brady the bitch thinks the hit was clean:
http://www.nfl.com/news/story/09000...l-on-fletchers-hit?module=HP11_content_stream
So yes, overall it was a horrible call.
- Status