Page 14 of 20 FirstFirst ... 41213141516 ... LastLast
Results 261 to 280 of 390

Thread: 2019 NFL Season

  1. #261
    I did not see the incident in real time. i watched the video via this tweet https://twitter.com/cjzero/status/1195201083020365825.

    First, Garrett tackles Rudolph legally. While they are on the ground Rudolph starts messing with Garrett's helmet. Then Garret rips off Rudolphs helmet, and while being restrained and pushed back by two Steelers, gets charged by Rudolph and attempt to hit Rudolph with the helmet. The one of the Steelers tackles Garrett and holds him down in the end zone while Pouncey comes in and attempts punches and kicks to the head repeatedly. If I were the czar of NFL punishment I would suspend Rudolph one game, the Cleveland guy that pushed Rudolph from behind one game, Pouncey 2 or 3 games, and Garrett for the season. I would punish the Browns more, but there are certainly culpable Steelers.

    I am not a Brown or Steeler fan. I like the Chiefs. You may not agree with me and we will probably continue to see this differently, but at a minimum on the Steeler side Pouncey deserves suspension, and given how ugly this incident was and Rudolph's helmet grab started the whole thing, I'd give him a game too.

  2. #262
    FWIW, dog fighting is illegal in all 50 states, the District of Columbia, and the territories of the United States. It is an outdated phrase much like removing layers of a cat. Hopefully we can advance our conversations beyond these outmoded phraseologies.

  3. #263
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Raleigh, NC
    Quote Originally Posted by chris13 View Post
    I did not see the incident in real time. i watched the video via this tweet https://twitter.com/cjzero/status/1195201083020365825.

    First, Garrett tackles Rudolph legally. While they are on the ground Rudolph starts messing with Garrett's helmet. Then Garret rips off Rudolphs helmet, and while being restrained and pushed back by two Steelers, gets charged by Rudolph and attempt to hit Rudolph with the helmet. The one of the Steelers tackles Garrett and holds him down in the end zone while Pouncey comes in and attempts punches and kicks to the head repeatedly. If I were the czar of NFL punishment I would suspend Rudolph one game, the Cleveland guy that pushed Rudolph from behind one game, Pouncey 2 or 3 games, and Garrett for the season. I would punish the Browns more, but there are certainly culpable Steelers.

    I am not a Brown or Steeler fan. I like the Chiefs. You may not agree with me and we will probably continue to see this differently, but at a minimum on the Steeler side Pouncey deserves suspension, and given how ugly this incident was and Rudolph's helmet grab started the whole thing, I'd give him a game too.
    This sounds about right. I wouldn't really mind if Pouncey were suspended the rest of the season (with Garrett's stretching into next season). Should be at least 2 games though.

  4. #264
    Quote Originally Posted by HereBeforeCoachK View Post
    There is a code...what Pouncey did was within the code - what Garrett did was totally out of bounds, unprecedented. And BTW, what Garrett did happened before what Pouncey did...it was a domino thing. Any analysis without that context is simply meaningless.
    Oh, well since there's a code... The notion that kicking a guy in the head while he's down on the ground under another guy is not that big a deal (and I view merely fineable as not that big a deal) because of a serious offense that precipitated it seems pretty laughable to me. But carry on, the code absolves all.
    Demented and sad, but social, right?

  5. #265
    Quote Originally Posted by BD80 View Post
    Really?

    Kicking a guy who is wearing his helmet is the same league with beating a bare-headed man with a helmet?

    Unbelievable.
    Not just A helmet. He used the mans helmet after he ripped it off his head using the face guard for leverage.

  6. #266
    Quote Originally Posted by Blue in the Face View Post
    Oh, well since there's a code... The notion that kicking a guy in the head while he's down on the ground under another guy is not that big a deal (and I view merely fineable as not that big a deal) because of a serious offense that precipitated it seems pretty laughable to me. But carry on, the code absolves all.
    To make such light of the code indicates that perhaps you don't fully understand WTF "a code" is in a sport. They all have them. It's unwritten, but everybody knows it. Every PLAYER knows it. Maybe you never played any team sports, but defending a teammate, taking up for a teammate - especially in violent games like football and hockey, is part of the accepted code. What is also part is that instigators do not get the benefit of the doubt that some responders do. Again, not talking about officiating here, talking about what players understand as the code.

    If you think the word code is cheap and light, think standards, or "what's acceptable." Defending a teammate, including retaliating for a teammate, is considered honorable and being a good teammate - and those doing that are given more leeway than the instigator.

    Then there's another thing you are totally missing. That is the totally unprecedented nature of Garrett's attack. Once someone has let a genie out of the bottle that has never been seen before, every action that follows should be viewed in that context. There is no rule book on what to do with an opposing player rips the helmet off a guy 75 pounds lighter and then beats him about the head with it.

    What Pouncey did, in almost any other context I've ever seen on a football field, is worthy of perhaps 4-6 game suspension and a hefty fine. But it needs to be viewed in the context of this has never happened before... From an admin standpoint, I realize the NFL must dole out punishment for Pouncey...but Im betting that inside NFL locker rooms, Pouncey's actions are considered positively or at the very least, understandable.

  7. #267
    Quote Originally Posted by Indoor66 View Post
    Not just A helmet. He used the mans helmet after he ripped it off his head using the face guard for leverage.
    Since I was the one who said that let me clarify. I’m not saying what Pouncey did is as bad as what Garrett did in severity. What I am saying is that they were similar actions in kind, both attacking a defenseless opponent outside of the scope of the game. I think Garrett should have gotten much more severe punishment than Pouncey and he did, but what Pouncey did reminded me of what Suh did when he was stomping on the head of that guy. Compare what Pouncey did too with what the other Steeler did who was just holding Garrett down in the end zone. I think the punishments here here are fair all around, although I would’ve fined or suspended Rudolph a game as well. It’s certainly a terrible look for the NFL that this happened.

  8. #268
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Steamboat Springs, CO
    Garrett did follow the first rule of football fights: if you are using a helmet as a weapon, use someone else's.

  9. #269
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Deeetroit City
    Just watches another view and its worse than I originally thought.

    https://twitter.com/i/status/1195206889736429568

    On the tackle that started it all, Garrett pinned Rudolph's arm and throws him head first into the ground - didn't need to do that to make the tackle.

    Then Garrett essentially lifts Rudolph off of the ground by his facemask.

    He then twists the helmet off of Rudolph's head.

    Rudolph goes after Garrett, who has Rudolph's helmet, and Garrett bludgeons him over the head with the helmet.

    Garrett deserves a second chance, but not this year or next, and only after completing some sort of therapy and public service.

  10. #270
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Location
    On the Road to Nowhere
    Quote Originally Posted by BD80 View Post
    Just watches another view and its worse than I originally thought.

    https://twitter.com/i/status/1195206889736429568

    On the tackle that started it all, Garrett pinned Rudolph's arm and throws him head first into the ground - didn't need to do that to make the tackle.

    Then Garrett essentially lifts Rudolph off of the ground by his facemask.

    He then twists the helmet off of Rudolph's head.

    Rudolph goes after Garrett, who has Rudolph's helmet, and Garrett bludgeons him over the head with the helmet.

    Garrett deserves a second chance, but not this year or next, and only after completing some sort of therapy and public service.
    Yeah, he yanks Rudolph up twice off the ground by the facemask before violently ripping the helmet off. Can't blame Rudolph for going after him. Though not so wise when you no longer have your helmet. Yet I'm sure I'm sure Rudolph never expected to have his helmet used as a weapon against his unprotected head. Unprecedented.

    Literally could have killed him.

  11. #271
    Quote Originally Posted by chris13 View Post
    Since I was the one who said that let me clarify. I’m not saying what Pouncey did is as bad as what Garrett did in severity. What I am saying is that they were similar actions in kind, both attacking a defenseless opponent outside of the scope of the game. I think Garrett should have gotten much more severe punishment than Pouncey and he did, but what Pouncey did reminded me of what Suh did when he was stomping on the head of that guy. Compare what Pouncey did too with what the other Steeler did who was just holding Garrett down in the end zone. I think the punishments here here are fair all around, although I would’ve fined or suspended Rudolph a game as well. It’s certainly a terrible look for the NFL that this happened.

    I think the statement in bold above is a mis diagnosis of the situation. What Garrett did is what led to Pouncey's actions, defending a teammate - therefore the two acts are in no way similar by definition. You keep pulling these actions out one by one, and trying to judge them on merit outside of the all important context. The same with your concept of Rudolph's actions as well. And BTW, Rudolph was the only player without a helmet, the only "defenseless" player - and every player knows not to go after the head of someone without a hat.

    Then there's the fact that Garrett knew his team was going to win the game at the time of these actions...you can't even use frustration as any kind of mitigating factor for Garrett. Garrett was the instigator at the beginning of this whole sequence and at the low point of the whole sequence.

  12. #272
    Quote Originally Posted by HereBeforeCoachK View Post
    To make such light of the code indicates that perhaps you don't fully understand WTF "a code" is in a sport. They all have them. It's unwritten, but everybody knows it. Every PLAYER knows it. Maybe you never played any team sports, but defending a teammate, taking up for a teammate - especially in violent games like football and hockey, is part of the accepted code. What is also part is that instigators do not get the benefit of the doubt that some responders do. Again, not talking about officiating here, talking about what players understand as the code.

    If you think the word code is cheap and light, think standards, or "what's acceptable." Defending a teammate, including retaliating for a teammate, is considered honorable and being a good teammate - and those doing that are given more leeway than the instigator.
    It's almost impressive how unironically you write this.

    Then there's another thing you are totally missing. That is the totally unprecedented nature of Garrett's attack. Once someone has let a genie out of the bottle that has never been seen before, every action that follows should be viewed in that context. There is no rule book on what to do with an opposing player rips the helmet off a guy 75 pounds lighter and then beats him about the head with it.
    I'm pretty sure no one in this thread has missed that, some just misjudge the extent to which the nature of Garrett's actions mitigate others'. I guess we just have to trust in the code. (By the way, why not uppercase - for such a governing doctrine, seems like it deserves more reverential designation than you're giving it).
    Demented and sad, but social, right?

  13. #273
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Colorado

    Colin Kaepernick saga

    The Kaepernick events of last week were very strange.

    I'm not sure why the NFL even attempted to set this up, given that fact that Kaepernick had sued them and won a settlement. Maybe this was a condition of the settlement or maybe Jay-Z had some influence on the NFL.

    Kaepernick, probably through his advisors, didn't do anything to advance a renewed career in the NFL. They changed the location at the last minute. Kaepernick, in my opinion, went out of his way to be hostile to the NFL and future employers. I think he sealed his fate with his conduct last week.

    So, yeah, I believe in the First Amendment. It doesn't mean I agree with Kaepernick's stance or conduct, but he absolutely has the right to talk and act the way he has. It makes him less employable. There is no way I would hire this guy if, in a different universe, I owned an NFL team[/LIST]

  14. #274
    Quote Originally Posted by MartyClark View Post
    The Kaepernick events of last week were very strange.

    I'm not sure why the NFL even attempted to set this up, given that fact that Kaepernick had sued them and won a settlement. Maybe this was a condition of the settlement or maybe Jay-Z had some influence on the NFL.

    Kaepernick, probably through his advisors, didn't do anything to advance a renewed career in the NFL. They changed the location at the last minute. Kaepernick, in my opinion, went out of his way to be hostile to the NFL and future employers. I think he sealed his fate with his conduct last week.

    So, yeah, I believe in the First Amendment. It doesn't mean I agree with Kaepernick's stance or conduct, but he absolutely has the right to talk and act the way he has. It makes him less employable. There is no way I would hire this guy if, in a different universe, I owned an NFL team[/LIST]
    Except everything he’s done has kept his name in the news. I seriously doubt he’s interested in a backup QB role, he can simply bang on Nike anytime he needs something. Wouldn’t surprise me if he becomes a sports /news commentator or preacher, he has the name.

  15. #275
    Quote Originally Posted by MartyClark View Post
    The Kaepernick events of last week were very strange.

    I'm not sure why the NFL even attempted to set this up, given that fact that Kaepernick had sued them and won a settlement. Maybe this was a condition of the settlement or maybe Jay-Z had some influence on the NFL.

    Kaepernick, probably through his advisors, didn't do anything to advance a renewed career in the NFL. They changed the location at the last minute. Kaepernick, in my opinion, went out of his way to be hostile to the NFL and future employers. I think he sealed his fate with his conduct last week.

    So, yeah, I believe in the First Amendment. It doesn't mean I agree with Kaepernick's stance or conduct, but he absolutely has the right to talk and act the way he has. It makes him less employable. There is no way I would hire this guy if, in a different universe, I owned an NFL team[/LIST]
    This is what seems to be missing from much of the chatter about Kaepernick...and others....is that the First Amendment is protection from being silenced, primarily by government. It does not make one immune from the consequences related to an employer. The NFL is not stopping Kaepernick from saying anything...but they should not be compelled to be his platform either.

    I think Stephen A Smith has had several really good takes on this in the past few days. Kaepernick doesn't want to play. He wants the attention.

  16. #276
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Austin, TX
    Quote Originally Posted by arnie View Post
    Except everything he’s done has kept his name in the news. I seriously doubt he’s interested in a backup QB role, he can simply bang on Nike anytime he needs something. Wouldn’t surprise me if he becomes a sports /news commentator or preacher, he has the name.
    The NFL wanted it behind closed doors. Kaepernick didn’t, so he used leverage and set the rules. It’s pretty clear no one is going to sign him, and I think CK knew that going in. So if it was going to be a sham tryout, it was going to be a sham tryout on his terms in a manner where people could watch and make their own assessments.

    I have my doubts as to whether CK can still be an effective QB. But I tip my cap to him for running the NFL through the ringer on this workout.

  17. #277
    Quote Originally Posted by A-Tex Devil View Post
    The NFL wanted it behind closed doors. Kaepernick didn’t, so he used leverage and set the rules. It’s pretty clear no one is going to sign him, and I think CK knew that going in. So if it was going to be a sham tryout, it was going to be a sham tryout on his terms in a manner where people could watch and make their own assessments.

    I have my doubts as to whether CK can still be an effective QB. But I tip my cap to him for running the NFL through the ringer on this workout.
    I see it differently.

    CK hasn't really wanted to get back to playing for a long time now. I think it's clear he didn't want to play the last year plus that he was on a roster. His skills - which were monstrous - went away long before age was a factor.

    This episode exposed him as a sham. The NFL? Well, they were already pretty low on the public opinion meter.

    And what do you mean "sham" workout where "people could watch and make their own assessments." You mean the public can see video on YouTube and therefore they are suddenly qualified to assess talent? I don't think so.

  18. #278
    Quote Originally Posted by HereBeforeCoachK View Post
    This is what seems to be missing from much of the chatter about Kaepernick...and others...is that the First Amendment is protection from being silenced, primarily by government. It does not make one immune from the consequences related to an employer. The NFL is not stopping Kaepernick from saying anything...but they should not be compelled to be his platform either.

    I think Stephen A Smith has had several really good takes on this in the past few days. Kaepernick doesn't want to play. He wants the attention.
    I agree with the First Amendment take - people tend to interpret that important piece of document to mean "free from consequences if I speak my mind.". That's simply not true. If one of my employee was espousing political beliefs that I felt were hateful, untoward, or simply hurting my business, I could fire them in a hot second. They just can't (or ought not) be subject to prosecution for said statements.

    As far as Kap - I think the fact that the NFL denies he is being blackballed is absurd. It would be far more honest for them to say something like "sorry, despite his talent, we feel her hurts our brand" - assuming that's their position.

    Look at some of the horrid backup QBs getting starts. It's almost impossible to imagine Kap doesn't merit a look from someone, given his record and physical assets. The workout was simply to show "hey, I'm in shape still and ready to go." I don't quite get the venue change, but I can understand wanting it to be in front of cameras to not allow the NFL to control the narrative.

    I suspect Colin will never wear a uniform again, and I also strongly suspect it has nothing to do with his ability or readiness.

  19. #279
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Chicago
    Quote Originally Posted by Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15 View Post
    I agree with the First Amendment take - people tend to interpret that important piece of document to mean "free from consequences if I speak my mind.". That's simply not true. If one of my employee was espousing political beliefs that I felt were hateful, untoward, or simply hurting my business, I could fire them in a hot second. They just can't (or ought not) be subject to prosecution for said statements.

    As far as Kap - I think the fact that the NFL denies he is being blackballed is absurd. It would be far more honest for them to say something like "sorry, despite his talent, we feel her hurts our brand" - assuming that's their position.

    Look at some of the horrid backup QBs getting starts. It's almost impossible to imagine Kap doesn't merit a look from someone, given his record and physical assets. The workout was simply to show "hey, I'm in shape still and ready to go." I don't quite get the venue change, but I can understand wanting it to be in front of cameras to not allow the NFL to control the narrative.

    I suspect Colin will never wear a uniform again, and I also strongly suspect it has nothing to do with his ability or readiness.
    Agreed. Taking on the guaranteed Media circus and potential locker room divisiveness that a Kap signing would entail is something no sane NFL GM or head coach would willingly undertake. I still think he has has the talent to play in the NFL, and I absolutely respect his right to protest in whatever form he sees fit. But actions do have consequences, and Kap's actions have made him unemployable.

  20. #280
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Chesapeake, VA.
    Quote Originally Posted by YmoBeThere View Post
    FWIW, dog fighting is illegal in all 50 states, the District of Columbia, and the territories of the United States. It is an outdated phrase much like removing layers of a cat. Hopefully we can advance our conversations beyond these outmoded phraseologies.
    In the South, people most often say they "don't have a dog in this hunt." I don't have any problem whatsoever with this particular idiom.


    Quick tangential question: If you don't like "more than one way to skin a cat," are you also equally displeased with "kill two birds with one stone?" Just curious.
    "We are not provided with wisdom, we must discover it for ourselves, after a journey through the wilderness which no one else can take for us, an effort which no one can spare us, for our wisdom is the point of view from which we come at last to regard the world." --M. Proust

Similar Threads

  1. 2019-20 DWBB Season
    By CameronBornAndBred in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 1505
    Last Post: 06-27-2020, 07:41 AM
  2. Dukies in the NFL, 2019 Season
    By Acymetric in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 209
    Last Post: 01-20-2020, 01:57 PM
  3. MBB: Emotions about the upcoming (2019-2020) season
    By slower in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 135
    Last Post: 08-23-2019, 02:28 PM
  4. Lax: 2019 Season
    By burnspbesq in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 645
    Last Post: 06-04-2019, 09:06 AM
  5. NBA Regular season thread 2019
    By JasonEvans in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 418
    Last Post: 03-12-2019, 09:07 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •