Vikes_Bolts1228 Posted August 23, 2019 Share Posted August 23, 2019 42 minutes ago, y*so*blu said: If he's had seven, he must already be at serious risk for CTE. Can the NFL force a player to retire? Yeah they basically just did that to Doug Baldwin with a failed physical designation. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hunter2_1 Posted August 23, 2019 Share Posted August 23, 2019 Definitely read that as WASTE Reed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
incognito_man Posted August 23, 2019 Share Posted August 23, 2019 Anyone else ready WASTE Jordan Reed ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
incognito_man Posted August 23, 2019 Share Posted August 23, 2019 1 hour ago, Hunter2_1 said: Definitely read that as WASTE Reed. lol, should have read the thread 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leader Posted August 23, 2019 Share Posted August 23, 2019 If its not concussions, it's his hammys. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Art_Vandalay Posted August 23, 2019 Share Posted August 23, 2019 Yeah, this should be it for him. At least he got one big contract before all this happened. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gmen Posted August 23, 2019 Share Posted August 23, 2019 As sad as it sounds, he probably knew five years ago that he was going to have CTE issues when he retires anyway. Probably figured he didn’t have much to lose by continuing to play. Might as well make as much money as possible to set himself and his family up. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nabbs4u Posted August 24, 2019 Share Posted August 24, 2019 1 hour ago, Gmen said: As sad as it sounds, he probably knew five years ago that he was going to have CTE issues when he retires anyway. Probably figured he didn’t have much to lose by continuing to play. Might as well make as much money as possible to set himself and his family up. Unfortunately, this is probably true. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
turtle28 Posted August 24, 2019 Share Posted August 24, 2019 This is awful for Reed. He should retire, but he won’t. Now, I usually side with defenders on most rules, grabs and hits in today’s NFL bc all the rules are so geared towards the offense that it makes playing defense and watching the game not as fun anymore bc of all the stupid ticky tack penalties. But, this hit by Neal was vicious and unnecessary. It was targeting, late and an unnecessary hit to Reed’s head. I’d hate to see this, but seriously the only way these defenders are going to learn to stop leading with their heads and to stop using their heads as a weapon is to kick them out of the game or suspend them the next week if the hit looks avoidable and is this vicious. I think the college rule goes too far and it needs to be scaled back but if it’s a hit like Neal put on Reed, the player needs to either be ejected after review of the hit in that current game or suspended the next game after the league reviews the hits that drew 15-yard penalties on Monday or Tuesday after the games have been played. You can’t have defenders coming in and spearing guys with their helmets. They are putting their own lives and the offensive players quality of life after football at risk. We all know football is a fast and violent game but it doesn’t have to be unnecessarily violent. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
turtle28 Posted August 24, 2019 Share Posted August 24, 2019 14 hours ago, incognito_man said: lol, should have read the thread That’s bc most people put WASH and he could have/should have put a comma. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
turtle28 Posted August 24, 2019 Share Posted August 24, 2019 (edited) 17 hours ago, Vikes_Bolts1228 said: 2 should be plenty. Let's be honest, the front office knows who they're cutting before the 4th game and the amount of true position battles that need to be decided by the 4th game isn't worth of risk of injury to a #2 lineman. We don't need game 4 where the last half is just a "participation award" for the players who never had a shot at making the team. The starters play a series in game one.....don't need it. The starters don't play a down in game 4....don't need it. So the relevant players essentially play 3 quarters of football out of 16. Let the starters play (if they want/need) a quarter in game one.....quarter + a series or a half in game two. That's still 5-6 quarters of football to evaluate back-up battles. Should be plenty. They definitely should scale preseason back to two games and expand the playoffs by two teams in each conference IMO. Week 1 of Preseason starters play a quarter and week 2, starters play a half. Institute mandatory team scrimmages in the preseason. Then, the league could have the Super Bowl on Presidents Day weekend and then everyone could get drunk for the Super Bowl and not have to take off for work on Monday or be hungover/exhausted at work on Monday. I don’t think the players are going to agree on an 18 game schedule without big raises from the owners or shorter guaranteed contracts but I do think the players would agree to an expanded playoffs bc that means they’d get paid extra if their team makes the playoffs. Edited August 24, 2019 by turtle28 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vikes_Bolts1228 Posted August 24, 2019 Share Posted August 24, 2019 3 hours ago, turtle28 said: They definitely should scale preseason back to two games and expand the playoffs by two teams in each conference IMO. Week 1 of Preseason starters play a quarter and week 2, starters play a half. Institute mandatory team scrimmages in the preseason. Then, the league could have the Super Bowl on Presidents Day weekend and then everyone could get drunk for the Super Bowl and not have to take off for work on Monday or be hungover/exhausted at work on Monday. I don’t think the players are going to agree on an 18 game schedule without big raises from the owners or shorter guaranteed contracts but I do think the players would agree to an expanded playoffs bc that means they’d get paid extra if their team makes the playoffs. 2 pre-season games, 17-game schedule, larger rosters game day rosters, 1 extra playoff week where the two extra teams play each other to move on (kinda like the MLB wildcard teams). That gives the other 8 teams an extra bye week before the playoffs (and probably taking off week 17 if they can) so they get plenty of chance to heal up/rest before the playoffs. Another bye week of sorts. Seems like a good compromise. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Broncofan Posted August 24, 2019 Author Share Posted August 24, 2019 There is no increase in the 16 game schedule without more guaranteed $ in the deals (minimum # years depending on length that’s better than current), a year removed from the rookie deals to hit FA earlier and a Larry Bird clause replacing the franchise tag. And better / earlier qualifications for medical and pensions. The ownership wants more $$ - they have to pony up more real $ not just the top end contracts. Because the 18 game schedule will grind all the players more and increase the risk of shortened careers and / or career ending injury before FA paydays. And there have to be 2 bye weeks in the season not even a question. Because of the above it’s not such a clear cut solution. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.