Soko Posted February 25, 2020 Share Posted February 25, 2020 2 minutes ago, BillsGuy82 said: Nope, i stated the last suspension was a joke.. Which it was and you're reverting to his history which nobody is arguing. I don't feel people should be suspended based off reputation. I feel people should be suspended off of action and i don't think the Doyle incident was a "intent to hurt" play and shouldnt of even been looked at by the league. It was a 15 yard penalty not a suspension Sure, that’s how you feel. But I asked why do you feel a player with the history that Burfict has should be looked at as any other player, when he has clearly exhibited either a disregard or unwillingness to change how he plays the game? It’s not his “reputation” as a bad guy that bought him his last big one. It’s his actual rap sheet of illegal and reckless behavior. I’m just confused on why you feel that shouldn’t be a factor? Aside from the judicial system, there are already statutes within the league (DV, PED) that offer escalating consequences based off of previous incidents. This isn’t exactly Burfict’s first rodeo. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillsGuy82 Posted February 25, 2020 Share Posted February 25, 2020 1 minute ago, Yin-Yang said: Sure, that’s how you feel. But I asked why do you feel a player with the history that Burfict has should be looked at as any other player, when he has clearly exhibited either a disregard or unwillingness to change how he plays the game? It’s not his “reputation” as a bad guy that bought him his last big one. It’s his actual rap sheet of illegal and reckless behavior. I’m just confused on why you feel that shouldn’t be a factor? Aside from the judicial system, there are already statutes within the league (DV, PED) that offer escalating consequences based off of previous incidents. This isn’t exactly Burfict’s first rodeo. So what you're basically saying is Burfict shouldn't get the same set of rules as any other NFL LB based off of his history How does that differ from suspending someone based off of reputation ? This thread just made my head hurt. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BayRaider Posted February 25, 2020 Share Posted February 25, 2020 (edited) It’s not that Burfict shouldn’t be treated differently, there was literally nothing, not even 5% dirty, about the Doyle hit. Mayock said, Gruden said it, Carr said it, Rich Eisen said it, Jack Doyle said it!!!, and plenty of other media- heads said it. After being confronted, the NFL claims they found another dirty hit on the season which contributed to the suspension yet never stated which hit they were talking about. Total BS. Edited February 25, 2020 by BayRaider 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillsGuy82 Posted February 25, 2020 Share Posted February 25, 2020 2 minutes ago, BayRaider said: It’s not that Burfict shouldn’t be treated differently, there was literally nothing, not even 5% dirty, about the Doyle hit. Mayock said, Gruden said it, Carr said it, Rich Eisen said it, Jack Doyle said it!!!, and plenty of other media- heads said it. After being confronted, the NFL claims they found another dirty hit on the season which contributed to the suspension yet never stated which hit they were talking about. Total BS. That is what I started on but the other fella is giving me a history lesson when all I'm saying is the last hit shouldn't of been a suspension. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soko Posted February 25, 2020 Share Posted February 25, 2020 Just now, BillsGuy82 said: So what you're basically saying is Burfict shouldn't get the same set of rules as any other NFL LB based off of his history How does that differ from suspending someone based off of reputation ? This thread just made my head hurt. Reputations are beliefs or opinions. Burfict has a factual history regarding his play, there’s no opinion on the matter. This isn’t like Bernard Pollard (big hitter, Patriots killer) or Kam Chancellor (LBer playing safety) getting a year long suspension over one illegal hit. Burfict has been fined. He’s been suspended. He’s had meetings with the commissioner. His leash is deservedly shorter - his choices dictated that. It’s not the league just picking him out. Burfict decided to illegally hit Conner. He decided to illegally hit Brown. He decided to illegally kick Nix. He decided to illegally hit Doyle. He decided to illegally hit Sherman. He decided to illegally twist the ankles of Olsen and Newton. He decided to illegally hit Hill. He decided to illegally hit Benjamin. He decided to illegally hit Jones. He decided to crotch shot the Packers TE. He decided to illegally stomp on Blount. He decided to illegally hit Williams. He decided to illegally hit Janovich. So once again, I’ll ask you - why do you feel a player who has chosen not to obey rules, intentionally gone out to injure players (I would call twisting ankles after a tackle just that), and disregarded punishments in the past, should be treated like a rookie with no history? You seem reluctant to answer this very straightforward question. I realize you feel his laundry list of deeds shouldn’t be taken into account, I’m asking why. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BayRaider Posted February 25, 2020 Share Posted February 25, 2020 3 minutes ago, BillsGuy82 said: That is what I started on but the other fella is giving me a history lesson when all I'm saying is the last hit shouldn't of been a suspension. He’s a persistent fellow that will not stop until you stop. I’ve never once seen him admit he’s wrong, ever. Pat fan who thinks Spygate was no big deal though, so you might wanna ignore. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soko Posted February 25, 2020 Share Posted February 25, 2020 (edited) 3 minutes ago, BayRaider said: He’s a persistent fellow that will not stop until you stop. I’ve never once seen him admit he’s wrong, ever. Pat fan who thinks Spygate was no big deal though, so you might wanna ignore. Yeah, explaining your opinion when a challenging POV comes up is difficult stuff. Much easier to ignore. Edited February 25, 2020 by Yin-Yang Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TecmoSuperJoe Posted February 25, 2020 Share Posted February 25, 2020 The shame of it all he has actually had the talent to be a HOF type player, but his boneheaded style of play resulted in his career going down the toilet. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KManX89 Posted February 25, 2020 Share Posted February 25, 2020 (edited) 15 hours ago, Gannon12 said: Over the line! he shouldn’t have even been suspended for his hit on Doyle. Completely ridiculous and obvious targeting by the league He made his bed with countless other dirty hit infractions. I'm surprised they're even letting him still play at all at this point. Edited February 25, 2020 by KManX89 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theJ Posted February 25, 2020 Share Posted February 25, 2020 7 hours ago, Yin-Yang said: Reputations are beliefs or opinions. Burfict has a factual history regarding his play, there’s no opinion on the matter. This isn’t like Bernard Pollard (big hitter, Patriots killer) or Kam Chancellor (LBer playing safety) getting a year long suspension over one illegal hit. Burfict has been fined. He’s been suspended. He’s had meetings with the commissioner. His leash is deservedly shorter - his choices dictated that. It’s not the league just picking him out. Burfict decided to illegally hit Conner. He decided to illegally hit Brown. He decided to illegally kick Nix. He decided to illegally hit Doyle. He decided to illegally hit Sherman. He decided to illegally twist the ankles of Olsen and Newton. He decided to illegally hit Hill. He decided to illegally hit Benjamin. He decided to illegally hit Jones. He decided to crotch shot the Packers TE. He decided to illegally stomp on Blount. He decided to illegally hit Williams. He decided to illegally hit Janovich. So once again, I’ll ask you - why do you feel a player who has chosen not to obey rules, intentionally gone out to injure players (I would call twisting ankles after a tackle just that), and disregarded punishments in the past, should be treated like a rookie with no history? You seem reluctant to answer this very straightforward question. I realize you feel his laundry list of deeds shouldn’t be taken into account, I’m asking why. Because the hit on Doyle was a hit that happens 20 times/game. Mainly it's just a ridiculous standard to say that if he has one helmet to helmet hit he's going to be suspended for 16 games. No defender can play football that way. Also, the defender who co-tackled on that play also went helmet-helmet and no one talked about him, lol. And BTW - i'm not defending his history. He's deserved pretty much everything he got. But the NFL has a witch hunt on him, to the extent that he can't really play the game short of changing positions to TE so he's not doing the hitting anymore. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BayRaider Posted February 25, 2020 Share Posted February 25, 2020 3 minutes ago, theJ said: Because the hit on Doyle was a hit that happens 20 times/game. Mainly it's just a ridiculous standard to say that if he has one helmet to helmet hit he's going to be suspended for 16 games. No defender can play football that way. Also, the defender who co-tackled on that play also went helmet-helmet and no one talked about him, lol. And BTW - i'm not defending his history. He's deserved pretty much everything he got. But the NFL has a witch hunt on him, to the extent that he can't really play the game short of changing positions to TE so he's not doing the hitting anymore. This. What Bills and I keep saying but he doesn’t listen. It’s not about his reputation. It’s the fact that wasn’t a dirty hit at all and it wad a witchhunt. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gannon12 Posted February 25, 2020 Share Posted February 25, 2020 56 minutes ago, KManX89 said: He made his bed with countless other dirty hit infractions. I'm surprised they're even letting him still play at all at this point. That shouldn’t matter when you are only playing the game by the rules! Watch the hit on Doyle then comment. Too much jumping to conclusions around here Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheKillerNacho Posted February 25, 2020 Share Posted February 25, 2020 but for how long? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
braylon Posted February 25, 2020 Share Posted February 25, 2020 9 hours ago, BayRaider said: It’s not that Burfict shouldn’t be treated differently, there was literally nothing, not even 5% dirty, about the Doyle hit. Mayock said, Gruden said it, Carr said it, Rich Eisen said it, Jack Doyle said it!!!, and plenty of other media- heads said it. After being confronted, the NFL claims they found another dirty hit on the season which contributed to the suspension yet never stated which hit they were talking about. Total BS. Didn't he absolutely obliterate a defenseless receiver who wasn't even targeted with a pass earlier in the same game? I can't find it anywhere, but I swear I remember it lol. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gannon12 Posted February 25, 2020 Share Posted February 25, 2020 7 minutes ago, braylon said: Didn't he absolutely obliterate a defenseless receiver who wasn't even targeted with a pass earlier in the same game? I can't find it anywhere, but I swear I remember it lol. No, he was just playing the position like he should 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.