TNF: Bears @ Packers

[nagahide13]

2 hours ago, Kip Smithers said:

No way he was aiming for his head. You don't launch yourself that low if you're aiming for the head and I'm not comfortable making that leap with a guy who has no rep of it. Bad timing that's it. I'd be annoyed if he was suspended honestly 

Maybe the actual head-shot was bad timing, but it's pretty clear that he put an unnecessary hit on a completely defenseless receiver. It seemed like he was intending to injure Adams. Obvious dirty hit. Can't have that kind of thing in the game.

[Kip Smithers]

7 hours ago, nagahide13 said:

Maybe the actual head-shot was bad timing, but it's pretty clear that he put an unnecessary hit on a completely defenseless receiver. It seemed like he was intending to injure Adams. Obvious dirty hit. Can't have that kind of thing in the game.

First of he wasn't a defenseless receiver. He's a runner at that point. Secondly, trying to injure and hurt are not the same. He tried to hit him to hurt him (which isn't dirty) and to hit him to where the ball maybe dislodged.

I guess my standards for dirty are not as low

[Small Town Values]

(Disclaimer... I consider the HTH hit to be deliberate)  

Trevathan should have been ejected, and / or suspended. The NFL needs to get serious on this issue. Fines don't work. 

OBJ should have been punished for his block in the back on Davis, that cause a concussion, last week as well. 

It's not about the game going soft, it's about implementing safety measures in light of new information. Fear of letting teammates down is a better deterrent than fines. 

 

[Kip Smithers]

14 minutes ago, Marc MacGyver said:

(Disclaimer... I consider the HTH hit to be deliberate)  

Trevathan should have been ejected, and / or suspended. The NFL needs to get serious on this issue. Fines don't work. 

OBJ should have been punished for his block in the back on Davis, that cause a concussion, last week as well. 

It's not about the game going soft, it's about implementing safety measures in light of new information. Fear of letting teammates down is a better deterrent than fines. 

 

Just no.

People act like this a regular occurrence and second of all act as if those hits that happen very infrequently in today's game are the ones that lead to health issues down the road. They've already put rules in place that prohibit you for leading with the crown of the helmet and that's a sufficient deterrent. This was an unfortunate case of bad timing. 

OBJ should've gotten a flag for that hit. Nothing more. A fine would've been excessive and a suspension would've been beyond absurd.

[DigInBoys]

1 hour ago, Kip Smithers said:

Just no.

People act like this a regular occurrence and second of all act as if those hits that happen very infrequently in today's game are the ones that lead to health issues down the road. They've already put rules in place that prohibit you for leading with the crown of the helmet and that's a sufficient deterrent. This was an unfortunate case of bad timing. 

OBJ should've gotten a flag for that hit. Nothing more. A fine would've been excessive and a suspension would've been beyond absurd.

One hit like the one on Thursday night can kill a man in the right circumstances let alone lead to serious health issues for the rest of their lives.

 

[nagahide13]

2 hours ago, Kip Smithers said:

First of he wasn't a defenseless receiver. He's a runner at that point. Secondly, trying to injure and hurt are not the same. He tried to hit him to hurt him (which isn't dirty) and to hit him to where the ball maybe dislodged.

I guess my standards for dirty are not as low

He was being held in place. His arms were being held down. He couldn't defend himself. He couldn't move, he couldn't drop to the ground. That is the very definition of a defenseless receiver. I think you're simply confusing "In the air" with "defenseless".

[Kip Smithers]

1 hour ago, nagahide13 said:

He was being held in place. His arms were being held down. He couldn't defend himself. He couldn't move, he couldn't drop to the ground. That is the very definition of a defenseless receiver. I think you're simply confusing "In the air" with "defenseless".

Yes he couldn't defend himself in the literal sense which is quite frequent on the football field. But according the rules he was not defenseless. He was a runner which means he isn't protected

 

1 hour ago, DigInBoys said:

One hit like the one on Thursday night can kill a man in the right circumstances let alone lead to serious health issues for the rest of their lives.

 

It's football, any hit can kill you or lead to serious health issues. Heck they still do kick offs and punt returns which are the most dangerous plays in football. Should we ban those who deliver ferocious hits?

[DigInBoys]

1 hour ago, Kip Smithers said:

Yes he couldn't defend himself in the literal sense which is quite frequent on the football field. But according the rules he was not defenseless. He was a runner which means he isn't protected

 

It's football, any hit can kill you or lead to serious health issues. Heck they still do kick offs and punt returns which are the most dangerous plays in football. Should we ban those who deliver ferocious hits?

You don't need to jump to extremes to try and prove a point. Common sense dictates a line be drawn on certain hits, and this one clearly crossed that line as evidenced by the fact that a man was taken out on a stretcher and everyone else seems to disagree with you.

[Kip Smithers]

2 minutes ago, DigInBoys said:

You don't need to jump to extremes to try and prove a point. Common sense dictates a line be drawn on certain hits, and this one clearly crossed that line as evidenced by the fact that a man was taken out on a stretcher and everyone else seems to disagree with you.

You just said that hit could've killed him which theoretically is true. So can a lot of other hits, yet  you accuse me of going to extremes?

It didn't cross the line, what you guys are looking at is the result of the hit. I am just able to separate the hit and the result of the hit. And while I think it was unnecessary, im not going to lengths of dirty. Could careless if you or others disagree with me. 

[bucsfan333]

I'll take any excuse I can to share more smoking Jay Cutler memes.

[Pugger]

6 hours ago, Kip Smithers said:

First of he wasn't a defenseless receiver. He's a runner at that point. Secondly, trying to injure and hurt are not the same. He tried to hit him to hurt him (which isn't dirty) and to hit him to where the ball maybe dislodged.

I guess my standards for dirty are not as low

According to the NFL rule book leading with the crown of your helmet is illegal because it puts both the hitter and the target in jeopardy no matter what or where the hitter was aiming..

[drfrey13]

22 minutes ago, Pugger said:

According to the NFL rule book leading with the crown of your helmet is illegal because it puts both the hitter and the target in jeopardy no matter what or where the hitter was aiming..

What I do not get is if leading with the crown of your helmet is a penalty why is it not called.  I see players leading with the crown of their helmet all the time.  The only time I see it flagged is when a huge hit is applied and a player lays their hurt.  I guess it is up to interpretation of the official what forcible is and the player to sell it.  Would tell my WRs to take a 2 count after every  hit from a helmet to try and draw a flag.  Long enough to sell but quick enough to get back for the next play.

[incognito_man]

4 hours ago, Kip Smithers said:

Yes he couldn't defend himself in the literal sense which is quite frequent on the football field. But according the rules he was not defenseless. He was a runner which means he isn't protected

You are wrong about the rules. They have already been posted. Why you continue to ignore them is beyond me.

He absolutely is protected. Literally word for word in this exact situation.

[Kip Smithers]

3 hours ago, incognito_man said:

You are wrong about the rules. They have already been posted. Why you continue to ignore them is beyond me.

He absolutely is protected. Literally word for word in this exact situation.

Umm I did not see the rules you're referring to, it's not me ignoring them. The only rule im aware of is the crown of the helmet rule which does apply here. 

[Kip Smithers]

4 hours ago, Pugger said:

According to the NFL rule book leading with the crown of your helmet is illegal because it puts both the hitter and the target in jeopardy no matter what or where the hitter was aiming..

I'm aware of that rule which in that case I get why a flag was thrown but like it has been mentioned it sure as heck isn't enforced a lot. The ref didn't even throw the flag until he saw Adams on the floor. It's hardly enforced.