- 11/22/2011, 10:19PM ET
HOOTZ said 11/22, 10:19 PM
The topic is whether or not Roger Goodell's doling out of huge fines for defensive hits has been clearly defined, has been fair and has been consistent.
This has nothing to do with Rex Ryan using profanity or Earl Bennett's shoes. It's strictly about defense.
I say that Roger Goodell and the NFL have been coming up short time and again on defining what is a legal hit and what isn't. The fines are getting out of hand and there seems to be no consistency on how those fines are caculated.
The Pittsburgh Steelers alone have been fined more than $182,000 this season. With Safety Ryan Clark being fined two weeks in a row. If a player wants to appeal a particular ruling from Goodell, they have to appeal to Goodell.
We're now hearing terms such as Launching and Projectile Motion. Can you change projectile motion? If there is a receiver or runner with the ball and 2 different defenders headed at him from different angles and that player goes from a fully vertcal stance to a crouch in a millisecond...the 2 bodys in motion can't change course. What should have been a shoulder hit is now a helmet hit.
I'm not sure where this will end up but I think the NFL has lost its compass.
Chosen1 said 11/24, 01:29 AM
In the fanmail before this throwdown you said
"All you have to do is support Goodell's stance on his weekly fining spree. Just come out and lay down the logic as to either why it's working or it's good for football"
Are some of the calls questionable? Yes and the league has been willing to reevaluate questionable calls and in some cases has overturned them
Take the week 1 hit from Richard Marshall on Cam Newton that was ruled a penalty later ruled by the league to be a legal hit
Football is dangerous and helmet to helmet hits add an unnecessary danger
Even Kevin Coyle the DB coach for the Bengals last year when discussing fines said
"All of those incidents that you saw over the weekend, there are no arm tackles or the art of tackling that we once knew where you hit through with shoulders, you run your legs and you grab and wrap with your arms. Now there is so much collision hitting in the NFL, just throwing shoulders and launching the body into a receiver."
Which is like begging for a helmet on helmet hit to happen and Goodell is trying to get back to the right way
Of course some tweaking could and probably will be done over time but it is not a bad start
HOOTZ said 11/24, 09:10 PM
Many calls are questionable because there is no decisive rule that addresses incidental contact on defensive plays where a helmet to helmet hit occurs inadvertently.
If a defensive player accidentally pulls on a players facemask during a tackle, the rules take into account that it was accidental and no penalty is assessed. This in itself creates a double standard and it's not the only defensive double standard in existence. There are many.
If an offensive player leads head first going into a tackle, you rarely if ever see a flag thrown. There is no discernable pattern of concern when a defensive player's health is put at risk in the same manner.
The Week 1 hit that you mentioned is the exception not the rule. The NFL allows a player to appeal a particular ruling and that's it. Goodell hasn't made a habit of reversing his rulings. MANY defenders, such as Brian Urlacher and Ray Lewis have voiced there displeasure over how little chance they have of appealing successfully.
As far as the Kevin Coyle quote, I'm glad that came from him and not you. It's completely assinign. Even if you go as far back as leather helmets, concussions were just as prevalent in that era.
- Awful Announcing
- Free Darko
- Pro Football Talk
- The Big Lead
- Joe Posnanski
- The Sporting Blog
- Big League Stew
- Bugs and Cranks
- Every day Should Be Saturday
- Mr. Irrelevant
- With Leather
- The Sports Hernia