Reed suspended one game for multiple violations of hits to the head.

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from shenanigan. Show shenanigan's posts

    Reed suspended one game for multiple violations of hits to the head.

    3 incidents going back to 2010.


    In theory, this is a good idea but the NFL is so stupid with it's flags that it's guaranteed they will suspend players for nothing. 

    Anyone see GB vs DET yesterday when a player accedently slapped Staffords helmet and got flagged?  Or when Spikes got fined for Fitz when Fitz ducked into him, or dozens of other examples.

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from AZPAT. Show AZPAT's posts

    Re: Reed suspended one game for multiple violations of hits to the head.

    I will say, and no one can even consider countering with this fact: if you (a player) aims for the large torso area he will most assuredly NOT get flagged for a helmet to helmet hit, unless the opposing player was on his way down prior to the hit. Imagine! the NFL enforcing rules about contact with a player's head with the focus on concussions!  

    Yes, it IS that simple. It's time to stop foolish excuses like "He ducked into it", "it was just a slap", etc. Apprently lack of responsibility has hit NFL fanbases, if not the NFL.  "IT'S NOT THEIR FAULT!"

    Not allowing ANYTHING to get to the head area should be sufficient eniught to understand. But, if players will continually trying to sert their own standards and circumstances, we'll have more flags and more fines. If players are confirtable with this, then we as fans shoudl be just as comfortable with it, even if it costs the team a game.   

     
  3. This post has been removed.

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from pcmIV. Show pcmIV's posts

    Re: Reed suspended one game for multiple violations of hits to the head.

    In response to LessPhatRex's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Can we all just agree that if that happened to a Patriot player the outrage would be beyond belief?  The talk of the anti patriots conspiracies and how Goodel has it out for BB would be in every post.  A tiny fine for that bust Spikes and it was unbearable.  Imagine a suspension. 

    [/QUOTE]

    Spikes is one of the reasons why New England has a top 10 run defense.  Your pathetic run D could use more "busts" like Spikes.  Learn the game.

     
  5. This post has been removed.

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from AZPAT. Show AZPAT's posts

    Re: Reed suspended one game for multiple violations of hits to the head.

    Nothing like staying on point.

    "But officer, I MAY have been drinking tonight, but I am NOT drunk! I only had 2 beers!" ***

    "Pal, doesn't matter what you think right now......."

    *** The standard answer for the question: Have you had anything to drink tonight? (per law enforcement agents)

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from themightypatriots. Show themightypatriots's posts

    Re: Reed suspended one game for multiple violations of hits to the head.

    The worst was the 2006 conference championship when Tully Banta Cain grazed the side of Manning's helmet with his pinky finger and it drew a 15 yard penalty.  That was on their go-ahead drive too.  Peyton is just so clutch.

     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from shenanigan. Show shenanigan's posts

    Re: Reed suspended one game for multiple violations of hits to the head.

    In response to AZPAT's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    I will say, and no one can even consider countering with this fact: if you (a player) aims for the large torso area he will most assuredly NOT get flagged for a helmet to helmet hit, unless the opposing player was on his way down prior to the hit. Imagine! the NFL enforcing rules about contact with a player's head with the focus on concussions!  

    Yes, it IS that simple. It's time to stop foolish excuses like "He ducked into it", "it was just a slap", etc. Apprently lack of responsibility has hit NFL fanbases, if not the NFL.  "IT'S NOT THEIR FAULT!"

    Not allowing ANYTHING to get to the head area should be sufficient eniught to understand. But, if players will continually trying to sert their own standards and circumstances, we'll have more flags and more fines. If players are confirtable with this, then we as fans shoudl be just as comfortable with it, even if it costs the team a game.   

    [/QUOTE]


    Players are most certainly not comfortable with it.  It is most assuredly not a fact that if you aim for the torso you will not get flagged. 

    How about they fine players for hits that can cause injury?  Or how about they take look at the speed of the game and don't require players to make moves that are humanly impossible like stopping their momentum in a fraction of a second?  In Detroit the defensive player tried to avoid the QB at the last moment because Stafford threw the ball as he was about to get hit.  As he turned and contorted his body to miss him one of his hands brushed up agains Staffords helmet.  Stafford probably couldn't even feel it.  It could not have possibly injured someone. 

    It's plain as day to everyone that these fines are much more about a show of safety to avoid a lawsuit than actually being safe.  It's still legal to hit runners in the head.

    Now I know it's easier to just make decisions without actually having to think or look at each individual incident.  The NFL has enough money and resources to write the rules that protect the players and enforce them.  Enforcing broad general rules like saying a "slap in the helmet" is the same as a "hit in the head" is just lazy. It's like saying if you're late to work you get fined, then somebody gets in a car accident that causes them to be late and you say "You have a lack of responsibility!"  The circumstances for any incident are always pertinent.  Not looking at the circumstances is lazy.

     

    They are enforcing what's easy instead of what's correct.  A lack of responsibility is not doing what's right because it's easier to do it the easy way.

     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from tcal2-. Show tcal2-'s posts

    Re: Reed suspended one game for multiple violations of hits to the head.

    It make sense that the dirtiest team in football has the dirtiest players.

    Thanks to concussions tonight will be the 2nd most boring game of the year. I don't know how anything can be worse then last night game.

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from TSWFAN. Show TSWFAN's posts

    Re: Reed suspended one game for multiple violations of hits to the head.

    REED should have been suspended after he went for Branch's head earlier this year. Lewis should have been convicted of murder years ago. Good upstanding citizens that crowd!!!

     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from vertigho. Show vertigho's posts

    Re: Reed suspended one game for multiple violations of hits to the head.

    The NFL is getting ridiculous.

     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from Muzwell. Show Muzwell's posts

    Re: Reed suspended one game for multiple violations of hits to the head.

    I'm OK with trying to legislate head shots out of the game, even if it sometimes leads to fines and penalties against players who clearly were not headhunting.  What bothers me is the defenseless receiver rule, which is called regardless of whether there is a hit to the head.  How is a defensive player supposed to dislodge the ball if he can't hammer a receiver who just caught it? I agree he shouldn't be able to contact the helmet, but they call that regardless of whether there is helmet contact.  

    There was a huge call against Cleveland yesterday that didn't involve helmet contact. In years past, it was a solid hit that would have been celebrated for helping them win the game. Instead, it was a personal foul that allowed Dallas to win.  Why can't you hit a guy in the chest?

     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from NY-PATS-FAN4. Show NY-PATS-FAN4's posts

    Re: Reed suspended one game for multiple violations of hits to the head.

    In response to Muzwell's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    I'm OK with trying to legislate head shots out of the game, even if it sometimes leads to fines and penalties against players who clearly were not headhunting.  What bothers me is the defenseless receiver rule, which is called regardless of whether there is a hit to the head.  How is a defensive player supposed to dislodge the ball if he can't hammer a receiver who just caught it? I agree he shouldn't be able to contact the helmet, but they call that regardless of whether there is helmet contact.  

    There was a huge call against Cleveland yesterday that didn't involve helmet contact. In years past, it was a solid hit that would have been celebrated for helping them win the game. Instead, it was a personal foul that allowed Dallas to win.  Why can't you hit a guy in the chest?

    [/QUOTE]


    +1.

    Ronnie Lott could not have played a down under this rule interpretation.

     
  14. This post has been removed.

     
  15. This post has been removed.

     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from dapats1281. Show dapats1281's posts

    Re: Reed suspended one game for multiple violations of hits to the head.

    In response to tcal2-'s comment:
    [QUOTE]

    It make sense that the dirtiest team in football has the dirtiest players.

    Thanks to concussions tonight will be the 2nd most boring game of the year. I don't know how anything can be worse then last night game.

    [/QUOTE]

    Every TNF game?

     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from Tydog. Show Tydog's posts

    Re: Reed suspended one game for multiple violations of hits to the head.

    Hope Spikes doesnt get convienently suspended by GODell for a playoff game

     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from palookaski. Show palookaski's posts

    Re: Reed suspended one game for multiple violations of hits to the head.

    In response to Muzwell's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    I'm OK with trying to legislate head shots out of the game, even if it sometimes leads to fines and penalties against players who clearly were not headhunting.  What bothers me is the defenseless receiver rule, which is called regardless of whether there is a hit to the head.  How is a defensive player supposed to dislodge the ball if he can't hammer a receiver who just caught it? I agree he shouldn't be able to contact the helmet, but they call that regardless of whether there is helmet contact.  

    There was a huge call against Cleveland yesterday that didn't involve helmet contact. In years past, it was a solid hit that would have been celebrated for helping them win the game. Instead, it was a personal foul that allowed Dallas to win.  Why can't you hit a guy in the chest?

    [/QUOTE]


    Good point Muzz

    This DR rule was clearly in evident last night with Ravens Vs Steelers. On three occassions the Steeler WR was hit hard immediately (ball on hands) by Reed and Pollard and it dislodged the ball for an incompletion. Not called because the hits were solid and timed perfect. Reminded me of the Pats DBs against the Rams/Warner in 1st SB win. Those wicked clean hits won the game for Ravens.

    Keep up the good work :)

     

     
  19. This post has been removed.

     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from bredbru. Show bredbru's posts

    Re: Reed suspended one game for multiple violations of hits to the head.

    In response to shenanigan's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    3 incidents going back to 2010.


    In theory, this is a good idea but the NFL is so stupid with it's flags that it's guaranteed they will suspend players for nothing. 

    Anyone see GB vs DET yesterday when a player accedently slapped Staffords helmet and got flagged?  Or when Spikes got fined for Fitz when Fitz ducked into him, or dozens of other examples.

    [/QUOTE]

    agreed.unless they are only punishing guys going for the knockouts

     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from bredbru. Show bredbru's posts

    Re: Reed suspended one game for multiple violations of hits to the head.

    In response to TSWFAN's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    REED should have been suspended after he went for Branch's head earlier this year. Lewis should have been convicted of murder years ago. Good upstanding citizens that crowd!!!

    [/QUOTE]

    "REED should have been suspended after he went for Branch's head earlier this year. "

    agree with that

     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from AZPAT. Show AZPAT's posts

    Re: Reed suspended one game for multiple violations of hits to the head.

    In response to shenanigan's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to AZPAT's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    I will say, and no one can even consider countering with this fact: if you (a player) aims for the large torso area he will most assuredly NOT get flagged for a helmet to helmet hit, unless the opposing player was on his way down prior to the hit. Imagine! the NFL enforcing rules about contact with a player's head with the focus on concussions!  

    Yes, it IS that simple. It's time to stop foolish excuses like "He ducked into it", "it was just a slap", etc. Apprently lack of responsibility has hit NFL fanbases, if not the NFL.  "IT'S NOT THEIR FAULT!"

    Not allowing ANYTHING to get to the head area should be sufficient eniught to understand. But, if players will continually trying to sert their own standards and circumstances, we'll have more flags and more fines. If players are confirtable with this, then we as fans shoudl be just as comfortable with it, even if it costs the team a game.   

    [/QUOTE]


    Players are most certainly not comfortable with it.  It is most assuredly not a fact that if you aim for the torso you will not get flagged. 

    How about they fine players for hits that can cause injury?  Or how about they take look at the speed of the game and don't require players to make moves that are humanly impossible like stopping their momentum in a fraction of a second?  In Detroit the defensive player tried to avoid the QB at the last moment because Stafford threw the ball as he was about to get hit.  As he turned and contorted his body to miss him one of his hands brushed up agains Staffords helmet.  Stafford probably couldn't even feel it.  It could not have possibly injured someone. 

    It's plain as day to everyone that these fines are much more about a show of safety to avoid a lawsuit than actually being safe.  It's still legal to hit runners in the head.

    Now I know it's easier to just make decisions without actually having to think or look at each individual incident.  The NFL has enough money and resources to write the rules that protect the players and enforce them.  Enforcing broad general rules like saying a "slap in the helmet" is the same as a "hit in the head" is just lazy. It's like saying if you're late to work you get fined, then somebody gets in a car accident that causes them to be late and you say "You have a lack of responsibility!"  The circumstances for any incident are always pertinent.  Not looking at the circumstances is lazy.

     

    They are enforcing what's easy instead of what's correct.  A lack of responsibility is not doing what's right because it's easier to do it the easy way.

    [/QUOTE]

    If you have never been there, the BIG problem with officiating any sporting event is trying to determine "intent". When this happens, we get the age-old "The ref has money on the game! He's showing favorites! He's been bought and paid for!" No matter what he does, the fans, at least half of them at any event have a strong dislike. So, we have aclear rule about hitting in the head area. It's there for a reason. A hand brush/pinkie touch isn't much, but if not called, what about teh open hand slap? The rule says "No touch!', so the players and coaches need to play/coach to that. Refs officiate to that rule. There is no room to determine intent, no matter how many replays the Talking Heads in the booth see. Yes. it's that simple. It can be done under the well proven guise of "behavior modification", no matter how much the players and fans dislike it. Guess what? We're not calling the shots on this issue. If you think that the fans have any say, you're kidding yourself. We'll bich and moan a lot, especially oif one of our Home Town Heroes gets flagged, but we'll still go back. The worst thing you can do is boycott games. Think someone else will step up and buy the tix if you don't? 

       
    I also think that if a player goes down for an injury, and the player making the tackle gets flagged, he needs to sit out just as long as the injured player does. In this case, we're looking at concussions. But, I'll also include other injuriues, if the player is flagged for actions during the play. Fines? Irrelevent, as it's only money. But, force the player to sit out, unpaid (missed pay goes to NFL charities), gives the player lots to think about. This wasn't Reed's first rodeo, and the NFL decided to sit on him hard. My guess is that they are tired of his "side of the story" on his previous fines.

    With his history, would you honestly feel the same if, on a pass play to Welker, he nailed him in the head? I seriously doubt it. It's up to the players to take care of themselves. They know this rule is out there, and if they want to walk on the wild side and risk it, they'll eventually get burned. Playing smart and hard is a whole lot better and different than being stupid and reckless.

     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from Philskiw1. Show Philskiw1's posts

    Re: Reed suspended one game for multiple violations of hits to the head.

    The Ravenswhined and now Reed has a 50 K fine and no suspension.   

     

Share