vontaze burfict suspended 3 games

TommyD4207 said:

If that was Julian Edelman taking a shoulder-to-shoulder hit, it's a fine at worst.

Click to expand...

"At worst" is the right call. More likely, it's not a fine at all as evidenced by the helmet-to-helmet hit in the Super Bowl last year:


Or this one:
https://mtc.cdn.vine.co/r/videos_h2...p4?versionId=_SXQTgczMMVXGVOCBQsZ84FMl5b1o2v0

People who think he didn't hit Brown in the head....

Did you eat a lot of paint chips as a kid?

TommyD4207 said:

That picture shows nothing. If you had gone another 2 frames, you'd see he hits Brown right in the shoulder, below his head.

Click to expand...

I think people are saying the should to shoulder, even if initial, was a glancing blow at best. But the force of the hit was to the head.

That's be like a boxer getting hit in the face and being KO'd in the process, but calling it a block because he barely got a glove on the inbound punch.

In the end, I think the Burfict appeal will go as follows:

Vontae: Mr. Goodell, sir. There's a saying, "Nobody's Burfict." and if nobody is burfict, then I couldn't have made that hit and deserve no suspension.

Goodell: *Looks Vontae in the eyes* I believe you my good son, but someone has to pay for this hit. But, I believe you case and the sincerity of your plea. I will only suspend you for 2 games.

So many aspects to this:

• For people arguing that Burfict should have received less due to blatant inconsistencies in the league's punishment system -- whether on headhunters in particular, or on the league's over-the-top treatment of the Pats this year -- I have no argument there. Yes, the league has a colossally effed up and inconsistent disciplinary 'system', and their guiding principle seems to be how severe the public (mob?) reaction is to a given incident, rather than the underlying incident itself.

• BUT...the league's inconsistency should not be a deterrent for doing a better job going forward. For example, literally every punishment levied post-Ray Rice looks absurd (and by extension, 'unfair') in comparison...but that doesn't mean that the league shouldn't legislate domestic violence cases harshly now. Suh may have only gotten one game for his actions, but maybe that was too lenient, and maybe the league is reaping what it sews on this issue for not brandishing a big enough stick on chronic, consistent offenders who repeatedly attempt to deliberately injure players.

• Regarding Burfict, IMHO I think people looking at this particular play in isolation may be missing the point. For a player not named Vontaze Burfict, we might apply some benefit of the doubt. But suspensions do fact in a player's history...and every piece of prior history suggests that Burfict is a guy out there trying to injure other players. Consider that:

• • Burfict has led the league in personal fouls (12 or 14?) since coming into the league in 2012.
  • In the final 5 weeks of the 2015 season, Burfict received major fines or a suspension for actions in 3 of those games (!) Burfict was fined $70K for his actions in the Pittsburgh game (including a VERY dangerous dive at Ben's knees well after the ball was out -- part of the reason he was fined); he was fined $50K for a no-look KO of Maxx Williams (Balt); and he was obviously just suspended in the playoff game. What is doubly alarming about this is that he was almost certainly talked to repeatedly by the league (and we assume, coaching staff) after each set of transgressions...and yet he essentially escalated his dangerous behavior in spite of it.
  • Burfict's behavior and intent to injure goes well after the whistle. I've mentioned him diving at Roethlisberger's legs after the play was over, but he was also fined for twisting the legs/ankles of Cam Newton and Greg Olsen last year; the Williams hit last week was on a receiver not even involved in the play. Really there's almost too much to history to document.

That all said, put yourself in our shoes: as Steelers' fans we've seen a LOT of Burfict over the years, and we have a pretty good idea of what he's about. Just this year, he's taken out Bell on a very dangerous (if legal by the rules) tackle, and subsequently took a below-the-knees, after-the-throw shot on our franchise QB. The fines he's received have done nothing to curb his behavior (and in fact, as stated before he almost appears to be escalating at this point). So we all went into the playoff game wondering -- "is this guy going to take one of our guys out?"....And then he did.

*How would Patriots Nation feel if a chronic offender took a post-whistle shot at Tom Brady's knees -- and was merely fined by the league, despite his history -- and then followed it up 5 weeks later by taking out and Edelman, or even Gronk-level player?*

That's kind of where I am with this. 99% of the guys in the league maybe don't get this suspension for that particular hit. But Burfict is a unique case, and what the league has done prior to this has done NOTHING to get him under control.

Vontaze Burfict's reckless, dirty behavior: A history lesson

Rob0729 said:

What happens in the game has no bearing on punishments. The 3 points were a penalty that Burfict and Jones inflicted on their own team. The suspension is individual punishment for Burfict. Two different things.

Click to expand...

Not to belabor this but I believe the original post was pointing at either the intended or unintended irony of a 3 game suspension to a player whose actions caused a chain reaction of penalties that led to a game winning 3 pointer for Pitt.

I think on-field player discipline is pretty much an impossible problem.

That said, one would think that the Player's Union would be wielding the biggest stick to protect it's general population of players against it's "bad actors". Sort of like what "Law Enforcement" does: protect and serve. I would think this would be "common ground" for both the NFL* and the Union.

These small fines are pretty much meaningless. You need a bigger stick to stop this behavior.

Maybe collectively, they could use a point system for each "egregious" hit, as a function of Hitter history, Hit Victim "worth" (expected annual take home pay), severity of the injury, and, based on all video available, a "viciousness factor". (accidental to purposeful Assault/cheap shot).

The result of this computation would result in a $ fine ranging from $20K into the SEVEN FIGURES. The ability for the Hitter to pay this would be levied in "Games Missed".

So, in the extremes, an accidental, first time, hit, even on an elite QB would be small, but the OBJ hit would be several games. Given Burfict's history (a three-time offender ? maybe more? ) he'd be gone from the game entirely.

To limit the appeals, the Union would simply publish the computation for each hit.

I know! IT'S NEVER GONNA HAPPEN. But, what we have now is absurd and unworkable, especially with the Cesspool* at 345 Park Ave the only enforcement and appeal agency, other than Federal Court.

Purfict!!

patman12 said:

Not to belabor this but I believe the original post was pointing at either the intended or unintended irony of a 3 game suspension to a player whose actions caused a chain reaction of penalties that led to a game winning 3 pointer for Pitt.

Click to expand...

Yep, let's not forget that play was 4th down so if Burfict controls himself and avoids the penalty the game is done.

ChessToCheckers said:

I think on-field player discipline is pretty much an impossible problem.

That said, one would think that the Player's Union would be wielding the biggest stick to protect it's general population of players against it's "bad actors". Sort of like what "Law Enforcement" does: protect and serve. I would think this would be "common ground" for both the NFL* and the Union.

Maybe collectively, they could use a point system for each "egregious" hit, as a function of Hitter history, Hit Victim "worth" (expected annual take home pay), severity of the injury, and, based on all video available, a "viciousness factor". (accidental to purposeful Assault/cheap shot).

The result of this computation would result in a $ fine ranging from $20K into the SEVEN FIGURES. The ability for the Hitter to pay this would be levied in "Games Missed".

So, in the extremes, an accidental, first time, hit, even on an elite QB would be small, but the OBJ hit would be several games. Given Burfict's history (a three-time offender ? maybe more? ) he'd be gone from the game entirely.

To limit the appeals, the Union would simply publish the computation for each hit.

I know! IT'S NEVER GONNA HAPPEN. But, what we have now is absurd and unworkable, especially with the Cesspool* at 345 Park Ave the only enforcement and appeal agency.

Click to expand...

I agree that it's a mess right now.

They could also:
-- institute a red/yellow card system (like in soccer)
-- institute a rule that says if you take another player out with an egregious hit, the player making the hit must sit for a time as well
-- allow for reviews of personal fouls (this would go both ways - confirm actual fouls while preventing fouls that look terrible but upon review were actually legal and simply looked bad....e.g. the Williams hit on Wheaton Saturday)

One reason the league has to get on top of this quickly: with the new emphasis on the concussion protocol it is much easier to remove a player from the field with a head shot. In a playoff game, the disincentive for a player to do something 'extra' to get an important player on the opposing team into the protocol is a mere 15 yards (it would have to be absolutely blatant for that player to get tossed). That's not much, relative to the benefit of removing a star from the playing field for a quarter (or the rest of the game for that matter). How long will it be until a star is taken out deliberately in such a fashion, with little or no penalty applied to the team that takes him out? And what does that do to the integrity of the game?

The NFL also has to be careful that their games don't devolve into consistent, rolling brawls... A college buddy of mine -- who played hockey -- once told me he believed there were so many penalties in hockey because the limited number of refs, coupled with the speed of the game, made it impossible for the refs to properly police the players...and therefore that hockey players had to essentially police themselves. I think this is, in part, what we're starting to see in the NFL: refs that can't (or won't) discipline over-the-line behavior in-game, and players that are increasingly taking matters into their own hands.

lillloyd said:

BUT...the league's inconsistency should not be a deterrent for doing a better job going forward. For example, literally every punishment levied post-Ray Rice looks absurd (and by extension, 'unfair') in comparison...but that doesn't mean that the league shouldn't legislate domestic violence cases harshly now. Suh may have only gotten one game for his actions, but maybe that was too lenient, and maybe the league is reaping what it sews on this issue for not brandishing a big enough stick on chronic, consistent offenders who repeatedly attempt to deliberately injure players.

Click to expand...

The league shouldn't be involved, at all, in penalizing players for non-NFL issues. That means domestic violence, recreational drugs, and the like.

Deus Irae said:

The league shouldn't be involved, at all, in penalizing players for non-NFL issues. That means domestic violence, recreational drugs, and the like.

Click to expand...

I don't see the NFLPA getting the personal conduct policy removed from the CBA.

patman12 said:

I don't see the NFLPA getting the personal conduct policy removed from the CBA.

Click to expand...

Probably not, at least not without a protracted strike that we all know they don't currently have the balls to attempt. They were stupid enough to give in to it, and the NFL would take a P.R. hit if they let it get removed.



And we know that Goodell's NFL is all about P.R., revenue, and egos.

Deus Irae said:

The league shouldn't be involved, at all, in penalizing players for non-NFL issues. That means domestic violence, recreational drugs, and the like.

Click to expand...

As incompetent as the management of the NFL is, and as moronic as some of their policies, this issue really has been created by fans, and the general public. There is absolutely no question that there is a vocal group protesting against the NFL for meting out punishment for off the field behavior. See Vick, Peterson, Hardy,et al. The league can't ignore the bad publicity and after all its purpose of existence is to make money, so it must make rules that are designed to protect its image in order to achieve its objectives. The league doesn't exist to be fair, it doesn't exist to care about players, it doesn't exist to be fan friendly. It exists to make money and every decision it makes has that at its core. Unfortunately it damages the product for the true fan, but again, that is not their concern.

I don't understand the logic of "no fun league"

1 game for a guy who has intent to do serious damage numerous times a game/season. Yeah...no fun. Lets have serious concussions and torn ACLs. THAT'S a fun league....

Deus Irae said:

Here's my problem with the defenseless rule in general, and you can see it here (I'm not defending Burfict, I'm talking about the rule). Brown clearly, and either deliberately or reflexively, lowers his head, thus making the contact with the helmet much more difficult for the defender to avoid. Now, I'm not saying Burfict was trying to avoid said contact. I'm simply pointing out an example of the problem I've always had with the rule. If the rule is to stay, there should at least be some degree of the weighting of defender intent v. actions of 'defenseless' receiver involved.

Click to expand...

It should also be reviewable. Calls like that are too big not to be. Brown lowered his helmet. Without him lowering his helmet, there would have been zero contact with the head. Like I said before, a guy like Burfict will probably now lead with the crown of his helmet from here on out because why not? Might as well make the fine and impending suspension worth his while.

Burfict also spit on people:

Steelers' Foster: Burfict 'wasn't only guy' to spit

no argument that the history coupled with the act warranted 3 games

no argument that the NFL is hilariously inconsistent with its fines and punishments

Yikes, all for a play where he didn't even lead with his helmet. I don't like Burfict at all, but the fact that his various other actual dirty plays haven't warranted a suspension--and Adam Jones' helmet slam on Amari Cooper didn't either--just further proves what we already know. That the NFL only cares about perception. People were talking about this play, so they came down ridiculously hard, with no regard at all for consistency. For all the dirty shots I've seen Burfict attempt, this one wasn't in the top 5. Shoulder-to-helmet hits are brutal, and I'm fine with a suspension if there was clear targeting, but I didn't see it here. Just a brutal hit in a high-profile spot that made the NFL feel like it has to look tough.

On a side note, this really highlights how badly the Pats screwed themselves by not showing up for weeks 16 and 17. If they'd won either of those games, we'd be gearing up to play a Steelers team probably without Antonio Brown and with Roethlisberger trying to play through a messed up throwing shoulder. Instead, we have a Chiefs team that has a very good shot at beating us.