Bernard Pollard whines about player safety rules; calls Brady "pretty boy"

[Blizzzard]

I'd like to take this thread as proof positive that Pats fans are better football fans than Ravens fans.

When news of Mannings serious neck injury and impending retirment broke, the overwhelming majority of posters on this board spoke out in dissappointment.
Everyone I saw was concerned for his health and recognized that the game was lesser for not having him in it.
While our hatred for him as a rival is clear, so is our respect for him as a competitor. Our champonships are that much more special for having to battle him on the way to them.

On the other hand, you have the Raven trolls that are here during championship week.. doing none other than defending the moronic hit that ended bradys 08 season, and threatened his career. Not to mention his sub par (for Brady) 2009 that ended in a shorthanded loss to an inferior (yeah I said it) 2009 Ravens squad.
You should be proud of how you represent your team and it's fans .
I'm sure the smart, respectful ravens fans that don't spend their time on OUR board would be ashamed that you represent them here.
I can't wait to see what you team does when faced with a Tom Brady that's not following a season on his couch due to an ACL injury, and hampered with a depleted WR core due to Welkers ACL injury a week earlier.
This game can't come fast enough for me.

 

[Lurks_All_Day]

It seems to me that hit could have come from any number of intentions

You may indeed be "getting it", but slowly.
Keep using the ol' noodle, good chap, and maybe you'll see that the scumbag you've been defending so vehemently is, in reality, a scumbag.

 

[Lurks_All_Day]

Pollard was a Raven when Brady got her boo-boo?

Ban-hammer is in your future, son.

 

[shmessy]

Man that stuff doesn't help. You are just antagonizing these guys.

I think if you step back, put away your biases and imagine yourself trying to make a bang-bang play in an NFL game you can at least see how something like that could happen. It's not premeditated murder by any means. But calling it a "boo-boo" is just going to rile people up and you are never going to get any kind of point across that way.

I guess on some level I'm really, really optimistic thinking that someone is going to read a post on a football forum and change their mind, but the truth is that just being rude and trash-talking each other is probably just as productive. Still ...

He gone. As is AvonBarksdale, Folamzz and RavensfanfromPA.

You're OK, you talk football. We appreciate visiting fans who bring relevant arguments to the table without resorting to trash.

 

[Lurks_All_Day]

He gone.

You're OK, you talk football.

Why can I only "like" once?
Why, Damie??? Why you do this to me????

 

[i82much]

He gone. As is AvonBarksdale, Folamzz and RavensfanfromPA.

You're OK, you talk football. We appreciate visiting fans who bring relevant arguments to the table without resorting to trash.

Thanks. I realize this stuff is sensitive. I have my own biases and god knows I could be dead wrong. Don't believe me, ask my girlfriend. I'm sure she'd be glad to expound

 

[Fencer]

I mean, to me, and I could be wrong, it looks like you have a tendency to attack people pretty quickly and you're looking to stir up trouble.

We've noticed the same things about him.

 

[strngplyr]

Thanks. I realize this stuff is sensitive. I have my own biases and god knows I could be dead wrong. Don't believe me, ask my girlfriend. I'm sure she'd be glad to expound

It's nothing about being sensitive to it, it's about getting rid of trolls. As long as you're participating in good conversation, nobody here cares what team you support.

 

[shmessy]

Thanks. I realize this stuff is sensitive. I have my own biases and god knows I could be dead wrong. Don't believe me, ask my girlfriend. I'm sure she'd be glad to expound

You've been great, and we appreciate the opposing point of view.

 

[i82much]

It's nothing about being sensitive to it, it's about getting rid of trolls. As long as you're participating in good conversation, nobody here cares what team you support.

Well, ya know, sensitive in the sense that some topics stir up more emotions than others. Not saying you guys are being sensitive, just saying the topic is sensitive.

 

[Blizzzard]

Sorry if it seems that I was attacking you "i82much", but I was getting pretty aggravated by the other guys defending Pollard, and when you joined the oppositions defense, I figured you were just another one of them.
I am always interested in hearing what football fans have to say. even if you don't have the same favorite team as me, we are all "brothers-from-another-mother" so to speak, as fans of football.
In that vein, here is a cut and paste of the explanation of the so called "brady-rule", from an earlier post by 'cityofchampons"
I've highlighted the most compelling point to our argument, and i'd like to hear your defense of Pollard when taking that sentence into account...

Quote:
On the Bengals' first pass play, Carson Palmer threw a 66-yard pass to rookie receiver Chris Henry. It was the longest completion in Bengals playoff history. After Palmer released the pass, Steelers defensive tackle Kimo von Oelhoffen, a former Bengal, made contact with Palmer's lower left leg. The tackle, later ruled unintentional, violently wrenched Palmer's knee, and he was forced to leave the game. A magnetic resonance imaging test revealed a severe knee injury; Palmer had tears of both the anterior cruciate and medial collateral ligaments as well as cartilage and meniscus damage. Coincidentally, Henry himself suffered a knee injury on the same play, though far less severe. The Bengals lost to the eventual Super Bowl champion Steelers 31–17.

During the off-season, the league's Rules Committee modified the rule regarding low hits on quarterbacks. The new rule prohibited defenders from hitting a passer at or below the knee unless they are blocked into him. Injuries to Palmer, Pittsburgh's Ben Roethlisberger, and Tampa Bay's Brian Griese were cited as reasons for the new rule. The rule now requires that defenders take every opportunity to avoid hitting a quarterback at or below the knees when the quarterback is in a defenseless position looking to throw with both feet on the ground.

So,.... can you in all honesty say that Pollard "took every opportuniy to avoid hitting a quarterback at or below the knees when the quarterback is in a defenseless position looking to throw with both feet on the ground"?

I look greatly forward to reading your interpretation of that viewpoint when I awake tomorrow. As I am tired and must go off to bed now.

 

[i82much]

Sorry if it seems that I was attacking you "i82much", but I was getting pretty aggravated by the other guys defending Pollard, and when you joined the oppositions defense, I figured you were just another one of them.
I am always interested in hearing what football fans have to say. even if you don't have the same favorite team as me, we are all "brothers-from-another-mother" so to speak, as fans of football.
In that vein, here is a cut and paste of the explanation of the so called "brady-rule", from an earlier post by 'cityofchampons"
I've highlighted the most compelling point to our argument, and i'd like to hear your defense of Pollard when taking that sentence into account...

Quote:
On the Bengals' first pass play, Carson Palmer threw a 66-yard pass to rookie receiver Chris Henry. It was the longest completion in Bengals playoff history. After Palmer released the pass, Steelers defensive tackle Kimo von Oelhoffen, a former Bengal, made contact with Palmer's lower left leg. The tackle, later ruled unintentional, violently wrenched Palmer's knee, and he was forced to leave the game. A magnetic resonance imaging test revealed a severe knee injury; Palmer had tears of both the anterior cruciate and medial collateral ligaments as well as cartilage and meniscus damage. Coincidentally, Henry himself suffered a knee injury on the same play, though far less severe. The Bengals lost to the eventual Super Bowl champion Steelers 31–17.

During the off-season, the league's Rules Committee modified the rule regarding low hits on quarterbacks. The new rule prohibited defenders from hitting a passer at or below the knee unless they are blocked into him. Injuries to Palmer, Pittsburgh's Ben Roethlisberger, and Tampa Bay's Brian Griese were cited as reasons for the new rule. The rule now requires that defenders take every opportunity to avoid hitting a quarterback at or below the knees when the quarterback is in a defenseless position looking to throw with both feet on the ground.

So,.... can you in all honesty say that Pollard "took every opportuniy to avoid hitting a quarterback at or below the knees when the quarterback is in a defenseless position looking to throw with both feet on the ground"?

I look greatly forward to reading your interpretation of that viewpoint when I awake tomorrow. As I am tired and must go off to bed now.

Hey - no worries! No big deal. Let's talk football.

FWIW, I tried not to express any opinion on whether the hit was legal, because I wasn't sure about the rule. Having read your post I totally agree that Pollard did not "take every opportunity" to avoid hitting Brady. Hard to tell from the video but I do think it is possible that the offensive player changed his trajectory somewhat. Doesn't matter - from my reading of the rule, regardless of whether the offensive player changed his trajectory, he had a responsibility to pull up instead of hit below the knee.

I just thought that some of the comments were going more toward Pollard's intentions, i.e. suggesting that he was specifically trying to hurt Brady. And hey - maybe he was. But I could also see how, just trying to hard to make a play, you break the rule and a guy gets hurt.

I did a little googling around on the whole thing and it's certainly not the only time Pollard has been involved in a controversial hit. But, FWIW, I didn't see his name listed in the NFL dirtiest players poll either, so at least he's not at the top of his peers' list of dirty players.

I guess really all I was driving at is that I don't see this as an obvious attempt to hurt Brady. I see it as an illegal hit that caused an injury.

 

[PatsFan24]

Pollard was a Raven when Brady got her boo-boo?

Hey jerkoff...I know you are banned now but I have a feeling you will find a way to try and come back at some point. Until then I will answer you this way, no he was not on the Ravens at the time but he is on the Ravens now and is still a thug. I hope you are smart enough to understand that. BTW, I am glad I was able to get you to react in a way that helped you get banned. Loser.

 

[Kontradiction]

Do I believe that Pollard intentionally went at Brady's knees? Yes.

Do I believe that Pollard thought about the consequences of his actions? No. He's clearly not that intelligent.

Does that make it a "cheap" shot? No. It makes it a stupid move by an ignorant player.

Was the rule about going at the knees of a QB solely the result of the hit on Brady? No. It wasn't. There were hits on Carson Palmer and Ben Roethlingsberger that also resulted in knee injuries in years prior. The hit on Brady was the proverbial "straw that broke the camel's back".

I was always under the impression that the rule was enforced more strictly AFTER Palmer's injury and that Brady's injury just put it in the limelight more.

 

[Grizzafted]

the revenge dynamic here is pretty absurd. getting even with the Ravens AND Bernard Pollard in one shot?

Are you there God? It's me, Grizzafted....please give me a Gronk-running-over-Bernard-Pollard Touchdown for football Christmas...

 

[SeymourTrophies]

If Brady hadn't been wearing a knee brace, he would have had his knee blown out against the Chargers this year. Antonio Garay holds a similar place in my heart to Pollard. Nothing good comes from leading with the helmet to a knee. See: James Harrison vs. Denver.

And yes, the Pollard hit was the last straw. Losman, Palmer, Campbell all had season-ending injuries in the few seasons before because of shots to the knee.

 

[UK_Pat37]

Pollard plays hard, and I like that, but he looks so reckless out there at times he's scary. He's one of those players you really need to look out for...he goes for the big hit, lowers his head and leads with it. One day he'll cripple himself or, even worse, someone else.

He's stupid for his comments, because the referees know his history with the Brady hit (which granted wasn't illegal at the time) and they now know what he;'s said. He could have come out with a better response to the question than that.

Even a hint of an illegal hit is going to get him flagged now. He'#s an idiot because he;'s going to have the officials watching him and his whole defense with those words.

When is Harbaugh, pardon the pun in relation to Pollard's words, going to put a leash on these guys? This is why his brother is a far better coach...he can control and discipline and teach his players the right way to go about things...and his brother doesn't whine constantly when things don't go his way i.e. referee's calls.

 

[UK_Pat37]

If Brady hadn't been wearing a knee brace, he would have had his knee blown out against the Chargers this year. Antonio Garay holds a similar place in my heart to Pollard. Nothing good comes from leading with the helmet to a knee. See: James Harrison vs. Denver.

And yes, the Pollard hit was the last straw. Losman, Palmer, Campbell all had season-ending injuries in the few seasons before because of shots to the knee.

One thing I will say about your comments, is you're generalising off of watching ONE play from a player. Antonio Garay is not a dirty player, and you don't general see incidents like that from him. It was an illegal hit but he was way off balance when it happened too...he did dive, but he's doing what he was taught, to go for the QB...one error of judgement doesn't warrant constant criticism this far down the line when he is not a repeat offender.

As for the hit at Denver, are you saying that was a bad hit? IMO it wasn't...hits below the waist of offensive players down field is common...especially if a player is bigger than you. I don't know if you've ever played but all coaches will teach you to go low if you're having trouble bringing someone down.

The only reason this rule was brought in for QBs only is because they are unprotected. Players down field can brace themselves for hits. Harrison's hit on Decker was absolutely fine...you cannot compare hits on down field players to rules/hits on QBs...different rules for different sets of players. For example, you can have helmet to helmet contact with a down field player when he has become a ball carrier, but obviously not on the QB regardless if he is behind the LoS.

 

[upstater1]

Hey - no worries! No big deal. Let's talk football.

FWIW, I tried not to express any opinion on whether the hit was legal, because I wasn't sure about the rule. Having read your post I totally agree that Pollard did not "take every opportunity" to avoid hitting Brady. Hard to tell from the video but I do think it is possible that the offensive player changed his trajectory somewhat. Doesn't matter - from my reading of the rule, regardless of whether the offensive player changed his trajectory, he had a responsibility to pull up instead of hit below the knee.

I just thought that some of the comments were going more toward Pollard's intentions, i.e. suggesting that he was specifically trying to hurt Brady. And hey - maybe he was. But I could also see how, just trying to hard to make a play, you break the rule and a guy gets hurt.

I did a little googling around on the whole thing and it's certainly not the only time Pollard has been involved in a controversial hit. But, FWIW, I didn't see his name listed in the NFL dirtiest players poll either, so at least he's not at the top of his peers' list of dirty players.

I guess really all I was driving at is that I don't see this as an obvious attempt to hurt Brady. I see it as an illegal hit that caused an injury.

I know this will ruffle feathers (heh!) but, while Pollard may not have gone hunting for Brady's knee, I definitely think that Suggs did in the first game of Brady's return. Suggs did a dive toward Brady's knee with absolutely no one on his back, and when Brady moved and Suggs missed, he chucked an elbow out there to get him. That's why the ref threw that flag even though Suggs didn't really hit him.

The NFL had a problem back then and I would not be surprised if Suggs got a talking to by someone higher up. After all, the penalty of a personal foul is 15 yards and up to $50k. Maybe $100k. That should be enough to dissuade a player from a cheap shot. But some of these rich guys may think $50k is worth it if they can end the QBs season. How many of Ravens would drop $50k right now for Brady to sit out the game?

Another thing I don't get about Suggs and Ray Lewis and Pollard complaining about personal fouls on the QB. Not only was the rule put in for Carson Palmer, and not only does Brady get fewer calls than 85% of the QBs in the league, but aren't defenders protected against High-Low blocks? Crackbacks? Leg Whips? Chopblocks?

There are all these rules put in to defend defensive players from getting hurt. Why would they complain about a QB who is relatively defenseless back there as he has 5 or 6 rushers out to get him whereas most defenders are facing 2 guys max?

 

[Dutchmaster617]

*ROFLMAO* Sorry, but you are becoming a troll with your idiotic comments.

Patriots players show plenty of emotion, personality, and speak their minds truthfully. Just because you are ignorant of that fact doesn't make it any less true.

Do yourself a favor and zip it on things you clearly don't know about.

No they don't, they never say anything that isn't scripted out and we all know it. I feel what that guy was saying because the culture in BAL's locker room is much different, we can't reasonably expect them to act like us, and I wouldn't want the whole league to be scripted (though I feel some of the trash talk is scripted for attention).