Goodell's newest anti-Patriots weapon

[Tunescribe]

It always starts as something benign and seems to make sense. It's how it gets used after the fact that alarms most of us. *note I'm staying away from drawing political comparisons too*

We have witnessed how 1-2 teams have been treated differently and how the majority, who are unaffected, seem to think it's ok. As long as it's the many to the few, they will seem to think it's ok (as long as its not them),

It's just one more tool in the Goodell arsenal to have ready in case needed to affect the outcome of games. We've already seen it in subtle ways with phantom OPI, etc. Imagine before a crucial late-season game that would give the Patriots home-field advantage in the playoffs where Goodell tells Blandino: "Tell your guys that if the opportunity presents itself to eject a Patriots starter." Just like, "Tell your guys to call OPI on Gronkowski extra tight." Etc., etc.

 

[XLIX]

How in the world is this an "anti-Patriots" weapon??? The Patriots are an extremely well disciplined team. I do not anticipate any ejections from New England - but I sure wouldn't be surprised to see a few Cincy or Denver players get the boot this year.

Seriously, people. Not every single thing the league office does is designed to get New England. By complaining about things like this makes legit complaints look less legit.

 

[Joker]

so then, don't complain and keep our mouths shut. Right. Got it...thanx for the "advice" Neville

 

[XLIX]

so then, don't complain and keep our mouths shut. Right. Got it...thanx for the "advice" Neville

I suppose you can complain if you want but I think Odell should have been ejected against the Panthers and Aqib should have been ejected against (insert any Broncos opponent here). So I really have no problem with this rule if implemented and I don't see it as something that will adversely affect the well coached, highly disciplined Patriots.

 

[Joker]

Zoooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooom....the point goes way over your head ...AGAIN.

"By complaining about things like this makes legit complaints look less legit."

No. It doesn't. It may SEEM that way to you and you are welcome to your opinion. Others feel that questioning ANY decision by an obviously corrupt demagogue who has repeatedly demonstrated ill will towards our franchise and we fans is more than justified ...it is a NECESSITY.

 

[XLIX]

Zoooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooom....the point goes way over your head ...AGAIN.

"By complaining about things like this makes legit complaints look less legit."

No. It doesn't. It may SEEM that way to you and you are welcome to your opinion. Others feel that questioning ANY decision by an obviously corrupt demagogue who has repeatedly demonstrated ill will towards our franchise and we fans is more than justified ...it is a NECESSITY.

How in the world is implementing a rule whereby a player can be ejected for 2 unsportsmanlike penalties an example of the league demonstrating ill will towards the Patriots?? If anything, the league is going after Denver and Cincy with this new rule, not New England. As I mentioned before, we are an extremely well disciplined and well coached team. What's next? An accusation that the new 25 yard line touchback (if implemented) is further evidence of the league's vendetta against New England??

When people complain about a new rule that has nothing to do with targeting the Patriots and call it anti-Patriots, it weakens the times we have a legit point of when the league behaves in an anti-Patriots manner (which they have done many times).

I like this new rule. The fact that the Commissioner is a corrupt scum sucking piece of **** is completely independent of my opinion regarding the new rule.

 

[Joker]

and I'm very happy for your ability to make this distinction in your mind...Neville.

I choose not to..primarily because of the fatigue that comes with enduring Tiger 88 tank tracks up and down my back as the NFL offices blitzkrieg continues unabated.

 

[QuantumMechanic]

I suppose you can complain if you want but I think Odell should have been ejected against the Panthers and Aqib should have been ejected against (insert any Broncos opponent here). So I really have no problem with this rule if implemented and I don't see it as something that will adversely affect the well coached, highly disciplined Patriots.

This rule does not cover what Odell did and so he could not be ejected under this rule (the refs certainly could have exercised some of there inherent discretion and made a judgement call to toss him if they wanted to.) I think the same is true of Talib.

 

[Tunescribe]

How in the world is implementing a rule whereby a player can be ejected for 2 unsportsmanlike penalties an example of the league demonstrating ill will towards the Patriots?? If anything, the league is going after Denver and Cincy with this new rule, not New England. As I mentioned before, we are an extremely well disciplined and well coached team. What's next? An accusation that the new 25 yard line touchback (if implemented) is further evidence of the league's vendetta against New England??

When people complain about a new rule that has nothing to do with targeting the Patriots and call it anti-Patriots, it weakens the times we have a legit point of when the league behaves in an anti-Patriots manner (which they have done many times).

Just read the damn thread and think. The title obviously is hyperbole but the implication involves the very real prospect of Goodell implementing rule changes putting even greater discretion in the hands of officials to determine the outcome of games. WHY? (I'm sure you will ask.) To FORCE the league-mandated parity the Patriots have defied for the better part of 15 years. Selective enforcement to "right the balance," a la last year's OPIs against Gronk. There, I've spelled it out for you and you owe me three minutes of life back.

 

[DefenseRules]

I have loved football all my life. This is the first offseason that I have shown very little interest to the NFL. I'm watching basketball. I hate the NFL right now. All those jealous owners who want to destroy the team I love can all go rot in hell.AND THEY WILL!!!
BASTARDS HAVE RUINED FOOTBALL

 

[RelocatedPatFan]

I have loved football all my life. This is the first offseason that I have shown very little interest to the NFL. I'm watching basketball. I hate the NFL right now. All those jealous owners who want to destroy the team I love can all go rot in hell.AND THEY WILL!!!
BASTARDS HAVE RUINED FOOTBALL

So you are saying they served the "golden goose" for dinner at the owners meeting.

I think I feel about the same. But I don't follow college ball so the draft has always been fairly passive for me and I wait to get camp reports before making any real opinion on the draft.

Free agents are easier for me to project onto the team.

 

[XLIX]

This rule does not cover what Odell did and so he could not be ejected under this rule (the refs certainly could have exercised some of there inherent discretion and made a judgement call to toss him if they wanted to.) I think the same is true of Talib.

Odell got hit with 3 personal fouls, so he definitely could have been ejected. Aqib is the sort where the refs can use some discretion. For example, that face mask tackle in the Super Bowl was one of the dirtiest plays of the year. Technically it wasn't an unsportsmanlike flag, but that's one where the refs could call it a "strike" if they wanted.

 

[XLIX]

Just read the damn thread and think. The title obviously is hyperbole but the implication involves the very real prospect of Goodell implementing rule changes putting even greater discretion in the hands of officials to determine the outcome of games. WHY? (I'm sure you will ask.) To FORCE the league-mandated parity the Patriots have defied for the better part of 15 years. Selective enforcement to "right the balance," a la last year's OPIs against Gronk. There, I've spelled it out for you and you owe me three minutes of life back.

If the league wanted the refs to ensure the Patriots lost games, they wouldn't need to implement this rule.

You don't realize it, but you support my point when you mention the OPI calls. The mechanisms are already in place to sway the outcomes of games if they were so inclined.

Not a single Patriot player will be ejected by virtue of this new rule in a meaningful moment of a game this year. Book it.

 

[Galeb]

Odell got hit with 3 personal fouls, so he definitely could have been ejected. Aqib is the sort where the refs can use some discretion. For example, that face mask tackle in the Super Bowl was one of the dirtiest plays of the year. Technically it wasn't an unsportsmanlike flag, but that's one where the refs could call it a "strike" if they wanted.

Not every type of personal foul is covered under the proposed rule. What you also ignored, and has already been pointed out to you, is that the refs already have the authority to eject players if they believe they've gone too far.

 

[BradyFTW!]

I suppose you can complain if you want but I think Odell should have been ejected against the Panthers and Aqib should have been ejected against (insert any Broncos opponent here). So I really have no problem with this rule if implemented and I don't see it as something that will adversely affect the well coached, highly disciplined Patriots.

I think this might as well just be named the Vontaze Burfict rule. I outright expect him to get ejected at least once this season.

If someone wants to worry that this rule may be used to target the Pats in the playoffs, then I kinda get it, I guess. After the past year-plus, it's hard to argue that the league doesn't have it out for us. But the rule certainly wasn't made for that purpose. And at least with this rule you can avoid that almost entirely by having your guys play with proper discipline. It's not like the various other 'areas of enforcement' that are utterly impossible for the players to avoid, to the point that it's basically just allowing the refs to call a mulligan on any play they choose.

 

[XLIX]

Not every type of personal foul is covered under the proposed rule.

I know, but Odell's were in the category that would get someone ejected. His 3 personal fouls weren't for chop blocks or face masks.

What you ignored, and was pointed out to you, is that the refs would apply some discretion such as with the Talib face mask in the Super Bowl.

 

[goheels22002]

The 49ers and Cincinnati have more to worry about than New England with this rule. Old friend Aquib Talib will get tossed for his douche-y behavior, and Ndamakong Suh will be watched closely for his extra-curriculars.

The only guys on the Patriots that I'd worry about are Shaq Mason and Bryan Stork. Those are two nasty men who love to put the wood to defenders when the opportunity presents itself. But whatever. If the offensive line is fully healthy, they should establish their dominance. That's what the trenches are all about.

One man who is laughing about this is Logan Mankins. The zebras would definitely go after him. I hope he gets into the NFL Hall of Fame - he was the best guard of his generation.

 

[archstanton543]

OT: It'd be funny if Shaq Mason's parents named him after the monstrous NBA player and he ended up being a skinny, short dweeb like say Michael Holley.

 

[rexxar]

How about calling flagrant D PI/holding, instead?

 

[QuantumMechanic]

Odell got hit with 3 personal fouls, so he definitely could have been ejected. Aqib is the sort where the refs can use some discretion. For example, that face mask tackle in the Super Bowl was one of the dirtiest plays of the year. Technically it wasn't an unsportsmanlike flag, but that's one where the refs could call it a "strike" if they wanted.

No, he wouldn't have. No more than one and perhaps none of the PFs Odell committed are the kind of PFs that count towards the auto-eject. The proposed rule is very specific about exactly which PFs "count". I have seen multiple articles about the proposed rules change that say "and OB would not have been auto-ejected because he did not have two of the listed PFs".