Discussion in 'NFL Football Forum' started by thenepatsrule, Jan 7, 2011.
That was a terrible hit
The league threatened suspensions for habitual offenders.
This was Brackett's 3rd offense this year, and this one was the worst.
So why no suspension? Because he is a Colt?
THAT'S IT??? WTF?? Brackett should have been tossed from the game and suspended for the play-offs..
So much for Goodell's BS helmet to helmet policy and habitual offenders.
I didn't see the hit, but it sounds terrible!
Should be suspending! Well done Roger! Glad you keep with your ideas!
YouTube - Gary Brackett - Missed field goal hit on return - Week 17 Titans
Happens around the 15 near the ball carrier, about 10 seconds in.
It was a dirty hit as Brackett Blindsided Amato, leading with his helmet and hitting Amato in the back of the Helmet.
being fined only $35K is a disgrace.
Worst commissioner in professional sports is at it again...
i dont think it was that bad of a hit. yah leading with the helmet, but to me, it didnt look like he was trying to be dirty
That is worse than I thought it would be!
If that was Brackets third offense he should have been bounced from the game suspended and fined about $75K. If he were a pat thats prolly what would have happened.
Wasn't Harrison fined $50K. How was this hit any less egregious?
Hey -- I know him!
Seriously, should have been more.
When is the NFL going to fine Brackett for his PED use in The Simpsons?
Even after Merriweather appealed his fine it still ammounted to more, on his first offense, on a lesser (imo) hit.
Ken Griffey, Jr?
The NFL make an example of a player on the Colts roster yeah good luck with that..
Brackett should definitely be suspended for this hit
That hit was terrible. And his third offense. Definitely warrants a suspension.
Oh wait! He plays for the Colts! Never mind.
So, you don't think it's dirty for a player to hit a guy, helmet to helmet, in the back of his helmet?
To me, that is the definition of dirty. Hitting a guy from behind.. Amato was extremely lucky not to have been severely injured
I'm starting to wonder if some of you watch these videos completely blindfolded. Where are you getting that Brackett hit him in the back of the helmet? Brackett was setting him up for a blindside block on the kick return and was originally poised to hit him in the side of the helmet. Before he had the chance to do that, Amato even turned his head TOWARD Brackett. That hit was decidedly NOT in the back of the helmet, though it was still helmet-to-helmet.
Man, that was a blindside helmet to helmet hit. He very easily could have moved his helmet to the side of the body and made an awesome block. Instead he lead with his helmet. Dude should be gone especially with it being his 3rd time. 35k wasn't enough. He shouldnt be playing in the first playoff game.
Meh. Incidental contact. Happens every week.
Helmet to helmet hit of course and should be fined. But not intentional imo. If you look closely, when Brackett goes in for the hit , he lowers his head to where the titan's player chest is. He aim's for the chest, and unfortunately as it always happens, the other player also lowers his head to protect himself.
Really neither player is at fault. Brackett goes in for the hit, lowering his head to where it would hit the opposing player in the chest, once he lowers his head , he really can't change direction.
Then if you look at it from the Titan's player pov, he sees Brackett coming in for the hit, and he seems to want to curl up into a fetal position. Which of course means lowering his head which in turn makes him get hit in the head.
He shoulda just taken the hit in the chest. But like most people, when you know you're gonna get hit, you want brace yourself. Which in this case means making yourself into a smaller target. And as usually happens , that means lowering your head to protect the front of your body.
Sorry, imo this was a totally unintentional helmet to helmet hit.
Most reasonable people, I think, are complaining about the lack of consistency from the commish on this topic.
I'll agree on that. I wish there was consistency in all these stupid flags/fines. But reading this thread seems many responders thought it was a blatant foul, which is what I didn't agree with.
I don't think it's blatent either. But they've been flagging and fining for helmet-to-helmet hits, which is what that hit was (intentional or not). So, while I don't agree with it, I'm not surprised.
Honestly? I think Mayo's hit was more blatant than this one. I know I'll get ragged on for that, but its true. Mayo didn't care where he hit him long as he hit him, hard. lol
Are you talking about the big hit in the Bills game?
Of course lol.
I'd have to see video of that as I don't remember it well enough off the top of my head to diagnose it as "blatent" or "not blatent". I remember seeing it, though, and thinking that it was just a big hit.
Separate names with a comma.