Gronk gets 1 game

[AtomicDawg]

Derrick Brooks lowers a lot of discipline for players so I would say Gronk at least has a small shot of getting it down to a heavy fine.

 

[The Brandon Five]

I doubt it. I think Gronk's hit was a bit more egregious and I don't think Burfict went into concussion protocol.

Burfict was not a receiver, so not sure what rule would have been broken there. Looks similar to the hit Michael Floyd put on a Dolphin last year.

 

[Tony2046]

Burfict was not a receiver, so not sure what rule would have been broken there. Looks similar to the hit Michael Floyd put on a Dolphin last year.

I think it was considered illegal because it was helmet to helmet. The taunting was just stupid.

 

[The Brandon Five]

I think it was considered illegal because it was helmet to helmet. The taunting was just stupid.

Ironically, this is now a penalty because of this hit Shazier put on Bernard a couple of years ago:



Ryan Shazier’s hit in playoffs will now be a penalty

 

[RobertWeathers]

I think it was considered illegal because it was helmet to helmet. The taunting was just stupid.

I'm not seeing a helmet to helmet hit. Maybe the side of JuJu's helmet his his cage but seems 98% of the impact was to the upper chest.

 

[RobertWeathers]

I'm 100% certain JuJu gets suspended.

Similar logic to the Gronk situation AFAIC - the league simply can't afford to look like they don't take a concussion-causing illegal hit seriously. Certainly not one that takes place on MNF.

We're evaluating these hits on a moral basis, but to the NFL once concussions are involved the evaluation is strictly a business decision.

I don't see a suspension. The hit looked legit to me. The taunting was dumb and that may be a fine.

 

[Tony2046]

Looks like helmet to helmet to me. Or helmet to chin if you want to get technical.




Edit: To add another angle.

 

[RobertWeathers]

Looks like helmet to helmet to me. Or helmet to chin if you want to get technical.




Edit: To add another angle.

Oh yea....thats helment to helmet no question.

Its just like the Gronk it we discussed yesterday. It happens so fast even when you slow it down you still cant tell.

 

[Simpelton]

I think it was considered illegal because it was helmet to helmet. The taunting was just stupid.

You know what? I don't have a problem with this hit in the slightest.

Primary contact point was the shoulder, no intention to hit the head. Block was within enough space of the ball carrier to be fully legal. Burfict got rocked because he wasn't aware the hit was coming. This is a football play, and any injury is clearly accidental. The intention was clearly a good hard block and Burfict actually shares some responsibility for his injuries because he did not have his head on a swivel -- focused on the ball carrier, no awareness of the blocker, that part's on him.

As far as league punishment I wouldn't punish this at all. It might get flagged for unnecessary roughness by the stripes since he probably didn't need to block Burfict quite so hard -- but on the other hand, if Burfict was braced for it he could have delivered a pretty good countercheck so the violence of the hit might have been necessary -- whole problem was that Burfict didn't see the block coming. Hard to fault the blocking player for that.

 

[RobertWeathers]

You know what? I don't have a problem with this hit in the slightest.

Primary contact point was the shoulder, no intention to hit the head. Block was within enough space of the ball carrier to be fully legal. Burfict got rocked because he wasn't aware the hit was coming. This is a football play, and any injury is clearly accidental. The intention was clearly a good hard block and Burfict actually shares some responsibility for his injuries because he did not have his head on a swivel -- focused on the ball carrier, no awareness of the blocker, that part's on him.

As far as league punishment I wouldn't punish this at all. It might get flagged for unnecessary roughness by the stripes since he probably didn't need to block Burfict quite so hard -- but on the other hand, if Burfict was braced for it he could have delivered a pretty good countercheck so the violence of the hit might have been necessary -- whole problem was that Burfict didn't see the block coming. Hard to fault the blocking player for that.

Intention has nothing to do with it. It doesn't matter. JuJu's helmet hit him in the lower side of his helmet.

 

[Simpelton]

Helmet made contact with helmet yes, but the primary impact was the shoulder. Helmet contact seemed to me to happen because the initial shoulder check ragdolled Burfict a bit and whiplashed his helmet into JuJu's. This is not full-force head hunting, it's a consequence of what otherwise looks like it would have been a pretty clean hit. He's coming in maybe a bit too high, but the primary force was delivered into the shoulder.

Again this wouldn't have been a huge problem if Burfict had been aware of the block and taken steps to protect himself. He got hurt because he got tunnel vision on the ball carrier and was blindsided.

 

[lillloyd]

My issue is with the league. The NFL should have a system of punishments in writing that explains exactly what is going to happen and what the fine/punishment will be for each infraction. It should get more stringent with each incident but it should be consistent.

First of all, couldn't agree more.

But I believe there is actually already a unifying theme running through the NFL's utterly arbitrary administration of penalties, fines, and suspensions:

Protect. The. Brand.

It's the guiding North Star that drives policy under Goodell's tenure.

If you're looking for a principled basis for NFL decisions, you won't find one; there is no underlying, forward-looking moral compass that provides a framework for policy.

Sure, there may be lip service paid to player safety or eradicating domestic abuse, but if you pan out to a larger view, those issues became a *rules* focus only when potential legal exposure (i.e. evidence of long-term brain trauma/CTE) or public outcry (i.e. wait, there's a *video* of the Ray Rice thing??) become impossible to ignore.

"Protect the Brand" is fundamentally reactionary because it requires public opinion and awareness to reach an obvious boiling point, before the league can be galvanized into action; basically, they hold a finger up to the wind, and belatedly lurch away from controversy towards sensible positions on safety and abuse.

It explains how the league actually marketed and celebrated the very hits they now demonize, prior to their about-face on player safety in 2008. It explains how domestic abusers could receive single week suspensions while weed smokers received a full year. It explains why the Saints - and yes, the Pats - received such draconian penalties a decade ago; after all, the league can't show that it tolerates bounty hunting, or anything that could upset the appearance of a level playing field.

Essentially, every punishment doled out by the league is one part justice, two parts PR stunt that helps make the league look appropriately serious on issue X.

Back to Gronk (and Juju)- the reality is, similar hits that don't take place in high profile games, or don't result in concussions or injury, won't generate the same level of public outcry or awareness. No one is talking about George Iloka's hit on Antonio Brown last night warranting a suspension...primarily because AB got up, and White/Burfict didn't.

Bottom line, IMO Gronk and JuJu had their suspensions punched the moment White and Burfict entered the concussion protocol (or were carried off on a stretcher)

Just my $.02

 

[Tony2046]

Oh yea....thats helment to helmet no question.

Its just like the Gronk it we discussed yesterday. It happens so fast even when you slow it down you still cant tell.

This play on the other hand was not helmet to helmet.

 

[lillloyd]

I doubt it. I think Gronk's hit was a bit more egregious and I don't think Burfict went into concussion protocol.

Forget the specifics of the hit for a moment; look at the public reaction. Twitter went crazy - not just for that hit but for the whole game. This weekend has become a mini-referendum on the state of the NFL. That kind of public outcry matters to the league office.

Plus, JuJu stood over a guy that got carried off on a stretcher, in a game where someone looked like they might have been paralyzed earlier. Terrible look for a league that's trying to argue that it supports player safety.

 

[RobertWeathers]

This play on the other hand was not helmet to helmet.

Most likely the most pathetic thing I have ever seen.

 

[lillloyd]

Most likely the most pathetic thing I have ever seen.

Only plausible explanation was that he was irrationally worried about getting flagged on a hit OOB.

I really like that CB, very good young player (William Jackson) that we were targeting last year in the draft. We ended up with Artie Burns (Burnt?)

 

[ForThoseAboutToRock]

I don't intend to unload on you but it is driving me crazy that there are fans who think, "Gronk should not appeal and should just take his medicine", and "BB should discipline Gronk as well". Why?

Here is a league that has disciplined this team where there was nothing to discipline them over.

If BB thinks he needs to sit Gronk a series or fine him because Gronk didn't "walk away" and he hurt the team then thats his call. But Gronk, BB and the NEP owe the league nothing. Zero. Nada.

People with this argument are providing zero actual analysis or providing any actual argument in favor of this position. It's just a talk radio "here's my opinion" thing.

 

[ForThoseAboutToRock]

Burfict was not a receiver, so not sure what rule would have been broken there. Looks similar to the hit Michael Floyd put on a Dolphin last year.

My post copied over from the "Antonio Brown" thread:

Prohibiting this exact type of act is a "point of emphasis" for the NFL in 2017: 2017 Rules Changes and Points of Emphasis | NFL Football Operations

One category of defenseless player:
A player who receives a “blindside” block when the path of the offensive blocker is toward or parallel to his own end line.

Prohibited acts on a defenseless player:
1. forcibly hitting the defenseless player’s head or neck area with the helmet, facemask, forearm, or shoulder, even if the initial contact is lower than the player’s neck, and regardless of whether the defensive player also uses his arms to tackle the defenseless player by encircling or grasping him
...
3. illegally launching into a defenseless opponent. It is an illegal launch if a player (i) leaves both feet prior to contact to spring forward and upward into his opponent, and (ii) uses any part of his helmet to initiate forcible contact against any part of his opponent’s body. (This does not apply to contact against a runner, unless the runner is still considered to be a defenseless player, as defined in Article 7.)
Click to expand...


So what Ju Ju did was textbook unnecessary roughness.

@Tony2046 ; @robertweathers (wanted you two to see the post since you're discussing)

 

[Jackson 2]

Thats actually a reasonable point. By being consistent it limits its PR options and ability to control the players and manipulate the narrative. With that said I don't think they always operate conscientiously.

Precisely. What I didn't include in my original post was that most organizations are interested in maintaining order while good ones are interested in maintaining order AND treating its employees with at least a modicum of fairness. The NFL meets the first criteria easily. The second? Not so much...

 

[raduray]

I agree the hit was excessive. No whistle was blown so the runner was deemed "live." There is no whistle blown on the cable feed until after Gronk took his cheap shot.

I am not defending the nature of the hit, but it occurred during a LIVE football play as officiated on field. The circumstances lead me as a fan to say eff the refs as things had been called that day (holding 87 just prior), and have been called against gronk for literally years. Gronk as a pro? No excuse. Then again, no whistle, so what if White gets to the EZ...he's Gronk and has a shot at a gnat flying within arms reach...

In a slow motion vacuum? The hit looks terrible, especially the back side look. I ask everyone to watch the live shot. No whistle until after the hit. The whole interception/hit/whistle time frame is literally less than 2 seconds.
So, start your stopwatch:
Gronk pushed my cb at top route by cb, gronk goes down and cb kinda comes back to ball while going down with the int. Dorsett comes flying in to touch cb down as gronk gets up and lays the hit. Whistle blows. Stop. Less than 2 seconds have elapsed.

LIVE PLAY

Caught in process of going to the ground...can still be made a drop?

How many live play hit excuses can be made?

Again, not justifying what happened, but if taken in a vacuum without a clear OOB prone player, 15 yard roughing penalty at worst. Watch the clip live. 1.7ish (less than 2 seconds but closer to 2) seconds between push at the top of the rroute and the whistle after gronks hit.

Your longwinded post fails to mention that the cb was clearly out of bounds. Kellyanne would be proud.