NFL Players Assoc - WTF?

[IcyPatriot]

No not at all. If a player is purposefully is trying to avoid helmet to head contact, for the most part he is going to be successful thus he will get penalized rarely if at all. OTOH if a player is purposefully trying to cause helmet to head contact, once again for the most part he is going to be successful and will quickly rack up enough offenses to be a repeat offender.

what about a QB who is ready to get sacked who makes sure he gets hit in the helmet to draw a penalty? Goodell is looking at the short term here ... long term there will be ways for this to be abused by all players.

take one in the helmet for the team ... not good and it will begin to happen.

 

[PatsWickedPissah]

No not at all. If a player is purposefully is trying to avoid helmet to head contact, for the most part he is going to be successful thus he will get penalized rarely if at all. OTOH if a player is purposefully trying to cause helmet to head contact, once again for the most part he is going to be successful and will quickly rack up enough offenses to be a repeat offender.

So by your analysis Pryor was purposefully trying to cause hemet to helmet contact. Or what you claim to be the rare penalty in that instance really isn't rare in reality as I contend. Either that or your above paragraph is false.

 

[TheGodInAGreyHoodie]

So by your analysis Pryor was purposefully trying to cause hemet to helmet contact. Or what you claim to be the rare penalty in that instance really isn't rare in reality as I contend. Either that or your above paragraph is false.

Not at all. The existance of something happening once, does not cease it from being rare.

Consider the next paragraph. The playoff system does not need to be changed because it is rare that a team goes 11-5 and misses the playoffs.

That paragraph is not false because the the Patriots missed playoffs in 2008 with an 11-5 record. Rare events do happen.

Likewise it will be rare that a player will be fined unless they use improper technique and/or intend the illegal contact.

 

[Aßßynormal]

Precisely
In their attempt to remove subjectivity the league instead removed rationality.

Massive FAIL

I agree with this and see this policy change as harmful to the game.

 

[cmasspatsfan]

Not at all. The existance of something happening once, does not cease it from being rare.

Consider the next paragraph. The playoff system does not need to be changed because it is rare that a team goes 11-5 and misses the playoffs.

That paragraph is not false because the the Patriots missed playoffs in 2008 with an 11-5 record. Rare events do happen.

Likewise it will be rare that a player will be fined unless they use improper technique and/or intend the illegal contact

Time will tell if this is a rare occurence or it happens more frequently than you think. I think there will be some tweaking of this rule as times goes on.

 

[PatsWickedPissah]

Not at all. The existance of something happening once, does not cease it from being rare.

Consider the next paragraph. The playoff system does not need to be changed because it is rare that a team goes 11-5 and misses the playoffs.

That paragraph is not false because the the Patriots missed playoffs in 2008 with an 11-5 record. Rare events do happen.

Likewise it will be rare that a player will be fined unless they use improper technique and/or intend the illegal contact.

Mathematically you are correct especially with a small sample size. However the burden is on you for your arguement as the one incident under discussion is an 'outlier'.

Point being the NFL has implemented a policy fraught with danger (punishing guys unable to conform given the laws of physics) and with the unintended (or maybe not given the emphasis on scoring) consequences of eliminating most QB hits and sacks. Whatever, it weakens the game.

As previously, I am NOT against what at least appears to be blatant head hits such as Merriweathers'. Fines and eventual suspensions for continued bad behaviour as determined albeit subjectively by league mavens. But making a headstrike per se however inadvertant not just a penalty (OK by me) but a fine with consequences for suspension for repeat (inadvertant!!!) behaviour ruins the game.

 

[WhiZa]

Since the NFL is favoring QBs we all need to be livid when Brady gets hit in the chest or higher. For some of us that won't be an issue (myself included )

 

[E Belichick Unum]

1. The fine was $7,500 not $75,000.

2. The fine was justified.

3. Even if it wasn't there is no cause of action for a malpractice suit.

4. There is already a thread on the fine.

They have hit James Harrison $75K this year.

I disagree that the fine was justified. Physics dictates that if on object hits another object at a specific angle, that object will continue along an altered course. Nothing can be done about it, fining anybody for a good hit to the chest is absurd.

 

[E Belichick Unum]

Malpractice? As in they gave it to Pryor in the ass outside acceptable proctological standards?

The players association is in existance to represent the players interests with the league. The fact that they are allowing the NFL to fine players an absurd amount of money is beyond reasonalbe. It is malpractice:

The breach by a member of a profession of either a standard of care or a standard of conduct.

 

[BTTA]

Question: what happens when QBs catch on and start slightly leaning their helments toward defenders?

A bunch of you guys are laughing at this, but just wait. Some alert QB is going to lower his head just enough to get a glancing blow. The thing is, with the rule as it is, he won't even have to hide what he was doing.

 

[mb6592]

Not at all. The existance of something happening once, does not cease it from being rare.

Consider the next paragraph. The playoff system does not need to be changed because it is rare that a team goes 11-5 and misses the playoffs.

That paragraph is not false because the the Patriots missed playoffs in 2008 with an 11-5 record. Rare events do happen.

Likewise it will be rare that a player will be fined unless they use improper technique and/or intend the illegal contact.

Mathematically you are correct especially with a small sample size. However the burden is on you for your arguement as the one incident under discussion is an 'outlier'.

Point being the NFL has implemented a policy fraught with danger (punishing guys unable to conform given the laws of physics) and with the unintended (or maybe not given the emphasis on scoring) consequences of eliminating most QB hits and sacks. Whatever, it weakens the game.

As previously, I am NOT against what at least appears to be blatant head hits such as Merriweathers'. Fines and eventual suspensions for continued bad behaviour as determined albeit subjectively by league mavens. But making a headstrike per se however inadvertant not just a penalty (OK by me) but a fine with consequences for suspension for repeat (inadvertant!!!) behaviour ruins the game.

Are you two shatting me? Do you not hear yourselves? PatsWickedPissah why are you even entertaining this? Jesus, try to contain the geekencies. TheGodInAGreyHoodie all you should concern yourself with is if they are ruining the game. I would argue that it has already been diluted with all the restrictions put on defensive players, this crap (a fine on Pryor? and you agree with it?) is over the top. When I wonder why the NFL seems intent on destroying what we would consider to be traditional football, I'm left with fantasy football as the culprit. I f---ing hate fantasy football. It's brought in too many non-fans.

 

[TheGodInAGreyHoodie]

TheGodInAGreyHoodie all you should concern yourself with is if they are ruining the game.

I disagree on two points.

First, I don't think they are ruining the game.

And I certainly should not only be concerned with that. We are talking about young men's bodies and lives here. If some modification to the sport I love will allow more of them to have healthy and productive lives post-football that is more important than me getting to watch a few extra hard hits during the season.

Here is what is ruining the sport. Every time the news on TV talks about a player getting a concussion playing in the NFL, a couple hundred 8-years old hear "NO!, you can play soccer if you want instead" from their mom when they ask to play in the pee-wee league.

 

[mb6592]

I disagree on two points.

First, I don't think they are ruining the game.

And I certainly should not only be concerned with that. We are talking about young men's bodies and lives here. If some modification to the sport I love will allow more of them to have healthy and productive lives post-football that is more important than me getting to watch a few extra hard hits during the season.

Here is what is ruining the sport. Every time the news on TV talks about a player getting a concussion playing in the NFL, a couple hundred 8-years old hear "NO!, you can play soccer if you want instead" from their mom when they ask to play in the pee-wee league.

Reference your points:

Point 1 - You're wrong
Point 2 - Good Gosh , you're a no tag in school guy too, aren't you?