NewCliche21 Posted October 21, 2013 Share Posted October 21, 2013 If you were listening, you would have realized I only defended Merriweather's hits yesterday(not him as a player), and I was making points about the new rule as a whole and how it directly contradicts what the NFL and Heads Up Football itself teaches. You haven't been able to respond to those points yet. Touché, sir. I'm talking about Meriweather's hits yesterday as being part of a cumulative career, hell even just this season, of being a dirty, dumbass player. You may be isolating yesterday's, but my view of the thread is that we're discussing him as a player. You don't typically get a suspension for one game's worth of hits. I will give you that the hyper-vigilance of the league in terms of helmet hits is making it difficult for players to play as they used to, but that's pretty much the entire point of it. It wasn't working, and just like with all other safety rules, be they effectively PR stunts or not, they're in place because someone got hurt when they weren't in place. The long-term effects of these hits are crystal clear. I understand the, "you know what risks you're taking" part, but when you're 22, you're not thinking about how you will be cognitively disabled when you're 55. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ozymandias Posted October 21, 2013 Share Posted October 21, 2013 Both hits were definitely penalities. The first one, he led with his helmet, thats a penalty. The second one was obvious. This guy is always looking to go for huge hits and has cost us a few times before as well. I just dont understand it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NewCliche21 Posted October 21, 2013 Share Posted October 21, 2013 Both hits were definitely penalities. The first one, he led with his helmet, thats a penalty. The second one was obvious. This guy is always looking to go for huge hits and has cost us a few times before as well. I just dont understand it. And I think that this is where we're getting too caught up with the medical effects/fairness of the rule. Either way it's costing us 15 yards every time. Fair or not, if you're driving a yellow Mustang going 80 in a 65, you're getting pulled over even if that silver Focus is going 82 right next to you. Why? Because that's the reputation that bright-colored sports cars have gotten. That's just the reality. Don't want that ticket? Don't buy the car and don't speed if you do. It's the same thing with Meriweather. Fairly or not, he's going to get these calls every single time, and it's affecting the scoreboard. No player is worth that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bang Posted October 21, 2013 Share Posted October 21, 2013 i'm not saying going for knees is ok either. are you seriously saying knee damage and brain damage are equal? lets get randall cobb's family and junior seau's family together and ask them. I'm saying damage is damage. Lets get Junior's family, and have them prove to me that he wasn't a chronic PED user. he sure exhibited every bit of the symptoms, and they have been proven to have long term effects. It's easy to get all sanctimonious and invoke names like that, but the truth is you don't know what caused what, or what he did. Sammy Baugh played for forty years with a leather hat and lived well into his 90s. No one can say what happened to Junior, because i would be willing to bet that the full story of Junior is not something we'll ever be privy too. So what about the other side of that coin that i mentioned and you didn't answer? How many times have you seen a guy go down and remain motionless because of a hit to the crown of his head because he was bent too low and got his neck jammed down? In fact, if you think about it, the majority of players you see who go down with those types of injuries are guys who were making a tackle and got rammed by on the top of the head (usually) by another tackler. You can't tell me that this injury potential is more devastating than the other one, so much so that the NFL will FORCE the defender to exponentially increase his risk of such a paralyzing hit so to protect the other guy. if it evened out the possibility of a dangerous injury OK, but it does not,, it significantly raises it. I'm not for just letting the refs stay home and having a brawl. But they have definitely decided to trade one injury for the other, they have definitely placed defensive players in a poition of having to choose to make a play or make a play in such a way that it may significantly injure them. it is a game of collisions. and they can urge players to take it easier,, penalize them.. but they have to be reasonable. as it is now, in the rules it is written that the responsibility is entirely on the defender, even if he's in the air when the ball goes off a guy. It's ridiculous. ~Bang Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kmd24 Posted October 21, 2013 Share Posted October 21, 2013 Bottom line is that, given the choice, the NFL prefers those plays to be completions over potential injuries. I don't see anything wrong with that. Defenders don't have to hit receivers as the ball arrives. Get there earlier and make a play on the ball. Failing that, wrap the guy up, maybe try to strip it. When a player calls for a fair catch on a punt, defenders running full speed for 40+ yards are able to pull up and not blast the guy. Why is it unreasonable to extend the same protection to defenseless receivers? Blasting a guy who is trying to catch a pass is just not a play the NFL wants to be legal. Limiting the fouls to the head and neck area is just the beginning, and making the point that knee injuries are harmful too isn't a useful distinction unless you think defenders should be unable to tackle receivers at all. I think a reasonable concession to defenses would be to allow more contact down the field. If the legal contact area extended 10 yards instead of 5, you'd see fewer guys running free, and defenders wouldn't have to compensate by going for kill shots on guys trying to catch the ball downfield. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bang Posted October 21, 2013 Share Posted October 21, 2013 It's perfectly fine to dislike the rules. But this man's job is to understand the rules and play by them. Yes, he's been doing something the same way all his life. I get it. If the speed limit on main road changed from 65 to 45 and you knew about it, it's still your fault when a cop catches you speeding. You can disagree with the rationale as to why they changed the speed limit. You can be pissed that the cop pulled you over instead of the other 3 cars that were keeping pace with you. But in the end, you have to be accountable for your actions. Totally agreed. for the record, I don't like Merriwether. for just this reason, he costs us more than he gains us, and the fact we've been stuck counting on him for 3(?) seasons brings up a whole slew or problems that he represents. Let me be clear.. i am not saying it's Ok to have brain damage. But I am also saying that they are not going to prevent it or even dent it. And i am saying that by forcing defenders lower they yhave indeed traded one for the other, and they have absolutely steeply increased the chance of the defender having a devastating spinal injury as a result. Look, these rules have been in place for two years now, and we see as many players as ever getting laid out and concussed on clean plays, not plays that draw flags. the ONLY thing they have managed to do is put the refs in more and more of a position to **** up the game. They have not prevented anything, they have not decreased penalties. What's the answer? Because trying to fit a rule into every potential play and hamstringing the defense sure isn't working. ~Bang Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NewCliche21 Posted October 21, 2013 Share Posted October 21, 2013 Bang, you can reasonably get a leg injury playing any sport or throughout the course of daily life. Rolling your ankle while running or even Gramattica tearing his ACL while jumping up and down celebrating an extra point. Trading a brain injury for a leg injury is like trading a hurricane for a thunderstorm. Yeah, they can both have longer-term effects, but I'll take a bum knee over Alzheimer's any day. It's pretty hard to enjoy the money that you've made during that season that you got a concussion because a player went up top to avoid hurting your knee when you don't even know your own name. The two are not interchangeable, and you keep trying to equate them to each other. EDIT: And Bang, there are rules protecting the legs, too. Horsecollar tackles are illegal, and they should be. Going for the knees of the quarterback is illegal, and it should be. Both are called almost every time, and they have prevented injuries by being illegal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dckey Posted October 21, 2013 Share Posted October 21, 2013 I had a discussion with a high school football player who plays safety and he shed some light for me as to why BM is not a good safety and it's not cause of his hits or the way he tackles but how he is made. He told me that he is taught like BM that you drive your shoulder into the chest with your head up to try and dislodge the ball or you just wrap up with your arms and make the tackle. Well if the person is in the endzone trying to catch the ball what is just wrapping him up going to do? So you have to try and dislodge the ball. He then pointed out that BM is not very wide and that because of his body frame anytime he leans in with his shoulder he will have head contact. So how do you fix this problem I asked him? GET A NEW SAFETY!!!!!!!!!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bang Posted October 21, 2013 Share Posted October 21, 2013 You can conceivably get a leg injury walking out the door, yes. BUT, with the new rules, the NFL HAS forced the hit lower. And in that respect they are indeed saying that they'd rather have your legs destroyed than you get a concussion. Like I said,, look what happened to Brian Cushing yesterday and wonder if that will result in long term issues for him. The hit in preseason in the Dolphins / titans game should have alerted them to this. receiver = gone for the year. defender = not sorry at all, justifies himself by saying that a hit like that will not get him fined OR cost him money. The defender is RIGHT. (Now we could debate the merit of that particular hit if you'd like, but) the point is that this is the attitude they are going to foster. How much does a defensive back or linebacker pay in fines every year? A TON. It's a regular problem for them, so many hits that don't even get flagged end up getting fined on Tuesday, a defensive player stands to LOSE tens of thousands of dollars just for playing the game. (He could lay up, save his money, give up the play and get fired, i guess.) But they are between a rock and a hard place when it comes to this, and the NFL's insistence on going overboard to protect the head (and ramp up the offense to light speed) are only forcing serious knee injuries, hip injuries, and potential spinal injuries on defenders. (It's not a two way street.. offensive players can lay them out on blindside blocks. we cheer.) I'm not trying to equate anything. I'm trying to say they can't get rid of it with the way they're going about it, and that what they're doing is hurting the game. Injuries happen. It's football. We as fans have made a decision to accept a level of it. (doesn't it feel weird cheering for a guy getting carted off?) I don't think they can get rid of it at all, but that's not here nor there. They've done one thing.. they've inserted the ref into the game in a completely unpredictable and unfair way. They have not prevented any injuries, they haven't cleaned up anything. They've just muddied it all up. Defenders do NOT know how to hit anymore, and NO one can teach them, because no one knows. One crew calls it this way, one crew calls it that. You can say all day that you can 't aim for the head, but the head moves, a lot. Sometimes it's unavoidable, and that is the defender's fault, who is literally supposed to defy laws of gravity and momentum in some cases. And the reason for this is they have exploded the rulebook, and have inserted so many ways for them to thrust their judgment into the game and remove the outcome from being solely the domain of the players. ~Bang Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stadium-Armory Posted October 21, 2013 Share Posted October 21, 2013 He's like Rip VanWinkle. Asleep (on IR) for s long, he's woken up to a different NFL. Can't play like that man. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vilandil Tasardur Posted October 21, 2013 Share Posted October 21, 2013 I really like the idea of extending the contact area to ten yards. It means fewer receivers running free and fewer defenders going for the dislodge. It allows the defenders to actually play man coverage again which, let's be honest, is completely gone from the game. What the Colts did last night to Manning's receivers was straight out of the 80s and is almost impossible these days. It'll never happen though because it slows down the Manning/Brady/Rodgers style of play where you spread out 5 guys and run 2 yard routes with tons of YAC since no defender can ever hope to keep pace with these quick guys without touching them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skinfan2k Posted October 21, 2013 Share Posted October 21, 2013 Is there any chance we can appeal until after the Broncos game. I dont think we need him for another big game. I dont see any big passing threats team in the near future Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NewCliche21 Posted October 21, 2013 Share Posted October 21, 2013 Mike Jones @MikeJonesWaPo32s Meriweather suspended two games by the NFL, league announces. #Redskins Good. Piece of **** player. Can't stay healthy, makes other players unhealthy, costs us 15 yarders, and now a waste of a roster spot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rufus T Firefly Posted October 21, 2013 Share Posted October 21, 2013 I think there are arguments to made about the application of the rule (for instance I think the emphasis should be on fines and suspensions rather than penalties since it's hard to see in real time), but the idea of stopping players from viscously going after other players' heads is a good one. And the idea that people want to act macho over it and actually defend thuggery seems wrongheaded, imo. In the case of Meriweather, there's really nothing to defend. The league has put in rules, he refuses to follow them. He doesn't just hit guys high, he launches himself at players' heads. The Patriots got sick of him doing it and let him go and we were foolish enough to sign him. The fact that he's also not a good player is secondary. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yeen80 Posted October 21, 2013 Author Share Posted October 21, 2013 Is there any chance we can appeal until after the Broncos game. I dont think we need him for another big game. I dont see any big passing threats team in the near future Phillip Rivers will eat our defense alive Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CRobi21 Posted October 21, 2013 Share Posted October 21, 2013 Boom, 2 game suspension via Tarik. Tarik El-Bashir @TarikCSN 6m #Redskins safety Brandon Meriweather suspended two games, NFL announces. #RedskinsTalk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlvinWaltonIsMyBoy Posted October 21, 2013 Share Posted October 21, 2013 Two games is excessive. Garbage. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yeen80 Posted October 21, 2013 Author Share Posted October 21, 2013 One game? fine. 2 games? Unwarranted Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fwo40 Posted October 21, 2013 Share Posted October 21, 2013 I think there are arguments to made about the application of the rule (for instance I think the emphasis should be on fines and suspensions rather than penalties since it's hard to see in real time), but the idea of stopping players from viscously going after other players' heads is a good one. And the idea that people want to act macho over it and actually defend thuggery seems wrongheaded, imo. In the case of Meriweather, there's really nothing to defend. The league has put in rules, he refuses to follow them. He doesn't just hit guys high, he launches himself at players' heads. The Patriots got sick of him doing it and let him go and we were foolish enough to sign him. The fact that he's also not a good player is secondary. exactly. Merriweather has a long history of this garbage, For anyone to paint him as a victim is absurd. He is leaving his feet constantly with the intent to spear. That is not getting unlucky with where the hit lands, that is being stupid and dirty from the get go. He'll be out of the league next season for good reason dude can't tackle or cover. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yeen80 Posted October 21, 2013 Author Share Posted October 21, 2013 I think there are arguments to made about the application of the rule (for instance I think the emphasis should be on fines and suspensions rather than penalties since it's hard to see in real time), but the idea of stopping players from viscously going after other players' heads is a good one. And the idea that people want to act macho over it and actually defend thuggery seems wrongheaded, imo. In the case of Meriweather, there's really nothing to defend. The league has put in rules, he refuses to follow them. He doesn't just hit guys high, he launches himself at players' heads. The Patriots got sick of him doing it and let him go and we were foolish enough to sign him. The fact that he's also not a good player is secondary. The Bears were foolish first Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skinfan2k Posted October 21, 2013 Share Posted October 21, 2013 Phillip Rivers will eat our defense alive He will get his typical 250 and 2 tds. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rufus T Firefly Posted October 21, 2013 Share Posted October 21, 2013 The Bears were foolish first Yeah, but at least they just picked him up last minute for a one year deal. The fact that he got himself benched there just makes our signing look dumber. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2v2nv Posted October 21, 2013 Share Posted October 21, 2013 Gosh you'd think he was Suh or something. He does have a rap but dang...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bang Posted October 21, 2013 Share Posted October 21, 2013 Fine by me, stop them from headhunting. Stopping their heads from ever contacting one another is impossible no matter how much you fine or penalize them. Launches and Crown-Of-The-Helmet spears are pretty easy to spot. As it is now, I'm seeing calls being made because it looks like the receiver's head is contacted, and on replay it shows shoulder contact.(not in this game or in these instances, in other games, and many more times than once.) I think if the NFL wants to make a case on the Marshall hit, OK, make a case,,, but the Jeffrey hit.. honestly, if we really want to protect "defenseless" players,, start calling it when a guard traps a linebacker and he's paying attention to the ball and gets de-cleated. Call it when a linebacker cleans up a running back who's fighting for yards. "defenseless".. as in most of the judgment call fouls should really be obvious. I think that the play they're trying to eliminate with this is the receiver crossing and getting his clock cleaned by a safety missile hit while he's extending for the ball. Fine. get rid of that. Call it when it happens. But how can anyone say a guy who is running WITH the ball is defenseless? (Other than the fact that they are one guy against 3, 4 or more guys trying to bring him down...) by trying to emphasize these rules, the refs really,, and I mean this,, they could literally call a half dozen penalties on any given play. In my mind, this unbalances the game. And this is much more evident than any protection they are offering anyone. And sorry,, it seems as if I'm changing the thread to a more broad discussion than just Merriweather. I think none of us in the discussion actually likes him, so we all agree there. ~Bang Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DCranon21 Posted October 21, 2013 Share Posted October 21, 2013 Kerry Rhodes is still available. Just sayin... Agreed. They need to forget about those rumors. Can he tackle and cover. Can he stop the run is all the questions that should be asked. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.