Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
Is the NFL sissifying football with the QB rules? (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter spider321
- Start date
The Gray Hood
Footballguy
merge, plz.
The Great Snook
Footballguy
I voted no. The QB is typically the face and the star of a football team. It is in the best interest of the league to keep the QB healthy and playing. We have all seen the difference between what a great QB can do to a team vs. what a crappy QB can do to a team. To do this the league needs rules which prevent QBs from having their knees hit, heads slapped, and from being pile drived.
In your other thread some posters were using the argument that QBs don't get hurt and it is defensive linemen, etc. who keep getting hurt. Well the simple answer is nobody really cares about them. If a DL gets hurt they shuttle in another one. The same is true for all of the other positions except for kickers.
In closing it is very brave to sit behind a keyboard and call the QB a sissy because there are rules protecting him. I'd be willing to wager that very few of us here in the shark pool would be willing to take a "legal" hit from a DL, LB, or a blitzing CB
In your other thread some posters were using the argument that QBs don't get hurt and it is defensive linemen, etc. who keep getting hurt. Well the simple answer is nobody really cares about them. If a DL gets hurt they shuttle in another one. The same is true for all of the other positions except for kickers.
In closing it is very brave to sit behind a keyboard and call the QB a sissy because there are rules protecting him. I'd be willing to wager that very few of us here in the shark pool would be willing to take a "legal" hit from a DL, LB, or a blitzing CB
FreeBaGeL
Footballguy
I don't know why this was starting a new thread over just for the small change, but I'll repeat myself I guess.
I would love to see some statistics on QB injuries compared to the rest of the league.
People always talk and talk about how the QB is "vulnerable" there in the pocket, but that seems like pure theorycraft to me. Ok, so Tom Brady got hit low and had a major injury. When was the last time it happened before that?
How many QBs have been injured this year? The only two semi-major ones I can think of are Mcnabb and Hasselbeck and both of those happened on plays where they were running, not in the pocket.
I mean, it seems like a lineman getting his leg rolled up on is a 100x more common injury than a QB getting hit low or the laughable handslap to the head of a QB, so should it be a 15 yard penalty if you fall on a lineman's leg? A lot of these guys getting roughing the passer called on them have just as little control coming out of a block as someone does falling on a lineman's leg, so why is that not a penalty when it causes 20x as many injuries as any of these ridiculous roughing the passer calls?
Also, it would seem if they really want to make protecting the QBs a priority they need to make it two hand touch on the QB once they cross the line of scrimmage, because most of them seem to get hurt on running plays even though they're getting hit a lot less on running plays than they are on passing plays.
Running backs, linemen, DBs, LBs. They all get hurt far more often than QBs. So why are QBs getting extra protection again?
I would love to see some statistics on QB injuries compared to the rest of the league.
People always talk and talk about how the QB is "vulnerable" there in the pocket, but that seems like pure theorycraft to me. Ok, so Tom Brady got hit low and had a major injury. When was the last time it happened before that?
How many QBs have been injured this year? The only two semi-major ones I can think of are Mcnabb and Hasselbeck and both of those happened on plays where they were running, not in the pocket.
I mean, it seems like a lineman getting his leg rolled up on is a 100x more common injury than a QB getting hit low or the laughable handslap to the head of a QB, so should it be a 15 yard penalty if you fall on a lineman's leg? A lot of these guys getting roughing the passer called on them have just as little control coming out of a block as someone does falling on a lineman's leg, so why is that not a penalty when it causes 20x as many injuries as any of these ridiculous roughing the passer calls?
Also, it would seem if they really want to make protecting the QBs a priority they need to make it two hand touch on the QB once they cross the line of scrimmage, because most of them seem to get hurt on running plays even though they're getting hit a lot less on running plays than they are on passing plays.
Running backs, linemen, DBs, LBs. They all get hurt far more often than QBs. So why are QBs getting extra protection again?
The Great Snook
Footballguy
see my post above yours.
NE_REVIVAL
Footballguy
Hell yes!
Its almost as if the NFL and their fans would prefer to watch the Bradys, Mannings, Rothlesbergers, Rivers, etc; rather than the Jamarcus Russells, Jason Campbells, Kyle Bollers, Harringtons, Leafs, Grossmans, etc. Go figure
Clearly we need more not less diving at QBs knees.
Its almost as if the NFL and their fans would prefer to watch the Bradys, Mannings, Rothlesbergers, Rivers, etc; rather than the Jamarcus Russells, Jason Campbells, Kyle Bollers, Harringtons, Leafs, Grossmans, etc. Go figure
Clearly we need more not less diving at QBs knees.
FreeBaGeL
Footballguy
Adrian Peterson? Reggie Bush? Larry Fitzgerald? Ladainian Tomlinson? These guys are stars, and all are much more likely to be injured than a star QB is. So why are the QBs the ones getting all the rules?Some star QBs go their entire CAREERS without missing a game to injury. That's absolutely unheard of for a RB/WR.
The Gray Hood
Footballguy
this thread is giving me deja vu.
NE_REVIVAL
Footballguy
Note to "Brady Haters" & "NFL is full of ssisys now" crowd.....I like watching the best players play and I don't want to watch Jim Sorgi and the Colts playing Brady and the Pats or vice versa. I want to see opposing teams at their best, it makes the games so much more meaningful. There are not nearly enough good qbs in the game today, never mind the few great ones. Hayneswoth crushed Brady several weeks back, he rightfully wasn't penalized, Brady and his fans didn't complain, big hits are stilla big part of the game. However, I am absolutely baffled that there are some who take offense to discouraging players from unnecessary crippling (intentionally diving at QBs knees) hits
As for the sissifying stuff, fwiw, NFL players are bigger, faster and stronger now than they have ever been. The teams and players playing today would wipe the floor with the best of the 60 and 70s etc. While somewhat on the subject, some of those lamenting the loss of the good old "tuff days" are hypocrites who incessantly whine about Rodney Harrision being dirty. The only real difference between the way "the great" Ronnie Lott played and the way Rodney Harrison played is the time period they played in.
Last edited by a moderator:
I don't understand why anyone would be opposed to keeping people safe. Safety is almost always a very big focus in every other area of life, yet in pro football people are called sissies or they should be wearing skirts. Tell you what, you stand still and let me dive at your knees then you can tell me if its cool.
spider321
Footballguy
I have never and would never complain about the way Rodney Harrison played the game.
The only Patriot I have grown to "hate" is Tom Brady and it has nothing to do with his many victories or his obvious talent.
It has everything to do with his whining to refs and begging for calls.
The only Patriot I have grown to "hate" is Tom Brady and it has nothing to do with his many victories or his obvious talent.
It has everything to do with his whining to refs and begging for calls.
Last edited by a moderator:
spider321
Footballguy
If you want to be safe, fine, just don't play professional football.Also, I'm pretty sure I could take a hit in the knees from a guy called Powder.
Native
Footballguy
Actually, we should just turn in everyones helmets and switch to flag football. This tackling stuff was a bad idea from the getgo.Note to "Brady Haters" & "NFL is full of ssisys now" crowd.....I like watching the best players play and I don't want to watch Jim Sorgi and the Colts playing Brady and the Pats or vice versa. I want to see opposing teams at their best, it makes the games so much more meaningful. There are not nearly enough good qbs in the game today, never mind the few great ones. Hayneswoth crushed Brady several weeks back, he rightfully wasn't penalized, Brady and his fans didn't complain, big hits are stilla big part of the game. However, I am absolutely baffled that there are some who take offense to discouraging players from unnecessary crippling (intentionally diving at QBs knees) hits
spider321
Footballguy
At the current NFL sissification pace, flags will be in use by 2016.After all, why would anyone oppose keeping people safe?Right Powder?
Last edited by a moderator:
NE_REVIVAL
Footballguy
As I pointed out in the other thread where you complained about rules that "only apply to Tom Brady" there are no such rules (see Buf v NE week1). The same call was made and it was every bit as questionable, but you only focus on the ones involving Brady and there is little doubt that the reason for that is largley if not almost entirely centered around how successful Brady has been. Now if you want to continue and make the arguement that the week1 tackle on Edwards (who still had the ball by the way) by Wilfork was less questionable than the dive at the knees by Suggs we can debate that. However, if you can't/won't make that arguement then your whole "Brady only rule" arguement goes out the window and the bias in your reasoning is pretty well exposed for what it is.
Native
Footballguy
Truth is, Brady was the only one who cried about it to the ref. Edwards sucked it up.
spider321
Footballguy
This reminds me of the liberal talking point that if you disagree with Obama, you are a racist.
I never made that argument.My thoughts on the subject in a nutshell...1) I hate the sissy qb rules. Period. I wish they didn't exist.2) If the NFL is going to have the sissy rules, they should be equally enforced for every QB.3) The sissy QB rules SEEM to be enforced primarily for Tom Brady.
Last edited by a moderator:
NE_REVIVAL
Footballguy
Ummm, the truth is A. Edwards had the ball and B. Wilfork didn't dive at his knees.
NE_REVIVAL
Footballguy
I think we are probably of like mind politically.1. I am not a fan of sissy rules, but I do think diving at qbs knees when they are essentially defensless should be discouraged. 2. Agreed, and for the most part I think they are equally enforced, but I would concede that the so called stars get more calls than lesser players which I think this is true in virtually all sports not just football.3. I don't agree and I think the Wilfork Edwards call in week 1 would be my exhibit "A".It's late, I think we can agree to agree on some things and agree to dissagree on some others and call it a night
Last edited by a moderator:
David Yudkin
Footballguy
I'm waiting for two hand touch only for QBs. It can't be that far off.
FreeBaGeL
Footballguy
And that might be a legitimate argument if QBs were actually more likely to get hurt. But this whole "vulnerable position" crap is nothing more than theory, theory that likely has been proven wrong if anything given half a century worth of data. QBs get hurt more often running than they do getting hit in the pocket even though they only run less than a tenth of the time they drop back into the pocket. Other positions, including high profile players, much more commonly have major injuries than quarterbacks do.But really, this biggest problem with this thread is that there's no way you can expect a Patriot's fan to be objective here. They support a team who's quarterback thinks it should be illegal to sack the quarterback and that was the victim of a fluke injury from a guy that could tackle him no other way at the time. Adrian Peterson hurt his knee his rookie year when he got hit low, and he's a high profile guy, why isn't it illegal to tackle a RB low? They get injured far more often from getting hit low than QBs do, and there are just as many of them that are stars as QBs.
Last edited by a moderator:
A
awesomeness
Guest
Very much so.
Every time i see the refs blow a play dead when a defensive player has the QB wrapped up but has yet to throw him to the ground, i cringe.
Every time i see the refs blow a play dead when a defensive player has the QB wrapped up but has yet to throw him to the ground, i cringe.
Steady Mooobin
Footballguy
I have to wholeheartedly disagree about your Lott/Harrison comparison. Ronnie Lott didn't jump on people after they were down, nor did he pull on players legs after a tackle. I understand exactly what you're trying to say, I just don't think they are even remotely in the same ball park. I like Rodney Harrison the player, dirty play and all. I want my safetys to be intimidating. As a long time fan, I find myself torn. Growing up, I was a big student of the game. Everything I read and watched on NFL films encouraged huge devastating hits and aggressive play. the #### Butkus' and Ray Nischkes. Night Train and Chuck Bednarik literally tried to take people's heads off. However, on the flip side, the modern athlete has changed. Everybody is fast, and everybody is huge. I have to believe that HGH use is ramped.I understand that you can't just let guys plow the QB long after hes thrown the ball like they used to. I just mentioned this in another thread, but does anybody remember "two steps"?My complaint is the ticky tack fouls being called now. I think the pendulum has swung too far in the direction of protecting the QB's, to the point where they can almost feel invincible in the pocket. Imagine if Joe Montana, John Elway, Johnny Unitas played with these rules? They would have significantly increased their stats. Between the rules set in place to protect the QB, and the rules to prevent rec's from being touched, they have such an advantage. I think the rules they have now are in theory good. They need to scale back on the cheap calls, and let the QB get touched from time to time. I agree you shouldn't be able to annihilate the QB after he's thrown it, and you shouldn't be able to dive at a players knees. I also don't think you should be able to lift a player up and drive him to the ground, falling on him with your entire weight. I don't like the calls when a defensive player picks a guy up and falls to the side, throwing the offensive player to the ground. That should not be a penalty.Defensive players aren't even allowed to leave their feet anymore. If you're a DE and you're rushing the edge, you should be able to pounce on a QB before he gets rid of the ball. I'm tired and rambling here. I voted they are sissifying the game.
you are ignoring that there are rules in place to protect other players. heres 2 new ones: horsecollaring and illegal hit on a defenseless reciever. not too long ago chop blocking was outlawed and more recently blocking low on an engaged lineman. obv facemasking and clotheslining and spearing have been illegal for a long time.its obv why its not illegal to hit a rb low. bc by forcing defenders to avoid such tackles it would completely change the game of football. also, on a per hit basis, rbs get injured far less than qbs. its bc proper throwing technique requires planting and shifting body weight. this makes hits on qbs more dangerous. does it change the game? yes, but the nfl feels its minor enough that sport will benefit. i tend to agree. i would imagine most that are critical have never suffered a debilitating injury.
Last edited by a moderator:
this is a good point. i think the refs often misapply the rules, but i think the rules are should definitely be in place.
theglorydays
Footballguy
I agree 100%. I just think the rules protecting quarterbacks are getting to be ridiculous. Imagine being a defensive lineman. Pretty much your whole objective is to get to the quarterback. Now when you actually get a chance to lay a hit on the quarterback, you have to think about not hitting him low and not touching his helmet in any way. The game is played so fast that you don't have the chance to really think, you just react. And a lot of times you don't have the opportunity to hit the quarterback in the midsection if you are scrambling on the ground around the quarterbacks legs. What if you don't get to the quarterback and jump in the air to swat the pass but your hand touches the quarterbacks helmet? Well that's 15 yards too.Injuries happen, this is football.theglorydays
Footballguy
Am I reading to much into this, or are the quotes around "the great Ronnie Lott" an attempt at sarcasm?Note to "Brady Haters" & "NFL is full of ssisys now" crowd.....I like watching the best players play and I don't want to watch Jim Sorgi and the Colts playing Brady and the Pats or vice versa. I want to see opposing teams at their best, it makes the games so much more meaningful. There are not nearly enough good qbs in the game today, never mind the few great ones. Hayneswoth crushed Brady several weeks back, he rightfully wasn't penalized, Brady and his fans didn't complain, big hits are stilla big part of the game. However, I am absolutely baffled that there are some who take offense to discouraging players from unnecessary crippling (intentionally diving at QBs knees) hits
As for the sissifying stuff, fwiw, NFL players are bigger, faster and stronger now than they have ever been. The teams and players playing today would wipe the floor with the best of the 60 and 70s etc. While somewhat on the subject, some of those lamenting the loss of the good old "tuff days" are hypocrites who incessantly whine about Rodney Harrision being dirty. The only real difference between the way "the great" Ronnie Lott played and the way Rodney Harrison played is the time period they played in.
IDrinkyourMilkshake
Footballguy
This is pretty much asking if you like Tom Brady or not.
spider321
Footballguy
Wrong.
Last edited by a moderator:
Snotbubbles
Footballguy
This is my opinion too. Yes they are over protecting the quarterbacks, but they need to. Quarterback is the one position on the field that makes the biggest difference between good play and bad play. Plus, the QB position is usually the most recognizable to the casual fan. I mean, if Peyton goes down, will anyone really tune into a prime time game to watch the Colts run by Jim Sorgi?
King of the Wolfies
Footballguy
from watching the espn discussion showing all the non calls on QBs, I believe that only the high profile QBs are being overly protected. seems like brady and favre are getting too many of these sissy calls.
The posters who are espousing that QBs are the most important commodity to a team should agree with the Bradys, Mannings, and Favres getting the calls while the low profile QBs are overlooked then. Cause who cares if Shaun Hill or David Garrard is out for the season then? The rules should only apply to the true faces of the franchise. The moneymakers!
Is there no middle option?
I mean...is it the rules, the intent of the rules, or the application of the rules which has become so irritating?
I agree with the intent. The QB is not just the normal face of the franchise, but is infinitely more difficult to replace. It's the one spot where a single injury can take a team from playoffs to a top 10 pick...and that fact alone demands special attention be paid to QB's.
So...the intent is a good one. Even those who don't agree QB's should be special can see the logic behind it.
The rules themselves seem to leave some room for judgement. Officials don't have to call every illegal contact they see, or every holding penalty they see. I don't think the rules, as written, are the problem.
That leaves the application. Here is where the NFL has it so screwed up. On a hold or illegal contact, officials (generally) decline to flag a play if there's any doubt whatsoever that a penalty actually occured. The further from the action/impact, the smaller that sliver of doubt has to be. This is NOT the case for a QB in the pocket. They fail safe there, to a ridiculous point. A lineman who's clear and obvious intent was to block a pass grazes the side of the QB's helmet on the way down, and the flag it as if the lineman was trying to rip the QB's head off. This was not the intent of the rules as stated, nor is it required by the letter of the law....it's the application that's gone awry.
This fail safe attitude is what's ruiningdamaging (ruining is overused, and over-reactive since it's false) the game, and irritating so many fans....not the rules themselves. I've argued in other threads that some of these rules should be aplied to all positions, (but certainly not if they keep the fail-safe attitude).
I mean...is it the rules, the intent of the rules, or the application of the rules which has become so irritating?
I agree with the intent. The QB is not just the normal face of the franchise, but is infinitely more difficult to replace. It's the one spot where a single injury can take a team from playoffs to a top 10 pick...and that fact alone demands special attention be paid to QB's.
So...the intent is a good one. Even those who don't agree QB's should be special can see the logic behind it.
The rules themselves seem to leave some room for judgement. Officials don't have to call every illegal contact they see, or every holding penalty they see. I don't think the rules, as written, are the problem.
That leaves the application. Here is where the NFL has it so screwed up. On a hold or illegal contact, officials (generally) decline to flag a play if there's any doubt whatsoever that a penalty actually occured. The further from the action/impact, the smaller that sliver of doubt has to be. This is NOT the case for a QB in the pocket. They fail safe there, to a ridiculous point. A lineman who's clear and obvious intent was to block a pass grazes the side of the QB's helmet on the way down, and the flag it as if the lineman was trying to rip the QB's head off. This was not the intent of the rules as stated, nor is it required by the letter of the law....it's the application that's gone awry.
This fail safe attitude is what's ruiningdamaging (ruining is overused, and over-reactive since it's false) the game, and irritating so many fans....not the rules themselves. I've argued in other threads that some of these rules should be aplied to all positions, (but certainly not if they keep the fail-safe attitude).
NE_REVIVAL
Footballguy
It isn't theory, it is common sense; qbs are in a vulnerable position because when they have the ball, unlike EVERY OTHER player on the field (Ks excepted) they do not have the luxury of focusing on the opposing players who want to crush them.I would like to see some statistics as well; how about the survival rate for qbs who are hit in the knee like Palmer and Brady? What is the percentage of serious injury when players drive their bodies into the knees of qbs? Obviously you can't prevent accidents from happening, but I don't understand why some are so vehemnetly opposed to discouraging these types of cheap crippling hits. Why are blows to the head, particularly to protect receivers called so much more now? It is obviously to prevent serious injury and I don't see why anyone should have a problem with that.FreeBaGeL said:
NE_REVIVAL
Footballguy
Ronnie Lott was famous for big hits, he would have had, many, many more fines if he had to play under the same rules and microsope that Harrision did.theglorydays said:Am I reading to much into this, or are the quotes around "the great Ronnie Lott" an attempt at sarcasm?NE_REVIVAL said:Note to "Brady Haters" & "NFL is full of ssisys now" crowd.....I like watching the best players play and I don't want to watch Jim Sorgi and the Colts playing Brady and the Pats or vice versa. I want to see opposing teams at their best, it makes the games so much more meaningful. There are not nearly enough good qbs in the game today, never mind the few great ones. Hayneswoth crushed Brady several weeks back, he rightfully wasn't penalized, Brady and his fans didn't complain, big hits are stilla big part of the game. However, I am absolutely baffled that there are some who take offense to discouraging players from unnecessary crippling (intentionally diving at QBs knees) hitsspider321 said:
As for the sissifying stuff, fwiw, NFL players are bigger, faster and stronger now than they have ever been. The teams and players playing today would wipe the floor with the best of the 60 and 70s etc. While somewhat on the subject, some of those lamenting the loss of the good old "tuff days" are hypocrites who incessantly whine about Rodney Harrision being dirty. The only real difference between the way "the great" Ronnie Lott played and the way Rodney Harrison played is the time period they played in.
Last edited by a moderator:
Steady Mooobin
Footballguy
Harrison isn't know to be a dirty player because he hits hard. It was all the extra curricular stuff.Ronnie Lott was famous for big hits, he would have had, many, many more fines if he had to play under the same rules and microsope that Harrision did.theglorydays said:Am I reading to much into this, or are the quotes around "the great Ronnie Lott" an attempt at sarcasm?NE_REVIVAL said:Note to "Brady Haters" & "NFL is full of ssisys now" crowd.....I like watching the best players play and I don't want to watch Jim Sorgi and the Colts playing Brady and the Pats or vice versa. I want to see opposing teams at their best, it makes the games so much more meaningful. There are not nearly enough good qbs in the game today, never mind the few great ones. Hayneswoth crushed Brady several weeks back, he rightfully wasn't penalized, Brady and his fans didn't complain, big hits are stilla big part of the game. However, I am absolutely baffled that there are some who take offense to discouraging players from unnecessary crippling (intentionally diving at QBs knees) hitsspider321 said:
As for the sissifying stuff, fwiw, NFL players are bigger, faster and stronger now than they have ever been. The teams and players playing today would wipe the floor with the best of the 60 and 70s etc. While somewhat on the subject, some of those lamenting the loss of the good old "tuff days" are hypocrites who incessantly whine about Rodney Harrision being dirty. The only real difference between the way "the great" Ronnie Lott played and the way Rodney Harrison played is the time period they played in.
Chaos Commish
Footballguy
I haven't read the thread but it is encouraging to see 'Yes' with a significant lead. Football is a violent sport. That's a major part of its appeal. If you choose to don pads and strap on a helmet and then stand with the ball looking down the field, while 6 or so of these animals pursue you with violent intentions, you should expect some damage from time to time. You get the most money, so endure the most risk, like a man. I'd like to see a Whining penalty.
"Number 12, whining like a sissy, 5 yards and a loss of down, 4th down!"
Seriously, the bogus unnecessary roughness last week turned me off. I'll watch less football the more I see these stupid calls. If a player nails a QB in the knees, nails him, them by all means throw a flag. If he delivers a blow to his head, a jarring blow, throw the flag. But all these penalties for incidental caressing of the QB in inappropriate ways is lame. Put flags on their belts and change their position to Wussyback.
"Number 12, whining like a sissy, 5 yards and a loss of down, 4th down!"
Seriously, the bogus unnecessary roughness last week turned me off. I'll watch less football the more I see these stupid calls. If a player nails a QB in the knees, nails him, them by all means throw a flag. If he delivers a blow to his head, a jarring blow, throw the flag. But all these penalties for incidental caressing of the QB in inappropriate ways is lame. Put flags on their belts and change their position to Wussyback.
puckalicious
Footballguy
I find it ironic that the people claiming the NFL is becoming "sissified" are the ones coming off sounding like sissies. Typical arm-chairing, so easy to complain when you're not the one getting creamed by a 300lb lineman. Why don't I hear any crying about punters getting different rules from other players? They are protected as well.
Go watch UFC if you want blood and gore.
Go watch UFC if you want blood and gore.
Chaka
Footballguy
There are rules protecting all players.You can't protect the QB more without altering the way defenders play but this works at every position. DBs push receivers on the sidelines while making catches far more now because of the rule changes. At the same time DBs can't go Chuck Cecil on helpless WRs. Offensive linemen can't chop block because of rules changes. Defensive lineman can't use the Deacon Jones head slap on o-linemen. The list goes on. I see no diminishing of the intensity that players (offensive or defensive) are bringing to the table.To be perfectly honest the rate that players have gotten bigger, faster and stronger has outstripped our ability to protect them with improved technology (there is also the lack of willingness by players to adopt new technologies like bigger helmets due to petty things like aesthetics). So perhaps some of these rules changes will help protect players from themselves a little bit.
The Great Snook
Footballguy
And how exactly do you want the refs to figure out and determine the difference betwen a nail to the knee, a jarring blow, or an incidental caress? Should the QBs be forced to wear uniforms that measure the PSI of the impact? Man that would really suck for the linebacker who swats a QB in the head and the red light goes off. I can already see them in the locker room complaining "I meant to hit him in the head with 62.8% of my strength, but I got carried away and hit him with 64.3% of my strength. I feel like I let my team down, but praise Jesus I will learn from this and be more under control next week" Sounds asinine doesn't it?It is much safer and easier for the refs to fairly call the game if "discretion" is taken out of the decision making process.
parrot
Footballguy
Interesting concept. How many yards in the hole would the Ravens have to start the next game after all the whining they've done?
spider321
Footballguy
I'm like rubber, you're like glue.... WEAK.
Last edited by a moderator:
Chaos Commish
Footballguy
The penalty would only apply during the game. If they want to fine the post game whiners, great. Donate the funds to Wussyback chest hair removal program.
parrot
Footballguy
Speaking of weak, nice retort. Interesting that you chose to respond to this post rather than the one where I pointed out that Trent Edwards is drawing roughing calls at twice the clip Brady is.
Similar threads
