Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
Mr. Brownstone

Myles Garrett needs to be permanently suspended

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, Mongidig said:

I know..."the law is the law"... "mandatory minimums"...Perpetuate the broken criminal justice system. More importantly, lets not use common sense and judge situations on an individual basis. Lets just make more laws to prevent this extremely isolated incident from ever happening again. I'm sure Garrett and all of those involved were contemplating the consequences of their behaviour in the heat of the moment. Lets just put these guys in an arena and let them pummel each other for 60 minutes and then throw the law at them when things get out of hand. Such a stupid society we live in.

"Your honor, I know my client committed assault with a deadly weapon, but it's only because he was really mad at the time."

 

  • Laughing 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, -fish- said:

"Your honor, I know my client committed assault with a deadly weapon, but it's only because he was really mad at the time."

 

Your just not getting it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, Pipes said:

Pouncey was punching and kicking a guy in the head even if deserved that's much worse than a shove. 

We are going to have to agree to disagree.  Sure, had Pouncy done that to a player with no helmet on I would support your position.  Had he done it to a player that was uninvolved at that moment in any altercation or one who had no way of knowing it was coming, I would support your position.  For me, and perhaps it is me alone, the act of charging a guy, from behind, a guy away from the fray, a guy without head protection, and knocking him over is worse.  Now I acknowledge it is not a head attack, but it is the element of cowardice and victimizing the nonparticipant at that moment, from behind which I find more reprehensible than giving a guy who has something coming more or less what he has coming.  

 

Now it does appear the league takes your position over mine, so you have support while I do not.  Not the first time my moral compass has had me standing somewhat alone.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Man this thread took a turn towards bizarro world pretty quickly here with all this assault charges talk

 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, -fish- said:

Huh.  I’ve been a lawyer for over 25 years and know how it is decided whether to bring criminal charges.  Please explain it to me.

Certainly, there is such a thing as prosecutorial discretion, which without a shadow of a doubt will be invoked to pass on the prosecution of a case of assault where no injuries were sustained, the victim refuses to cooperate, and a multi billion dollar corporation with a major branch in your city wants badly to go away. I believe that is how the law will work in this case, and in any such case outside of Utopia Law School.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, kneeshooter said:

Wait, did you just call him naive then follow that up by saying as long as nobody was hurt there's no reason to prosecute?

I didnt say there was no reason to prosecute. I said there would be no prosecution. That isnt the same thing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, mbuehner said:

Certainly, there is such a thing as prosecutorial discretion, which without a shadow of a doubt will be invoked to pass on the prosecution of a case of assault where no injuries were sustained, the victim refuses to cooperate, and a multi billion dollar corporation with a major branch in your city wants badly to go away. I believe that is how the law will work in this case, and in any such case outside of Utopia Law School.

The victim's agent is currently threatening civil action, and the NFL has issued a disciplinary action.   Neither of those is an indication that the "victim refuses to cooperate" or that the NFL is pressuring anyone not to prosecute.

They may or may not charge him, but your view of how things actually work is just wrong.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Mongidig said:

Your just not getting it.

One of us isn't, I'll give you that.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Some smoking hot takes in here and some astute ones as well.

1) Banning him from the playoffs lol; might as well ban Fantasycurse42 from the Pro Football Hall of Fame.

2) Precedent should be set here, I'd be okay with banning next season as well. Not sure how it would impact the CBA, but I think it would delay a season towards free agent eligibility.

3) Glad it happened late at night and my kids didn't see it (guess it was a Browns game, so they prob wouldn't have seen it anyways :) ).

4) I'm okay with the retaliation of the Steelers players (Pouncey); once you swing a helmet at a player (especially a QB, but regardless really), all bets are off.

5) I hope he isn't reinstated next season, but assume he will be. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, -fish- said:

One of us isn't, I'll give you that.  

One of us is strictly by the book and one of us uses common sense.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, -fish- said:

The victim's agent is currently threatening civil action, and the NFL has issued a disciplinary action.   Neither of those is an indication that the "victim refuses to cooperate" or that the NFL is pressuring anyone not to prosecute.

They may or may not charge him, but your view of how things actually work is just wrong.

So you are suggesting the NFL would welcome a criminal prosecution of something that happened in one of their games based on the fact that they moved quickly to handle to handle it in house? Interesting read.

And as to Rudolphs lawyer, well lets just see if that case gets off the ground... or if you hear another word out of his mouth once Rudolphs employers have a chance to confer with him.

They will not charge him. Than can charge him, but its not going to happen. If you disagree, i'm open to a wager.

Edited by mbuehner
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd highly recommend Rudolph not seek criminal prosecution especially given he will be playing against Cleveland again in a couple weeks. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Mongidig said:

I'd highly recommend Rudolph not seek criminal prosecution especially given he will be playing against Cleveland again in a couple weeks. 

this isnt going to happen regardless of schedule 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Mongidig said:

I know..."the law is the law"... "mandatory minimums"...Perpetuate the broken criminal justice system. More importantly, lets not use common sense and judge situations on an individual basis. Lets just make more laws to prevent this extremely isolated incident from ever happening again. I'm sure Garrett and all of those involved were contemplating the consequences of their behaviour in the heat of the moment. Lets just put these guys in an arena and let them pummel each other for 60 minutes and then throw the law at them when things get out of hand. Such a stupid society we live in.

I've been a fan of this game, and have been watching teams play this game for 60 minutes and pummel each other while doing so for decades.  I've never seen a player forcibly remove an opposing player's helmet and then use it as a weapon against that player.  Garrett not only crossed the line, he took a triple jump over it on his way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, kneeshooter said:

NFL Memes

@NFL_Memes

BREAKING: NFL has punished Steelers for their role in TNF brawl by not suspending Mason Rudolph

 

THAT IS JUST TOO FUNNY!  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Mongidig said:

One of us is strictly by the book and one of us uses common sense.

"By the book"=our actual laws.   Your version of common sense is that if someone acts in the heat of the moment, they shouldn't be held responsible because they weren't considering the consequences of their actions at the time.   Those are your words.  That's absolute rubbish.   We don't let people commit crimes because they lack impulse control.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm good with Garrett's punishment.  His agent/agency will earn their money this off-season, because Garrett better put together a resume about why he should be reinstated next year. If Rudolph were from Chicago, he'd wake up today with "lingering headaches, back pain, and dizziness"....essentially the Myles Garrett retirement plan

I thought Pouncey's punishment was a game more than it needed to be, and might be reduced on appeal.  His kick to Garrett's helmet, however weak, is where the extra game came from.  Given the league's (purported) stance on head injuries, I'd understand it staying at 3 to send a message.  

I would have thrown a 2 gamer at Ogunjobi.  To a certain extent his cheap shot was worse than Garrett's.  Not necessarily as potentially lethal, but was an incredibly cheap blindside hit on a player without a helmet.  That wasn't a "heat of the moment" thing like Garrett was going through.  It was a purposeful attack.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, -fish- said:

"By the book"=our actual laws.   Your version of common sense is that if someone acts in the heat of the moment, they shouldn't be held responsible because they weren't considering the consequences of their actions at the time.   Those are your words.  That's absolute rubbish.   We don't let people commit crimes because they lack impulse control.

"by the book"=our actual laws in a broken criminal justice system.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Dr. Dan said:

Should an MLB pitcher be charged with assault for throwing at a batter's head? 

No, that's in the game.  Now, if it's purposeful, an argument could be made but I'd personally still be against it.  Ripping off another player's helmet and then using it as a weapon is not "part of the game".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, Ditkaless Wonders said:

We are going to have to agree to disagree.  Sure, had Pouncy done that to a player with no helmet on I would support your position.  Had he done it to a player that was uninvolved at that moment in any altercation or one who had no way of knowing it was coming, I would support your position.  For me, and perhaps it is me alone, the act of charging a guy, from behind, a guy away from the fray, a guy without head protection, and knocking him over is worse.  Now I acknowledge it is not a head attack, but it is the element of cowardice and victimizing the nonparticipant at that moment, from behind which I find more reprehensible than giving a guy who has something coming more or less what he has coming.  

 

Now it does appear the league takes your position over mine, so you have support while I do not.  Not the first time my moral compass has had me standing somewhat alone.

I think it’s also fair to mention that it seemed like DeCastro had Myles pinned to the turf when Pouncey’s feet started flying. DeCastro is the one guy that did right during the situation. I applaud him. Too bad one of his other teammates or a Browns defensive player didn’t restrain the QB when he got to his feet and charged. 

Edited by Bobcat10
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Mongidig said:

"by the book"=our actual laws in a broken criminal justice system.

Please take your opinions on our justice system to the political sub-forum. I popped in today to read about Garrett, his suspension, and implications regarding the NFL. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not related to the Garrett incident, but giving a little background to the atmosphere of last night - can anyone recall a player getting a helmet to helmet hit so bad that they start BLEEDING FROM THE EAR?  Yes, the D Johnson hit earlier in the game.  I'd never seen that in an NFL game that I can remember.  Perhaps it happens and they just don't show it, but that looked horrible. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, SaintsInDome2006 said:

I realize the guy's an Aggie, but did anyone have any clue that Garrett would do this kind of thing?

Everything I hear about the guy says this was a one-off incident.  He sometimes plays hard after the whistle, but no more so than the average player.

None of these guys are teddy bears, but from what I can gather Garrett isn't a thuggish player.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, matttyl said:

Not related to the Garrett incident, but giving a little background to the atmosphere of last night - can anyone recall a player getting a helmet to helmet hit so bad that they start BLEEDING FROM THE EAR?  Yes, the D Johnson hit earlier in the game.  I'd never seen that in an NFL game that I can remember.  Perhaps it happens and they just don't show it, but that looked horrible. 

I've never heard of that and I've watched the game for forty years. That's worrisome. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Statorama said:

Everything I hear about the guy says this was a one-off incident.  He sometimes plays hard after the whistle, but no more so than the average player.

None of these guys are teddy bears, but from what I can gather Garrett isn't a thuggish player.

Thanks, that was my impression also. He just went off.

Btw the NFL has a history of violence just like that. There is film of Dick Butkus doing just that kind of thing (IIRC) and he is beloved for being the classic old school player. This was the game that became a national past time. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, fantasycurse42 said:

Please take your opinions on our justice system to the political sub-forum. I popped in today to read about Garrett, his suspension, and implications regarding the NFL. 

How about just move on to the next post like everyone else.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, matttyl said:

No, that's in the game.  Now, if it's purposeful, an argument could be made but I'd personally still be against it.  Ripping off another player's helmet and then using it as a weapon is not "part of the game".

I can appreciate that argument, but what if it was purposeful? 

What about any purposeful pitch thrown at the batter, not just at the head? 

 

What about Suh stomping on Aaron Rodgers? 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, fantasycurse42 said:

Please take your opinions on our justice system to the political sub-forum. I popped in today to read about Garrett, his suspension, and implications regarding the NFL. 

this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hopefully the Steelers are sending someone to Atlanta tomorrow to check out that guy that "took a knee" and never attempted to rip someones helmet off during the last seconds of an ###-wippin. 

 I'm just sayin... 😏

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, agame2323 said:

Hopefully the Steelers are sending someone to Atlanta tomorrow to check out that guy that "took a knee" and never attempted to rip someones helmet off during the last seconds of an ###-wippin. 

 I'm just sayin... 😏

Hes worse than Rudolph

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Encumbrance said:

I've never heard of that and I've watched the game for forty years. That's worrisome. 

Dr. Chao said it was from the helmet, not from the head injury.   

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not a fan of Pouncey's suspension - feels like if he was someone else, might've been 2 or less. Hopefully that is appealed and reduced. Unwritten rule in sports, but if someone takes a cheap shot at the QB, we all know the linemen are coming in... Someone swings a helmet at their bare head, there will be harsh retaliation.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, fantasycurse42 said:

Not a fan of Pouncey's suspension - feels like if he was someone else, might've been 2 or less. Hopefully that is appealed and reduced. Unwritten rule in sports, but if someone takes a cheap shot at the QB, we all know the linemen are coming in... Someone swings a helmet at their bare head, there will be harsh retaliation.

 

All bets are off when you kick somebody in the head.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

IMO, the equivalent of what Garrett did is an MLB player charging the mound with his bat and taking a swing... 6 meaningless games for a 4-6 team is far from enough, IMO. 

Assume any sponsors behind him will drop him swiftly too... Hopefully he loses next season on top. Without setting a strong precedent, what prevents this from happening again? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, fantasycurse42 said:

Not a fan of Pouncey's suspension - feels like if he was someone else, might've been 2 or less. Hopefully that is appealed and reduced. Unwritten rule in sports, but if someone takes a cheap shot at the QB, we all know the linemen are coming in... Someone swings a helmet at their bare head, there will be harsh retaliation.

 

I think it was set at 3 because they’ll end up reducing it to 2 upon appeal. The league probably doesn’t want him on the field in 2 weeks and I think that’s a wise decision if true.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Bobcat10 said:

I think it was set at 3 because they’ll end up reducing it to 2 upon appeal. The league probably doesn’t want him on the field in 2 weeks and I think that’s a wise decision if true.

If I was in the Browns front office, I wouldn't want Baker Mayfield on the field either. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Dr. Dan said:

Should an MLB pitcher be charged with assault for throwing at a batter's head? 

I think the right analogy would be if a batter took his bat and clobbered the pitcher in the head, yes, I think that would be assault.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, fantasycurse42 said:

If I was in the Browns front office, I wouldn't want Baker Mayfield on the field either. 

Unfortunately this has merit for reasons I smartly won’t get into here. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Joe Summer said:

 


Rudolph doesn't want Garrett to file charges against Pouncey for kicking him.

I've read most of your comments on this subject and you have to be fishing, you cannot be serious with most of your comments.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Statorama said:

In fact, I'd get out in front of this immediately if I were Myles.  Let everyone know how sorry I was, heat of the moment, all that jazz.  Say you're prepared to do whatever the league mandates.  He better be prepared to say the same schpiel to a thousand different reporters the rest of his career.

he did this last night at his locker. Looked genuinely upset

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, fantasycurse42 said:

If I was in the Browns front office, I wouldn't want Baker Mayfield on the field either. 

And what does this comment have to do with Garrett or any of the other's involved?  Mayfield was nowhere near this scene, let alone a part of it.  Let's keep to the topic please.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Peak said:

And what does this comment have to do with Garrett or any of the other's involved?  Mayfield was nowhere near this scene, let alone a part of it.  Let's keep to the topic please.

He said the NFL doesn't want Pouncey on the field, something I agree with. I note that Steelers could be looking for retaliation, maybe take some low hits on Mayfield based on Garrett going after Rudolph. Pretty adjacent discussion, imo. Might be smart to just sit him down for the game, not sure why that irks you. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Engelberg said:


I've read most of your comments on this subject and you have to be fishing, you cannot be serious with most of your comments.


The specific line that you just quoted may have been hyperbolic, but I'm not fishing.

I strongly believe that the government should not intervene in the realm of sports infractions unless it crosses a line that involves A) an unprecedented act, and B) serious injuries.

And based on the reduction in pitchforks and torches this morning, I don't think my opinion is an extreme outlier. Edited by Joe Summer

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, Dr. Dan said:

I can appreciate that argument, but what if it was purposeful? 

What about any purposeful pitch thrown at the batter, not just at the head? 

 

What about Suh stomping on Aaron Rodgers?

If not "in the game" I would be all for legal action being taken.  If Suh stomped Rodgers and it caused Rodgers to miss games, I'd be surprised if legal action wasn't taken. 

Also, baseball thrown into batter's shoulder is no where near the same as a full sized NFL helmet being swung into a helmetless player's head. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The more I see the replay the more Rudolph comes off as a dink to me, even more so with his postgame presser and now his agent suggesting legal action. The kind of guy you want to punch or, I guess, whack with a helmet.*

 

* I in no way condone Garrett's actions and think six games is about right.

  • Like 9

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Kevrunner said:

I think the right analogy would be if a batter took his bat and clobbered the pitcher in the head, yes, I think that would be assault.

Juan Marichal says hi.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Nigel said:

The more I see the replay the more Rudolph comes off as a dink to me, even more so with his postgame presser and now his agent suggesting legal action. The kind of guy you want to punch or, I guess, whack with a helmet.*

* I in no way condone Garrett's actions and think six games is about right.

One of the most famous sayings in football is it's always the second guy that gets punished.

This whole thing is weird when you take the personalities of the people involved into account.  Garrett is kind of low-key and laid back, Rudolph is brash and way more of a hot-head.

Rudolph should have pulled a Tomlin at his presser or even asked Ben for advice.  I get why he said what he said, but he's got to realize whether he wants it or not he's a leader on this team and has to act that way.  He didn't carry himself like a leader in his presser, he carried himself like a guy that got smacked around and was PO'd about it.

I'll give Garrett a TON of credit for not claiming Rudolph used a racial slur.  Would have been easy to do and would have escalated this thing even more and made it much worse.

Edited by Statorama
grammar

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.