Andy Dufresne
Footballguy
The good thing is that this will continue to be called so we'll be able to get other fan bases' opinions on this.

There's a lot of that going around.I'm pretty sure you're not even trying to understand.
We've already got their opinion. Unbiased people across America have chimed in. 98% of people think it was a horrible call.The good thing is that this will continue to be called so we'll be able to get other fan bases' opinions on this.![]()
I am trying to understand how anyone watching that play saw Cousins being lifted.I'm pretty sure you're not even trying to understand.
Did you round up or down on that number?We've already got their opinion. Unbiased people across America have chimed in. 98% of people think it was a horrible call.
In this case lifted means turned and/or twisted so as to end up with the result of Cousins on topmand Matthews on the bottom.I am trying to understand how anyone watching that play saw Cousins being lifted.
"I don't know what else to do".Zero wrong with this hit.
- Defensive players have a right to hit QBs in the act of throwing. It's not a pile drive, it's not low, it's not at the head. The league is just going to call this randomly throughout the season and it will affect games, like a bullet just falling from the sky. Oh well.
Good lord is right, you were the one that said "don't tackle QBs that no longer have the ball". So you are arguing with yourself here.He wasnt called for a late hit. Good lord.
"I don't know what else to do".
Dont end up in top you learning disabled mongoloid.
This is actually what happens when a man hits another man when running at him so as to hit him in such a way as to put him on the ground.In this case lifted means turned and/or twisted so as to end up with the result of Cousins on topmand Matthews on the bottom.
Ending up on top isn't relevant, the ref said he wasn't called for landing on him."I don't know what else to do".
Dont end up in top.![]()
Read it in context, friend.Good lord is right, you were the one that said "don't tackle QBs that no longer have the ball". So you are arguing with yourself
I did, and it still made no sense, friend. Sorry, but you are arguing with yourself.Read it in context, friend.
Okay. Seems we're getting closer.This is actually what happens when a man hits another man when running at him so as to hit him in such a way as to put him on the ground.
This is not a mystery. I see what you're saying. I think everyone does. What has happened is that the league has made a totally natural part of the game - tackling with force at a run - illegal when it is applied to the QB.
The gjallorhorn noise has effected his cognition. It happens. Still good folks in my book.I did, and it still made no sense, friend. Sorry, but you are arguing with yourself.
Matthews' head is already past Cousin's body when Cousins releases the ball. At that point as far as CM knows Cousins has the ball and it's absolutely imperative he be tackled as fast and as hard as possible. He is paid millions to do just that.Okay. Seems we're getting closer.
What was the necessity of Matthews taking Cousins to the ground? And in taking him to the ground, without the football mind you, what was the necessity in ending up on top of him?
Plus, the way Matthews tucked his head the way he did seemed to be to avoid hitting him with his helmet, but the official misinterpreted that as him lowering himself to drive him into the ground. So basically, the defenders can't win.Matthews' head is already past Cousin's body when Cousins releases the ball. At that point as far as CM knows Cousins has the ball and it's absolutely imperative he be tackled as fast and as hard as possible. He is paid millions to do just that.
I am ok with this because (a) the QB is the only player (sans punter/kicker/holder) who is expected to play stationary in a prone position; and (b) the game sucks when the elite QBs are not able to play.This is actually what happens when a man hits another man when running at him so as to hit him in such a way as to put him on the ground.
This is not a mystery. I see what you're saying. I think everyone does. What has happened is that the league has made a totally natural part of the game - tackling with force at a run - illegal when it is applied to the QB.
Because, unlike Barr last year he had no way of knowing or seeing that the ball was released. It might not have been. Unlike the Barr play he did not drive him into the turf and intentionally land on top of him, his momentum carried him in that direction and he did make an effort to not do so. Otherwise, though, you are completely correct, there was a football game.Okay. Seems we're getting closer.
What was the necessity of Matthews taking Cousins to the ground? And in taking him to the ground, without the football mind you, what was the necessity in ending up on top of him?
This is no longer the case. It is the basis for these new rules protecting the QB.Matthews' head is already past Cousin's body when Cousins releases the ball. At that point as far as CM knows Cousins has the ball and it's absolutely imperative he be tackled as fast and as hard as possible. He is paid millions to do just that.
Lifted means turned? Are you even hearing yourself?In this case lifted means turned and/or twisted so as to end up with the result of Cousins on topmand Matthews on the bottom.
Look. I see it. You don't. It's cool. Beauty is in the eye of the beer holder.
Well the as fast as possible still applies. The as hard does not but by Clay putting his left arm done to brace their fall, tells me he didn't try to tackle Cousins as hard as possible.This is no longer the case. It is the basis for these new rules protecting the QB.
Lifted means turned? Are you even hearing yourself?
Which is why I bolded the relevant part. Operating under the presupposition that the part of the defender's objective is something that has been made illegal renders any discussion moot.Well the as fast as possible still applies.
Exactly my point, but that is a part of football. See my comment above.This is no longer the case. It is the basis for these new rules protecting the QB.
Not any more it isn't. The NFL is protecting it's stars.Exactly my point, but that is a part of football. See my comment above.
As others have pointed out, Mathews uses his left arm to brace the impact in an effort to protect the quarterback. Its the opposite of driving him into the ground.Usually agree with you on a lot of stuff, but you could not be more wrong here. Look at this video here, and tell me how he is supposed to know whether or not the ball is gone, and (2) how he should have tackled him differently.
https://deadspin.com/a-bull####-penalty-let-the-vikings-tie-the-packers-1829095434
LOL still bitter about last week I see. Funny thing is a lot of Non Packer fans chiming in saying it was a BS call. Oh for the record so was the call on Kendricks in the first half. And last week's late hit call on Matthews was totally legit.Normal Packers issues. Win a lot of games. Throw a big fit cry just like their qb when they don't win. Matthews popped Trubisky from behind and hit him in the head after he let go of the ball last week. Nothing. You can't even breathe on Rodgers without getting a penalty called. Nothing to see here.
I think we're clearer now. I agree with your premise, we just value a different kind of game. Personally I enjoy the game that has had great success for now 100 seasons. I realize before that this was a game that actually resulted in deaths. Modifications have been made before.I am ok with this because (a) the QB is the only player (sans punter/kicker/holder) who is expected to play stationary in a prone position; and (b) the game sucks when the elite QBs are not able to play.
I don't want to get into a metaphysical debate. To me football is a game with certain immutable characteristics and if you change those characteristics it's not the game anymore. To you the game is whatever they decide it is. They could send them out with shuttlecocks and kitchen mitts, call it football and it would be football. I don't want to argue this point as it's philosophical, I certainly respect your POV.Not any more it isn't. The NFL is protecting it's stars.
You can stomp on his leg when he is down without consequence as did Suh. You can take two steps, launch, and drive him to the turf breaking his collarbone, as did Barr, but no, you can't breath on him.Normal Packers issues. Win a lot of games. Throw a big fit cry just like their qb when they don't win. Matthews popped Trubisky from behind and hit him in the head after he let go of the ball last week. Nothing. You can't even breathe on Rodgers without getting a penalty called. Nothing to see here.
This is true of all sports. The consequences are little more punitive in FB given the lower number of possessions.I think we're clearer now. I agree with your premise, we just value a different kind of game. Personally I enjoy the game that has had great success for now 100 seasons. I realize before that this was a game that actually resulted in deaths. Modifications have been made before.
But I think the primary problem is that people want assured rules, fairness, and competitive balance. Rules like this are harmful to football because they will be unevenly and inherently unfairly applied. So in one game I guarantee you the same kind of tackle will be penalized and in another it won't be. Games will be decided seemingly on the whim of a ref. Fans will be left angry and feeling like the game is not fair. It is confusing and players who are basically tackling the QB holding the ball will be penalized at some point in a game and yet at another they will not be. So fans will be upset and the game will be less enjoyable. People by and large enjoy the game of football, and yes it's a trillion dollar money machine so like everything else with Goodell why should he care. He doesn't.
The broken collar bone is one of the types of plays they are trying to get rid of with this rule.You can stomp on his leg when he is down. You can take two steps, launch, and drive him to the turf breaking his collarbone, but no, you can't breath on him.
My memory was that Matthews was called for a hit on Trubisky last week, but my memory is probably not as good as yours. BTW, when the second bear landed on Rodgers, who was giving himself up, and was then subsequently injured, was there a flag because if not it makes your point more than a bit wrong.?
Actually, that Deadspin video shows it really well.
Matthews hits Cousins as he's throwing (or close enough for arguments sake) but then drives him diagonally with his next step - resulting in his ending up on top of Cousins. I'll agree he couldn't avoid the contact but maintain that he didn't need to end up on top of him. The second part is what the NFL is trying to avoid - his the Barr/Rodgers situation.
Yes, but the greater subjectivity allowed the more it happens. A ref could have looked at that Matthews hit and decided it was not illegal. Another ref certainly could have. The same ref could have ignored that same play earlier. This is just going to cause a perception of arbitrariness.This is true of all sports. The consequences are little more punitive in FB given the lower number of possessions.
This is only fair if the QB can no longer scramble outside of the pocket or run for positive yards. Surely, QB's and OC's are designing plays to take advantage of this new interpretation of the rules, as any QB who can do a good pump fake and is relatively mobile has a huge advantage in this new game. I would expect most offenses are designing "roughing the passer option" plays to use in key situations. If you can get the timing right, this play would be unstoppable.I am ok with this because (a) the QB is the only player (sans punter/kicker/holder) who is expected to play stationary in a prone position; and (b) the game sucks when the elite QBs are not able to play.
WTF? If that's what you inferred you have some serious comprehension issues.I don't want to get into a metaphysical debate. To me football is a game with certain immutable characteristics and if you change those characteristics it's not the game anymore. To you the game is whatever they decide it is. They could send them out with shuttlecocks and kitchen mitts, call it football and it would be football. I don't want to argue this point as it's philosophical, I certainly respect your POV.
Wow, my first time seeing this and that is a pitiful call. Absolutely pitiful that's where we are with protecting the QB.Zero wrong with this hit.
- Defensive players have a right to hit QBs in the act of throwing. It's not a pile drive, it's not low, it's not at the head. The league is just going to call this randomly throughout the season and it will affect games, like a bullet just falling from the sky. Oh well.
Apologies, I get sarcastic. I'm just trying to explain that you and I see the game differently. Me as a fixed thing and you as something which can be changed like this.WTF? If that's what you inferred you have some serious comprehension issues.
No worries. Mondays are rough here during football season. My sarcasm detctor is always a little offApologies, I get sarcastic. I'm just trying to explain that you and I see the game differently. Me as a fixed thing and you as something which can be changed like this.