Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I wonder why that is. i think there's a skin color component to this.
WTH???
Hope you are not referring to me because you are definitely assuming things and you know what they say about making assumptions.
Where did I ever say Garrett does not deserve exactly what he is getting? Heck I was one of the very first posts on here in the week 10 thread suggesting he could be suspended for the season.
IMO, one could argue Pouncy's actions were justifiable. But he is still being suspended 3 games. So we could also argue Rudloph was justified in trying to rip Garrett's helmet off and kicking him in the groin. But there should still be consequences even if the action is justified in your opinion. Reports are that Rudolph will be fined for his involvement so it looks like the NFL agrees more strongly with my opinion than perhaps yours. Personally, I would think a kick to the groin other than possible self defense would warrant a one game suspension regardless of the player and position.
[quote=Brill;56653270]1-2 games. Let's not pretend anything, lets look at what actually happened. Garrett tackles Rudolph, Rudolph starts grabbing at Garretts helmet and tries to pull it off. Then kicks Garrett in the groin. Garrett pulls off Rudolph helmet. Another Steelers pushes Garrett back to separate them. Rudolph charges back at Garrett and Garrett smacks him with his helmet.
If the NFL wants to send a message that this will not be tolerated, then Rudolph needs a suspension too. Otherwise, they send the message that it's ok for the QB to react to the defense however they want with no punishment.
People keep saying the game was over. Then why did Rudolph drop back to pass? Why didn't he just kneel? If Steelers were going to keep playing, so should the Browns. If Rudolph can't handle getting tackled, then he needs to find a new line of work. It does make it interesting to watch. But they have to issue stiff fines for all to stop it.
I dont blame Rudolph for getting p***ed. Garret had his arms around Rudolph with his hands locked and took him down and held him there, this was after the play had been blown dead. No one would like that. Rudolph should of kneed him in the n**s.
Hope you are not referring to me because you are definitely assuming things and you know what they say about making assumptions.
Where did I ever say Garrett does not deserve exactly what he is getting? Heck I was one of the very first posts on here in the week 10 thread suggesting he could be suspended for the season.
IMO, one could argue Pouncy's actions were justifiable. But he is still being suspended 3 games. So we could also argue Rudloph was justified in trying to rip Garrett's helmet off and kicking him in the groin. But there should still be consequences even if the action is justified in your opinion. Reports are that Rudolph will be fined for his involvement so it looks like the NFL agrees more strongly with my opinion than perhaps yours. Personally, I would think a kick to the groin other than possible self defense would warrant a one game suspension regardless of the player and position.
you defended a late hit as no big deal after claiming the QB 'started it'.
That doesn't seem like an objective stance.
You seem eager to get to 'the qb started it' conclusion.
You really like putting words in my mouth. All I said is we see late hits on QBs nearly every week. But when is the last time you saw a QB retaliate by ripping the defenders helmet off and kick him in the groin?
I think Garrett is getting exactly what he deserves for his actions. So stop trying to make it look like I disagree with you on that point.
You said the QB started it and I accurately quoted you saying that.
I asked how did the QB start it if it was a late hit.
You then deflect and say late hits happen every week. That doesn't explain how the QB 'started it'. If your point is a late hit is no big deal, that's not a good point. It's easy for somebody not getting hit to say a late hit is no big deal. IF this big guy had a late hit on you, you'd see it differently.
As I pointed out, this QB got hit a lot in this game.
I would also counter that the QB has probably been hit late before and not reacted the same way so perhaps there is more to what Garrett did than you realize.
I have no problem with NFL suspending or fining the guy if they chose to do that. I do think it is weird you are saying he started it even if it was a late hit.
Last edited by ClemVegas; 11-17-2019 at 12:22 PM..
Although I was never a big fan of the show, you just gave me a good laugh by reminding me of "Leave It to Beaver".
actually thinking of this one...
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
