The only two states that think Suh shouldn't be suspended are...
This map reflects the rose colored glasses of Husker fans. While I too do not think it warranted a suspension he did intentionally kick toward Matt. Where it landed was pure chance.
-
You do not need to register if you are not going to pay the yearly fee to post. If you register please click here or log in go to "settings" then "my account" then "User Upgrades" and you can renew.
HuskerMax readers can save 50% on Omaha Steaks .
Locked due to no posts in 60 days. Report 1st post if need unlocked Suh fined $30,000 for kick to the jewels
- Thread starter Huskers57
- Start date
- Status
This map reflects the rose colored glasses of Husker fans. While I too do not think it warranted a suspension he did intentionally kick toward Matt. Where it landed was pure chance.
If the evidence was strong enough to suggest it was an intentional kick, he would have been suspended, period. The fact he wasnt was another "we're watching you" warning with the fine.
He has a reputation now as a dirty player. That tag is hard to shake, and will probably stick with him for a long time. He plays with a lot of intensity, and has had some boneheaded moments in the league. But that kick would have made a commical list, or sports center NOT top 10 plays of the week if it were someone else. Now you reap what you sow, but in this case, his reputation drew the fine, not the action. From everything I have heard from a good friend of mine whos pretty close to the Lions organization, the team supports him, and is glad that hes on their team, but really wants some of these types of things to stop happening as it draws so much negative attention to a team not known for many positive things recently.
Last edited:
he was fined because they can fine; they knew it was bogus but didn't want to upset the idiots who had run their mouths about it like the hind end of a trotting horse; it's easier to fine the player.
I'd probably argue that the fine indicates the NFL believed the kick may have been intentional but the video evidence was simply not conclusive. I don't disagree that it's also a warning that future play will be scrutinized closely. I think all players with a reputation for dirty play are probably watched more closely.
The NFL HAS to go "soft". They are being sued by former players for all the head injury stuff...and they will likely settle for a HUGE chunk of change. A lot of what the NFL is doing now is for future damage control.
Won't be long before colleges start getting sued.
The whole game of football could look very different 10 years from now.
That said...kicking a dude in the nuts is never cool. Trying to unscrew a QB's head is never cool. Stomping on another player, even if it's not viscious is never cool.
Not condoning his actions at all, but the game has become softer. Long gone are the days of Steve Atwater destroying guys over the middle. Or Ray Nitschke making tackles that would draw 15 yard penalties today, one after the other. I understand its for player safety, but its still a very violent sport and trying to control that is hard to do.
It was 100% for sure that he stomped on the guy's arm last year and yet some on this board still denied that it happened.
If the NFL would continue its benefits to retired players, they wouldnt have to soften the game. They did it to themselves by having crap benefits that basically go away and dont cover much of anything to begin with.
From an injury perspective, football is still way below the injuries of basketball, soccer and other sports with far less contact. Concusions are serious business, but to make it so basically you cant ever touch anyones head, youre opening the door to other very bad injuries as well. Then what are they going to do? Make it so you cant tackle anyone?
By the way...there's no rule in the NFL that I know of that says they HAVE to suspend guy's for certain conduct. A fine is a perfectly legitimate alternative. Maybe they didn't think it was severe enough. Maybe they thought, like I do, that he was definitely kicking at Schaub but certainly targeting the jewels. This idea that they fined and didn't suspend because they aren't sure is off base.
I don't know all the intricacies of head injuries but that is where the suits are coming from. And it's not likely anything to do with benefit plans. The issues are that guys were sent back out to play after having their "bell rung"...when in reality they had concussions...and many of these guys are pretty low functioning people these days. Seen an interview with Jim McMahon lately?
Hey, I don't like it anymore than anyone else. In this game it's pretty hard not to hit someone's head...even when you're trying not to. But the NFL is a job. And employers, for better or worse, are responsible for what happens to their employees in the course of the job. And the teams/league, as employers, have a duty to their employees (and to their own investment) to protect them. I have guys that don't want to follow OSHA rules...it makes their job more difficult and many of the rules are just dumb. But at the end of the day it's MY arse if someone gets hurt while not following the rules...or if I don't implement and enfore a safety plan. If I leave them to their own devices and slough it off by saying "hey, they know it's a dangerous job...not my problem." I'm opening myself up to financial ruin. That's what the owners are trying to protect against...financial ruin.
I hear you. If Suh were a former Sooner or Longhorn, not only would folks on this board consider his play uncool, they would be piling on like he was the anti-Christ.
Last edited:
Truer words have not been posted on this board.
There is no rule to fine them either. I dont care who it is, Suh, Schaub or anyone for that matter, if they intentionally kick someone, they are getting suspended. The NFL has a conduct policy, and kicking players definitely falls into a breach of that policy. Also, the rules state that striking, kneeing or kicking results in player disqualification (rule 12-2-11)
http://static.nfl.com/static/content/public/image/rulebook/pdfs/2012%20-%20Rule%20Book.pdf
page 96 (or scroll page 104 if youre using the arrows in reader)
Last edited:
Nailed it.
- Status
