Burfict's penalty???

[*ochocincos*]

(11-27-2017, 01:35 PM)sandwedge Wrote: By definition, what he did wasn't a foul. I believe it was called just because it was unneeded and done by a guy who has a reputation for unneeded stuff. 

Good point. I was focusing on the illegal contact when I believe it was called for unnecessary roughness.
And what sucks about unnecessary roughness is it's a subjective penalty based on opinion. It's not always clear cut like contact to the head/neck, false start, offsides, etc.
IMO the only way Burfict will be able to avoid these things is to change his playstyle such that he always has his eyes to the football instead of a defender and make wrapup tackles rather than hits.

EDIT - And I don't think the NFL is out to specifically screw over Burfict or the Bengals, but moreso to target any player who seems to have a desire to hit people for the sake of hitting people. The NFL is clearly all about player safety now (even at the expense of viewer enjoyment), and those players that don't adapt their game will suffer the consequences (flags, fines, suspensions).