(08-28-2017, 09:21 AM)treee Wrote: So where you do you draw the line? Are you only allowed to play pattycake within 5 yards of the LOS or what? These are professional players and they should know to have their head on a swivel until they clear those 5 yards, period. It was a clean shoulder to chest hit.

It was within the 5 yard limit, it was shoulder to chest, you are right, it's legal.

At this point, the only thing im really wondering is if Burfict actually had knowledge of the new rule and knew it existed...

If not, then whos fault is that? Coaching staff for not telling Burfict?

(08-28-2017, 01:57 PM)cinci4life Wrote: It wasn't an unnecessary cheapshot or fineable. It was shoulder to chest and the pass even though downfield was also a low pass so it was hard to tell if it was going to the RB or downfield as it did. Clean legal hit. Period!

It was a cheapshot. And in the old days as in last year it would have been a legal cheapshot. And if Burfict cant tell if Smith was throwing it 30 yards downfield or to the fullback he hit 4 yards off the line, then he has terrible judgement.

(08-28-2017, 02:04 PM)Wyche Wrote: It was within the 5 yard limit, it was shoulder to chest, you are right, it's legal.

The 5 yard limit isnt a thing anymore, man. Read the new rules. The hit was illegal. 

The ONLY thing worth debating about this is if the receiver was defenseless or not. Which is personal judgement.

You can bet your bottom dollar the NFL cooked up the suspension about five femtoseconds after Vontaze Burfict made that amazing route-jumping interception against the Redskins yesterday.

(08-28-2017, 02:08 PM)Fan_in_Kettering Wrote: You can bet your bottom dollar the NFL cooked up the suspension about five femtoseconds after Vontaze Burfict made that amazing route-jumping interception against the Redskins yesterday.

He knew about the suspension before the game yesterday... 

From PFT:
http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2017/08/28/was-vontaze-burficts-hit-legal/

Quote:Before a hearing officer can decide whether a five-game suspension represents the appropriate punishment for Bengals linebacker Vontaze Burfict, a hearing officer must decide whether the hit merits any punishment at all.

That’s the real question here. Did Burfict deliver an illegal hit to Chiefs fullback Anthony Sherman? He was running a pass route, which this year puts him within the scope of the protections afforded to defense players. Which means that Sherman can’t be struck in the head or neck area.

Was he? Look at the video. While there may have been some minor, incidental contact with Sherman’s facemask, Burfict dropped a shoulder into the chest of Anthony Sherman. The fact that the ball was away doesn’t matter; the punishment doesn’t arise from unnecessary roughness. It flows directly from the notion that Burfict hit Sherman in the head and neck area while he was defenseless.

“I’m crossing my fingers and hoping for the best,” Burfict told the team’s official website. “I feel like I’ve let down my teammates, but I also feel like I’ve done a good job with this. I only had one personal foul last year. We feel like this was a legal hit. I hit him in the shoulder. I hit hard, so it may have looked like I hit him in the head, but it was the shoulder. I helped him up and he said he was good and I asked if he was good on the next series and he said, ‘Yeah, that was a legal hit.'”

Sherman’s opinion doesn’t matter. Ultimately, the league office’s opinion doesn’t, either. The question here becomes whether the hearing officer believes the hit was illegal. If it wasn’t, there’s no basis for disciplining Burfict at all.

(08-28-2017, 02:09 PM)WeezyBengal Wrote: He knew about the suspension before the game yesterday... 

Thank you -- but I won't put anything past the NFL when it comes to the Bengals.

(08-28-2017, 02:07 PM)WeezyBengal Wrote: The 5 yard limit isnt a thing anymore, man. Read the new rules. The hit was illegal. 

Not exactly true. From how it's explained it has conditions.

Quote:According to ESPN’s Kevin Seifert, there are three criteria that would make this an illegal hit:

Quote:The NFL's suspension of Bengals LB Vontaze Burfict is likely based on a new rule for 2017 that gives defenseless player protection to a "receiver running a pass route," as Chiefs running back Anthony Sherman was on the play in question. It is illegal to hit that receiver when approaching from the "side or behind," according to the rule. But for the hit to be illegal, it must be one of three types: 1) Either a forcible hit to the receiver's head or neck area with a helmet, forearm or shoulder, 2) A hit achieved by lowering the crown of the helmet into the receiver's body or 3) Launching with both feet into air and hitting with the helmet. Based on one video angle available on Sunday night, Sherman was definitely a defenseless receiver. But we'll need an explanation from the NFL to understand which of those three hit types Burfict was determined to have used.

(08-28-2017, 02:03 PM)WeezyBengal Wrote: And you are 100% wrong. The hit doesnt have to be to the head or neck. Here is the rule: 

Prohibited contact against a player who is in a defenseless posture is:

1. forcibly hitting the defenseless player’s head or neck area with the helmet, facemask, forearm, or shoulder, even if the initial contact is lower than the player’s neck, and regardless of whether the defensive player also uses his arms to tackle the defenseless player by encircling or grasping him
2. lowering the head and making forcible contact with the crown or ”hairline” parts of the helmet against any part of the defenseless player’s body
3. illegally launching into a defenseless opponent. It is an illegal launch if a player (i) leaves both feet prior to contact to spring forward and upward into his opponent, and (ii) uses any part of his helmet to initiate forcible contact against any part of his opponent’s body. (This does not apply to contact against a runner, unless the runner is still considered to be a defenseless player, as defined in Article 7.)
   

It does have to be to the head or neck because you can't have forcible contact to those areas otherwise. The rule says even if initial contact is below the neck which was to the chest however the contact did not continue upward to and above the neck which is what would have made it illegal. Therefore there was no forcible contact by that rule.

(08-28-2017, 02:04 PM)Wyche Wrote: It was within the 5 yard limit, it was shoulder to chest, you are right, it's legal.

The 5 yard rule doesnt apply here though, because as the NFL says he came in from the side. And they will say he hit him just below the neck area. Now if Burfict had hit him head on (well without any heads involved), then it would have been legal within 5 yards. 

For the record, I am not a fan of this rule change overall, especially hitting from the side part of it. Hitting a defenseless receiver from behind, ok, I can see that. Hitting the helmet, ok, fine. But hitting from the side leaves it up to too much interpretation imo.

(08-28-2017, 02:11 PM)Synric Wrote: Not exactly true. From how it's explained it has conditions.

Exactly. And none of the videos show Burflict using any of those hit types. 

(08-28-2017, 02:07 PM)WeezyBengal Wrote: The 5 yard limit isnt a thing anymore, man. Read the new rules. The hit was illegal. 

The ONLY thing worth debating about this is if the receiver was defenseless or not. Which is personal judgement.

(08-28-2017, 02:09 PM)bfine32 Wrote: From PFT:
http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2017/08/28/was-vontaze-burficts-hit-legal/

Quote:"That’s the real question here. Did Burfict deliver an illegal hit to Chiefs fullback Anthony Sherman? He was running a pass route, which this year puts him within the scope of the protections afforded to defense players. Which means that Sherman can’t be struck in the head or neck area.


Was he? Look at the video. While there may have been some minor, incidental contact with Sherman’s facemask, Burfict dropped a shoulder into the chest of Anthony Sherman. The fact that the ball was away doesn’t matter; the punishment doesn’t arise from unnecessary roughness. It flows directly from the notion that Burfict hit Sherman in the head and neck area while he was defenseless."

Legal Weezy....didn't realize the 5 yard rule had been altered, but the hit was still legal. Even Sherman felt it was. This a huge reach on the league's part, and they're using 55 to get the message out about their new rule. If this is illegal, they may as well take all NFL LBs off of the field.

I dont think anyone knows the damn rules and what the hell they mean anymore. Thats part of the problem with the shitty NFL.

(08-28-2017, 02:20 PM)WeezyBengal Wrote: I dont think anyone knows the damn rules and what the hell they mean anymore. Thats part of the problem with the shitty NFL.

This! Rep

Here's the thing. This league is entirely too much into protecting their money making teams and gladly look the other way when popular teams do the same thing and worse on a regular basis ,but it's become blatantly obvious the league is a fixed league. It's gotten to the point where small market teams are completely incapable of winning long term not because they're not coached right or don't have the best players, but because the league scripts the outcomes of who wins and losses by hook or crook and there's absolutely no governing body that can change it and even if there were there's too much money involved so lawmakers have no interest in changing how things work. 
What cannot be said enough is there are NO LAWS on the books to prevent the league from determining who will be in the championship games. It's not about clean competition and never has been. It's about profit, profit and more profit. 
I have absolutely no doubt that if the Cincinnati Bengals wanted this to all go away the only thing they would have to do is to make this team popular enough and profitable enough. 
Nobody will ever convince me that a sporting event with millions and perhaps billions of dollars on the line is even remotely 100% clean and unscripted..The games are fixed, the outcomes are fixed and no matter how good any small market team is they will never be able to overcome the almighty dollar bill. 
If Vontez Burfict played for any of the big market teams none of this would so much as make it on page 93 of the Sunday newspaper.  All of it would be within the rules and he would be lauded as the greatest linebacker in the modern era of football.  

(08-28-2017, 12:11 PM)ShowMeUrTDs Wrote: Easy to see why soccer is gaining in popularity in the U.S.!

Ironically the sport that has the most concussions is woman's youth soccer. Not sure how football can be remotely watchable if it gets as soft as that.

I'm pissed that Burfict put himself in this situation to begin with. When I first saw it I though the pump fake is what drew him to make the contact cause it didn't look to me that he looked back up after the fake. But damnit the rules are written in a way where they can call any hit they want dirty. We had a guy get leveled last week in a block down field that was worse than this.

The appeal might reduce it one game if any. They wanted someone to use to make an example of for this new rule and Burfict was dumb enough to make a questionable hit like that in a pre season game.

I think it's just football, you get hit, the guy didn't get hurt, no flag was thrown so it shouldn't be an issue. But he will get suspended no question. I know I will be watching Pitt, NE, etc players this year for hits like this and calling them out as I hope everyone will.

(08-28-2017, 02:03 PM)WeezyBengal Wrote: And you are 100% wrong. The hit doesnt have to be to the head or neck. Here is the rule: 

Prohibited contact against a player who is in a defenseless posture is:

1. forcibly hitting the defenseless player’s head or neck area with the helmet, facemask, forearm, or shoulder, even if the initial contact is lower than the player’s neck, and regardless of whether the defensive player also uses his arms to tackle the defenseless player by encircling or grasping him
2. lowering the head and making forcible contact with the crown or ”hairline” parts of the helmet against any part of the defenseless player’s body
3. illegally launching into a defenseless opponent. It is an illegal launch if a player (i) leaves both feet prior to contact to spring forward and upward into his opponent, and (ii) uses any part of his helmet to initiate forcible contact against any part of his opponent’s body. (This does not apply to contact against a runner, unless the runner is still considered to be a defenseless player, as defined in Article 7.)
   

Honestly don't think he did any of these. Or am I being a homer now? He didn't hit his head or neck area, didn't launch, and (finally) didn't lead with his head.

(08-28-2017, 02:20 PM)WeezyBengal Wrote: I dont think anyone knows the damn rules and what the hell they mean anymore. Thats part of the problem with the shitty NFL.

Lol so true.

I forget which preseason game it was or which teams was playing but this week I watched the refs call a strip sack saying the QBS arm wasn't moving forward...but the ball traveled 4 yards past thr line of scrimmage. I'm still trying to figure out how th3 ball could travel 7 to 10 yards when the QBs hand wasn't moving forward... 

I'd say that you really have to give Sherman credit for his acting ability.  Burfict looked like he was merely trying to squeeze out of a crowded elevator while Sherman looked like he'd been hit by a train running at full speed. Something just doesn't add up there. It's a blatant attempt to keep the Cincinnati Bengals from ever fielding a championship winning team so somebody really needs to compile video of every single similar play that ISN'T flagged and nobody is fined or suspended and I'd bet my left and probably right nut that every one that is flagged happens to small market teams.