Get the fuck out of here, Jeanquev. We both know that's ridiculous. He hit a FB, whose body is turned upfield, a yard from the line of scrimmage, and did so by hitting his chest with his shoulder pads, and didn't lower his helmet or launch his body. The player wasn't defenseless, and if that's a defenseless receiver, then let's stop pretending, and move the sticks to 20 yards. Giving an offense free reign like that is just playing pitch and catch. Catfish, it did look violent, and that's exactly why the NFL cracked down. The NFL doesn't give one single shit about whether or not a player is actually hurt. That doesn't matter a single fucking bit to them. What does matter, however, is public perception - whether or not they can continue pretending that they care. A play that looks like that will get called accordingly every single game, simply because they can't have anything reminding people that this game leads to early deaths and catastrophic injuries. You can't support or endorse this league, in any way, shape, or form. You just can't. The fact that people still watch the NFL is because it hasn't gotten bad enough to force them out of a habit or long-time routine. That's not the case for me. Hopefully the trend of the NFL's ratings dropping continues.
What in the hell do you think Burfict was doing??? BLOCKING?? He hit a defenseless player by defintion dline. He did it with the intent to harm, don't give me the bullshit about the no fun league or anything. When a player is doing something to harm another player, that's ridiculous. This was CLEARLY the case here. What other reason could he have POSSIBLY had to make that hit?
What in the hell do you think Burfict was doing??? BLOCKING?? He hit a defenseless player by defintion dline. He did it with the intent to harm, don't give me the bullshit about the no fun league or anything. When a player is doing something to harm another player, that's ridiculous. This was CLEARLY the case here. What other reason could he have POSSIBLY had to make that hit? Obviously you do support, endorse in many ways shape and form, because you are on a sports website talking about a play that happened in the league,. You are not only endorsing the league, you are promoting the league.
I partially agree with both sides. It wasn't a head shot (imo) and looked to be the type of hit the NFL endorsed a few years back. The problem is, it was definitely an unnecessary. It was essentially a crack back block in execution, which is illegal. Burfict wasn't even looking to make a play. He just wanted to hit, or hurt, someone
I'd bet a lot of money something preceded the hit and this was once again Burflict trying to settle a score. It never got any national attention but last year after DeCastro pancaked Burflict he was heard saying, "Watch your knees". On the next offensive play for the Steelers DeCastro was pulling left and Burflict came in like a missle and dove at DeCastro's knees. Wasn't even looking at the ball carrier. Just tried to injure. I bet this was similar situation. Probably got blocked by the FB earlier, threatened retaliation and then took the cheap shot.
There is zero support for that assertion on this play, Irish. In fact, there is no part of the "defenseless " definition that this hit or the player himself meets. Didn't make contact with the head, didn't lower his own, didn't launch, made contact square with the front of the body, the receiver was within five yards and not catching a pass... You guys are telling me the hit was unnecessary, and that's why it was illegal?? What was he supposed to do to the 230 lb Fullback, hit him softer?? Fuck you. That's ridiculous. To your second assertion, Irish, don't give me that lame and tired "Well, you're talking about it" bullshit. First, that argument holds no water in almost any circumstance. Second, I don't think the NFL is hurting in the 'publicity' department. Third, I'm calling them out and trying to expose their bullshit to people who are currently fans of the league. I mean, come on, Irish - if you're gonna come at me, have more than that weak shit.
Also, I think this is probably important, in no small part because I'm discussing with AFC North fans: I'm not defending Burfict as a person or player, I'm defending the hit. This is not a play that should get someone suspended.
And I'm telling YOU, even as an AFC North fan, you are ignorant to the rules here. You keep saying it isn't the definition of defenseless player, but he was looking back at the QB AFTER the ball was already thrown upfield and was in NO WAY involved in the play..Unless Burfict has Extra Sensory Perception and absolutely knew they were going to intercept the ball (which didn't happen by the way), there was NO REASON for hitting the FB AT ALL...Let alone sticking your shoulder just below the chin strap and hitting him with as much force as you could possibly put into him. You said it, but you should have said it to a mirror.
Dline I remember watching football in the 70's, and this hit would be more than legal back then, we aren't in the 70's no more. There are much whimpier rules in place now.
DLINE or anyone else...my nephew is crying that there was no flag on the hit. there was no replay on the hit either to call a penalty, so why is the league office suspending him? well just bc there wasn't a flag thrown live doesn't mean it wasn't illegal or dirty. dline-i like football so i watch it. that doesn't mean the game doesn't have its fair share of problems. that won't stop me from watching the games on sundays from my living room. im a sports fan, so i watch sports. been doing so for 40 yrs. i can't see me not watching sports no matter what troubles the sport has.
DO NOTHING DLINE- the play or pass wasn't to him ! why is he hitting the player when the play and pass went over their heads to someone else? So everyone has to get hit dline no matter what ?
You may not like the rule but it is the rule. You want to believe that Burfict was all sunshine and lollipops on that hit more power to you and while you are believing in that I have a unicorn to sell you. The hit was illegal and everyone but the Bengals, Burfict and you knows he meant to injure the guy. If you don't want to watch football anymore more power don't let the door hit you on the way out. The league started its safer crusade several years ago and yes it was because they were being sued and stand to loose money why that started isn't as important as the fact they are trying to make the sport safer so that the sport will survive. Yeah some will cry its watered down and no fun anymore but in my opinion if it keeps the best players on the field longer I'm all for it. There are also still plenty of big legal hits out there maybe instead of crying over one that is illegal by the rule made by a head hunting thug you should go find those big legal hits to watch.
Alright, so everyone's hanging onto the same piece of information, here (except IrishDawg, who I'll remind, Burfict hit him square in the chest. Player had his head turned 'round, not his body. Perfectly legal hit): the pass was thrown elsewhere. Watch the play again. I can't believe someone who is impartial watches that play and would expect Burfict to do nothing, assuming the pass will go elsewhere. The QB is looking his direction, the FB is open and readying for the reception, the QB then begins to plant and throw. The ball doesn't leave his hands until about the time of the hit. If you're Burfict, and you do nothing, and the FB gets the ball, you didn't do your job. Simple as that. How can anyone expect him to do anything otherwise? You all make it out to seem like he hit the FB well after the ball was in the air, and prior to that, there was no indication the ball was going to the FB. No one with clear vision and a right mind can say that, watching the play. I'm really starting to doubt everyone's sanity, here. If you don't like Burfict, fine. If you don't like hard hitting football, fine. But you cannot watch that play and make the case for a defenseless receiver or an unnecessary hit. It's not possible. You can argue that there was contact with the head on the hit, and that's what the NFL is doing, because it covers their ass accordingly. Several of you also seem to misunderstand my position regarding the NFL. Someone made the case that they're trying to make the game safer... Factually, they simply haven't done that. The game isn't any safer, now. And their half-hearted attempts are motivated solely by public perception, and nothing more. I'm just not defending or putting up with their bullshit, like so many of you here. I picked the wrong crowd to have this discussion with - whether it's multiple conspiratorial suggestions of an alternative motive on Burfict's part, a pointing to rules that are refuted on tape, or a lack of realistic interpretation of the play itself, it seems we're at an impasse. It's a good thing the NFL has no history of poorly implementing and enforcing rules, choosing to err on the side of perception over reality... That would put you all in a rough spot.
D-line, as a Ravens fan I'm definitely a fan of hard hitting football. And I've defended Burfict before so there's no agenda here. They were 5 yards apart when the QB begins his throwing motion. When the hit took place, the ball is more than 5 yards past the QB. If the ball was going to the FB, then it's pass interference so he wouldn't have been "making a play". Jean directly posted the NFLs rules and their definition on what a defenseless player is and that's exactly what it was. The only legal thing about Burfict's entire action was the way he hit. High chest, but chest none-the-less, and led with the shoulder. But the FB was defenseless, by rule, and IF the ball was going to him it would have been pass interference anyway.
Actually, if you can read, I he was "looking back towards the QB", I didn't say anything about his body, other than he was hit just below the chin strap, which also indicates I never made mention of a head shot....so unless you have no comprehension skils, I'm not sure why you singled me out on this one. If you want to suggest that he believed that ball was coming to the FB, then I will again call bullshit or say he is a TERRIBLE player. If he truly thought that ball was coming to the FB, he was stopped and set up right by the FB, which he could have easily moved in front of him to make an interception. Which is better? Intercepting a ball to cause a turnover, or knock the snot out of a guy? Now, given the actual view of the play HE OBVIOUSLY sees the QB the entire way, as you are even suggesting he was "timing up a hit" to cooincide with the ball, so he would CLEARLY see where the ball is going if he were trying to make a legal hit. That is part of his job, knowing when to hit and knowing when NOT to hit...The FB NEVER makes a football move towards the ball, rather his body goes limp realizing the ball isn't coming his way. It isn't a conspiracy against Burfict, I could care less one way or the other on the player..However, he has a history of making bad choices when it comes to disregarding fellow players safety, so for you to think he all of a sudden changed his attitude and this is all a misunderstanding of others, besides himself, the Bengals and apparently you...I think you are the one living in la la land. It isn't about liking/hating the rules changes for safety, it is understanding the past and how these hits HAVE EFFECTED players. How can you not want these guys to be able to live out their post football lives without CTE and such? Do I like seeing big hits, hell yes, it's exciting...but when you are talking about long term health issues, I am also a human being and understand why they want to curtail the issues causing long term damage.
https://www.cbssports.com/nfl/news/...on-with-suspended-linebacker-vontaze-burfict/ well he just got a whole lot richer. wow.
Hopefully, he won't see it as a "reward" and continue with his extra "dirty business" or leg/knee/ankle twists. That shitbag should be in the WWE... getting his ass kicked.
https://www.cbssports.com/nfl/news/...a-go-after-appearing-to-kick-steeler-in-head/ he's back and kicking players now !
