Week 3 Discussion Thread

[BeerBaron]

Originally Posted by Jughead10

The refs are always out to stick it to the Ravens. Win or lose, real or replacement refs, they're out to get them. You didn't know that?

I think you're being sarcastic, but just in case, there is a big difference between getting nickel and dimed for every little thing you do like what happens to the Raiders, and getting legit penalties for throwing yourself at people's heads.

[b316]

If Branch was taller, he would have got hit right square in the chest.

But cause he is small and he lowered his head, it became helmet to helmet.

[Jughead10]

Originally Posted by BeerBaron

I think you're being sarcastic, but just in case, there is a big difference between getting nickel and dimed for every little thing you do like what happens to the Raiders, and getting legit penalties for throwing yourself at people's heads.

I am being sarcastic. It's a whole culture of blaming and hating the refs in Baltimore. The fan base eats that crap up.

[cmarq83]

Originally Posted by bhaarat316

If Branch was taller, he would have got hit right square in the chest.

But cause he is small and he lowered his head, it became helmet to helmet.

It is what it is. Unfortunately you can't have different rules based on people's heights. I don't like it either, but it is better for player's safety to not get lit up in the head.

[BeerBaron]

Originally Posted by Jughead10

I am being sarcastic. It's a whole culture of blaming and hating the refs in Baltimore. The fan base eats that crap up.

Pittsburgh fans as well. They believe they're being victimized by the refs, replacement or not, when these kinds of calls are made.

Logic be damned.

[Jvig43]

Originally Posted by bhaarat316

If Branch was taller, he would have got hit right square in the chest.

But cause he is small and he lowered his head, it became helmet to helmet.

And this is going to happen more often than not because bracing for someone to hit you is a natural thing to do. If a defender aims himself at a fair level it shouldnt be a penalty because some player lowers his head at the last split second.

[b316]

Ed Reed was waiting for him, Branch lowered himself into Reed.

though the first one he straight mugged him. No launching, but that was straight to the head.

[BeerBaron]

Originally Posted by Jvig43

And this is going to happen more often than not because bracing for someone to hit you is a natural thing to do. If a defender aims himself at a fair level it shouldnt be a penalty because some player lowers his head at the last split second.

It wouldn't be flagged if the defender wasn't "launching himself." Maybe I'm just very confused, but that is also against the rules, is it not?

There are helmet to helmet hits where, if you make first contact as a tackler with your helmet against another player's helmet, you get flagged.

But then there are the "launching" penalties. It wouldn't be the first time the announcers were blatantly wrong about something, but in both the DHB and Branch hits, two different sets of announcers talked about "launching" penalties. (DHB's was helmet to helmet, so that should have been flagged no matter what, but still...)

So even if the ball carrier lowers his head while bracing himself, you can still be flagged if you "launch" yourself at him while leading with the crown of your helmet, even if you only contact him with your shoulder.

And right now, as if to mock me, two Steeler fans a cubicle over are talking about how the DHB hit was "a football play" and shouldn't have been flagged. Ugh.

Just...just...ugh. Headphones on for the day.

[Jughead10]

What got into Reed? He made more hits last night than he has in the previous 2 seasons.

[b316]

Look slow it down, reed didn't launch himself in the Branch hit. He didn't leave his feet....his toes were still on the ground, ahha. But after the initial impact he followed through.


Mundy hit, was a lunch. he left both his feet, and didn't even aim at the chest.

[BeerBaron]

Originally Posted by bhaarat316

Ed Reed was waiting for him, Branch lowered himself into Reed.

though the first one he straight mugged him. No launching, but that was straight to the head.

No, bull ****. Watch from 1:09 on when it's in slower motion. Reed goes helmet down and puts his shoulder into Branch's head. He's moving forward into Branch. That's launching.

[Jughead10]

Originally Posted by bhaarat316

Look slow it down, reed didn't launch himself in the Branch hit. He didn't leave his feet....his toes were still on the ground, ahha. But after the initial impact he followed through.

He's a real lazy tackler at this point. He didn't launch himself but the receivers are in a defenseless position and he's going high with his arms as well.

[BeerBaron]

Originally Posted by Jughead10

He's a real lazy tackler at this point. He didn't launch himself but the receivers are in a defenseless position and he's going high with his arms as well.

That's another good point. There's no wrap up attempt at all.

Also, Reed all but leaves his feet. Only his left toes are still on the ground as the hit is being made. His full body weight is going into Branch.

[cmarq83]

Originally Posted by bhaarat316

Look slow it down, reed didn't launch himself in the Branch hit. He didn't leave his feet....his toes were still on the ground, ahha. But after the initial impact he followed through.


Mundy hit, was a lunch. he left both his feet, and didn't even aim at the chest.

Keep your head up, it's as simple as that. Yes, you're less likely to put on the kind of hit that will jar the ball loose, but those are the rules now. Never at any point in football are you taught to tackle like Ed Reed did in that play.

[Jughead10]

Originally Posted by cmarq83

Keep your head up, it's as simple as that. Yes, you're less likely to put on the kind of hit that will jar the ball loose, but those are the rules now. Never at any point in football are you taught to tackle like Ed Reed did in that play.

Maybe at the U.

[cmarq83]

Originally Posted by Jughead10

Maybe at the U.

I rescind my previous statement. After watching Brandon Meriweather for 4 years I can confirm that this is the only thing he ever learned there.

[bigbluedefense]

I played safety. I don't understand how you can take launching away from these guys. It's as much a part of playing the position as the stiff arm is to running backs.

Safeties have to defend the middle of the field. Part of that is intimidation. You have to be able to lay wood on these guys. Jar the ball out. When you're running as fast as they are out there, I don't see how you can stop on a dime and make a form tackle when a guy runs a skinny your way.

[jrdrylie]

Every Monday during football season, I wear the Bears tie below to work. And every Monday, multiple people come up to me and say "War Eagle." It's so annoying. I know it is Auburn colors, but come on, there is a big C on it. The guy who sits across from me has said it to me every Monday since the 2010 season. That's over 30 times I have told him, "No, I'm not an Auburn fan. This is a Bears tie." But alas, this morning, he walks in and say "War Eagle."

[AntoinCD]

Originally Posted by bigbluedefense

I played safety. I don't understand how you can take launching away from these guys. It's as much a part of playing the position as the stiff arm is to running backs.

Safeties have to defend the middle of the field. Part of that is intimidation. You have to be able to lay wood on these guys. Jar the ball out. When you're running as fast as they are out there, I don't see how you can stop on a dime and make a form tackle when a guy runs a skinny your way.

Because it's dangerous. And sure, if guys launched but at least attempted to wrap a guy up it wouldn't be as bad, but that doesn't happen. Big hits can still be made within the framework of the rules. The big issue is a lot of these guys are lazy tacklers and just throw their body at their other guy

[Hines]

I still can't believe Schwartz called a QB sneak on fourth down when they should have just tied the game up. What a moron.

[BeerBaron]

Originally Posted by bigbluedefense

I played safety. I don't understand how you can take launching away from these guys. It's as much a part of playing the position as the stiff arm is to running backs.

Safeties have to defend the middle of the field. Part of that is intimidation. You have to be able to lay wood on these guys. Jar the ball out. When you're running as fast as they are out there, I don't see how you can stop on a dime and make a form tackle when a guy runs a skinny your way.

It sucks, because I enjoyed the big hitting of the previous years of football, but the NFL isn't going to allow this stuff to continue. They're staring down the barrel of multiple major concussion lawsuits which, even if the NFL wins, they're going to have to spend a lot of time and money fighting.

They need to show they take concussions seriously and eliminating any kind of helmet-to-helmet or "launching" hits is part of that.

Players who continue to do it are only going to end up costing their team via penalties and are also going to find themselves much lighter in the wallet.

I don't know that it's happened since the bigger emphasis on illegal hits has started up, but someone is going to get suspended over it. Maybe then teams like the Ravens and Steelers will take it more seriously when they're without one of their starters for a game because of it.

Originally Posted by jrdrylie

Every Monday during football season, I wear the Bears tie below to work. And every Monday, multiple people come up to me and say "War Eagle." It's so annoying. I know it is Auburn colors, but come on, there is a big C on it. The guy who sits across from me has said it to me every Monday since the 2010 season. That's over 30 times I have told him, "No, I'm not an Auburn fan. This is a Bears tie." But alas, this morning, he walks in and say "War Eagle."

Auburn's blue is a different blue anyway, isn't it? The Bears is more of a duller navy while Auburn's blue has a little more sharpness? Same goes for orange where Auburn's is brighter.

[bigbluedefense]

Originally Posted by BeerBaron

It sucks, because I enjoyed the big hitting of the previous years of football, but the NFL isn't going to allow this stuff to continue. They're staring down the barrel of multiple major concussion lawsuits which, even if the NFL wins, they're going to have to spend a lot of time and money fighting.

They need to show they take concussions seriously and eliminating any kind of helmet-to-helmet or "launching" hits is part of that.

Players who continue to do it are only going to end up costing their team via penalties and are also going to find themselves much lighter in the wallet.

I don't know that it's happened since the bigger emphasis on illegal hits has started up, but someone is going to get suspended over it. Maybe then teams like the Ravens and Steelers will take it more seriously when they're without one of their starters for a game because of it.

The thing is, you can't prevent hits from happening. It's going to happen. You can limit it yes, but you can't remove it completely. These guys can't defy the laws of physics. If a guy is coming full speed at you, you can form tackle him by the book, but if he twists his body in an awkward position at the last second your helmet can still collide with his. How is that your fault?

Originally Posted by AntoinCD

Because it's dangerous. And sure, if guys launched but at least attempted to wrap a guy up it wouldn't be as bad, but that doesn't happen. Big hits can still be made within the framework of the rules. The big issue is a lot of these guys are lazy tacklers and just throw their body at their other guy

This is a violent sport. Where do we draw the line? Should the 3 point stance get removed bc their heads collide with every snap?

I'm not advocating terrible tackling, bc I hate it as much as the next guy, but the proper launch is perfectly fine with me. Lead with your shoulder, aim for the chest, I see nothing wrong with that.

There's a proper way to launch. It shouldn't be removed from the game, safeties need to use it as a weapon to defend the middle of the field.

And it's definitely taught to us to lay wood. Our coach taught us to give them 2 options:

Get down, or lay down. They could avoid the hit, just get down. But if you want to get some YAC, you had to accept the consequences, and that sometimes meant you were gonna lay down.

It's football. Defenses get paid to hit.

[cmarq83]

I have far less of an issue with the defenseless receiver rule than I do with the QB rules. At least the defenseless receiver rules are fairly avoidable. Guys like Patrick Chung have adjusted and have been able to put big hits by squaring up in the torso. It can be done, the fact that guys are still launching themselves is stupid and lazy on their part.

[AntoinCD]

Originally Posted by bigbluedefense

This is a violent sport. Where do we draw the line? Should the 3 point stance get removed bc their heads collide with every snap?

I'm not advocating terrible tackling, bc I hate it as much as the next guy, but the proper launch is perfectly fine with me. Lead with your shoulder, aim for the chest, I see nothing wrong with that.

There's a proper way to launch. It shouldn't be removed from the game, safeties need to use it as a weapon to defend the middle of the field.

And it's definitely taught to us to lay wood. Our coach taught us to give them 2 options:

Get down, or lay down. They could avoid the hit, just get down. But if you want to get some YAC, you had to accept the consequences, and that sometimes meant you were gonna lay down.

It's football. Defenses get paid to hit.

I agree, and the over-emphasis on player safety is getting a little ridiculous. I am of the opinion that these guys sign their sometimes multi-million dollar checks with the full knowledge they are playing a dangerous and violent sport. However there is a difference between launching with good technique and head hunting. I know there is a difference, you know there is a difference and most people on this board know there is a difference. However it appears that way too many NFL players don't realise there is a difference.

[BeerBaron]

BeerBaron's Thoughts - Lite Version

Just throwing out a couple of observations since I don't have time to do full fledged ones anymore:

1.) Best NFC North QB so far? Christian Ponder.
As surprising as it might be, through 3 weeks, Ponder has been the most consistently good QB in the division. Cutler and Stafford have been outright lousy while Rodgers has failed to achieve the kind of success he was seeing last year.

Ponder has been an efficient machine. 4-0 TD-INT ratio and he's completely 70% of his passes while leading the Vikings to an unlikely 2-1 record with Peterson still a bit limited. And finally, he did something that neither Rodgers nor Stafford, two guys who many had in their top 5 QBs after last season, could do: beat the 49ers. If Ponder can keep this level of play up while the other teams in the division fall below expectations, the Vikings could end up making some surprising noise in the race to the post season.

2.) The Cardinals are legit.
Their defense is just thrashing everyone they come up against. The Eagles went into yesterday's game as the #1 offense in the league and got completely smacked by the Cardinals defense. They have playmakers on every level of the defense with Daryl Washington really stepping up. He was a complete animal in yesterday's game, showing up to make plays all over the field.

If there is one area of concern, it's definitely with the offense. They are 27th in the league in terms of running the ball and, while he hasn't made any critical mistakes to cost them games, Kevin Kolb is still about as uninspiring as they come. He still looks extremely uncomfortable in the pocket and floats passes as badly as ever. You can get by when you have Larry Fitzgerald to throw to, but seeing a little more command and confidence out of him would really do wonders for this team.

Needless to say, I really look forward to the first matchup between the Cardinals and 49ers.

3.) RGIII might be closer to Vick than to Newton
One thing I noticed about yesterday's game was just how much Griffin was getting hit. He once again played above his experience level, but he took a beating in the process.

A lot of people seem to want to compare Griffin to Newton, but there is a major difference there: about 25 pounds to be exact. Newton is very thickly built and seems to hold up better when taking shots from NFL defenders.

Griffin on the other hand reminds me more of Vick in how he runs and takes hits. He just doesn't have the mass to absorb as many hits as he leaves himself open to each game. (He was sacked 3 times yesterday and was hit many more.)

So while Griffin has all of the potential in the world, he needs to figure out something Vick hasn't been able to: how to avoid taking as many hits.