What's wrong with that block? Amato was trying to make the tackle and looked at Brackett as he was about to block him. About the only thing that was wrong with that block was that it was helmet to helmet but even that is a little bit weak considering Amato ducked his head into Brackett's
Exactly - and the fact that blocking a opposing defender from making a tackle is somehow now considered a "cheap shot" is insane. Brackett made the play that he was supposed to make. A hard block that eliminated his man from making a play. Totally different from the Sapp cheap shot on Clifton. It was only helmet to helment b/c Amato lowered his head and shoulder to absorb the hit - Amato wasn't blindsided and Amato wasn't defenseless and Amato was attempting to make a play on the ball carrier. This shouldn't even be a 5 yd penalty.
If you're going to quote E to make your point, you should quote the entire post so that you don't take him out of context.
has the NFL suspended a player yet for this kind of hit? Why would they start now on a hit where the victim lowered his helmet into the hit? (btw I'm not arguing it wasn't dirty, just not uncommonly so) ...plus it would seem to send the wrong message about their intentions if they started plucking players from teams as they head into the playoffs
no, dumb is knowing he mistakenly used the word tackler and then basing your argument around that mistake and thinking you actually disputed his argument.
thanks for the info... I actually didn't know that ...but still, that was direct contact helmet to helmet on a defenseless receiver, not a circumstance where the victim saw the block coming and lowered his own shoulder in anticipation (which had some part in the resulting h2h contact) Anf we both know that there have been dozens of hits just as bad as both of them that never resulted in a suspension (or fine, or flag for that matter) I can deal with the new rules, but the inconsistency on the part of the NFL is mindboggling to me
Ok and then the argument could be made the first contact propelled him into Eric Smith.......it wasn't premeditated. Plus friggin its impossible to make a tackle like that without leading. Brackett was a block Smith was going for the ball. The Eagles weren't fined or suspended for the Collie hit cause one action caused him to get helmet to helmet with the other.
He launched himself and used his helmet as a weapon. How do you not see that? Take off the green goggles (or blue and gold if you are wearing the Titans version).
Ok, and what if Boldin cleanly got down and got hit in the mid-section. He was aiming low, watch Austin Collie get knocked out its the same play.
He did not so it is moot. Smith used his helmet as a weapon. He launched himself and led with the helmet. Did you ask him? How do you know he was aiming low? If he was aiming low, he did a terrible job. He hit Boldin in the head- not the waist or legs. It looked to me that Smith was fixin' to land a kill shot.
That Bolden hit was insane. I never noticed before - it almost looks like Rhodes and Smith BOTH led with their heads - one from the back and one from the front.
unless a player purposely tries to injure another player (and i mean purposly not a little late but say the play is way over and he punches a player or picks the Qb up and piledrives him etc) should a player ever be suspended. period. or of course if they hit a ref
It's nice to hear what you think the rules SHOULD say. Doesn't really advance the discussion, though.
It wasn't a blind side hit. He didn't lead with his head. He should not be suspended. If a player kills and tortures dogs he should be suspended.
I know I am coming into this late and you have probably already been answered but I will again anyway. Look at the picture of Brackett with his arms down at his sides, fully intent on using his helmet. Now look at Leon and watch his arms extend to make try and make the hit. Now go read the rule. There lies your difference.
Let him play. Otherwise, all we'll hear about when we win is that they were forced to play shorthanded.
