Agreed. I wonder if anyone actually got that one. And that's exactly the point. You can't argue intent. All you can discuss is the result. The hit was nasty. Not "dirty", but nasty, and that's what I think is the difference. Smith clearly wasn't looking to hurt Boldin, but he was looking to hit him hard. The end result was a player lying on the ground with two teams and tens of thousands of fans sitting silently and sharing prayers. Goodell did the right thing here. The fine should have been lower, but the suspension is fair. He already made this clear coming into the year that safety would take a higher position this year. Look at the facemask ruling. It's always 15 yards now, as it should be. All players know the risks, but there's no reason that a little intelligence and legislation can't make the game safer while still being entertaining.
That is what I want our safeties playing like. I want to see WRs get jacked up against us. our secondary needs to step it up more and this was just an accident. lets be serious. It was a good hit and a bad call by goodell
Okay, I won't argue "intent," but I will argue "cheap shot," although, in my mind, it's always been hard to separate cheap shot and intent. Again, if you're taking a "cheap shot," it almost always involves intention. The two are inseparable. Now, if the act of helmet-to-helmet is the bottom line (and for whatever reason, intent or not), then why not fine Boldin also? Bottom line is, Boldin's guilty of helmet-to-helmet too, right? He just shouldn't have done it, no matter what was transpiring! Ridiculous? Sure it is. But my point is, the play just happened that way, period, and I don't think Smith should be labeled as having taken a "cheap shot." I just don't see it. He had absolutely no way of knowing or seeing that Boldin was going to get creamed from behind by Rhodes and that Boldin's head would be propelled forward and down at the last split second, putting it in position to be a helmet-to-helmet. But you're right in that the NFL has no choice but to react the way they are. They have to, otherwise it's perceived as condoning (especially after it is replayed dozens of times in peoples' family rooms), and this opens the door for more helmet-to-helmet, possibly intentional behavior. But no, the only reason I mentioned intent is because I read the "cheap shot" part, and, at least in my mind, a clear "cheap shot" is almost always intentional. I don't see Smith taking a cheap shot, no way.
Also remember, if they're going to start suspending players for taking "cheap shots" then it's good bet Rodney Harrison will be missing every other game
I think he's lucky he didn't break somebody's neck, including his own. Imagine if he took out Revis with that hit.
The hit while "incidental" is still illegal. He should be fined, but a suspension?This is the NFL in typical knee-jerk overkill. A 10K fine and stiff warning should have been sufficent in this case.
I agree with you here. I don't think it was at all a cheap shot. However, the new stance per Goodell coming into the year stated that all helmet-to-helmet plays will be reviewed and subject to punishment. (I can't remember the exact wording, so don't quote me on that.) This play had to be reviewed and punished for exactly the reasons you stated. It was a helmet-to-helmet that every guy with access to ESPN has seen at least once. It was an unfortunate accident that thankfully turned out okay. It justified a game off to show the NFLPA that even accidents won't be tolerated so be careful. Again, I just think the fine is excessive. Won't he also be losing money for missing the game as well?
Next Game , Bengals up by 21 in the 4th qtr with 1:12 left, Palmer Hits Ocho cinco for a 30 yard gain in the endzone, DBs ____________ and ___________ are seen to 'woman out' of making the hit need to seperate the WR from the ball...... Game ends , Bengals 28 -0. I want Smith laying and every other D player playing hard, every down, regardless of the scoreline.
Funny, but we were talking about "intent" before. Mangini issued a statement late yesterday that was in the Star-Ledger today, basically saying (I'm paraphrasing) that he was certain Smith didn't "intend" to hit Boland that way. NFL fines and suspensions aside, it's important to make that distinction from a player's and coach's point of view. Having said that, the hit was the hit, and based on the amount of publicity it attracted just because it was so spectacular, it was bound to cause Goodall to use it as an example.
Man, Smith is fighting beat writers now? Damn, maybe he does deserve the fine and suspension then...:smile:
Imagine Can'O'Lardo trying to do an ESPN interview with Eric Smith dangling from between his 6th and 7th chin?
I thought it was a cheap shot based on the score of the game. Its not necessary in garbage time to try and show how tough you are. The fact that I think it was cheap isn't relevant to whether I as commissioner would act. Head to Head contact gets fined and suspension doesn't matter if I think its a cheap shot or not. The action is what should be fined not the intent. Intent just puts another judgement call in the hands of the official.
I just got a mental image of Bizzaro's head mounted on Jabba the Hutt's body, swallowing poor Eric Smith whole after picking him out from his turkey neck.
The shot wouldn't have been cheap if they were behind by only 6 points at the time of the catch? I don't understand. I never questioned the fact that if, hypothetically, you were commissioner, you'd have to act. What we disagree on is that it was a "cheap shot." My opinion is that it wasn't (and Mangini apparently agrees, as he stated yesterday). Your opinion is that is was. We'll just have to leave it at that and agree to disagree.
Boldon has a broken sinus. I think where Smith may have erred is he lauched himself to hi so he hit the helmet instead of say the mid section
It's unfortunate that Boldin is injured and I'm sure Smith feels very badly about it. In fact, I think Smith said the other day that he was going to reach out to Boldin and see how he is doing. Football is a rough contact sport. It often amazes me that there aren't a hell of a lot more injuries.
Yes so am I but I guess the ROI is worth it on the players end. Maybe it is its roughness that makes it so popular?
