UPDATE: Ed Reed's suspension lifted

[Craic]

And I said before that it wasn't even worthy of a fine, much less a suspension. It's exactly the kind of scenario that I have been criticizing from day one. What the hell are defenders supposed to do when the WR also lowers his head? Bang-bang plays like that should be seen for what they are, but to this group of pansy-asses, it's a reason to suspend someone. Fuck that shit. You can go on defending these guys, but at some point, even you are going to start questioning their decisions.

It's actually pretty simple. Don't go in head first. Our DB's have learned how to do it. Other DB's have learned how to do it. So for those few who refuse to learn how, it's their own fault. The rule has been in place long enough that they get no sympathy from me.

Hey, if Clark can learn, anyone can. That's not a rip on Clark's intelligence, but rather, a statement on the way Clark plays the game. He's sheer reaction and instinct, and he learned to change the way he hit - for the better.

[steelerdiva]

Bang-bang unavoidable hits make up 90%+ of the BS fines and suspensions defensive players are getting nailed with nowadays, so I'm not surprised in the least. The powers-that-be in the NFL want 43-37-type games every game.

Bingo!

[X-Terminator]

It's actually pretty simple. Don't go in head first. Our DB's have learned how to do it. Other DB's have learned how to do it. So for those few who refuse to learn how, it's their own fault. The rule has been in place long enough that they get no sympathy from me.

Hey, if Clark can learn, anyone can. That's not a rip on Clark's intelligence, but rather, a statement on the way Clark plays the game. He's sheer reaction and instinct, and he learned to change the way he hit - for the better.

Ah, nevermind. You and I are never going to see eye to eye on this. I don't like pansy ball, and I'm going to keep speaking out against it. I don't understand for the life of me why the league doesn't simply punish the blatant headshots and take into consideration the circumstances of the play. That would be too easy, I guess. But hey, all in the name of "player safety," right? Who cares if the game gets ruined?

[Chidi29]

Ah, nevermind. You and I are never going to see eye to eye on this. I don't like pansy ball, and I'm going to keep speaking out against it. I don't understand for the life of me why the league doesn't simply punish the blatant headshots and take into consideration the circumstances of the play. That would be too easy, I guess. But hey, all in the name of "player safety," right? Who cares if the game gets ruined?

Because then you create a ton of grey area if you start claiming what was avoidable and what wasn't, what was intentional and what wasn't. It's a lot less messy to make the issue black and white.

[bayz101]

"I believe the game is designed to reward the ones who hit the hardest. If you can't take it, you shouldn't play." Jack Lambert.

[silver & black]

Total bullshit. Reed led with his shoulder. This is out of hand. Basically, he gets suspended for playing football.

I understand the safety thing (read that: NFL is afraid of of player lawsuits), but somehow, at some point, the league is going to have to figure out a better system. Intent has to be taken into consideration when levying fines and suspensions. It really isn't that hard.

[steel striker]

Welcome to the new NFL and, I don't agree with it. Fansince76 is right on the league wants shoot out's instead of real football.

[VTsteel]

Getting suspended for that hit is complete Horseshit. Citing an incident dating back to 2010 is ridiculous.

This is just another example of the pussification of the league.

[86WARD]

He's suspended for the whole portfolio...however, that shouldn't have been the hit that put him over the "limit."

Having said that, I wouldn't mind seeing him appeal, play week 12 and be suspended Week 13...

[Craic]

Ah, nevermind. You and I are never going to see eye to eye on this. I don't like pansy ball, and I'm going to keep speaking out against it. I don't understand for the life of me why the league doesn't simply punish the blatant headshots and take into consideration the circumstances of the play. That would be too easy, I guess. But hey, all in the name of "player safety," right? Who cares if the game gets ruined?

We're not, because it seems like you see headshots as necessary in football in order for it to not be Pansy ball. I see headshots as unnecessary and that the league doesn't care how hard you hit, as long as you don't hit someone in the head.

Do you really think that simply telling the players to not hit someone in the head = pansyball? Because that's exactly what this amounts to.

[X-Terminator]

We're not, because it seems like you see headshots as necessary in football in order for it to not be Pansy ball. I see headshots as unnecessary and that the league doesn't care how hard you hit, as long as you don't hit someone in the head.

Do you really think that simply telling the players to not hit someone in the head = pansyball? Because that's exactly what this amounts to.

That's a pretty good leap of faith. Find me one time...just ONE...where I said ANY of that?

Nah, forget it. I'm starting to get pissed off, and I respect you too much to go there. So I'll just end this conversation now.

[Dwinsgames]

why do they use the word Banned from the game anyways ? 1 week is not a ban ...

a Ban to me is permanence , not 1 week ...

the hit in itself was not why he got SUSPENDED ( not banned ) it was for being a multiple offender in this leagues eyes , Just Like Harrison

[Boh]

Meanwhile, #FreeEdReed is trending in the unites states on twitter lol

[86WARD]

why do they use the word Banned from the game anyways ? 1 week is not a ban ...

a Ban to me is permanence , not 1 week ...

the hit in itself was not why he got SUSPENDED ( not banned ) it was for being a multiple offender in this leagues eyes , Just Like Harrison

That hit shouldn't have been the one that suspended him though...

[Chidi29]

Total bullshit. Reed led with his shoulder. This is out of hand. Basically, he gets suspended for playing football.

I understand the safety thing (read that: NFL is afraid of of player lawsuits), but somehow, at some point, the league is going to have to figure out a better system. Intent has to be taken into consideration when levying fines and suspensions. It really isn't that hard.

Leading with any part of the body does not matter.

Intent should not be taken into consideration. Because when the league fines a guy for intent, the player will just say there was no intent and you have a he said/she said scenario.

[Psycho Ward 86]

Suspension lifted. LOL looks like this is about to turn into a 10 page thread

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap100...rturned-by-nfl

[Boh]

awesome!

[fansince'76]

Intent should not be taken into consideration. Because when the league fines a guy for intent, the player will just say there was no intent and you have a he said/she said scenario.

Why not? They don't seem to have any problem with reading a player's mind to discern whether or not they're faking an injury.

[Hindes204]

Suspension lifted. LOL looks like this is about to turn into a 10 page thread

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap100...rturned-by-nfl

[Count Steeler]

Suspension lifted. Now what say you Preacher and Chidi? Is the league wrong in its assessment?

It is one thing to defend the league in principle, but that hit did not deserve a fine nor a suspension.

[X-Terminator]

Suspension lifted. LOL looks like this is about to turn into a 10 page thread

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap100...rturned-by-nfl

The morons shouldn't have suspended him in the first place, because that hit didn't come close to warranting it. Somebody must have turned up the dimmer switch in their empty heads for them to overturn it.

[silver & black]

Leading with any part of the body does not matter.

Intent should not be taken into consideration. Because when the league fines a guy for intent, the player will just say there was no intent and you have a he said/she said scenario.

Not even you believes that...lol.

[Chidi29]

Suspension lifted. Now what say you Preacher and Chidi? Is the league wrong in its assessment?

It is one thing to defend the league in principle, but that hit did not deserve a fine nor a suspension.

Only if you guys admit that Goodell does not have a dicatorship....that there are checks and balances throughout the league.

The hit still got a hefty fine (50K). So you can take that up with Cotrell. And the hit got a suspension not for that one alone but the multiple illegal hits over the season/years.

[fansince'76]

Only if you guys admit that Goodell does not have a dicatorship....that there are checks and balances throughout the league.

Just kidding, Chidi!

[Count Steeler]

Only if you guys admit that Goodell does not have a dicatorship....that there are checks and balances throughout the league.

The hit still got a hefty fine (50K). So you can take that up with Cotrell. And the hit got a suspension not for that one alone but the multiple illegal hits over the season/years.

I think you are more obsessed with this now. Boh was the only one to mention Goodell's name in this thread until you posted his name. This thread was not an explicit attack on Goodell, but where this league stands now. If that hit from Reed deserves a fine and a suspension, this game is further gone than I had hoped.

What continues to be bothersome to me, whether Goodell is responsible or not, is the inconsistency of the fines. I can understand refs missing calls on the field, but how can a panel of reviewers, look at plays on tape and continue to miss obvious fines and hand out frivolous fines? Still haven't seen the replay of the fine on Will Allen in the first quarter of the Giants game.

And how, in this game, do concussions effect some players more than others? A RB that gets slammed in the head is tolerable, but a WR or QB, OMG, they just can't take the hits. I think it is the linemen and the defensive players that are most effected by the long term results of concussions, but nothing is done to protect them.

And don't even discuss the chop block. Until that crap is removed from the game, the NFL is hypocrisy to the extreme. Player safety? Yeah right!

[Chidi29]

Not even you believes that...lol.

I fully believe it. I wouldn't say it if it wasn't true.

[Count Steeler]

Leading with any part of the body does not matter.

Intent should not be taken into consideration. Because when the league fines a guy for intent, the player will just say there was no intent and you have a he said/she said scenario.

Sanders said he was hurt. The League said he wasn't. Sanders is fined with the Steelers. I just want to know how the Steelers got the message to Sanders to fake the injury. Or is this an understanding that the coaches teach to the players?

[Chidi29]

I think you are more obsessed with this now. Boh was the only one to mention Goodell's name in this thread until you posted his name. This thread was not an explicit attack on Goodell, but where this league stands now. If that hit from Reed deserves a fine and a suspension, this game is further gone than I had hoped.

What continues to be bothersome to me, whether Goodell is responsible or not, is the inconsistency of the fines. I can understand refs missing calls on the field, but how can a panel of reviewers, look at plays on tape and continue to miss obvious fines and hand out frivolous fines? Still haven't seen the replay of the fine on Will Allen in the first quarter of the Giants game.

And how, in this game, do concussions effect some players more than others? A RB that gets slammed in the head is tolerable, but a WR or QB, OMG, they just can't take the hits. I think it is the linemen and the defensive players that are most effected by the long term results of concussions, but nothing is done to protect them.

And don't even discuss the chop block. Until that crap is removed from the game, the NFL is hypocrisy to the extreme. Player safety? Yeah right!

Let's face it, when you say "the league" the first think that pops into everyone head is Goodell. He is the face of the league so I use those words pretty interchangeably.

The difference is that those players are able to protect themselves. That are deemed not to be "defenseless" players. That's why those hits are legal. The league has made that point clear.

And yes, I don't agree with the ticky-tack chop block rule of it being legal one lineman over. But remember that rule change would have to be approved by the owners, who probably don't care about player safety nearly as much as the commissioner does.

- - - Updated - - -

Sanders said he was hurt. The League said he wasn't. Sanders is fined with the Steelers. I just want to know how the Steelers got the message to Sanders to fake the injury. Or is this an understanding that the coaches teach to the players?

I do not agree with the league's decision of fining Sanders. I don't say I agree with every decision they make because I certainly do not.

I will say that at least in that case, no one else was potentially suffering a serious injury. That's still the case in a body to helmet hit, regardless of intent. So there is a slight difference there.

[Count Steeler]

So "defenseless" is the issue, or is helmet to helmet? Sorry, if player safety is the mantra, what is the difference?

So the owners only care about the WR and QB, not about player safety. If they are just honest about it, it would certainly help their stance.

[Chidi29]

So "defenseless" is the issue, or is helmet to helmet? Sorry, if player safety is the mantra, what is the difference?

So the owners only care about the WR and QB, not about player safety. If they are just honest about it, it would certainly help their stance.

Yes, defenseless is the issue. Remember, it's not just helmet to helmet that is illegal. It's striking the helmet of a defenseless player with any part of your body (shoulder, forearm, etc).

From what I can gather, the league reasons that RBs and non-defenseless players have the ability to protect themselves from bone-jarring hits while defenseless players have no ability to do do so.

Yes, I highly doubt Dan Snyder cares about player safety. Would it be nice for them to be honest about it? Sure. Will they ever? Not a chance.