Oh. So NOW it's a problem...

Agree with your sentiment 100%, but Brady makes the NFL lot's of dough and that's all they care about. Ben doesn't have that appeal. That aside, that Yahoo writer is a no one, if only a blogger, so not sure how much merrit there is to his claim.

 

Fixed it for ya Ray!

 

My god, more crying about the Patriots. Ridiculous the whining that goes on here.

There's been outrage all year long about the horrible officiating, you're just choosing to pay attention to it now. The guys on SiriusXM have been blasting the refs on an almost daily basis. Every week on twitter there's tons of people calling for change. This is nothing new.

 

Not sure he's got much of an argument.... looked to me like a launch into a defenseless player.... it's probably close, but sure looked like both feet were off the ground at the time of the hit, maybe shortly after. But it would seem to meet the spirit of the rules by not allowing those hits on defenseless players. Add the fact that he actually suffered a concussion as a result..... and I doubt they make any rule changes to make that a legal hit.

The rule actually reads "any part of the helmet", it doesn't have to be the crown of the helmet. I think the right call was made.

 

What's even more ridiculous is "Steeler fans" who hate Ben and yet still have a chubby for Brady.

 

You couldn't be further off base with the claim about the writer being a nobody.

 

looked like a penalty to me
left his feet and make contact to the head before he completed the catch
should have been announced as defenseless receiver rather than helmet to helmet maybe

 

Have a chubby for Brady? As in acknowledging that he's one of the greatest players ever? Fine, guilty as charged. Chubby for Brady as in I want him to win? You have no idea what you're talking about and couldn't be more wrong.

I hate Ben because to me he is a guy that abused and degraded women. He let fame and success go to his head. I hate those kind of people. That doesn't mean I don't cheer for him. I want him to throw for 500 yards every game he plays. I want him to win every game he plays.

As for this incident blowing up, it has nothing to do with the Patriots. It was a nationally televised game, which of course automatically brings more attention to it. It was a game in which the Patriots were down by 1 and the hit led to a TD which would have given them the lead in the 4th quarter. That too brings more attention to it.

There's always one incident that brings attention to situations. The Michael Brown shooting for example has brought attention to problems in policing that have existed since the beginning of time. Don't tell me that Michael Brown is some societies darling, because he was nothing but a thug, yet he is the reason for all the attention that has been brought to policing.

If this game hadn't been on national TV and hadn't resulted in the reversal of a come from behind TD in the 4th quarter, there wouldn't be as much attention to it as there is. There still would be attention though, just like there has been outrage among many when these types of hits have occurred in the past. I hear it every single week on the radio shows I listen to. This is nothing new.

 

There was no head to head whatsoever, nor did he leave his feet or launch in any way. Anyone that says this was an illegal hit doesn't know the rules of the game.

 

It's bad enough that we have to hear how great Brady is every minute of every day from every sports media in existence now we have to hear it on a Steelers message board also? Give it a rest please. You also got uptight because someone called out the Pats as being the darlings of the NFL? This is a Steelers discussion forum and you have to expect things like that because it is true the Pats do get favored by the NFL....do you remember the tuck rule? Do you remember Goodell burning the evidence of cheating? Didn't the NFL make a rule change after Brady had his knee blown out? Did they do that for Carson Palmer or Drew Brees after they had their knees destroyed?

As far as Ben goes did he ever get convicted or found guilty in a court of law? You don't know what really happened but you found him guilty anyway. Did you find Brady guilty of cheating without the tapes?

I have a lot to say about the Michael Brown thing but that topic doesn't belong here so I will leave it alone.

 

I didn't bring up Brady, you did. I almost never talk about Brady, at least no more than most other QB's around the league. But hey, if you don't like what I write, there's an ignore feature, you can use it.

 

I get where the OP is coming from. Indeed, it seems if it "happens to the Patriots" then it must be dealt with. I completely agree. The Pats have become the most coddled (and protected) franchise in the NFL.

 

Other teams fans say the same thing about us.

“All things are subject to interpretation. Whichever interpretation prevails at a given time is a function of power and not truth.”

 

Then show them this, which wasn't even called. Even Cris Collinsworth was having a cow over it. (You know damn well, if that were Gronk or any Patriot, for that matter, it'd be 15.)

[video=youtube;ohmwkWGw-UM]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ohmwkWGw-UM[/video]

 

I think the main thrust of Ray D's post here Shaner is not that NE fans, talking heads, athletes or what have you are complaining about the hit. I believe the thrust is that the league seems less inclined to look at things when certain teams like the Steelers send them film than when the Pats come a knocking. So it is shocking that hte league or people associated with the league are saying "yeah we really should take a look at that rule and tweak it." I remember reading during the preseason that the Pats had recommended something like 10-15 rule changes to the competition committee and like 9 of them were good ideas that went to the next level to be discussed and talked about with the PA and owners. Not sure about the numbers but the sheer fact that Kraft and his organization have that much pull with the league is enough to make me call foul.

 

Facts without context are meaningless. So 9 of their proposed rule changes went to the next level. How do you know that they weren't good ideas deserving of consideration regardless of who proposed them? How many of them were actually put into effect? Also, is anyone from the NFL talking about reviewing flags due to the hit last night? All I'm seeing is talk from the media, and this is far from the first time I've seen this stuff from the media.

The reality is that if the Pats sucked every year instead of basically being the top seed in the AFC, they wouldn't ever get brought up on here. It just seems like jealousy or insecurity to me. I simply don't buy the favouritism argument and never will, and I'll call it out when I see it, even if it does make people hate me.

 

It would concern me if were the Browns, Raiders, Cowboys and yes the Pats just due in large part to one man having to much control in the league and having close relationships with owners that could be construed as showing favoritism. When the Rooney's and the Mara's get together and think something is wrong with Goodell having too much control I defer to their opinion. I would like to see more transparency in discipline, calls, fines, and infractions. The NHL makes videos readily available to the fans showing why they did what they did and the reasons behind suspensions and fines. I have liked the head of officiating taking time to show why certain calls were correct on NFL network but have trouble taking him seriously when he is holding and xbox controller (LOL)

edit: sorry shaner my Pats bias was showing it was only four rule changes recommend by the pats

 

Brady is protected and coddled no doubt. But they did change the rules back in 2004 to favor Manning and the Colts after the Patriots were mugging their WRs and throwing his timing off.

As far as Spygate, I think that was bigger than the Patriots. That cover up was to protect the integrity of the league, IMO. You had a current modern day dynasty that just won 3 of 4 SBs by cheating, and if all the facts would have been known the legitimacy of those wins would have without a doubt been in question. Roger had to sweep that under the rug and destroy the evidence to 'protect the shield.'

 

It was a penalty. His shoulder made contact with the "head or neck area" of the receiver. Sure he didn't target it, but the league has made it clear that it's on the defender to avoid the contact. he should have aimed lower.

 

They don't want to review that because they don't want guys hitting the head/neck area ... or even trying to cut it close. The bad penalties will eventually encourage DBs to lower their target area further ... which is the effect the NFL wants. Aim for the rib cage.