James Harrison's appeal denied

We tried that with the lockout... WE were the only team that didnt vote to ratify the new cba...
Mostly because WE (the Pittsburgh Steelers Team), didnt think the fining process was fair and arbitrary, and that there was no independent review, or impartial party, to take our grievances to... :o
No hard feelings, huh?

FFFFFFF Goodell!!! :evil:

 

:godell:

 

Did anybody else NOT watch the game Thursday night? I'm done with all the other games. I'll watch my Steelers and that's it. And they won't get anymore money from me, that's for sure.

 

I don't agree with the rules, but James is stupid (and hurting himself + the team) by not playing within the rules.
He can't just act like a little kid and stomp his feet and say "I DON'T WANT" and hope he gets what he wants. If he wants to keep playing football in the NFL, he will have to adapt, otherwise he won't be playing much longer in Pittsburgh (maybe the punks in Oakland will take him)

And yes, i'm losing patience with him. It's true that Goodell and his crusade is stupid but the players have to deal with it, firstly by playing within the rules and if the majority is against those rules, negotiate for rule changes as a group.[/quote:yjfc3ne4]

Well said corey... well said. I have never said anything about agreeing with the rules. My comments have been that Harrison has to follow them if he wants to keep making millions of dollars every year.

 

I don't actually think that's what's going on here; the Tom Brady line was a joke. First of all, I'm on record saying most of his previous infractions are BS, so the entire justification for a suspension is BS. So it's not like he's refused to play by the new rules 5 times, as some would have you believe (I DON'T WANNA!). It's more like this is his first -- yes, first -- real illegal helmet to helmet hit. I've explained away the others already in another thread. He doesn't want to change the way he plays, but that's because there's nothing wrong with the way he's been playing. He's no headhunter. People say he's under a microscope and so he should have been more worried about McCoy's head than playing defense. I think that's stupid. To go after McCoy was the right decision. Everyone misses by two inches once in awhile, especially when the play is as unusual as it was.

If you look at his previous infractions justly, you'll find one play that deserved a penalty flag, and even that did not deserve a fine. Now this, and it's, "When will he ever learn? Why is he being so stubborn?" My God people, one helmet to helmet hit every couple of years HAPPENS. It happens by people every Sunday. Harrison's only problem is that he had 4 strikes against him before he ever got started, and that's not his fault... Unless you want to talk about the magazine article, which is a separate thing entirely. James was firing back at someone who had screwed him over first. Maybe not smart, maybe deserves some kind of punishment. But he didn't get one. But that non-punishment rolls over into another one he doesn't deserve?

 

How come they call what Suh does his intensity?

http://msn.foxsports.com/nfl/story/Suh- ... nce-121611

That's all I have to say about this bs.

GO SILVERBACK!!!

 

The way the game was meant to be played!!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PIrHz_kc ... re=related

 

The general location of where he hit the guy was his helmet and you can't do that to a QB! How can that fact be disputed? The league doesn't care if he hit the bottom 2 inches of his facemask or if he hit him in the crown of the helmet.

 

My point was that James Harrison was tackling a guy, and for the first time his helmet hit the quarterback's. I believe it was a football play. We can't possibly determine if he intended to hit him in the head or not. I believe he didn't, because he has no history of that (yep, that's right). You and the league think that tackle was worse behavior than two punches to the face, and I disagree. A lot.

 

I asked this before and I'll ask it again. How to you measure intent? Do you ask the guy that did the hitting if he meant to do it? Do you ask the guy that got hit if the guy that hit him meant to do it? Do you say "Well, Harrison knew he was on thin ice so he clearly wouldn't intend to hit a QB in the head so this one doesn't count"? It's impossible to measure intent and that is why it isn't even a consideration when it comes to flags and fines.

As far as the NFL goes, it doens't matter if this is the first time Harrison made H2H contact with a QB. It's the pattern of illegal hits on QBs (whether you or any other fans think they were legit calls or not) that Harrison has demonstrated. He could have speared McCoy or hit him late and he still would have been suspended.

 

A majority of these H2H hits are incidental, which is why I do not like the fines/suspensions that come with them. 15-yard flag I can deal with, barely, but the suspensions and fines are total BS.

I just watched Elvis Dumervil totally whack Tom brady on a blindsided sack, and what I clearly noticed (because I pay attention to this kind of stuff now) was that his technique was the same as James' hit on Colt (complete with head-dipping and hitting with the crown of the helmet). The only difference is that Elvis' helmet did not hit Brady's helmet/facemask, possibly because Brady did not see him coming and had not chance to move/react, thus changing positioning possibly inviting a H2H hit.

I mention that because I read a lot of comments on this board, the old board, in the media and in the comment section of articles that essentially call out James for not changing his style to fit within the rules. That's BS. There's nothing about James' play that needs to change because there was nothing wrong with it to begin with. He's being punished for purely incidental events that will never be removed from the game. It's not like he's stomping on dudes faces or arms after the whistle, or punching people in the face after the whistle. He's making hard tackles with incidental H2H contact within the field of play and within the whistles. He doesn't need to change. The NFL discipline system needs to change.

I also witness a gang sack on Tebow, in which all three of the Patriots defenders dipped their heads at the moment of impact, as did Tebow as he saw it all coming. There was no H2H contact, but there very well could've been. If there had been, it would've been purely incidental, like 99% of all H2H hits. I do not understand how someone can be fined and/or suspended for incidental contact that happens as a byproduct of the way the game is played. It's like fining/suspending NASCAR drivers for incidentally rubbing tires or nipping bumpers at 180 mph.

The NFL suspension/fining system is a joke and James is caught right in the middle of it.

 

I don't agree with the rules, but James is stupid (and hurting himself + the team) by not playing within the rules.
He can't just act like a little kid and stomp his feet and say "I DON'T WANT" and hope he gets what he wants. If he wants to keep playing football in the NFL, he will have to adapt, otherwise he won't be playing much longer in Pittsburgh (maybe the punks in Oakland will take him)

And yes, i'm losing patience with him. It's true that Goodell and his crusade is stupid but the players have to deal with it, firstly by playing within the rules and if the majority is against those rules, negotiate for rule changes as a group.[/quote:2hgd4t13]

Good point here. It really doesn't matter who does/doesn't agree with the rules. They are what they are, and even if Harrison is under greater scrutiny because of his "repeat offender" status or whatever reason, he HAS to play accordingly. You are absolutely right that James is being stupid for continuing to go high on a QB given his history. While he may have seen McCoy as a runner on that play, he certainly did not forget that he was a quarterback. Stupid penalties (especially those that lead to suspension) hurt both the player and the TEAM. The Steelers are all about TEAM, so JH needs to buck-up and play accordingly. He claims he "can't". I disagree. He is a tremendous football player and CAN adjust if he chooses to and it will be better for the Steelers when he does.

 

In some cases it's easy to determine intent, which is why it most definitely should play a role in flags and fines, when it can. The classic headhunting play I always go to is Brandon Meriweather vs. Todd Heap a year or two ago. Heap went up for a ball, tipped it one direction. Meriweather was charging him from behind, saw the whole thing unfold, knew the ball was gone, and instead of letting up or hitting him normally, he drastically changed direction and launched his crown into Heap's noggin. He really had to go out of his way to do it. You don't need to see the uniform colors or name on the jersey to know what he was trying to do. There is only one possible explanation. Same thing for the guys who punch and stomp and head slap (speaking of which, how does Terrell Suggs not have a reputation for one of the dirtiest players in the league?). It's very easy to measure intent on certain plays.

Where it gets iffy is when it's a totally normal play and some H2H or other illegal contact occurs. The McCoy hit's a perfect example. I don't know how anyone can say with a straight face that he definitely was going for the helmet. At the same time, I can't prove that he wasn't. We aren't in his head. To me it was a good form tackle on a weird weird play that wound up a couple inches higher than the rules allow. There's no visible malice. McCoy didn't exactly drop his head like some people are saying, but he was pretty hunched all around, unlike Tom Brady yesterday who was standing as tall as possible. So call it a penalty and let's move on. For a hit like the one on Massaquoi, you can prove he had no malicious intent, because the only reason he hit him in the head is that Massaquoi basically ran his head right into Harrison. James couldn't have done that on purpose if he tried. To me that's like a baseball catcher jumping in front of a swinging baseball bat when the ball's coming. And then the batter gets fined for it.

So there are two plays, Meriweather vs. Heap and Harrison vs. Massaquoi, that when watched closely show one person going out of his way to literally try and knock a guy's head off, and one person laying a hit in which a head fell on his shoulder.

[youtube:2bzpi4p6]d2iGzAJIHX8[/youtube:2bzpi4p6]

I couldn't find one of Harrison/Massaquoi that was in slow motion. It all looked like a blur on youtube. But if you see it from the side in slow motion, it's very clear.

I hate to hear, "The NFL had no choice but to suspend him" because you (and the NFL) are using the NFL's own bogus fines as justification for it. The NFL can do what it wants and can choose to exercise judgement. Goodell could fabricate penalties out of thin air and fine a guy for them, and then say, "Oh, I gotta suspend him, look how many fines he has and he's not changing!" That's sort of what's happened here. Harrison's two largest offenses, Massaquoi and FitzPatrick, are both bogus. Without those two, all the NFL has on him is one roughing the passer (that probably wouldn't have received a fine at all if not for the previous fines and snowball effect) plus that weird Vince Young play for which he was only fined $5K.

People listen when the NFL speaks, and it can explain whatever it wants. It can say "After careful review of Mr. Massaquoi's injury last Sunday, we find it is due to very unfortunate circumstances that Mr. Massaquoi was injured. We find that Mr. Harrison broke no rules during the play and so no fine will be issued." People would get that. Some people thought Ryan Clark would be fined for his hit on Wes Welker back in the glory days of 2008, but the NFL came out and said he broke no rules and it was part of the game. Even Welker agreed.

[youtube:2bzpi4p6]N1nN1Gmqm3o[/youtube:2bzpi4p6]

 

So should intent be considered on some hits and not others? Would it be considered for flags, fines, suspensions or a combination of the 3? A lot of people complain about the inconsistency of rule enforcement and you want to add another factor.

I've seen the hit on Welker a billion times and know that there was no flag or fine but that was in '08. IMHO Clark would have been flagged and fined for that hit today. I'm not saying he would deserve to be but he would be.

As far as the NFL not having a choice but to suspend Harrison, I stand by my opinion. He was suspended because the boss said "You aren't allowed to do this" over and over and over and it was clear to him that the fines weren't influencing his behavior as intended so what choice did he have? None. It's like a kid being told "Don't touch the TV". He might get yelled at the first and second time he touches it but eventually he is going to get sent to his room if he keeps doing it because yelling at him isn't getting the job done.

I don't have to justify anything the NFL does, I'm just explaining my point of view. Take it or leave it.

 

Okay, I guess we're done here.

The Clark hit was flagged, but not fined. I think there were like 3 flags thrown. The week after, Mike Pereira said that Clark did not break any rules or deserve a flag, and it was a clean hit, BUT he was still glad the refs threw the flags because it was such a big hit and so violent. I didn't understand that then and I don't now.

 

Just had to use the smiley there. I don't see how hard that is to grasp. The buddy I had the argument over Harrison's hit this week, whop was so vocal about his technique, sat there and ate it as I pointed out every-time a player lowered his head when they went in on a tackle in the 4 games we watched Sunday. I just kept going "look he lowered his head before impact!", "Crown of the helmet!", "Look, Ray Ray's doing it too! H2H, but that's legal right?". He and the rest of them had no answer with the video right in front of them and me calling them on it. They had all previously said he uses bad form.

 

Were Lewis' hits on what the NFL considers defenseless receivers or QBs? Don't forget that Goodell doesn't care about RBs.

 

Didn't matter, we were discussing technique. The NFL and the Media has the whole country thinking Harrison's technique is very poor and that's why injuries are happening. Only when you show that damn near every hit or tackle that is squared up, the players head drops and drives through the player, do you really open peoples eyes and they have to concede. Every one of them had no rebuttal and I received nodding heads. This is from people that we were literally screaming at each other about technique a day before.

 

I'm only asking the question because of the statement I highlighted in red. In that context, it does matter.

 

Ahh, yes in that instance it does matter. That one was not to a QB IIRC, but came up along with a comment about repeat offender with the Hines Ward hit included. I was really surprised that one just got a look of...got me.

 

All this talk of form is amuzing. How in Hades do you tackle with a leading shoulder and NOT actually have your head in the lead.......the head is actually on top of the shoulders/body as I recall. Now no player actually WANTS to initiate contact with their own head intentionally unless they are suicidal.....or have some sick wish to be stuck in a wheel chair for the rest of their life. Does change form mean tackling with your arms and chest only, head up? I don't believe the H2H hits are intentional for any Defender, it's a fast paced game, minute changes of body attitude and direction happen in a split second. If the League is going to protect the players, ALL the players without bias then they need to look at all the hits. Including blindside offensive blocking. Ever see a WR take out a LB with a H2H shot that doesn't get called? Why not if we're just worried about player safety and not increasing box scores and flamboyant plays??

Anyone paying attention to the entire League that says with a straight face that JH isn't being targeted for what happens in every single NFL game is self delusional.

There was an almost exact carbon copy of the Harrison/McCoy hit/penalty in the Eagles/Jets game. Vick rolled out in a clear run scramble but flipped the ball out imediately before contact. It was third and long, 15yd resulted in a first down for "Roughing the passer". Later in the series Vick ran the ball for a score....you have gotta know that penalty had influence on the Jet defense. For me, it is not Roughing the Passer when the QB is scrambing way, way outside the pocket and approaching the line of scrimage in a running back form. Was it still a penalty? unnecessary roughness, illegal hit, maybe. My problem is there is no consistency in these calls. Plenty of H2H every Sunday that does not see anywhere near the same scrutiny.....