PDA

View Full Version : James Harrison is a Coward



vandammage13
01-10-2012, 11:17 AM
I meant to make this thread after the game, but it slipped my mind.

Harrison is a guy that has made a living off of taking cheap shots at defensless, smallish QB's and WR's.

Now when he gets the chance to be matched up against the 6'3", 240 lb beast that is Tim Tebow, this guy was nowhere to be seen.

Tebow made this guy look like a deer in the headlights running the read option and Harrison wanted no part of it.

Matched up against a QB that is Harrision's equal in size and strength, he cowers away.

Great job laying out a defenseless, 185 lb Colt McCoy...Where were you when Tebow was coming at you?

What a coward...:tsk:

BORDERLINE
01-10-2012, 11:20 AM
Harrison is an aggressive player.

No discipline what so ever and that is the perfect defensive player you want to be playing against if you run any kind of option. He will self-destruct like he did on sunday.

tomjonesrocks
01-10-2012, 11:23 AM
Hate him, but Von Miller said he didn't think the Decker play was dirty.

Thnikkaman
01-10-2012, 11:24 AM
It was a clean hit. I can't fault Harrison for that play. He was doing what the NFL wants him to do, go low instead of high.

Ravage!!!
01-10-2012, 11:26 AM
Harrison is a big guy that gets paid to tackle people that are smaller than he is. What do you want him to do... "Go pick on someone his own size" as a LB? The hit was clean on Decker, and to suggest that Harrison was scared to hit Tebow, is pretty absurd.

vandammage13
01-10-2012, 11:37 AM
Harrison is a big guy that gets paid to tackle people that are smaller than he is. What do you want him to do... "Go pick on someone his own size" as a LB? The hit was clean on Decker, and to suggest that Harrison was scared to hit Tebow, is pretty absurd.

I'm not necessarily pointing to the Decker hit, but just his justified reputation over the course of his career.

The guy had a chance to end Tebowmania and all he gets is one late hit.

On those read option plays, matched one on one with Tebow, he constantly chose to commit to the RB when clearly containing Tebow was his responsibility in those situations.

He committed to the RB because he was scared. Watch the game again (as I have twice), and it is easy to see he wanted no part of Tebow.

Traveler
01-10-2012, 11:51 AM
Harrison was consistently getting sucked inside on the read option plays and losing contain on the end.

Secondly, he was a non factor because he didn't get many chances to pass rush. We were also in several jumbo packages which didn't allow him much of a chance to do his thing.

Lastly, Clady played one of his best games this season and stoned him for much of the game.

Harrison's shot on Decker wasn't a cheap shot. Dude was just manhandled by our offensive line and the scheme nullified what he does best.

Ravage!!!
01-10-2012, 11:57 AM
He committed to the RB because he was scared. Watch the game again (as I have twice), and it is easy to see he wanted no part of Tebow.

Yeah... the sad/funny part of this sentence, is that I actually know you BELIEVE this crap.

Come on.. scared? really? That has got to be one of the biggest OVERBLOWN statements about Tebow we've seen on the board.

I know you are better than this.

vandammage13
01-10-2012, 12:05 PM
Yeah... the sad/funny part of this sentence, is that I actually know you BELIEVE this crap.

Come on.. scared? really? That has got to be one of the biggest OVERBLOWN statements about Tebow we've seen on the board.

I know you are better than this.

I'll admit, "scared" might be the wrong word, but watch the game again and watch Harrison on those read option plays. TT had this guy thinking twice, and I think his physical nature had a lot to do with it.

Personally, I just feel that Harrison was much less violent/aggressive towards Tebow as opposed to other QB's and was tentative due to Tebow's size.

Just watch the game...Harrison had his chances to hit TT, but was never his same aggresive self.

BigDaddyBronco
01-10-2012, 12:11 PM
I question Harrison's hit on Decker due to his past dirty hits. It was like "well if I can hit 'em high, I'll take them out at the knees". DJ had a big hit on the Steelers TE that was a shoulder right in the chest, Harrison could have done the same to Decker but chose to take him out at the knees. Why do you have to obliterate his legs when you outweigh him by 40 lbs?

Now I don't think Harrison is Suh type dirty where his emotions get he better part of him and he does stupid stuff, he just always goes for the kill shot and puts other players health at risk.

So yea, if it was anyone else I would have said it was a clean hit and no bad intentions, but with Harrison I just don't know.

camdisco24
01-10-2012, 12:38 PM
I don't really question his aggression toward Tebow, but I do question the hit on Decker. Technically you can claim it was a clean hit. However, my issues come in when you watch the replay and you can she him slightly lift his head to hit Decker square in the knee. Coincidence? Maybe... but based on his past, I really question what his intentions were.

Yes, he is a tough football player, and I do like that. But I have no respect for a guy who has a history of making dirty plays. Dirty and tough are too totally different things.

NightTerror218
01-10-2012, 01:25 PM
Harrison showed his lack of brains and getting fool by Tebow and the option everytime

TXBRONC
01-10-2012, 01:38 PM
It looked to me like Harrison could have went a little with his hit. Having said that, it was still a legal hit.

Ravage!!!
01-10-2012, 01:39 PM
I'll admit, "scared" might be the wrong word, but watch the game again and watch Harrison on those read option plays. TT had this guy thinking twice, and I think his physical nature had a lot to do with it.

Personally, I just feel that Harrison was much less violent/aggressive towards Tebow as opposed to other QB's and was tentative due to Tebow's size.

Just watch the game...Harrison had his chances to hit TT, but was never his same aggresive self.

So you are saying he was physically troubled to try and hit Tebow? Really? I guess he feels the same way when tackling TEs or FBs too....or is it just Tebow?

Come on. Did you ever think that he's been warned over and over by the NFL, and CERTAINLY preached to by his coaches and teammates, about hitting QBs and getting 15 yrd penalties (and possibly getting a game suspension) would be the worst thing he could do for his team at this time in the playoffs?

Do you know his read assignments? Do you know what they practiced during the week with tendencies? Was he just fooled, or was he betting on the fact taht the inside guy got the ball more often? I know this, I know the DCs and Steeler coaches flubbed up big time by having the safeties so close to the LoS and not play their roles, why is it hard to believe that the LBs got the same bad practices bfore game?

I just think its silly to suggest that ANY LB in the NFL, especially Harrison, is "scared" to hit Tim Tebow. Smaller RBs that are running much faster than Tim, hit harder than a QB on the option. I promise you.

Ravage!!!
01-10-2012, 01:40 PM
I don't really question his aggression toward Tebow, but I do question the hit on Decker. Technically you can claim it was a clean hit. However, my issues come in when you watch the replay and you can she him slightly lift his head to hit Decker square in the knee. Coincidence? Maybe... but based on his past, I really question what his intentions were.

Yes, he is a tough football player, and I do like that. But I have no respect for a guy who has a history of making dirty plays. Dirty and tough are too totally different things.

you can say that about every play in the NFL when you slow it down in slow mo.

camdisco24
01-10-2012, 02:31 PM
you can say that about every play in the NFL when you slow it down in slow mo.

Say what? That every player lifts to go for the knees or other injury prone areas? I dont think so...

Flex040679
01-10-2012, 11:53 PM
Harrison... Lewis...Suggs... Briggs...farrior

All *********

smith49
01-11-2012, 02:26 AM
Well, I hate that POS as much as anyone on here. Unfortunetly I dont think he meant to destroy Decker's knee. In fact, I think he looked pretty awkward when he was going in for the hit. As if he did not know how to go low. Like I said, I do agree that he is a POS, but I just dont see any justification in saying that it was a dirty play. As for him being scared of TT, not likely. I just saw him getting manhandled by our O line and then making too agressive of reads when TT was deciding wether to keep the ball or give it to Willis.....just my thoughts on it.

sneakers
01-11-2012, 02:49 AM
LOL remember he was the guy who didn't want to go to the White House after the Steelers won the Super Bowl.

sneakers
01-11-2012, 02:50 AM
LOL remember he was the guy who didn't want to go to the White House after the Steelers won the Super Bowl.

bcbronc
01-11-2012, 03:06 AM
I didn't like the tackle on Decker, but not sure what else he's supposed to do. It seems any WR running a crossing route, if a defender is in front of him and hits him, it's deemed a personal foul. It seems pretty arbitrary what they'll call and what they don't these days. That doesn't really leave Harrison much choice.

Fells got tackled nearly the same way on a catch he made off a play action bootleg pass. Wasn't by Harrison, and it was from behind, but same thing with the defender going low. I was worried about Fells at the time. It's something the league and players are going to have to figure out, if the concussions turn into ACL tears, it's not any better off as far as safety goes.

That's the other thing with Harrison, a lot of his dirty hits would have been perfectly clean not too long ago. The hit on McCoy is a perfect example, if that hit happened in 1998 it's a highlight real hit not a penalty. He's a physical player that needs to push right to the edge to be effective, sometimes he goes over.

Joel
01-11-2012, 04:18 AM
I question Harrison's hit on Decker due to his past dirty hits. It was like "well if I can hit 'em high, I'll take them out at the knees". DJ had a big hit on the Steelers TE that was a shoulder right in the chest, Harrison could have done the same to Decker but chose to take him out at the knees. Why do you have to obliterate his legs when you outweigh him by 40 lbs?

Now I don't think Harrison is Suh type dirty where his emotions get he better part of him and he does stupid stuff, he just always goes for the kill shot and puts other players health at risk.

So yea, if it was anyone else I would have said it was a clean hit and no bad intentions, but with Harrison I just don't know.
Yeah, the history is a lot of it. I'm sympathetic to the whole "gotta go low 'cos I can't go high" thing, as it sounds like most players are. I don't like "the James Harrison rule" against hitting defenseless receivers, have frequently and vocally criticized it. I've seen NFL DBs say they feel like they're playing flag football, and there's a lot of truth to that; more to the point, we've heard a lot of talk about how unfair it is that running QBs don't get the protection pocket passers do, but when's the last time anyone was flagged for hitting a "defenseless running back"? Even though it's an axiom that running backs have shorter careers because they get hit so much.

The thing is, Harrison isn't just trying to make a big play, a big hit or even inflict pain so receivers think twice about going over the middle: He is deliberately trying to injure. That's why the James Harrison rule was created; DBs had been timing their hits to coincide with the balls arrival for decades and no one said anything. It's just like the Roy Williams rule: Defenders used to grab shoulder pads to tackle guys from behind all the time, because that's often the only thing they can reach. Then some :censored: comes along and decides it's not enough to just make the tackle, he must SLING people down by their pads and try to give them whiplash or break some bones. So now you can't do it at all; funny how once he couldn't do that anymore Roy Williams dropped off the face of the Earth. Good riddance, even if he did play for one of my favorite teams.

The League is not only overcomplicating this a lot, but screwing up the way the game is played in the process. We have penalties for unnecessary roughness and unsportsmanlike conduct: When you see a guy deliberately trying to inflict INJURY, particularly serious injuries, that should be enough. It shouldn't be a question of "well, OK, he was trying to paralyze that dude for life, but did the specific MANNER violate any existing rules about where you can hit whom with what?" If the answer is "no" but the other player is in a wheelchair for the next 50 years, is that OK? And just brushing his helmet with your hand or shoulder pad, well, that's a 15 yard penalty, $20,000 fine and, if it's happened before, a suspension, even if there was no intent to injure and the guy didn't even know he was "hit" until he reads about your fine in tomorrows paper? Talk about totally missing the point.

Same deal on "leading with the helmet." Spearing has been illegal at every level of football for decades; if we enforce that rule we don't need another one, and if we DON'T enforce the rules, creating more unenforced rules does nothing but complicate the game without otherwise affecting it.

So, yeah, suspend guys when they clearly seek out vulnerable parts of opponents bodies at vulnerable moments with the undeniable intent to injure them. Slapping a $20,000 fine on a multimillionare is like a speeding ticket for you or me, but when Suh missed a month of games during the Lions playoff run, I guarantee he felt that, and he'll feel it when he goes to negotiate his next contract with a team wondering how many games he'll play even when healthy. Were it up to me, Harrison would start 2012 on suspension for the hit on Decker, even though it was technically legal, because he has a history of hitting people with intent to injure. I don't really care if he's found an alternate way to do it that doesn't violate the rule against his previous method. Again, the point is not "you can't deliberately injure people by hitting them in the head, but trying to snap their knees is OK." The point is you shouldn't be intentionally attempting to injure people at all, whether or not you can do it within the letter of the law, and the letter of the law should reflect THAT rather than hamstringing the vast majority of clean players until they can no longer do their jobs.

One final note: Deckers reception was ruled incomplete, which is probably a good thing for Denver since Harrison trying to take his leg off "broke his concentration" enough that the ball started coming out before he hit the ground. Yet, he got both feet on the ground after he had possession of the ball; that was kinda the problem: His left foot was planted when Harrison hit his knee, so his entire body above that point went to the right while his lower leg stayed put, and his whole leg bent sideways at about a 20° angle. In other words, he had possession and two feet on the ground, so it should be a catch unless he hadn't yet "made a football move," and that's the ONLY way the pass could be incomplete.

Guess what: Hitting a receiver as he makes a catch but BEFORE "a football move" is pretty much the definition of the James Harrison defenseless receiver rule.

So fine his butt for the, what, fourth time? And suspend him for at least the first month of 2012. Frankly, if it keeps up I think a season suspension is reasonable, and a life time ban after that. It's the NFL, not UFC.

Joel
01-11-2012, 04:22 AM
Yes, he is a tough football player, and I do like that. But I have no respect for a guy who has a history of making dirty plays. Dirty and tough are too totally different things.
I'd have a lot more respect for the League if it did a better job of making that clear to players and fans alike. It is an intensely physical GAME, not a blood sport. Maybe if we made that more clear to guys coming up we wouldn't have to explain to Michael Vick why blood sports are wrong.

I didn't like the tackle on Decker, but not sure what else he's supposed to do. It seems any WR running a crossing route, if a defender is in front of him and hits him, it's deemed a personal foul. It seems pretty arbitrary what they'll call and what they don't these days. That doesn't really leave Harrison much choice.

Fells got tackled nearly the same way on a catch he made off a play action bootleg pass. Wasn't by Harrison, and it was from behind, but same thing with the defender going low. I was worried about Fells at the time. It's something the league and players are going to have to figure out, if the concussions turn into ACL tears, it's not any better off as far as safety goes.

That's the other thing with Harrison, a lot of his dirty hits would have been perfectly clean not too long ago. The hit on McCoy is a perfect example, if that hit happened in 1998 it's a highlight real hit not a penalty. He's a physical player that needs to push right to the edge to be effective, sometimes he goes over.
The contact was similar, but that was a guy diving to make a play he wouldn't have made without diving; when you dive at a guy running away from you you'll usually hit him low. Harrison had a little more latitude with his hit on Decker: He CHOSE to go for his knee. And the rules about hitting him in the head were probably part of that, but specifically putting his pads specifically into his knee was a choice independent of that (I believe in the tackle on Fells the defender hits his knee with the side, rather than top, of his shoulder, and I don't think he was AIMING for anything except whatever he could hit to save a TD.)

We eliminate the whole issue by penalties/fines/suspensions for intentional hits likely to cause injury, which is the thing we actually want to prevent, rather than treating football like some kind of blunt force fencing where it's OK to pulverize some vital body parts but not others. "Did you see that great hit coach?! I KNEW I could collapse his lung if I tried, and since I used my pads instead of my helmet it was TOTALLY LEGAL! :)" *vomits* Get rid of THAT and DBs can go back to timing their hits to coincide with the ball and generally playing pass coverage, as long as they aren't LITERALLY head hunting.

HORSEPOWER 56
01-11-2012, 07:07 AM
I don't have a problem with the Harrison hit. There was nothing illegal or cheap about it, IMO. Like him or not, he did exactly what a lot of players do (including most of our DBs) when confronted with a runner in the secondary, go low and take his legs out from under him. Because of his positioning, he almost had to dive to try to make the tackle.

The guy has made a lot of illegal hits and been fined and suspended for them. Because of this the refs watch him like a hawk. He got that BS roughing the passer call vs Tebow later in the game. That wasn't roughing the passer... it was one step and a push in the back. It looked worse because Tebow went down and fell face first into the back of his O-lineman.

This is much ado about nothing. Guys get hurt, it happens, even on clean/legal plays. Harrison is another one of those guys that everyone who isn't a Steelers fan just loves to hate. He's their Romanowski. Talks trash, plays dirty on the filed sometimes, but always plays hard. You hate him when you have to play him but love him when he's on your team.

Slick
01-11-2012, 08:27 AM
I still think Decker caught that ball and was down by contact. Lots of questionable calls in that game.

Mobile Post via http://Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

CoachChaz
01-11-2012, 08:37 AM
So I'm lead to believe that Harrison hit a WR moving full speed and jumping for a ball at the EXACT spot that would cause the most damage? Get real.

Accept the win and the injuries that come with it and get ready for next week. This is petty

Tebowtime2011
01-11-2012, 09:15 AM
I meant to make this thread after the game, but it slipped my mind.

Harrison is a guy that has made a living off of taking cheap shots at defensless, smallish QB's and WR's.

Now when he gets the chance to be matched up against the 6'3", 240 lb beast that is Tim Tebow, this guy was nowhere to be seen.

Tebow made this guy look like a deer in the headlights running the read option and Harrison wanted no part of it.

Matched up against a QB that is Harrision's equal in size and strength, he cowers away.

Great job laying out a defenseless, 185 lb Colt McCoy...Where were you when Tebow was coming at you?

What a coward...:tsk: I'm sorry but he was scared because he just bern fined and suspended he wouldn't have hit any qb after being fined and suspended it changes your aggressiveness

Joel
01-11-2012, 04:54 PM
Harrison is another one of those guys that everyone who isn't a Steelers fan just loves to hate. He's their Romanowski.
I agree with that, but not in the positive way you seem to mean; Harrison is VERY similar to the guy who:

1) Admits that when he couldn't get the ball loose from Dave Meggett at the bottom of a pile he consciously chose to break his finger "like a chicken bone,"

2) Intentionally dislocated former teammate Shannon Sharpes elbow as a Raider,

3) Kicked an opponent in the head during a game,

4) Threw a ball into an opponents crotch during a game and

5) Threw a punch at a teammate so hard IN PRACTICE that he shattered the guys eye socket and ended his career.

Romo at least had the cause, if not the excuse, of being pumped full of steroids the whole time; Harrison just LIKES it, and evidently doesn't think he can defeat an able bodied opponent.

Don't be surprised if some guard decides ending his season with a chop block is worth being suspended a few games. Ain't right, but that's how these things go, and what happens when football turns into Ultimate Fighting. The solution is suspensions and fines for that kind of deliberate behavior whether done in a technically legal way or not, rather than banning all physical contact that MIGHT cause injury and turning the NFL into flag football.

karnage
01-11-2012, 07:27 PM
Harrison wasn't scared.....he's just stupid....he didn't understand how a black man kept spawning off of Tebow's hip....and he was just chasing McGahee to ask him about it...

weazel
01-11-2012, 07:47 PM
lets all just agree that the guy is a scumbag

wayninja
01-11-2012, 08:23 PM
Yeah, the history is a lot of it. I'm sympathetic to the whole "gotta go low 'cos I can't go high" thing, as it sounds like most players are. I don't like "the James Harrison rule" against hitting defenseless receivers, have frequently and vocally criticized it. I've seen NFL DBs say they feel like they're playing flag football, and there's a lot of truth to that; more to the point, we've heard a lot of talk about how unfair it is that running QBs don't get the protection pocket passers do, but when's the last time anyone was flagged for hitting a "defenseless running back"? Even though it's an axiom that running backs have shorter careers because they get hit so much.

The thing is, Harrison isn't just trying to make a big play, a big hit or even inflict pain so receivers think twice about going over the middle: He is deliberately trying to injure. That's why the James Harrison rule was created; DBs had been timing their hits to coincide with the balls arrival for decades and no one said anything. It's just like the Roy Williams rule: Defenders used to grab shoulder pads to tackle guys from behind all the time, because that's often the only thing they can reach. Then some :censored: comes along and decides it's not enough to just make the tackle, he must SLING people down by their pads and try to give them whiplash or break some bones. So now you can't do it at all; funny how once he couldn't do that anymore Roy Williams dropped off the face of the Earth. Good riddance, even if he did play for one of my favorite teams.

The League is not only overcomplicating this a lot, but screwing up the way the game is played in the process. We have penalties for unnecessary roughness and unsportsmanlike conduct: When you see a guy deliberately trying to inflict INJURY, particularly serious injuries, that should be enough. It shouldn't be a question of "well, OK, he was trying to paralyze that dude for life, but did the specific MANNER violate any existing rules about where you can hit whom with what?" If the answer is "no" but the other player is in a wheelchair for the next 50 years, is that OK? And just brushing his helmet with your hand or shoulder pad, well, that's a 15 yard penalty, $20,000 fine and, if it's happened before, a suspension, even if there was no intent to injure and the guy didn't even know he was "hit" until he reads about your fine in tomorrows paper? Talk about totally missing the point.

Same deal on "leading with the helmet." Spearing has been illegal at every level of football for decades; if we enforce that rule we don't need another one, and if we DON'T enforce the rules, creating more unenforced rules does nothing but complicate the game without otherwise affecting it.

So, yeah, suspend guys when they clearly seek out vulnerable parts of opponents bodies at vulnerable moments with the undeniable intent to injure them. Slapping a $20,000 fine on a multimillionare is like a speeding ticket for you or me, but when Suh missed a month of games during the Lions playoff run, I guarantee he felt that, and he'll feel it when he goes to negotiate his next contract with a team wondering how many games he'll play even when healthy. Were it up to me, Harrison would start 2012 on suspension for the hit on Decker, even though it was technically legal, because he has a history of hitting people with intent to injure. I don't really care if he's found an alternate way to do it that doesn't violate the rule against his previous method. Again, the point is not "you can't deliberately injure people by hitting them in the head, but trying to snap their knees is OK." The point is you shouldn't be intentionally attempting to injure people at all, whether or not you can do it within the letter of the law, and the letter of the law should reflect THAT rather than hamstringing the vast majority of clean players until they can no longer do their jobs.

One final note: Deckers reception was ruled incomplete, which is probably a good thing for Denver since Harrison trying to take his leg off "broke his concentration" enough that the ball started coming out before he hit the ground. Yet, he got both feet on the ground after he had possession of the ball; that was kinda the problem: His left foot was planted when Harrison hit his knee, so his entire body above that point went to the right while his lower leg stayed put, and his whole leg bent sideways at about a 20° angle. In other words, he had possession and two feet on the ground, so it should be a catch unless he hadn't yet "made a football move," and that's the ONLY way the pass could be incomplete.

Guess what: Hitting a receiver as he makes a catch but BEFORE "a football move" is pretty much the definition of the James Harrison defenseless receiver rule.

So fine his butt for the, what, fourth time? And suspend him for at least the first month of 2012. Frankly, if it keeps up I think a season suspension is reasonable, and a life time ban after that. It's the NFL, not UFC.


Joel, you gotta work on your brevity, other than that, spot on.

spikerman
01-11-2012, 08:38 PM
Guess what: Hitting a receiver as he makes a catch but BEFORE "a football move" is pretty much the definition of the James Harrison defenseless receiver rule.


Well thought out post Joel, but there are too many points to address so I just picked this one.

Unfortunately, for it to be a foul Harrison would have had to target his head or neck area. There is nothing in the rule book that I know of that talks about hitting a player low. Personally, I had no problem with the hit. It sucks that Decker got hurt, but I don't think Harrison was targeting his knee. Even if he was, it means he's a jerk (which we already know), but it isn't illegal.

SR
01-11-2012, 09:33 PM
I'm not necessarily pointing to the Decker hit, but just his justified reputation over the course of his career.

The guy had a chance to end Tebowmania and all he gets is one late hit.

On those read option plays, matched one on one with Tebow, he constantly chose to commit to the RB when clearly containing Tebow was his responsibility in those situations.

He committed to the RB because he was scared. Watch the game again (as I have twice), and it is easy to see he wanted no part of Tebow.

If that's what you want to see, that's what you'll see. Harrison made some good plays on Tebow, on McGahee, and played a pretty solid game minus the roughing the passer penalty he took.

Some of you Broncos fans are flat out pussies when it comes to how other people play and act toward the team. Grow a pair. Football is a ******* man's sport, not badminton.

wayninja
01-11-2012, 09:50 PM
Well thought out post Joel, but there are too many points to address so I just picked this one.

Unfortunately, for it to be a foul Harrison would have had to target his head or neck area. There is nothing in the rule book that I know of that talks about hitting a player low. Personally, I had no problem with the hit. It sucks that Decker got hurt, but I don't think Harrison was targeting his knee. Even if he was, it means he's a jerk (which we already know), but it isn't illegal.

obviously a different scenario, but chop blocks are specifically about hitting a player low.

wayninja
01-11-2012, 09:53 PM
If that's what you want to see, that's what you'll see. Harrison made some good plays on Tebow, on McGahee, and played a pretty solid game minus the roughing the passer penalty he took.

Some of you Broncos fans are flat out pussies when it comes to how other people play and act toward the team. Grow a pair. Football is a ******* man's sport, not badminton.

C'mon Red. We aren't pissed because he was hurt, we know that comes with the territory. We are pissed because, while legal, the shot was aimed to take the other player out of the game. It's the definition of a dirty hit. Perfectly legal, but definitely not the only place he could have gone on him. Decker had no chance to stop him, Harrison could have walked up and simply bear hugged him.

Not saying that would be a good move, tackle-wise, but he definitely didn't need to spear a knee.

Harrison gets fined a lot because he's dirty, he's not dirty because he gets fined.

Compare this hit to the one DJ put on Johnson in the 4th (or maybe 3rd?). A big hit, but it was shoulder to chest. Harrison could have done the same thing.

spikerman
01-11-2012, 10:01 PM
obviously a different scenario, but chop blocks are specifically about hitting a player low.

I should have been more specific. I was talking about under the "defenseless receiver" rule. Obviously there are times when low blocks (below the waist) are illegal. One thing to keep in mind, though, about chop blocks is that the low block of a chop block could be legal. A chop block is a high/low or low/high combination so if the first blocker engages below the waist first, the foul would come when the second blocker engages above the waist.

Edit - Also, remember those low hits are about blocks, not tackles. Things that are illegal about hitting a player low during a block are perfectly legal against a ball carrier.

wayninja
01-11-2012, 10:06 PM
I should have been more specific. I was talking about under the "defenseless receiver" rule. Obviously there are times when low blocks (below the waist) are illegal. One thing to keep in mind, though, about chop blocks is that the low block of a chop block could be legal. A chop block is a high/low or low/high combination so if the first blocker engages below the waist first, the foul would come when the second blocker engages above the waist.

So extend that out. What specifically IS in the defenseless receiver rule about how and where you can hit? Does it say you can ONLY hit low (knees)?

spikerman
01-11-2012, 10:25 PM
So extend that out. What specifically IS in the defenseless receiver rule about how and where you can hit? Does it say you can ONLY hit low (knees)?

The NFL may be slightly different (but I don't think so). From the NCAA rule book, "No player shall target and initiate contact to the head or neck area of a defenseless opponent with the helmet, forearm, elbow, or shoulder. When in question, it is a foul."

wayninja
01-11-2012, 10:30 PM
The NFL may be slightly different (but I don't think so). From the NCAA rule book, "No player shall target and initiate contact to the head or neck area of a defenseless opponent with the helmet, forearm, elbow, or shoulder. When in question, it is a foul."

Ok, so Harrison had about 5 and 1/2 feet to work with and hit in the one spot that ends the vast majority of careers/seasons.

Joel
01-12-2012, 02:00 AM
Well thought out post Joel, but there are too many points to address so I just picked this one.

Unfortunately, for it to be a foul Harrison would have had to target his head or neck area. There is nothing in the rule book that I know of that talks about hitting a player low. Personally, I had no problem with the hit. It sucks that Decker got hurt, but I don't think Harrison was targeting his knee. Even if he was, it means he's a jerk (which we already know), but it isn't illegal.
It appears you're right, so I guess it was legal, my mistake:

Article 9 It is a foul if a player initiates unnecessary contact against a player who is in a defenseless
posture.
(a) Players in a defenseless posture are:
OFFICIAL NFL PLAYING RULES 73(1) A player in the act of or just after throwing a pass;
(2) A receiver attempting to catch a pass; or who has completed a catch and has not had time to
protect himself or has not clearly become a runner. If the receiver/runner is capable of avoiding or
warding off the impending contact of an opponent, he is no longer a defenseless player;
(3) A runner already in the grasp of a tackler and whose forward progress has been stopped;
(4) A kickoff or punt returner attempting to field a kick in the air;
(5) A player on the ground at the end of a play;
(6) A kicker/punter during the kick or during the return;
(7) A quarterback at any time after a change of possession, and
(8) A player who receives a “blindside” block when the blocker is moving toward his own endline and
approaches the opponent from behind or from the side.
(b) Prohibited contact against a player who is in a defenseless posture is:
(1) Forcibly hitting the defenseless player’s head or neck area with the helmet, facemask, forearm, or
shoulder, regardless of whether the defensive player also uses his arms to tackle the defenseless
player by encircling or grasping him; and
(2) Lowering the head and making forcible contact with the top/crown or forehead/”hairline” parts of
the helmet against any part of the defenseless player’s body.
Note: The provisions of (2) do not prohibit incidental contact by the mask or helmet in the course of a
conventional tackle on an opponent.
Penalty: For unnecessary roughness: Loss of 15 yards. The player may be disqualified if the action is
judged by the official(s) to be flagrant.
http://static.nfl.com/static/content/public/image/rulebook/pdfs/15_Rule12_Player_Conduct.pdf
It also appears the League has put the rulebook online:
http://www.nfl.com/rulebook

Thing is, there are players who step on the field INTENDING to seriously injure others; that's been true since Walter Camp was playing. Rules designed piece meal to restrict the MANNER in which such players inflict those injuries miss the point badly, and the players always have and always will find ways around them. The intent and behavior is what should be restricted, not particular forms of physical contact. That would make a lot more things judgement calls, which I don't like any more than refs do, but, ultimately, judgement calls are their job. In THIS case, I think greatly restricting deliberately injurious hits AND removing a mess of rules that inhibit defenders WITHOUT reducing the number and severity of injuries is more than worth it.

This incident illustrates the point, but so do plenty of others: The hit was legal, but the tackle could easily have been made WITHOUT targeting the knee, by a player with a long and well documented history of trying to injure opponents. As such, I think a penalty, fine and suspension SHOULD be warranted even though they are not under current rules.

spikerman
01-12-2012, 06:22 AM
It appears you're right, so I guess it was legal, my mistake:

It also appears the League has put the rulebook online:
http://www.nfl.com/rulebook

Thing is, there are players who step on the field INTENDING to seriously injure others; that's been true since Walter Camp was playing. Rules designed piece meal to restrict the MANNER in which such players inflict those injuries miss the point badly, and the players always have and always will find ways around them. The intent and behavior is what should be restricted, not particular forms of physical contact. That would make a lot more things judgement calls, which I don't like any more than refs do, but, ultimately, judgement calls are their job. In THIS case, I think greatly restricting deliberately injurious hits AND removing a mess of rules that inhibit defenders WITHOUT reducing the number and severity of injuries is more than worth it.

This incident illustrates the point, but so do plenty of others: The hit was legal, but the tackle could easily have been made WITHOUT targeting the knee, by a player with a long and well documented history of trying to injure opponents. As such, I think a penalty, fine and suspension SHOULD be warranted even though they are not under current rules.

I really think that in this case Harrison's reputation is what hurts him. I'm just not convinced that he was aiming for the knee. I think he had a WR moving at full speed and he just threw himself at him. I know that we'll never know, but I just don't think his aim is that good. If it had been pretty much any other player I don't believe this would even be an issue.

Joel
01-12-2012, 08:31 PM
I really think that in this case Harrison's reputation is what hurts him. I'm just not convinced that he was aiming for the knee. I think he had a WR moving at full speed and he just threw himself at him. I know that we'll never know, but I just don't think his aim is that good. If it had been pretty much any other player I don't believe this would even be an issue.
Almost certainly, but it wasn't just any other player, it was one with multiple fines in separate seasons for violating a rule created almost entirely because of his actions. I'd prefer to err on the side of caution, which rules against the MANNER rather than intent and effect of contact do not. He didn't have to go low, he consciously chose to do so, and I think it less a matter of him aiming very well that one time than aiming most of the time and causing injury on a certain percentage of them. Refresh my memory: Weren't all tackles below the knees once illegal because of injuries like this?

KCL
01-12-2012, 08:39 PM
Same thing happened to Eric Berry early in the season...injuries happen all the time.


Haley wouldn't say whether he thought the hit by Johnson was dirty, even though it appeared the Bills wide receiver deliberately dived for Berry's knee. There is nothing in the NFL rule book that prohibits blocks below the waist in the open field unless they happen from behind.

spikerman
01-12-2012, 09:18 PM
Almost certainly, but it wasn't just any other player, it was one with multiple fines in separate seasons for violating a rule created almost entirely because of his actions. I'd prefer to err on the side of caution, which rules against the MANNER rather than intent and effect of contact do not. He didn't have to go low, he consciously chose to do so, and I think it less a matter of him aiming very well that one time than aiming most of the time and causing injury on a certain percentage of them. Refresh my memory: Weren't all tackles below the knees once illegal because of injuries like this?

I guess I'm just not sure where he was supposed to hit him. If he goes high, he gets fined, if he goes low he's called dirty. Players are taught to go low, I think it was just an unfortunate injury. To be honest, when it first happened I thought he got him at the thigh, but either way, imo, there was nothing wrong with the play.

I can't ever remember a time when tackles below the knee were illegal. I guess it's possible, but I just don't remember it.

SR
01-12-2012, 09:21 PM
C'mon Red. We aren't pissed because he was hurt, we know that comes with the territory. We are pissed because, while legal, the shot was aimed to take the other player out of the game. It's the definition of a dirty hit. Perfectly legal, but definitely not the only place he could have gone on him. Decker had no chance to stop him, Harrison could have walked up and simply bear hugged him.

Not saying that would be a good move, tackle-wise, but he definitely didn't need to spear a knee.

Harrison gets fined a lot because he's dirty, he's not dirty because he gets fined.

Compare this hit to the one DJ put on Johnson in the 4th (or maybe 3rd?). A big hit, but it was shoulder to chest. Harrison could have done the same thing.

I don't think Harrison is dirty. He plays mean, but he's not a cheap shot artist. He plays like he's pissed off...like Ronnie Lott used to and like Terrell Suggs does. I've got no problem with Harrison's game. Sucks Decker is out, but I have an extremely hard time believing Harrison made that play with the intent of hurting him.

KCL
01-12-2012, 09:30 PM
Elway said he didn't think it was a dirty hit on Decker.

I Eat Staples
01-13-2012, 06:01 AM
Harrison wasn't scared of Tebow, he just isn't smart enough to defend the option. He's aggressive and strong, but sometimes smart scheming beats raw talent.

This time, our coaching staff won out.

muse
01-13-2012, 07:13 AM
It was a clean hit. I can't fault Harrison for that play. He was doing what the NFL wants him to do, go low instead of high.

Whatever, the gif in your sig has Elvis picking on poor Tom Brady. I wrote Doom a strongly worded letter saying that that wasn't a very nice thing to do.

Joel
01-13-2012, 04:50 PM
I guess I'm just not sure where he was supposed to hit him. If he goes high, he gets fined, if he goes low he's called dirty. Players are taught to go low, I think it was just an unfortunate injury. To be honest, when it first happened I thought he got him at the thigh, but either way, imo, there was nothing wrong with the play.

I can't ever remember a time when tackles below the knee were illegal. I guess it's possible, but I just don't remember it.
Well, I wouldn't expect you to remember it first hand; I think it was in the '20s, maybe earlier.

My issue isn't WHERE Harrison hit Decker but WHY; again, I think focusing on the manner and location of contact was a BIG mistake that has complicated life for refs, greatly inhibited play for defenders and done little if anything to reduce serious injuries. The best way to reduce serious injuries, IMHO, is penalties, fines and suspensions for intending and causing serious injuries rather than every play that MIGHT produce one. Realistically, almost any play in a full contact sport carries significant risk of serious injury, but there's a world of difference between delberately trying to injure someone and doing so inadvertently.

spikerman
01-13-2012, 06:02 PM
Well, I wouldn't expect you to remember it first hand; I think it was in the '20s, maybe earlier.

My issue isn't WHERE Harrison hit Decker but WHY; again, I think focusing on the manner and location of contact was a BIG mistake that has complicated life for refs, greatly inhibited play for defenders and done little if anything to reduce serious injuries. The best way to reduce serious injuries, IMHO, is penalties, fines and suspensions for intending and causing serious injuries rather than every play that MIGHT produce one. Realistically, almost any play in a full contact sport carries significant risk of serious injury, but there's a world of difference between delberately trying to injure someone and doing so inadvertently.

I see what you're saying, I'm just not sure how you determine intent.

Joel
01-13-2012, 09:14 PM
I see what you're saying, I'm just not sure how you determine intent.
Not easily; as I said before, it would require judgement calls from refs, which I generally dislike, but is ultimately their job; reducing injuries and restoring the ability of defenders to defend the pass is worth that price.

Seriously, THREE guys in ONE year break Marinos record for single season passing yardage? As many as have surpassed the single season TD record he set the same year. Anyone old enough to remember Marinos sophomore season and only Super Bowl appearance knows that was a FREAKISH performance; he belongs in Canton for that year alone. Things like the Harrison and Brady rules have made those once in a life time numbers as common as concussions and injuries like Deckers remain. They didn't make the game safer, only gave passing a huge competitive advantage to a passing game that already had plenty.

We've handcuffed defenders to the detriment of the game yet severe injuries continue apace; obviously, barring TECHNIQUES rather than ACTS isn't doing the job. For the record, I also think Harrison hit Decker in the thigh just ABOVE rather than ON the knee (where he was "aiming" only he knows.) Ironically, a hit on the knee might have been better; in replays it's clear Deckers entire body above the knee moved right from the force of the blow, while everything below the knee remained stationary, which is probably what stretched his MCL.

Yet that illustrates my point: Say there were no rules against removing helmets, punching or blows to the head. Repeatedly beating opponents over the head with ones helmet would still be unsportsmanlike and unnecessary roughness justifying ejection, fines and suspensions. Do we really need rules explicitly STATING that? Evidently, the answer is "desperately."

I think the infraction should be intent to cause serious injury, and the determing factors:

1) Whether a player chooses more dangerous contact when less dangerous contact is possible, 2) Whether the contact does, in fact, cause injury and 3) A history of the player committing such illegal acts.

All three should not be required for a penalty/ejection/fine/suspension, but in Harrisons hit on Decker all three were present, IMHO: He didn't have to go high OR low; he could have wrapped up at the waist, though Decker would probably have gotten another half a yard (and completed the catch.) Harrison CHOSE to go low, consciously or otherwise, which caused the injury.

Again, I realize rules like I'm suggesting force refs to make a many judgement calls, and typically consider that a major deficiency in rules but, as also previously stated, judgement calls are ultimately in their job description. Every time a ref must decide whether a runner was down before he lost the ball or it crossed the goal line/first down marker, that's a judgement call. It just usually doesn't cause paralysis if they blow it.

spikerman
01-13-2012, 10:58 PM
I'm going to take these in sections if you that's ok.


Not easily; as I said before, it would require judgement calls from refs, which I generally dislike, but is ultimately their job; reducing injuries and restoring the ability of defenders to defend the pass is worth that price.
There are some plays that require judgement on the part of the officials, but usually it doesn't entail what the player is thinking, only a judgement of the act itself. I'll explain that a little more later.



Seriously, THREE guys in ONE year break Marinos record for single season passing yardage? As many as have surpassed the single season TD record he set the same year. Anyone old enough to remember Marinos sophomore season and only Super Bowl appearance knows that was a FREAKISH performance; he belongs in Canton for that year alone. Things like the Harrison and Brady rules have made those once in a life time numbers as common as concussions and injuries like Deckers remain. They didn't make the game safer, only gave passing a huge competitive advantage to a passing game that already had plenty.

I agree that the rules heavily favor the offense, but that's just the game today. To this day, I don't believe I have ever seen a passer as accomplished as Marino. I remember that year well and I don't think any of the big three this year are nearly as impressive as he was that year. I think your argument is with the competition committee, but with the popularity of the game today I don't see much of a chance of them making major changes.


We've handcuffed defenders to the detriment of the game yet severe injuries continue apace; obviously, barring TECHNIQUES rather than ACTS isn't doing the job. For the record, I also think Harrison hit Decker in the thigh just ABOVE rather than ON the knee (where he was "aiming" only he knows.) Ironically, a hit on the knee might have been better; in replays it's clear Deckers entire body above the knee moved right from the force of the blow, while everything below the knee remained stationary, which is probably what stretched his MCL.

Yet that illustrates my point: Say there were no rules against removing helmets, punching or blows to the head. Repeatedly beating opponents over the head with ones helmet would still be unsportsmanlike and unnecessary roughness justifying ejection, fines and suspensions. Do we really need rules explicitly STATING that? Evidently, the answer is "desperately." I would argue that, yes, these rules are needed. I can't tell you how many times players and coaches have questioned what should be an obvious foul and I've had to explain the rule to them. If the rule wasn't in place and it was completely up to the official to determine what rose to the level of an ejection it would lead to charges of favoritism and ultimately chaos. Granted there is some discretion on the part of an official as to whether a personal foul or ejection is warranted, but there are also guidelines for those actions. I don't think the players, fans, or even officials want to make the rules more "flexible".


I think the infraction should be intent to cause serious injury, and the determing factors:

1) Whether a player chooses more dangerous contact when less dangerous contact is possible, 2) Whether the contact does, in fact, cause injury and 3) A history of the player committing such illegal acts.

All three should not be required for a penalty/ejection/fine/suspension, but in Harrisons hit on Decker all three were present, IMHO: He didn't have to go high OR low; he could have wrapped up at the waist, though Decker would probably have gotten another half a yard (and completed the catch.) Harrison CHOSE to go low, consciously or otherwise, which caused the injury.

Again, I realize rules like I'm suggesting force refs to make a many judgement calls, and typically consider that a major deficiency in rules but, as also previously stated, judgement calls are ultimately in their job description. Every time a ref must decide whether a runner was down before he lost the ball or it crossed the goal line/first down marker, that's a judgement call. It just usually doesn't cause paralysis if they blow it.
Again, you're asking the officials to rule on what the player is thinking at the time. I don't think that's realistic. I see all kinds of things on the field and I have no idea what these guys are thinking. :) Imo, if a player has to think about all of the things you want them to while playing you're ultimately going to see a slower, much less exciting game. By the time Harrison would have thought about whether he needed to go high, or low, or try to wrap him up, Decker would have been gone.

As for the judgement calls, you're right, officials make judgements on things like forward progress, fumble/not a fumble, catch/not a catch, etc., but those are tangible things that, at the college and NFL level, can be reviewed. They don't make judgements on what a player is thinking. If I see a player take a swing at another player, I don't care why he did it, only that he did it.

Sorry if I went off on a tangent or if I missed your point. It's been a long day. Hopefully, just the fact that we're having this disagreement points out how tough it wil be to ask officials to make these kinds of calls on the fly. :beer:

bcbronc
01-14-2012, 01:36 AM
I can't tell you how many times players and coaches have questioned what should be an obvious foul and I've had to explain the rule to them.

hey spike, just curious, what level do you ref at?

chazoe60
01-14-2012, 01:44 AM
Spike refs Texas HS (biggest HS football in the world BTW) and Semi-Pro ball in Texas.

I met him at the taigate, he's a standup guy and he definitely knows his shit.

Joel
01-14-2012, 01:53 AM
I'm going to take these in sections if you that's ok.
Probably best.

There are some plays that require judgement on the part of the officials, but usually it doesn't entail what the player is thinking, only a judgement of the act itself. I'll explain that a little more later.
'K, and I agree it's counterproductive to expect mind reading.

I agree that the rules heavily favor the offense, but that's just the game today. To this day, I don't believe I have ever seen a passer as accomplished as Marino. I remember that year well and I don't think any of the big three this year are nearly as impressive as he was that year. I think your argument is with the competition committee, but with the popularity of the game today I don't see much of a chance of them making major changes.
It's both; the competition committee (basically owners) surely enjoys the shootout revenue, but if even awful teams can just chuck the ball up for grabs and count on a catch or penalty to keep them in games against the best, fans will lose respect for and thus interest in the game, lowering rather than increasing revenue. You want parity to preserve competitiveness to preserve interest, but you SACRIFICE interest if it reaches the point of actively handicapping the best teams. "Sorry, Coach McCarthy, but the Rams REALLY suck; you have to bench Aaron Rodgers to keep it 'fair.'"

Yet if the competition committee gave us the Bert Emmanuel rule, their goal with the Harrison and Brady rules was reducing injury, and their main motive the revenue lost when highly paid marquee players miss months of games. Makes you wonder why they'll decide hits made thousands of times in decades of games will be illegal next year (REAL reason: Peyton misssed the whole season and has a $20 million bonus scheduled for March. ;))

I would argue that, yes, these rules are needed. I can't tell you how many times players and coaches have questioned what should be an obvious foul and I've had to explain the rule to them. If the rule wasn't in place and it was completely up to the official to determine what rose to the level of an ejection it would lead to charges of favoritism and ultimately chaos. Granted there is some discretion on the part of an official as to whether a personal foul or ejection is warranted, but there are also guidelines for those actions. I don't think the players, fans, or even officials want to make the rules more "flexible".
You misunderstand: My point was without rules against punching, helmet removal and blows to the head, bludgeoning an opponents skull with a helmet would be entirely legal because, despite clear deliberate intent to inflict severe injury, no rule prohibited the SPECIFIC MEANS of doing so. Thus, though we SHOULD not, we DO need rules against ALL acts with dangerously vicious intent, whether or not the specific form is legal. We wouldn't need to prohibit nearly as much if such rules existed, and existing prohibitions against myriad things don't significantly reduce serious injury, or even prevent vicious players finding legal ways to deliberately inflict them.

Officials are already plagued with charges of bias, and always will be (did you see the Texans last two regular season games? :tsk:) Why not get something worthwhile to show for it?

Again, you're asking the officials to rule on what the player is thinking at the time. I don't think that's realistic. I see all kinds of things on the field and I have no idea what these guys are thinking. :) Imo, if a player has to think about all of the things you want them to while playing you're ultimately going to see a slower, much less exciting game. By the time Harrison would have thought about whether he needed to go high, or low, or try to wrap him up, Decker would have been gone.
I do not and would not ask officials to read minds. My stated criteria were:

1) Whether a player chooses more dangerous contact when less dangerous contact is possible,
That's a slight judgement, but requires no telepathy; whether a player can make a hit AND avoid vital and/or injury prone areas is usually clear (and I'd only argue for a penalty when it WAS, as I think Harrisons hit was.)

Harrison knows the importance of wrapping up to secure tackles, and the danger of low hits; he could've dived at Deckers waist and wrapped up as easily as he dived at his leg with his shoulder. He might not have made the tackle (though the chance would probably have been higher) and Decker would've gotten another half yard (plus a catch,) but in tons of scenarios like that the NFL has decided preventing injury trumps making the play.

Simms stated at the time Pitt players have said they'll start going low, aware of the risk to joints, to avoid penalties for going high. Note: They seek to avoid penalties/ejections/fines/suspensions (NOT causing concussions) by doing things they explicitly admit knowing will cause serious injuries. That's the problem with prohibiting means rather than ends, but knowing intent does not always require knowing thoughts.

2) Whether the contact does, in fact, cause injury
Again, no telepathy required; whether a hit causes injury is rarely a judgement call, and never more than marginally

3) A history of the player committing such illegal acts.
That requires no more than knowledge of the players documented history; it's already used as the standard for escalated penalties against repeat violators of the Harrison rule.

As for the judgement calls, you're right, officials make judgements on things like forward progress, fumble/not a fumble, catch/not a catch, etc., but those are tangible things that, at the college and NFL level, can be reviewed. They don't make judgements on what a player is thinking. If I see a player take a swing at another player, I don't care why he did it, only that he did it.
Yes, because punches and blows to the head are both prohibited. What about an elbow or knee to the kidney? I can't kick or stomp, but what if I remove my shoe THEN cleat a guy on the ground; he must leave the game if bleeding. ;) Focusing on MANNER of contact rather than MOTIVE and EFFECT just makes a list of illegal ways to seriously injure, intentionally or not. The problem is that simultaneously creates a list of LEGAL ways to seriously injure DELIBERATELY, and another of things with NO risk of injury that still draw flags and fines.

It's a 15 yard penalty and fine if a guy accidentally smacks a head with a forearm, even if the other player doesn't know about or feel it. If a guy with a history of that needlessly blows up Deckers knee it's fine, because the MEANS is legal. Those are opposite but common extremes of rules failing their purpose. I can't fault refs; their job is to enforce, not define, rules--just another of many good reasons to fix the well intended but flawed rule.

Sorry if I went off on a tangent or if I missed your point. It's been a long day. Hopefully, just the fact that we're having this disagreement points out how tough it wil be to ask officials to make these kinds of calls on the fly. :beer:
Sometimes, often in fact, calls are hard, especially on the fly. Sometimes REALLY important calls. That makes it more rather than less inexcusable for refs to punt calls like, say, Mike Renfros TD catch in the '78 AFCCG. ;)

Joel
01-14-2012, 02:28 AM
Spike refs Texas HS (biggest HS football in the world BTW) and Semi-Pro ball in Texas.

I met him at the taigate, he's a standup guy and he definitely knows his shit.
I think it's because they had no pro teams until 1960, and the only college team the NCAA took remotely seriously was Texas. Even they were looked down on because A&M was usually their only real competition in the state, and the only out of state SWC team was Arkansas (until they bailed for the SEC because the NCAA always snubbed the SWC.) Yet OU was elected "champion" repeatedly even though Nebraska was usually THEIR only real competition. Just another reason the NCAA is such a joke to me, and probably part of why HS football is like a religion in Texas (that, and there's NOTHING else to do on Friday nights in MANY tiny towns. ;))

rcsodak
01-14-2012, 02:57 AM
I'm not necessarily pointing to the Decker hit, but just his justified reputation over the course of his career.

The guy had a chance to end Tebowmania and all he gets is one late hit.

On those read option plays, matched one on one with Tebow, he constantly chose to commit to the RB when clearly containing Tebow was his responsibility in those situations.

He committed to the RB because he was scared. Watch the game again (as I have twice), and it is easy to see he wanted no part of Tebow.

:coffee:

Mobile Post via http://Mobile.BroncosForums.com/forums

spikerman
01-14-2012, 12:13 PM
Spike refs Texas HS (biggest HS football in the world BTW) and Semi-Pro ball in Texas.

I met him at the taigate, he's a standup guy and he definitely knows his shit.

Thanks Chaz, I don't claim to be an expert, and I hope I don't come off that way, I just have to do a lot of studying. I'm sure Carol says the same thing about her son. It really is much harder than I thought it would be, but I have to admit, I love it. :)