Broncos' Julius Thomas fined by NFL for chop block vs. Cardinals

[Denver Native (Carol)]

Cardinals coach Bruce Arians won't be happy.

Despite his calls for Julius Thomas to be suspended over a cut block he called the "dirtiest play in 37 years" in pro football, Broncos tight end Julius Thomas was fined only $8,286 for the incident, two NFL sources confirmed, the standard amount for a first offense.

Arians remains angry because Calais Campbell injured his knee and will be sidelined several weeks. Thomas expected to be fined, but said he " did not intentionally" hurt Campbell. During the game, Thomas told Arizona cornerback Antonio Cromartie to let Campbell know he didn't mean to hurt him.

rest - http://www.denverpost.com/broncos/ci_26687346/broncos-julius-thomas-fined-by-nfl-chop-block

[Northman]

**** Arians.

[Ravage!!!]

This fine makes NO sense. They caught the foul in the game, and was penalized for it. It took back a 77 yrd td. Are they going to fine EVERY penalty that occures in the game? If its comes down to "those that are dangerous"..then how come every facemask penalty isn't fined? Clipping? Leg Whipping? Horse collar? Hands to the face? Roughing the passer?

This fine is another BS fine that is ruled by the NFL's "reactionary" tactics.

[Buff]

This fine makes NO sense. They caught the foul in the game, and was penalized for it. It took back a 77 yrd td. Are they going to fine EVERY penalty that occures in the game? If its comes down to "those that are dangerous"..then how come every facemask penalty isn't fined? Clipping? Leg Whipping? Horse collar? Hands to the face? Roughing the passer?

This fine is another BS fine that is ruled by the NFL's "reactionary" tactics.

Actually, your boy Roger does dole out fines for all the things you mentioned pretty regularly.

[BroncoJoe]

BS fine.

[Buff]

BS fine.

It was a pretty dirty hit - whether he intended for it to be or not. I think the thing that made it dirty was that he took a step like he was going downfield, then came back and took out his legs from the blindside. If you're going to blindside a guy, you can't dive at his knee. Especially if he's engaged with an o-lineman.

[Joel]

Somewhere in Colorado, Wes Welker is shaking his head, trying to clear the latest cobwebs and figure out why this was a penalty AND fine, but Earl Thomas and D.J. Swearinger head-hunting him weren't.

[BroncoJoe]

It was a pretty dirty hit - whether he intended for it to be or not. I think the thing that made it dirty was that he took a step like he was going downfield, then came back and took out his legs from the blindside. If you're going to blindside a guy, you can't dive at his knee. Especially if he's engaged with an o-lineman.

The O-Lineman contact came after Thomas went down on him.

Ew. That sounds gross.

I agree with the fine.

[Joel]

It was a pretty dirty hit - whether he intended for it to be or not. I think the thing that made it dirty was that he took a step like he was going downfield, then came back and took out his legs from the blindside. If you're going to blindside a guy, you can't dive at his knee. Especially if he's engaged with an o-lineman.
Except he WASN'T engaged: Clady didn't engage until AFTER Thomas had already DISENGAGED. If memory serves, Clady was even the one who got the flag, for precisely that reason.

[Buff]

Except he WASN'T engaged: Clady didn't engage until AFTER Thomas had already DISENGAGED. If memory serves, Clady was even the one who got the flag, for precisely that reason.

I think if we are being literal, you are correct. It was a "lure" - which is a subset of being engaged.

[Ravage!!!]

It was a pretty dirty hit - whether he intended for it to be or not. I think the thing that made it dirty was that he took a step like he was going downfield, then came back and took out his legs from the blindside. If you're going to blindside a guy, you can't dive at his knee. Especially if he's engaged with an o-lineman.

Wait, that step is to fool defenders and LBs so that they don't get a read, that wasn't so he could ocme to the backside. Also, WATCH where JTs shoulder pad HITs the DE on the block.. it was NOT the knee. Three, the DE was NOT engaged with the OL when he made the block.

[BroncoJoe]

Wait, that step is to fool defenders and LBs so that they don't get a read, that wasn't so he could ocme to the backside. Also, WATCH where JTs shoulder pad HITs the DE on the block.. it was NOT the knee. Three, the DE was NOT engaged with the OL when he made the block.

That's exactly how I remember it.

[Ravage!!!]

Actually, your boy Roger does dole out fines for all the things you mentioned pretty regularly.

Does he? Because there are a LOT of facemask penalties throughout games... where are those fined?

[OrangeHoof]

I'm okay with the penalty and the fine. Both deserved even though I don't think they intended to hurt Campbell. I just think JT still isn't adept at blocking and made the wrong move with Campbell engaged with Clady.

[BroncoJoe]

The only other thing I'll say is if one of their players did that to one or ours, and they got hurt, we'd all be up in arms, screaming.

I get it. Don't agree with it, but I get it.

[slim]

The only other thing I'll say is if one of their players did that to one or ours, and they got hurt, we'd all be up in arms, screaming.

I get it. Don't agree with it, but I get it.

Cut blocks are not illegal and that wasn't chop block, so I don't get it.

I get why AZ fans would be pissed, but I don't get the fine or the penalty.

[BroncoJoe]

Cut blocks are not illegal and that wasn't chop block, so I don't get it.

I get why AZ fans would be pissed, but I don't get the fine or the penalty.

I don't get the fine, but get the penalty. In live action, our OL'man engaged while (barely) JT was cutting him.

It's football. Shit like this happens every game.

[Ravage!!!]

The only other thing I'll say is if one of their players did that to one or ours, and they got hurt, we'd all be up in arms, screaming.

I get it. Don't agree with it, but I get it.

My problem is intent. I think its obvious that the player did NOT intend to be malicious, thus a foul is a foul, and things happen in football.

THAT being said, as much as I think the NFL is all about reactionary discipline, like you said, I get it. A player was hurt (thankfully not worse than it was)...but their Coach made it out to be worse than it is/was, and thus the NFL comes back with a reactionary fine. I DO that that illegal plays that DO cause injuries are more likely to get fines than the same ones that don't cause injuries....despite that being hypocritical and completely backwards.

Also, I think the NFL needs to make steps in being SURE to publicize the plays that are "under review"... but do NOT fine the player. GIVE the player credit, publically, by saying "this player did the RIGHT thing, by attempting to ______, and because of that will not be fined." Not only does this put a better image on the NFL for actually looking at plays and deciding NOT to fine them, but gives credits to the player and GOOD plays so that they can be appreciated.

[BroncoJoe]

My problem is intent. I think its obvious that the player did NOT intend to be malicious, thus a foul is a foul, and things happen in football.

THAT being said, as much as I think the NFL is all about reactionary discipline, like you said, I get it. A player was hurt (thankfully not worse than it was)...but their Coach made it out to be worse than it is/was, and thus the NFL comes back with a reactionary fine. I DO that that illegal plays that DO cause injuries are more likely to get fines than the same ones that don't cause injuries....despite that being hypocritical and completely backwards.

Also, I think the NFL needs to make steps in being SURE to publicize the plays that are "under review"... but do NOT fine the player. GIVE the player credit, publically, by saying "this player did the RIGHT thing, by attempting to ______, and because of that will not be fined." Not only does this put a better image on the NFL for actually looking at plays and deciding NOT to fine them, but gives credits to the player and GOOD plays so that they can be appreciated.

Arian is an idiot.

[Ravage!!!]

Cut blocks are not illegal and that wasn't chop block, so I don't get it.

I get why AZ fans would be pissed, but I don't get the fine or the penalty.

I'm with you. This wasn't a chop block. Iits like when a player is cut blocked, and falls forward, THEN running into an OL. That makes it a "chop block"..but it doesn't make sense that it's a chop block since the intent of the rule of chop blocking is to not cut a guy while he's planted and engaged with another player. How is he 'engaged' if the cut happens before? Its backwards, but its meant to eliminate the "fuzzy lines" I think.

[BroncoJoe]

Him getting fined is absolutely retarded.

[TXBRONC]

I fully excepted he would be fined and nothing more regardless of the little hissy fit Arians threw.

[Northman]

I fully excepted he would be fined and nothing more regardless of the little hissy fit Arians threw.

Yea, to be honest the fine doesnt really bother me as much as Arians trying to smear the guy's name. JT is FAR from a dirty player.

[blamkin86]

Here's a link to the video for those old dudes like me who need a refresher:

http://ftw.usatoday.com/2014/10/calais-campbell-chop-block-penalty-injury-bruce-arians-rips-broncos-julius-thomas

I remember it not being on TV during the play, and having to be rebroadcast.

I also remember Clady looking like "Oh crap" and getting off the block as soon as he realized what happened.

It may have resulted in injury, but if they intended that, Clady would not have backed off early. Sorry.

[VonDoom]

I fully excepted he would be fined and nothing more regardless of the little hissy fit Arians threw.

This. I figured he would get fined, and he did (the minimum for "first time offenders", from what I've read). No need to be outraged anymore. Arians made a stink, and now it's over.

[GEM]

This fine makes NO sense. They caught the foul in the game, and was penalized for it. It took back a 77 yrd td. Are they going to fine EVERY penalty that occures in the game? If its comes down to "those that are dangerous"..then how come every facemask penalty isn't fined? Clipping? Leg Whipping? Horse collar? Hands to the face? Roughing the passer?

This fine is another BS fine that is ruled by the NFL's "reactionary" tactics.


NFL has to collect money to pay the concussion payments somehow.

[weazel]

meh... its a cheap play and he got caught. I dont see the problem with the fine.

[CrazyHorse]

I seriously hope Julius cut blocks a lot more players. If he gets flags or fines it would just show the league's own hypocrisy. According to the rules, It's perfectly legal. The play was borderline because Clady went high.

[Ravage!!!]

I seriously hope Julius cut blocks a lot more players. If he gets flags or fines it would just show the league's own hypocrisy. According to the rules, It's perfectly legal. The play was borderline because Clady went high.

I thought that it was BECAUSE Clady would go high that would make it an illegal chop?

[Ravage!!!]

meh... its a cheap play and he got caught. I dont see the problem with the fine.

See, I don't see it as being cheap. WOuldn't have even be illegal had it not been for the tiny touch by Clady, and THAT only happened because they didn' get the play change at the LoS from Manning.

[CrazyHorse]

I thought that it was BECAUSE Clady would go high that would make it an illegal chop?

Yeah, that is why. Typically a chop block is when a player blocks high and another player takes their legs out from under them. This was basically that in reverse.

[Dapper Dan]

Only in Obama's America..

[MOtorboat]

NFL has to collect money to pay the concussion payments somehow.

While that's a fun way to think of it because we disagree with it, fines still go to charity.

I'm not surprised. I, mostly, disagree with the fine, and honestly, the penalty. I don't understand how that differs from a zillion other plays, other than the Cardinals bitching.

[Canmore]

Yeah, that is why. Typically a chop block is when a player blocks high and another player takes their legs out from under them. This was basically that in reverse.

You can't go low on a pass play.

[MOtorboat]

You can't go low on a pass play.

Sure can.

[Ravage!!!]

You can't go low on a pass play.

Yes you can. In fact, OL do often because it forces DL to keep their hands low..thus out of the passing lanes. Play action passes, OL aren't going back into pass blocking, and RBs will go low to pick up blitzing defenders.