Originally Posted by chiefzilla1501:
It is at least a start. I don’t see the nfl relaxing rules on protocol. But this at least creates some kind of equal loss. Unlike targeting which ejects a player even if the other guy isn’t hurt, it seems fair that if a player knocks another player out, that player should also sit out until the hurt player clears protocol. This is at least realistic.
This is entering bad deberg troll thread territory lol. That's such a dumb idea lmao. [Reply]
Originally Posted by -King-:
This is entering bad deberg troll thread territory lol. That's such a dumb idea lmao.
So a defensive player can knock out the best offense player intentionally, and the biggest punishment to the defense is a 15 yard penalty? Are you aware that New Orleans knocked out not 1, but 2 qbs to get to the bountygate super bowl? [Reply]
Originally Posted by chiefzilla1501:
So a defensive player can knock out the best offense player intentionally, and the biggest punishment to the defense is a 15 yard penalty? Are you aware that New Orleans knocked out not 1, but 2 qbs to get to the bountygate super bowl?
Which QBs were those?
And can you show me this happening in the concussion protocol era? Must be widespread for you to be so worried about it. [Reply]
Originally Posted by BigRedChief:
I could see the player who hit another player in the head and the player is out and got flagged being ejected.
There is a huge incentive to take out a difference maker. But, it would still not be a deterrent. Losing a starting CB/LB/DL would still not be comparable ejection to a QB, especially one at Mahomes level.
They only true way it would be fair is if the other teams starting QB had to sit out the same amount of time as the QB in concussion protocol. [Reply]
There is less than a zero percent chance of this. No way the NFL is opening themselves up to another lawsuit. This helps them for legal reasons as much as anything else because it protects the league and gives them something to show they're proactive. [Reply]
Originally Posted by tk13:
There is less than a zero percent chance of this. No way the NFL is opening themselves up to another lawsuit. This helps them for legal reasons as much as anything else because it protects the league and gives them something to show they're proactive.
I agree protocol likely won't change. But bountygate was a huge black eye too, and Wentz getting knocked out of the game while clowney gets zero penalty is a really bad look too. And a retroactive fine isn't going to fix it. [Reply]
Originally Posted by chiefzilla1501:
I agree protocol likely won't change. But bountygate was a huge black eye too, and Wentz getting knocked out of the game while clowney gets zero penalty is a really bad look too. And a retroactive fine isn't going to fix it.
It's not a bad look. Shit happens in NFL games. Most people understand that. As long as Clowney wasn't doing it maliciously, then there's no reason he should be forced out of the game or anything like that. [Reply]
Originally Posted by chiefzilla1501:
I agree protocol likely won't change. But bountygate was a huge black eye too, and Wentz getting knocked out of the game while clowney gets zero penalty is a really bad look too. And a retroactive fine isn't going to fix it.
Yeah maybe, but none of that stuff is going to cost the NFL $1 billion in a lawsuit again. [Reply]
Originally Posted by treeguy27:
Zilla needs to be in the concussion protocol.
Whatever, what I'm saying is stuff most people were chirping about for pages and pages after the chiefs/Colts and chiefs/titans playoff games. A lot of these opinions have changed because it wasn't our team. Most people here agree that there's a very real problem of Tonya harding it without any real repercussions. I appreciate the discussion because obviously the fix isn't easy... Maybe not even possible. That's why we're talking about it. [Reply]
If you make a hit that looks intentional that ends with the other player winding up in the protocol: you're off the field as long as that player is off the field. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Discuss Thrower:
If you make a hit that looks intentional that ends with the other player winding up in the protocol: you're off the field as long as that player is off the field.
On the surface, sure sounds logical. Until people start throwing undrafted 3rd string scrubs at drew brees. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Discuss Thrower:
If you make a hit that looks intentional that ends with the other player winding up in the protocol: you're off the field as long as that player is off the field.
So who will be the judge of what he's look or don't look intentional? [Reply]
