The Seahawks Own Your Face

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tony bagadonuts

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DirtyB

The lack of a fine doesn't make it a bad call. It just means that it didn't warrant a fine.

Davis is still not cleared to play.

---

The penalty was for launching. If he was deemed to have launched then he would have been fined. The fact that he wasn't fined means that the NFL reviewed the play and came to the conclusion that he didn't launch. If he didn't launch there shouldn't have been a flag.

The fact that Davis isn't cleared to play is unfortunate, but completely irrelevant.

Edit - How hard does Chancellor hit if he can give Vernon Davis a concussion without hitting him in the head??

---

I thought he would get fined because he was in the act of launching but Davis body stopped that, as well as the act of hitting upwards. Personally I think it was a great hit but I'm a little shocked no fine just to protect the refs they could have said he was in the act of launching. Have to give props to the NFL for not doing that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tony bagadonuts

Richard Sherman won his appeal and will not be suspended.

Great day in the morning! What once was lost now is found.

Outrageous that he isn't a first team pro bowler as he is probably the best corner in the NFC right now.

---

For the record he won because the collection process was fucked up not because he didnt take anything. Its kinda like the Ryan Braun thing that happened here. Sure he won but it doesnt mean he didnt break the rules in the first place it just means he might have got away with it because of some moron.

Plus you never know these guys that take the samples are probably fans of their home teams and whos to say that a guy that knows hes pissing dirty doesnt offer a guy soem outrageous amount of money to fuck it up. A guy making $10hr gets 50k thrown at him who knows. A 4 game suspension would cost them alot more in money and rep. Not saying it happened in this case just saying Its possible it has happened before.

There seems to be some misunderstanding as to just what launching is, so here's the NFL's version. Clearly, Kam did not launch.

Code:

---

(j)  if a player illegally launches into a defenseless opponent. It is an illegal launch if a player (1) leaves
both feet prior to contact to spring forward and upward into his opponent, and (2) uses any part of his
helmet (including the top/crown and forehead/”hairline” parts) to initiate forcible contact against  any
part of his opponent’s body.

Note: This does not apply to contact against a runner, unless the runner is still considered to be a defenseless
player, as defined in Rule 12, Section 2, Article 9.

---

If the hitter's head does not make first contact, it cannot possibly be called launching by rule.

Sherman made PFFs Pro Bowl team

Cornerbacks: Richard Sherman (SEA), Charles Tillman (CHI) and Casey Hayward (GB)

As our premium subscribers will find from looking at the top of our cornerback rankings this decision was somewhat of a four into three with the most worthy coverage defenders taking the top spots for the NFC and the ultra active and instinctive Antoine Winfield just missing out. In his second season Richard Sherman has cut down the penalty count and is making a strong case for being the best man coverage cornerback in the league in the absence of Darrelle Revis. Meanwhile Charles Tillman had a streak of forced fumbles earlier in the season that must have had skill position coaches running extra ball carrying drills in the run up to games against the Bears. Not merely a turnover a machine Tillman is also amongst the league leaders in terms of limiting gains for opposing receivers when he does give up a reception it hasn’t resulted in a gain of more than 30 yards. The group is rounded out by the phenomenal rookie Casey Hayward who has proven capable of shutting down receivers both in the slot and out wide. He started the season on the fringes of the lineup but as the season progressed he saw an increased role in the defense and responded with the kind of consistently good coverage performances that you would expect from only the best veteran corners.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Crowe Diddly

There seems to be some misunderstanding as to just what launching is, so here's the NFL's version. Clearly, Kam did not launch.

Code:

---

(j)  if a player illegally launches into a defenseless opponent. It is an illegal launch if a player (1) leaves
both feet prior to contact to spring forward and upward into his opponent, and (2) uses any part of his
helmet (including the top/crown and forehead/”hairline” parts) to initiate forcible contact against  any
part of his opponent’s body.

Note: This does not apply to contact against a runner, unless the runner is still considered to be a defenseless
player, as defined in Rule 12, Section 2, Article 9.

---

If the hitter's head does not make first contact, it cannot possibly be called launching by rule.

---

He was clearly leading with his shoulder but his head still makes contact right before his shoulder.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ShadyJ

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Crowe Diddly

There seems to be some misunderstanding as to just what launching is, so here's the NFL's version. Clearly, Kam did not launch.

Code:

---

(j)  if a player illegally launches into a defenseless opponent. It is an illegal launch if a player (1) leaves
both feet prior to contact to spring forward and upward into his opponent, and (2) uses any part of his
helmet (including the top/crown and forehead/”hairline” parts) to initiate forcible contact against  any
part of his opponent’s body.

Note: This does not apply to contact against a runner, unless the runner is still considered to be a defenseless
player, as defined in Rule 12, Section 2, Article 9.

---

If the hitter's head does not make first contact, it cannot possibly be called launching by rule.

---

He was clearly leading with his shoulder but his head still makes contact right before his shoulder.

---

YEah, you're right.

The helmet contact was incidental, not forcible, as the rule demands. I shouldn't have wrote that last line above, as yeah, the helmet did hit first. The helmet "didn't initiate forcible contact" is what I shoulda wrote.

I get all confused when I start using rules-sound words like incidental and forcible contact.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DirtyB

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tony bagadonuts

No fine for Chancellor, it was a clean hit.

Bad call by three referees. If they can't make the right call due to the speed of the play then it needs to be reviewable.

---

The lack of a fine doesn't make it a bad call. It just means that it didn't warrant a fine.

Davis is still not cleared to play.

---

This is one of the most retarded posts I've ever seen.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nightmarefish

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DirtyB

The lack of a fine doesn't make it a bad call. It just means that it didn't warrant a fine.

Davis is still not cleared to play.

---

This is one of the most retarded posts I've ever seen.

---

Consider the source.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Crowe Diddly

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ShadyJ

He was clearly leading with his shoulder but his head still makes contact right before his shoulder.

---

YEah, you're right.

The helmet contact was incidental, not forcible, as the rule demands. I shouldn't have wrote that last line above, as yeah, the helmet did hit first. The helmet "didn't initiate forcible contact" is what I shoulda wrote.

I get all confused when I start using rules-sound words like incidental and forcible contact.

---

How are we supposed to understand the rules when the NFL themselves dont. I think the NFL is just to worried about possible future lawsuits they can say hey we did everything we could, but it sucks that these def guys are taught one way their whole life then all of a sudden thats wrong, and they really dont know whats right.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nightmarefish

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DirtyB

The lack of a fine doesn't make it a bad call. It just means that it didn't warrant a fine.

Davis is still not cleared to play.

---

This is one of the most retarded posts I've ever seen.

---

Not every personal foul called gets a penalty, but the Davis being cleared or not is irrelevant.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tony bagadonuts

No fine for Chancellor, it was a clean hit.

Bad call by three referees. If they can't make the right call due to the speed of the play then it needs to be reviewable.

---

There doesn't need to be a review on every single questionable play. Games already take too long. I don't want to watch a 5 hour football game. Officials need to be given some discretion to make calls on the field. It was a clean hit. It was also a bad call. But it was an understandable bad call. I can see why he called it the way he did. Given the speed of the hit, and it's impact on Davis's body, most of the time that is a helmet to helmet hit. Later in the game, a 49ers player was called for a questionable personal foul call for slamming a player to the ground. Probably a make up call. At the end of the day, it usually all evens out. And I have read and heard multiple times over the years that officials try and make sure that it does.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Anal_Hershiser

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tony bagadonuts

No fine for Chancellor, it was a clean hit.

Bad call by three referees. If they can't make the right call due to the speed of the play then it needs to be reviewable.

---

There doesn't need to be a review on every single questionable play. Games already take too long. I don't want to watch a 5 hour football game. Officials need to be given some discretion to make calls on the field. It was a clean hit. It was also a bad call. But it was an understandable bad call. I can see why he called it the way he did. Given the speed of the hit, and it's impact on Davis's body, most of the time that is a helmet to helmet hit. Later in the game, a 49ers player was called for a questionable personal foul call for slamming a player to the ground. Probably a make up call. At the end of the day, it usually all evens out. And I have read and heard multiple times over the years that officials try and make sure that it does.

---

Agreed, but if they were going to go to replay for any penalty I wish it would be pass interference. The pass int calls are so bad they should go to the college type 10 yards and a 1st down.

I hope Sherman sues the NFL and wins something here and sets a precedent for them to not "leak" the drug tests. This has happened in all major sports for years

There is always a story that comes out that says "league sources" or "sources" say XYZ tested positive and in some cases they include the drug.

I am not a lawyer here but should not these cases be kept confidential?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by chinamaniac

I hope Sherman sues the NFL and wins something here and sets a precedent for them to not "leak" the drug tests. This has happened in all major sports for years

There is always a story that comes out that says "league sources" or "sources" say XYZ tested positive and in some cases they include the drug.

I am not a lawyer here but should not these cases be kept confidential?

---

I'm pretty sure the NFL is the one pro league that does not say what substance was found. Thus, this new trend of every NFL player saying they are taking Adderall. Probably a lie, but it doesn't hurt the public perception of them as bad as admitting to steroids or other things.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gut

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by chinamaniac

I hope Sherman sues the NFL and wins something here and sets a precedent for them to not "leak" the drug tests. This has happened in all major sports for years

There is always a story that comes out that says "league sources" or "sources" say XYZ tested positive and in some cases they include the drug.

I am not a lawyer here but should not these cases be kept confidential?

---

I'm pretty sure the NFL is the one pro league that does not say what substance was found. Thus, this new trend of every NFL player saying they are taking Adderall. Probably a lie, but it doesn't hurt the public perception of them as bad as admitting to steroids or other things.

---

Drug aside , what about the NFL leaking that they tested positive for something. Surely this is something that should remain confidential until a suspension is made

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by chinamaniac

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gut

I'm pretty sure the NFL is the one pro league that does not say what substance was found. Thus, this new trend of every NFL player saying they are taking Adderall. Probably a lie, but it doesn't hurt the public perception of them as bad as admitting to steroids or other things.

---

Drug aside , what about the NFL leaking that they tested positive for something. Surely this is something that should remain confidential until a suspension is made

---

I doubt it is a coordinated effort by the NFL to leak it, but who knows? I'm sure some of the top writers/organizations have their own "Deep Throat" inside league offices.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gut

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by chinamaniac

Drug aside , what about the NFL leaking that they tested positive for something. Surely this is something that should remain confidential until a suspension is made

---

I doubt it is a coordinated effort by the NFL to leak it, but who knows? I'm sure some of the top writers/organizations have their own "Deep Throat" inside league offices.

---

Personally I don't care whether the stuff gets leaked but if I were a player I wouldnt be happy.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by chinamaniac

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gut

I doubt it is a coordinated effort by the NFL to leak it, but who knows? I'm sure some of the top writers/organizations have their own "Deep Throat" inside league offices.

---

Personally I don't care whether the stuff gets leaked but if I were a player I wouldnt be happy.

---

Don't take banned substances and you have nothing to worry about.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Anal_Hershiser

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by chinamaniac

Personally I don't care whether the stuff gets leaked but if I were a player I wouldnt be happy.

---

Don't take banned substances and you have nothing to worry about.

---

What about false positives?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by chinamaniac

I hope Sherman sues the NFL and wins something here and sets a precedent for them to not "leak" the drug tests. This has happened in all major sports for years

There is always a story that comes out that says "league sources" or "sources" say XYZ tested positive and in some cases they include the drug.

I am not a lawyer here but should not these cases be kept confidential?

---

The NFL doesnt leak anything they punish the player. Sherman got a 4 game suspension. Its not like all of a sudden hes not playing and everyones like wheres Sherman. They announce the punishment. They dont announce what substance was used which is bs.