DawgTalkers.net
Posted By: SaintDawg Garrett part 2 - 11/15/19 11:24 PM
Linkage

The NFL rulebook addresses what Garrett did. It is under Rule 12, Section 2, Article 17.

Rule 12 covers player conduct and Section 2 governs personal fouls.

Here is what Article 17 says: “USE OF HELMET AS A WEAPON. A player may not use a helmet that is no longer worn by anyone as a weapon to strike, swing at, or throw at an opponent.

Penalty: For illegal use of a helmet as a weapon: Loss of 15 yards and automatic disqualification. If the foul is by the defense, it is also an automatic first down.”

Article 15 governs grabbing an opponent’s facemask, which applies in this incident, too. This is what it says: “TWISTING, PULLING, OR TURNING THE FACEMASK OR HELMET OPENING. No player shall grasp and control, twist, turn, push, or pull the facemask or helmet opening of an opponent in any direction.

“Note: If a player grasps an opponent’s facemask or helmet opening, he must immediately release it. If he does not immediately release it and controls his opponent, it is a foul.

“Penalty: For twisting, turning, pushing, pulling, or controlling the mask or helmet opening: Loss of 15 yards. The player may be disqualified if the action is flagrant. If the foul is by the defense, it is also an automatic first down.”

Garrett was disqualified, and most agree his actions were flagrant.

The NFL didn’t wait long to hand out punishment to Garrett and others involved in the brouhaha



** I think he's got a point of appeal here..
Posted By: Dawgs4Life Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/15/19 11:47 PM
Hmm
Posted By: Punchsmack Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/15/19 11:48 PM
I would doubt the Browns appeal. They want it all behind them. Appealing will only keep it on the front page longer.

Plus, any appeal would lose. You can defend Myles using a helmet like that. He's LUCKY if he's only out 6 games. I predicted last night, he'll be out for multiple games next season too.

Plus, how do you appeal an indefinite suspension? We don't know exactly how many games right now, so how can it be lowered? Sure, maybe settle on 6 and leave next year open, but the league won't budge on this one.
Posted By: SaintDawg Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/15/19 11:50 PM
They may have to. It's in black and white in the contract w NFLPA
Posted By: GMdawg Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/15/19 11:55 PM
Quote:
I would doubt the Browns appeal. They want it all behind them. Appealing will only keep it on the front page longer


I hope the Browns have the gonads to stick up for their player while admitting what he did was wrong. There is ZERO precidense for what the NFL is trying to do.
Posted By: SaintDawg Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/15/19 11:58 PM
Originally Posted By: GMdawg
Quote:
I would doubt the Browns appeal. They want it all behind them. Appealing will only keep it on the front page longer


I hope the Browns have the gonads to stick up for their player while admitting what he did was wrong. There is ZERO precidense for what the NFL is trying to do.


Albert Haynesworth head stomp on Gurode
Posted By: CapCity Dawg Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/16/19 12:09 AM
j/c

Went out to eat and I could see the TV fro my seat. Was on ESPN. Muted, no closed captioning so not sure what was being said. It was about Garrett and they pretty much had the incident on a continuous loop. But just the part with Garret taking Rudolph's helmet off and hitting him with it. Not once did they show how it all started.

Looked like Rudolph was minding his own business, going to choir practice, when Garrett jumped him.
Posted By: Tulsa Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/16/19 12:14 AM
Looks like the Players Association needs to go to bat for Garrett.
Posted By: Dave Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/16/19 12:21 AM
I hope Myles appeals this. Suspension should be 3 or 4 games, no more. That dickweed Rudolph should have gotten at least a 1 game suspension. He grabbed and tried to remove Garrett's helmet, kicked him in the junk, came after Garrett when Garrett was trying to fight off DeCastro, punched him in the junk again, and then got a glancing blow from the padded portion of the helmet. He's lucky Garrett didn't make him eat the helmet.
Posted By: GMdawg Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/16/19 12:23 AM
Originally Posted By: SaintDawg
Originally Posted By: GMdawg
Quote:
I would doubt the Browns appeal. They want it all behind them. Appealing will only keep it on the front page longer


I hope the Browns have the gonads to stick up for their player while admitting what he did was wrong. There is ZERO precidense for what the NFL is trying to do.


Albert Haynesworth head stomp on Gurode


Which was 5 games AND Gurode didn't start it or escalate it. So why are they coming down harder of Myles???????? Like I said ZERO Precedents.
Posted By: Knight_Of_Brown Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/16/19 12:25 AM
According to TMZ Garret is appealing the suspension

https://www.tmz.com/2019/11/15/myles-garrett-helmet-attack-no-police-investigation-steelers-browns/

Word is Garret will meet with the league next week but when it’s all set and done I figure it will be 2-4 games. Garret has no prior history of suspensions it would be hard to justify such a lengthy suspension when no one was even hurt. Unlike guys lime Burfict that was concussing people left and right.

I’ll be surprised if Garret isn’t back before the end of the year but no way he is back before the next Steeler game they want that to cool off for awhile

Rudolph called him a coward to the media after starting a fight with him and kick and punching Garret in the nuts...Rudolph better hope he is a back up next year because if he has to play Garret is probably chomping at the bit to beat the stuffing out of him the legal football way.
Posted By: Dawgs4Life Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/16/19 12:26 AM
Well, this will be interesting now
Posted By: GMdawg Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/16/19 12:27 AM
OK once again the NFL jumps all over the steelers jock. So sickening that I really want to puke. What Myles did was 110 percent wrong. I am not making one single excuse for what he did. It was wrong no question about it. Yes I am going to add a huge BUT. Rudolph started the mess, and kept it going and instigated it. Was there a penalty for him grabbing Myles helmet and twisting and ripping at it...... or for kicking him either i the stomach or groin Oh hell NO he is a Steeler he is allowed to abuse Cleveland Players. It has happened for years while Cleveland was forced to sit back and take it. Well guess what the NFL still wants Cleveland to sit back and take it up the back side. It's nothing new it has been going on for years. Myles should be suspended for 2 to 4 games, but the NFL wants to bury him and Cleveland. Rudolph should also be suspended for at least half the time that Myles is. Anything less is just a huge middle finger to Cleveland and Browns fans.
Posted By: DeputyDawg Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/16/19 12:37 AM
Where is the two kicks to the nuts rule in the rule book because I'm interested to see if a slap on the wrist is proper punishment?
Posted By: GMdawg Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/16/19 12:43 AM
Slap on the wrist?????????

WTF are you talking about Rudolph got off Scott free no penelty, no suspension, and no fine. The NFL might just as well as said it's open season on Browns players AND WE DON'T GIVE A DAMN.
Posted By: FL_Dawg Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/16/19 12:51 AM
Originally Posted By: GMdawg
Slap on the wrist?????????

WTF are you talking about Rudolph got off Scott free no penelty, no suspension, and no fine. The NFL might just as well as said it's open season on Browns players AND WE DON'T GIVE A DAMN.


The League has been stating that all season.
Posted By: Pdawg Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/16/19 01:00 AM
Originally Posted By: GMdawg
Slap on the wrist?????????

WTF are you talking about Rudolph got off Scott free no penelty, no suspension, and no fine. The NFL might just as well as said it's open season on Browns players AND WE DON'T GIVE A DAMN.


I saw on NFL Network Ruldolph will be fined only.
Posted By: GMdawg Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/16/19 01:00 AM
Since 1999

They are still peed off that Cleveland got to keep their team
Posted By: GMdawg Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/16/19 01:01 AM
Originally Posted By: Pdawg
Originally Posted By: GMdawg
Slap on the wrist?????????

WTF are you talking about Rudolph got off Scott free no penelty, no suspension, and no fine. The NFL might just as well as said it's open season on Browns players AND WE DON'T GIVE A DAMN.


I saw on NFL Network Ruldolph will be fined only.


Come on Pdawg you know that punishment is like the NFL telling me I can only drink 17 beers instead of 18.
Posted By: Dawgs4Life Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/16/19 01:05 AM
Jc

When I saw Myles got 6 games, I figured Rudolph probably got 2-3 ... and then I see he got zero? Laughable IMO.

Myles is not innocent in the least .... his was egregious and dangerous and dumb.

But Rudolph was guilty as well
Posted By: DeputyDawg Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/16/19 01:12 AM
Originally Posted By: GMdawg
Slap on the wrist?????????

WTF are you talking about Rudolph got off Scott free no penelty, no suspension, and no fine. The NFL might just as well as said it's open season on Browns players AND WE DON'T GIVE A DAMN.


Actually that is exactly what I'm talking about. A fine is a slap on the wrist.
Posted By: Rishuz Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/16/19 01:17 AM
And there is no way that Myles is getting back on the field this year. The backlash the NFL would take would be strong. They will take advantage of the Haslam's because they just want it to go away. Public perception is strong on this one and it ain't in the Browns favor.

Something tells me this going to galvanize the team. I think the offense is going to start clicking and I wouldn't be surprised if Chad Thomas emerged as a player. Get past Miami and get Larry back. Beat Pitt the second time and I think we run the table.

If Baker happens to be on waivers in your FF leagues, go and get him.
Posted By: Squires Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/16/19 01:17 AM
The Steelers punishment is Rudolph still gets to play.

Seriously, the nfl pretty much said QB's can do what they want and not get punished.
Posted By: GMdawg Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/16/19 01:17 AM
The Steelers will pay his fine. So he still got off Scott free. I am sick and tired of hearing how great the Rooneys are when all they do is Cover their own players and they don't give a crap about any other players. The ROoneys are out for their selves and screw everybody else. It's about time that the public realizes just how dirty the Rooneys really are, and how much they get away with murder. Well OK not murder but they get away with anything they want.
Posted By: slick Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/16/19 01:34 AM
Like I said in another thread. Ray rice knocked his girlfriend unconscious and dragged her limp body from a elevator....oh and he spit on her to. His punishment was 4 games, that's it. Give me a break. Goodell plays favorites. Especially when it comes to teams like batl, Pitt and NE
Posted By: Dawgs4Life Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/16/19 01:46 AM
Don’t forget the Rooney’s close relationship with the competition committee
Posted By: GMdawg Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/16/19 01:47 AM
I thought incest was illegal?
Posted By: FL_Dawg Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/16/19 01:50 AM
Message to Defensive players.

The League has just declared open season on your nuts for QBs'
Posted By: OldColdDawg Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/16/19 02:05 AM
Every fan going to the second game should carry a regulation browns helmet and wear a jockstrap.
Posted By: jaybird Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/16/19 02:11 AM
Totally think the suspension in Garrett is right... if he wants to appeal fine... but six games feels right...

But how the hell does mason get off Scott free?!? Dude needs at least one game suspension
Posted By: GMdawg Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/16/19 02:14 AM
Originally Posted By: OldColdDawg
Every fan going to the second game should carry a regulation browns helmet and wear a jockstrap.


Every fan going to the second game should be ready to have the NFL break it off in their backside and claim they didn't to the folks who are being sodomised by the NFL.
Posted By: GMdawg Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/16/19 02:15 AM
Originally Posted By: jaybird
Totally think the suspension in Garrett is right... if he wants to appeal fine... but six games feels right...

But how the hell does mason get off Scott free?!? Dude needs at least one game suspension


ONE ROTFLMFAO OK Roger
Posted By: jaybird Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/16/19 02:17 AM
Well franklyym2-3 makes sense but at least one is a start
Posted By: northlima dawg Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/16/19 02:19 AM
Originally Posted By: jaybird
Totally think the suspension in Garrett is right... if he wants to appeal fine... but six games feels right...

But how the hell does mason get off Scott free?!? Dude needs at least one game suspension


I thought Rudolph should get 2-3 games and Myles should have gotten 4 to end of regular season. And if Rudolph called him a racial slur, i would think about more.

This would not have been a big deal if Myles would have just dropped the helmet when he yanked it off his head.

I am actually surprised that the NFL gave pouncey a 3 game suspension.

If Rudolph plays the way he did yesterday, the worst punishment for the Steelers would be to keep him on the field.

Gonna be an interesting game in two weeks. Both teams are going to have a chip and we are not going to get away with anything.
Posted By: GMdawg Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/16/19 02:19 AM
I can agree with 2 to 4 games thumbsup
Posted By: 10YrOvernightSuccess Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/16/19 02:24 AM
Went to the gym this morning and TVs as usual are all set to ESPN, ESPN2, ESPNn and another random network. It was looped endlessly on all TVs, every time I looked at any screen. I later saw a client who never talks about anything but work stuff and has no interest at all in sports (and has no idea I’m even a football watcher let alone a Browns fan) launch into the “disgusting violence” of a football game she saw this morning. “They should be put in jail!” She said. Wowsers. This is big.

I can’t help but think that it being a Thursday night game on an otherwise slow sports day made this the singular inescapable black-hole story whereas it might have been just the biggest among several stories if it were Sunday. And ultimately that’s what made this such a forced hand for the league. This story sucked so much media energy and public attention that the league had to blow up the punishment to the biggest degree just to satisfy the call. And they had do so immediately, there was no waiting and mulling, no cool off period.

He’s done for the year and I’m guessing Into next year. Maybe deep into next year. Maybe even longer. Is it right? Is it proportional? Does it compare to past crimes and punishments? Are all parties being treated with the same justice?

Totally irrelevant questions.

This is PR 101. This has to do with a major publicity black eye for the league at a time it’s desperately trying to avoid just such black eyes. They need Garrett to go away for long enough that people stop talking about this as the state of the league in the present tense, which will be this season at the very least. The only way to make it stop for them is to banish him for a long while. Appeals will fall on deaf ears. This is way too much in the wider public eye for the league to equivocate at all. There’s no good reason for them to reverse course from all but the harshest punishment possible. Anything less invites ridicule from everyone not in Cleveland. There’s zero incentive to just and detached reason and we shouldn’t expect it.
Posted By: OldColdDawg Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/16/19 02:37 AM
Originally Posted By: jaybird
Totally think the suspension in Garrett is right... if he wants to appeal fine... but six games feels right...

But how the hell does mason get off Scott free?!? Dude needs at least one game suspension


6 games would be acceptable with no need to appeal. He got an INDEFINITE SUSPENSION! That means he can come back whenever the NFL feels like letting him and he has to jump through hoops to do that. These are nowhere near the same punishment.
Posted By: EveDawg Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/16/19 02:43 AM
I read he is appealing.

https://www.tmz.com/2019/11/15/myles-garrett-helmet-attack-no-police-investigation-steelers-browns/
Posted By: Clemdawg Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/16/19 03:05 AM
I find this pic appealing:

Posted By: HotBYoungTurk Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/16/19 03:11 AM
with the rule book as it is... I can see a Myles Garrett rule coming...
Posted By: Pdawg Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/16/19 04:42 AM
Originally Posted By: GMdawg
Originally Posted By: Pdawg
Originally Posted By: GMdawg
Slap on the wrist?????????

WTF are you talking about Rudolph got off Scott free no penelty, no suspension, and no fine. The NFL might just as well as said it's open season on Browns players AND WE DON'T GIVE A DAMN.


I saw on NFL Network Ruldolph will be fined only.


Come on Pdawg you know that punishment is like the NFL telling me I can only drink 17 beers instead of 18.


I know. I was just posting what I heard. I think Rudolph deserves at least a game suspension.
Posted By: myka Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/16/19 04:53 AM
Originally Posted By: Pdawg
Originally Posted By: GMdawg
Originally Posted By: Pdawg
Originally Posted By: GMdawg
Slap on the wrist?????????

WTF are you talking about Rudolph got off Scott free no penelty, no suspension, and no fine. The NFL might just as well as said it's open season on Browns players AND WE DON'T GIVE A DAMN.


I saw on NFL Network Ruldolph will be fined only.


Come on Pdawg you know that punishment is like the NFL telling me I can only drink 17 beers instead of 18.


I know. I was just posting what I heard. I think Rudolph deserves at least a game suspension.


I agree. I'd be madder that Rudolph isn't suspended except he's terrible anyways.

Where were all the suspensions when the Steelers were bullying us?

I honestly don't understand how the NFL continues to get away with biased behavior towards the Browns.

Who's job is this to fix? Haslam?

I'm debating if I want to stop watching the NFL entirely.

I'd miss it so much, but it just feels like I'm supporting a criminal enterprise. I can deal with biased Refs calls until we have superstars for them to protect. I can deal with mismanagement, extra fines, etc, but suspending players of ours and not theirs is next level favoritism.

Some people say it's racism because Rudolph was the only white player of the 4. The MOST at fault, and yet got the least punishment.

Could that be true? That would make me sad.
Posted By: jacksondawg Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/16/19 11:11 AM
This will get appealed because Haslam is getting cost 100,000,0000 of dollars.
This means the AFC north is a 3 way dogfight.
Posted By: PerfectSpiral Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/16/19 12:51 PM
1 player does not make a team. We won and the Steelers took a good ole fashion butt whipping. Moving on.
Posted By: devicedawg Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/16/19 12:56 PM
J/C

I keep reading how Browns/Browns fans are playing the blame game. I'm not blaming anyone, in fact I don't care how it started. I'm taking what I saw in the video and issuing suspensions. I don't even care who or why it started...

I don't understand how Rudolph gets no suspension after looking at the video. I would LOVE to hear the reasoning why the NFL didn't suspend him and what they saw in the video to justify it.

If Rudolph does nothing after having his helmet ripped off, the incident is over, we have ejections and minimal fines and suspensions. Except, Rudolph charges after Garrett and punches/grabs him in the groin. Is the NFL gonna say he was just trying to get his helmet back?

After the incident, Ogunjobi pushes Rudolph to the ground and he receives a game suspension? Are you kidding me? Since when is pushing a player to the ground a suspension? No punches thrown, nothing. Game suspension, but the guy who prolongs the fight, nothing.

It's unbelievable that Rudolph received zero suspension. Unbelievable! Maybe Garrett starts it, maybe Rudolph did, but Rudolph 100% prolonged in the fight charging after Garrett.

Please NFL, tell me what you saw that justifies no suspension for Mason Rudolph. I'm most upset about this than potentially losing the best defensive player in the league for the season.

What Garrett did is inexcusable, but Mason Rudolph no suspension is a complete and utter joke.


Posted By: Brown to the Bone Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/16/19 01:12 PM
Rudolph tried to puck MG and got the worst end of it period.

Now I don't go for after the play is over violence but you have to ask yourself a question why did this whole thing start?

MG had Rudolph grab his facemask and ear hole and twist, MG then ripped his helmet from his head, then Rudolph tried to go for MG no-no's and got a helmet to his head for his trouble. The NFL can blame MG for his act, but not Rudolph for his.

The fact is MG overreacted and could have inflicted a life threatening injury to Rudolph, but Rudolph is far from a innocent victim here and that would be my point.

Make no mistake either the Browns were ready for the Steelers to TRY to punch them in the face as they have so many times.

IMO its long past time the Browns stood up to the Steelers but this went a bit to far. I got MG back, but never use a helmet to do the deed beat the hell out of him with your hands he is a punk treat him like one, beat his ass.
Posted By: jfanent Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/16/19 01:16 PM
After looking at the steeler message boards, there are more than a few of their fans that wish Rudolph would get suspended.
Posted By: bluecollarball Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/16/19 01:18 PM
j/c

I had a feeling the punishment they would hand out would be handed out. Rudolph is skating, basically, because he's a quarterback. Pouncy will appeal and have it knocked down to 2 games perhaps, long enough to keep him out of the next meeting.

Garret is so wrong man. I know it's emotion but the better part of valor is to walk away. Be the bigger man and be the better man. Now, he's the villain of the entire NFL community to say nothing of mainstream media running this story and social media. He made Ben Shaprio for God sakes!

Now the dude is going to lose more money than I will make in ten lifetimes and hurt his team by not being out on the field. I don't feel sorry for him. I am irked, really.

That being said, the NFL has a discipline problem. Myles gets an indefinite suspension which could mean, and it wouldn't surprise me, that he's suspended into next year. This is PR pure and simple. He's getting a bigger suspension than dudes who beat women or do drugs. This is PR punishment.

Rudolph should be suspended a game or two as well. That little punk cried and played the "babe of the woods" routine and had is agent talk to a lawyer. I sincerely hope, that when we play again in two weeks, we beat the ever loving snot out of him, pick off four more passes and beat the crap out of that team in their stadium.
Posted By: bluecollarball Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/16/19 01:19 PM
Originally Posted By: jfanent
After looking at the steeler message boards, there are more than a few of their fans that wish Rudolph would get suspended.


I know several Steelers fans that feel the same way. If it was Big Ben though they probably wouldn't say that . . . they say that cause Rudolph sucks.
Posted By: Tulsa Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/16/19 01:20 PM
I’m already down to watching only the Browns games in their entirety. Other nfl games I pay little attention to, if they’re on my tv, it’s generally as background noise. These actions by goddell are just one more nail in the nfl coffin for me. I’m finally to a point where the nfl isn’t worth the time investment I’ve previously made to the sport. To not give Rudolph any kind of suspension is the nfl’s version of picking winners and losers. Either suspend no one or everyone involved, this outcome is absolutely unfair.
Posted By: WSU Willie Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/16/19 01:42 PM
Originally Posted By: bluecollarball


Garret is so wrong man. I know it's emotion but the better part of valor is to walk away. Be the bigger man and be the better man. Now, he's the villain of the entire NFL community to say nothing of mainstream media running this story and social media. He made Ben Shaprio for God sakes!


Garrett WAS walking away...retreating towards the back of the endzone...neutralized by a Steeler O Lineman. Mason charged at Garrett.

None of the videos making it to TV show any of that...not how it all started...not Garrett retreating...not even Pouncey in a roid rage.

I was discussing the fight with a Bengal-fan friend last night. He said that Garrett should not have come at Rudolph...I explained that Garrett did NOT come after Rudolph...we argued about the point...the game was being replayed in the bar. At the end of the game, he changed his mind 100% about who was at fault once he saw the whole event.

Not many non-Browns fans or non-Steeler fans will ever see the entire event...those who did, saw the guy who unnecessarily started the fight get punked...just like it should be in life.
Posted By: waterdawg Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/16/19 01:55 PM
Doesn't fit the narrative the Media wants to push . Why many, many folks don't trust the Media anymore .

If you broke the incident down frame by you come away with a totally different opinion of the incident.

All know that Garrett went overboard . he is going get Time Out !

Not on the same page with our Owners ( as usual ) . Would have worded my statement very differently !
Posted By: Knight_Of_Brown Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/16/19 02:11 PM
After seeing Rudolph's press conference...yuck...what a smug SOB

Its important to understand, Garret HELD BACK that swing was a defensive swing, not an offense one...Garret easily could have split rudolph's head in half if he wanted to, Have you SEEN Myles Garret?

Trust me, Garret held back, he barely swung that helmet at Rudolph at all, he easily could have split his head or killed him if he wanted to. That needs to be stated that Garret did indeed hold back.

I don't think Garret will be out that long, the indefinite suspension is just there because they haven't decided a number of games yet, they are meeting with them next week.

Garret has the NFL Rulebook on his side:

Rule 12 Section 2

ARTICLE 17. USE OF HELMET AS A WEAPON.
A player may not use a helmet that is no longer worn by anyone as a weapon to strike, swing at, or throw at an opponent.

Penalty: For illegal use of a helmet as a weapon: Loss of 15 yards and automatic disqualification. If the foul is by the defense, it is also an automatic first down.

Simply put, swinging a helmet is just an ejection and nothing more.

Mason Rudolph grabbing and twisting Garrets helmet is JUST AS EGREGIOUS as what Garret did according to the NFL Rule book, perhaps even moreso:

ARTICLE 15.
TWISTING, PULLING, OR TURNING THE FACEMASK OR HELMET OPENING


.No player shall grasp and control, twist, turn, push, or pull the facemask or helmet opening of an opponent in any direction.

Note:If a player grasps an opponent’s facemask or helmet opening, he must immediately release it. If he does not immediately release it and controls his opponent, it is a foul.

Penalty: For twisting, turning, pushing, pulling, or controlling the mask or helmet opening: Loss of 15 yards. The player may be disqualified if the action is flagrant. If the foul is by the defense, it is also an automatic first down.

https://operations.nfl.com/media/3831/2019-playing-rules.pdf

Simply put, What Garret did is being blown out of proportion. Rudolph didn't get hurt or killed because Garret wasn't trying to hurt or kill him, he was simply trying to get Rudolph away from him before he could take a 3rd shot at his man parts.

Mason Rudolph is not in a hospital or dead today soley because Myless Garret chose not to use his real actualy power in swinging that helmet. Garret CONSCIUOUSLY CHOSE not use his full power in that swing....Rudolph is a lucky, lucky man...he would do best to remember that.
Posted By: Damanshot Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/16/19 02:21 PM
Originally Posted By: GMdawg
Quote:
I would doubt the Browns appeal. They want it all behind them. Appealing will only keep it on the front page longer


I hope the Browns have the gonads to stick up for their player while admitting what he did was wrong. There is ZERO precidense for what the NFL is trying to do.


I finally got to see the replays in slo mo...

Rudolph started it.. Garrett finished it.

Garrett was wrong, no question. But for Rudolph to walk scottfree, no,... I don't think so.
Posted By: CapCity Dawg Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/16/19 02:22 PM
j/c:

The NFL is saying that if you wear brown and orange, you don't matter.
Posted By: eotab Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/16/19 02:55 PM
I find it funny all these pundits stating that Garrett used the helmet as a weapon and could have killed Rudolf.

Meanwhile in football the helmet is being used as a weapon every game and the NFL is trying to stop that of course.

Rudolf was not injured the helmet was not a hammer being wielded immediately Rudolf lifts his hands up and looks for a ref. not go to the ground injured and after the melee you see him in the huddle "LAUGHING" cause he knows what he did and got away with it.

I'm sure he was bragging about it in the huddle....hahaha I grabbed his nuts, hahaha

This is an obvious reaction from the NFL to the Browns organization, they will do whatever they can to penalize the Browns organization as their fans forced them to put a team in Cleveland over LA Calif. Then the fans has the audacity to run the refs out of the stadium as the new rule for replay that was installed clearly stating that it could not be utilized after a play was ran. Which we did and then they say hold it we are reviewing the play...against the rules.

Yes, what we did throwing bottles at the refs was wrong.

Yes, what Garrett did hitting a player in the head with a helmet in hand. Was clearly wrong and I'm sure to a man/woman here we are saying he should be punished but there seems to be a great double standard here.

Rudolf was clearly the aggressor.
Rudolf clearly broke the rules by grabbing at Garretts facemask.
Shame shame on Aikman who was kissing the Steelers butt all game. Stating that Rudolf's finger was stuck in Garretts helmet that is why he was pulling on it. Shame on Aikman!!!

Garrett clearly pulled back on Rudolf and clearly ripped off his helmet.

Garrett was then held and rendered done and over altercation DONE!
Rudolf then clearly runs after Garrett with hatred and teeth bared punching Garrett in the nuts.

Garrett then responded in a REACTION...not premeditated to swing the only available arm at Rudolf striking him on the top of the head which didn't PHASE RUDOLF one bit as he immediately threw up his hands and turned to a REF as in I'm an innocent guy in all this and look what happens to me. Come on Refs, you are supposed to protect me not only am I a QB but I'M A STEELER who gets special considerations by the NFL!!!

Then he is laughing in the huddle after all this was done and over.

Garrett who never had an incident prior not even a breath of wrong doing except being caught off sides a few times and complaining to refs for being held as in almost all the time!

Haynesworth had a history and prior incidents. As did Burfict ,, Suh and others. Garrett NOTHING in his history.

But how dare he make the Steelers look foolish on national television. The NFL made a KNEE JERK reaction cause of all the people who hate on football as the political correct politicians have been trying to push SOCCER on us so we can be like the rest of the world, how dare we have our own game called football. How dare we not excel in the World cup.

So all these football HATERS reacted to just the edited film where Garrett swings the helmet and hits Rudolf on the top of his head. NO BLOOD, no woozy action by Rudolf one bit. Immediately he is looking for a ref to get Garrett in trouble and then after Garrett was apologizing to all he has the audacity to call Garrett a Coward this coming from the guy who hit Garrett in the NUTS!

Once again we fans must rise up against the NFL and bombard their offices with not so much to say that Garrett is an INNOCENT...cause he is not. But he does not have a history and Rudolf's involvement in this is being totally ignored.

Pouncey gets 3 games for kicking Garrett when on the ground defenseless...possibly causing MORE HARM then Rudolf being hit on top of his head. NOT WITH an hammer as they seem to want all to believe but the helmet by itself is not a weapon. It gives and without a HEAD INSIDE it to make it solid is really just a shell of an implement. Again that should never be used in that action. Garrett should pay but not to the tune of the most costly degree of penalty imposed on a football player.

Meanwhile whilst the real coward is there smirking in the huddle as he got away with.
1. Starting the melee.
2. Continuing the melee after it was OVER.
3. Punching Garrett in the nuts.

We have been abused by the Steelers physically for years and then we are kicking their butts all over the place and They OBJECTED to the fact that we continued to kick their butts when the game was over...well sorry I did not see the Steelers take a knee to run out the clock and go home. LIKE MEN

Nah they took the Steeler way and were wussies all the way.


jmho biased as it may be but peel away all the HOMERISM in there and the facts tell the story and I am not far off by any means! This bowing down for years by the NFL with ridiculous calls in playoffs all in the Steelers favor. With their HC actually coming onto the field and sticking out his leg tripping a guy who was going to score on a kickoff return and what did he get...just guessing "COACH OF THE YEAR"???

How dare the Browns totally dominate the Steelers...against all odds my goodness its almost like Trump who out of nowhere won an election. Immediately the list of injured players is put up on the screen to excuse the totally domination we were doing on the Steelers.

I can go on and on...my wife is like...Please stop I don't want to see you have another heart attack over this. As I just came out of the hospital Thursday...wanting to watch my Browns on my TV at home not in the hospital so begged the doctors to release me not on Friday! Oh btw got a clean bill of health regarding my Cancer and told one last check up a year from now and they will consider me in full remission as in GONE FOR GOOD!!!

Now only if I could walk again...without limping and can golf without losing my balance. Oh man we can still do this.

But I will guarantee you ONE THING...when we sack Rudlolf in 2 weeks from now...watch the yellow flag come out and we will get a ROUGHING THE PASSER Penalty...unless it is as pure clean a hit as possible and even then it might not matter. Our aggression will be taken away from us.

You will see, you heard it here first. "ROUGHING THE PASSER"...yup we touched the upper portion of the chest so flag is thrown!!!

smh
Posted By: mgh888 Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/16/19 02:58 PM
Originally Posted By: eotab
I find it funny all these pundits stating that Garrett used the helmet as a weapon and could have killed Rudolf.

Meanwhile in football the helmet is being used as a weapon every game and the NFL is trying to stop that of course.


While I am as frustrated as anyone at some of the perceived preferential treatment of teams like NE and Pit .... there is a huge, huge, huge difference between helmet hits to players who are protected with a helmet - and swinging a helmet at a guy who is unprotected. You just can't try to compare the two situations.
Posted By: jfanent Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/16/19 02:59 PM
Originally Posted By: bluecollarball
Originally Posted By: jfanent
After looking at the steeler message boards, there are more than a few of their fans that wish Rudolph would get suspended.


I know several Steelers fans that feel the same way. If it was Big Ben though they probably wouldn't say that . . . they say that cause Rudolph sucks.


That's exactly why they want him suspended.
Posted By: PrplPplEater Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/16/19 03:00 PM
Originally Posted By: SaintDawg
They may have to. It's in black and white in the contract w NFLPA


Garrett needs to get the NFLPA to initiate the appeal.
I doubt that they stand with him right now, however.
Posted By: eotab Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/16/19 03:10 PM
Originally Posted By: mgh888
Originally Posted By: eotab
I find it funny all these pundits stating that Garrett used the helmet as a weapon and could have killed Rudolf.

Meanwhile in football the helmet is being used as a weapon every game and the NFL is trying to stop that of course.


While I am as frustrated as anyone at some of the perceived preferential treatment of teams like NE and Pit .... there is a huge, huge, huge difference between helmet hits to players who are protected with a helmet - and swinging a helmet at a guy who is unprotected. You just can't try to compare the two situations.


wont carry this on and on.

What I'm stating is this was 100% wrong. But the media showing this over and over as stating that this was a weapon that could have killed Rudolf. IS SIMPLY WRONG.

It is not a dangerous weapon as an EMPTY SHELL. It is MOST DANGEROUS when it is filled with an object (A HEAD) like a fist is much more dangerous if you are holding a roll of Nickles cause it makes the fist totally solid. Take that helmet and it the ground with it...watch the helmet BOUNCE...now fill that helmet with cement and hit the ground and look at the dent it makes into the ground.

I am not saying what Garrett did was right and for kids to copy this action. All I am saying is that as ugly as it looked....kicking a guy on the ground actually had more potential of causing injury than a helmet with just the shell and nothing in it.

If you cannot understand what I'm saying then I apologize for the inability to express my self but it was not this life threatening action as the media of STOP FOOTBALL in America wish it to look like and in showing it over and over.

Thats it, I'm done on that subject...hopefully you understand what I'm saying.
Posted By: Homewood Dog Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/16/19 03:15 PM
Many valid points being talked about here but the one thing that bothers me about the whole mess; there were only 8 miserable seconds left in a game we had won. Couldn't Myles have just gotten up after initial contact and walked away? For 8 seconds all this grief and our season is ruined. It makes me sick!!!
Posted By: mgh888 Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/16/19 03:17 PM
No I hear what you are saying. A helmet with 250 lbs of man inside of it moving at speed is very dangerous. I just disagree that it's more dangerous than an empty helmet swung by MG at someone's unprotected head. Hell, I could kill a man with a blow to his head with a helmet.

Anyway - don't need to belabor the point. We agree to an extent but ultimately disagree. All good. I hope MG appeals and wins. Based on the rule book he has a good case to reduce the suspension, 4-6 games would be about right in my view.
Posted By: mgh888 Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/16/19 03:20 PM
Originally Posted By: Homewood Dog
Many valid points being talked about here but the one thing that bothers me about the whole mess; there were only 8 miserable seconds left in a game we had won. Couldn't Myles have just gotten up after initial contact and walked away? For 8 seconds all this grief and our season is ruined. It makes me sick!!!


Whether it's road rage or the heat of battle in a football game, when the red mist descends and you are pushed over the edge, I don't believe there is any thinking, just rage. A bit like Eo - I agree with what you're saying, that would have been good/better ... but in that instant there wasn't anything other than rage. And no I don't think it's Roid Rage as someone mentioned in a post.
Posted By: Baker_Dawg Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/16/19 03:20 PM
Garret made a mistake. He is not an evil person. He is paying a penalty.

What I hate is the holier-than-thou media's ability to assassinate a person's character and career, which they built over a lifetime, after a self-admitted mistake when showing remorse. This started in politics and now has filtered into sport. It's why I don't follow politics any more.

Go Browns!
Posted By: PrplPplEater Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/16/19 03:23 PM
All I know is that I hope that this is the beginning of Pittsburgh seeing Garrett as the Boogeyman, and I want a Garrett jersey for Christmas.

The more I watch the video and see how their QB started everything, the more I'm in Garrett's corner. Including the helmet swing, even though it was colossally stupid to do it because of how it hurt the team.... but, let me be clear, the fact that it hurts the team is the only reason I'm down on it. Dude earned it.
Posted By: Baker_Dawg Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/16/19 03:32 PM
Originally Posted By: Homewood Dog
Many valid points being talked about here but the one thing that bothers me about the whole mess; there were only 8 miserable seconds left in a game we had won. Couldn't Myles have just gotten up after initial contact and walked away? For 8 seconds all this grief and our season is ruined. It makes me sick!!!


In my head I am imagining Garrett is out for the year because of a blown acl. It makes it easier to bear the loss.

I am not ready to concede anything though, and I think for all their faults, many people on this team (Baker, Landry to name a few) may thrive with their backs against the wall and everyone doubting them.
Posted By: BADdog Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/16/19 03:35 PM
Originally Posted By: jfanent
Originally Posted By: bluecollarball
Originally Posted By: jfanent
After looking at the steeler message boards, there are more than a few of their fans that wish Rudolph would get suspended.


I know several Steelers fans that feel the same way. If it was Big Ben though they probably wouldn't say that . . . they say that cause Rudolph sucks.


That's exactly why they want him suspended.


I’m wondering if it’s because they believe he used a racial slur.
Posted By: DeisleDawg Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/16/19 03:46 PM
I'm stunned.. Social Media has once again stepped in and forced a decision prematurely... The NFL should have had the balls to tell the Media that they will make a decision after they have investigated the incident.

I believe most people are voicing an opinion only because they feel they have to follow along with what Social Media is trying to sell.

Before Social Media back in the day when Football was played with sweat and blood in the trenches... There were players like Mike Ditka who would lay on top of a player and ram his fingers through the Face Mask and gouge at his eyes..That player could have had serious eye injuries ..but the game went on...

Now we are living in the Rodger Goodell days where he has done nothing but put a dark cloud over the Cleveland Browns...This organization has lost it's respect... It has been looked down on...On a weekly basis.

This organization has been unfairly judged by Goodell and his Referee's that are incompetent to Referee a game. Other teams have lost respect for this team. Fans have lost respect for this team.

I have watched the Pittsburgh Steelers disrespect this Organization and the Players that wear the Orange and Brown... I have had enough of the Steelers getting away with the dirty play they do.

I'm tired of seeing the Cleveland Browns get smacked in the face.. I'm tired of the Cleveland Browns not getting any Respect. I'm tired of Browns fans NOT SUPPORTING one of their teams Player.

To be a Browns fan and disgrace a player that was attacked by a QB and two other Steeler players by saying he should be banned and that he is a bad person is absolutely a disgrace to that Player who wears the Browns colors.

This team will never gain respect as long as they let teams come in and treat them the way that QB and two others did to a Browns player..Now what's going to happen ? Every team and QB know they can attack a Browns player and will get away with it.

Sometimes it takes what MG did to start teams to show respect and be fearful on how they treat a Browns Player. Right or wrong...It is Necessary to support MG and the Cleveland Browns.

I personally can't stand seeing the Browns treated as a whimp team ..The whimp teams in the past have done nothing to change a losing Culture..

I saw a Browns Player being attacked by three Steelers..NO WAy in hell will I ever want to see that again...I SUPPORT MG...And if your a Browns fan and you don't...Then there's a towel in Pittsburgh you can go suck !

Let this RIVALRY begin
Posted By: Dawgs4Life Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/16/19 04:19 PM
J/c

As I told my Steeler friends: Let’s be honest, you’re MOST UPSET about the final score, not Myles Garrett’s actions. Heck, most Steeler fans hate Rudolph
Posted By: FATE Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/16/19 04:22 PM
Originally Posted By: FL_Dawg
Message to Defensive players.

The League has just declared open season on your nuts for QBs'

Not just that, we told players that it is okay to instigate without repercussion. The exact opposite of what the message should be, it only serves to exacerbate the actual problem.

Imagine if our message to bullies was that it is okay... And told those that are bullied to thicken their skin and just put up with it.
Posted By: SaintDawg Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/16/19 04:24 PM
Originally Posted By: PrplPplEater
Originally Posted By: SaintDawg
They may have to. It's in black and white in the contract w NFLPA


Garrett needs to get the NFLPA to initiate the appeal.
I doubt that they stand with him right now, however.



This will be HUGE
Posted By: waterdawg Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/16/19 04:25 PM
I would happy if the OWNER would grow a set and stand with Garrett !
Posted By: UrbanaDawg Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/16/19 07:32 PM
Originally Posted By: eotab
Originally Posted By: mgh888
Originally Posted By: eotab
I find it funny all these pundits stating that Garrett used the helmet as a weapon and could have killed Rudolf.

Meanwhile in football the helmet is being used as a weapon every game and the NFL is trying to stop that of course.


While I am as frustrated as anyone at some of the perceived preferential treatment of teams like NE and Pit .... there is a huge, huge, huge difference between helmet hits to players who are protected with a helmet - and swinging a helmet at a guy who is unprotected. You just can't try to compare the two situations.


wont carry this on and on.

What I'm stating is this was 100% wrong. But the media showing this over and over as stating that this was a weapon that could have killed Rudolf. IS SIMPLY WRONG.

It is not a dangerous weapon as an EMPTY SHELL. It is MOST DANGEROUS when it is filled with an object (A HEAD) like a fist is much more dangerous if you are holding a roll of Nickles cause it makes the fist totally solid. Take that helmet and it the ground with it...watch the helmet BOUNCE...now fill that helmet with cement and hit the ground and look at the dent it makes into the ground.

I am not saying what Garrett did was right and for kids to copy this action. All I am saying is that as ugly as it looked....kicking a guy on the ground actually had more potential of causing injury than a helmet with just the shell and nothing in it.

If you cannot understand what I'm saying then I apologize for the inability to express my self but it was not this life threatening action as the media of STOP FOOTBALL in America wish it to look like and in showing it over and over.

Thats it, I'm done on that subject...hopefully you understand what I'm saying.


I totally agree!
We Just got back from the game yesterday, and boy had a great time! In the hotel watching ESPN and listening to the radio on the way home I was saying the same thing. This was a horrible act visually but lets be truthful, it was NOT going to kill Mason. This is a over reaction by the media to entrench the severity behind the situation. This was to say the obvious, to the public, that as a player in football, we're not to do this. Was it dangerous , YES, but even I highly doubt it would even ended Masons career and even less likely to kill Mason. I know some of you on here have been hit in the head by an object or two just like myself. As myself, and I'm sure some of you,have been hit in the head by WAY worse than a empty helmet on top of our noggin and are perfectly O.K.! By No way am I excusing Myles for what we saw, it is a bad look! But please stop acting like this is Negan hitting Glenn with Lucille.(Walking Dead)
I'm just saying lets use common sense and quit over reacting.
This is all I'm going to say just my .02 cents.
Posted By: jacksondawg Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/16/19 08:45 PM
I am complete agreement there is sometimes as a boss you need to let employees know you have there backs.
Posted By: PitDAWG Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/16/19 08:55 PM
Hitting a player wearing no helmet with a helmet is using it as a weapon.
Posted By: OldColdDawg Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/16/19 08:57 PM
Originally Posted By: PitDAWG
Hitting a player wearing no helmet with a helmet is using it as a weapon.


I say that depends on how you look at it. (Said in my best fox news host voice.)
Posted By: Brown to the Bone Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/16/19 09:39 PM
Originally Posted By: eotab
I find it funny all these pundits stating that Garrett used the helmet as a weapon and could have killed Rudolf.

Meanwhile in football the helmet is being used as a weapon every game and the NFL is trying to stop that of course.

Rudolf was not injured the helmet was not a hammer being wielded immediately Rudolf lifts his hands up and looks for a ref. not go to the ground injured and after the melee you see him in the huddle "LAUGHING" cause he knows what he did and got away with it.

I'm sure he was bragging about it in the huddle....hahaha I grabbed his nuts, hahaha

This is an obvious reaction from the NFL to the Browns organization, they will do whatever they can to penalize the Browns organization as their fans forced them to put a team in Cleveland over LA Calif. Then the fans has the audacity to run the refs out of the stadium as the new rule for replay that was installed clearly stating that it could not be utilized after a play was ran. Which we did and then they say hold it we are reviewing the play...against the rules.

Yes, what we did throwing bottles at the refs was wrong.

Yes, what Garrett did hitting a player in the head with a helmet in hand. Was clearly wrong and I'm sure to a man/woman here we are saying he should be punished but there seems to be a great double standard here.

Rudolf was clearly the aggressor.
Rudolf clearly broke the rules by grabbing at Garretts facemask.
Shame shame on Aikman who was kissing the Steelers butt all game. Stating that Rudolf's finger was stuck in Garretts helmet that is why he was pulling on it. Shame on Aikman!!!

Garrett clearly pulled back on Rudolf and clearly ripped off his helmet.

Garrett was then held and rendered done and over altercation DONE!
Rudolf then clearly runs after Garrett with hatred and teeth bared punching Garrett in the nuts.

Garrett then responded in a REACTION...not premeditated to swing the only available arm at Rudolf striking him on the top of the head which didn't PHASE RUDOLF one bit as he immediately threw up his hands and turned to a REF as in I'm an innocent guy in all this and look what happens to me. Come on Refs, you are supposed to protect me not only am I a QB but I'M A STEELER who gets special considerations by the NFL!!!

Then he is laughing in the huddle after all this was done and over.

Garrett who never had an incident prior not even a breath of wrong doing except being caught off sides a few times and complaining to refs for being held as in almost all the time!

Haynesworth had a history and prior incidents. As did Burfict ,, Suh and others. Garrett NOTHING in his history.

But how dare he make the Steelers look foolish on national television. The NFL made a KNEE JERK reaction cause of all the people who hate on football as the political correct politicians have been trying to push SOCCER on us so we can be like the rest of the world, how dare we have our own game called football. How dare we not excel in the World cup.

So all these football HATERS reacted to just the edited film where Garrett swings the helmet and hits Rudolf on the top of his head. NO BLOOD, no woozy action by Rudolf one bit. Immediately he is looking for a ref to get Garrett in trouble and then after Garrett was apologizing to all he has the audacity to call Garrett a Coward this coming from the guy who hit Garrett in the NUTS!

Once again we fans must rise up against the NFL and bombard their offices with not so much to say that Garrett is an INNOCENT...cause he is not. But he does not have a history and Rudolf's involvement in this is being totally ignored.

Pouncey gets 3 games for kicking Garrett when on the ground defenseless...possibly causing MORE HARM then Rudolf being hit on top of his head. NOT WITH an hammer as they seem to want all to believe but the helmet by itself is not a weapon. It gives and without a HEAD INSIDE it to make it solid is really just a shell of an implement. Again that should never be used in that action. Garrett should pay but not to the tune of the most costly degree of penalty imposed on a football player.

Meanwhile whilst the real coward is there smirking in the huddle as he got away with.
1. Starting the melee.
2. Continuing the melee after it was OVER.
3. Punching Garrett in the nuts.

We have been abused by the Steelers physically for years and then we are kicking their butts all over the place and They OBJECTED to the fact that we continued to kick their butts when the game was over...well sorry I did not see the Steelers take a knee to run out the clock and go home. LIKE MEN

Nah they took the Steeler way and were wussies all the way.


jmho biased as it may be but peel away all the HOMERISM in there and the facts tell the story and I am not far off by any means! This bowing down for years by the NFL with ridiculous calls in playoffs all in the Steelers favor. With their HC actually coming onto the field and sticking out his leg tripping a guy who was going to score on a kickoff return and what did he get...just guessing "COACH OF THE YEAR"???

How dare the Browns totally dominate the Steelers...against all odds my goodness its almost like Trump who out of nowhere won an election. Immediately the list of injured players is put up on the screen to excuse the totally domination we were doing on the Steelers.

I can go on and on...my wife is like...Please stop I don't want to see you have another heart attack over this. As I just came out of the hospital Thursday...wanting to watch my Browns on my TV at home not in the hospital so begged the doctors to release me not on Friday! Oh btw got a clean bill of health regarding my Cancer and told one last check up a year from now and they will consider me in full remission as in GONE FOR GOOD!!!

Now only if I could walk again...without limping and can golf without losing my balance. Oh man we can still do this.

But I will guarantee you ONE THING...when we sack Rudlolf in 2 weeks from now...watch the yellow flag come out and we will get a ROUGHING THE PASSER Penalty...unless it is as pure clean a hit as possible and even then it might not matter. Our aggression will be taken away from us.

You will see, you heard it here first. "ROUGHING THE PASSER"...yup we touched the upper portion of the chest so flag is thrown!!!

smh


1st play send the house and a message we own you get used to it.
Posted By: Bard Dawg Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/16/19 09:49 PM
The Ruddy-Off should have suspension as well IMO. Baker better take advantage of stirring things up for us without any major penalty at all.

The punk started it, escalated it, and kept it going. Wrong for MG; but if the others had done it on the sidewalk, we would see jail for more than him. I do not condone the NFL ruling. But these vague endless things are unfair. Know your time and cost.
Posted By: DeisleDawg Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/16/19 10:12 PM
Quote:
What I'm stating is this was 100% wrong. But the media showing this over and over as stating that this was a weapon that could have killed Rudolf. IS SIMPLY WRONG.



You are so VERY RIGHT...

The media saying what if he hit him with the other side of the helmet.. what if he hit him in the temple...what if he hit him with the crown of the helmet to the top of his head could of seriously injured him..

Guess what Media asses... the what if's didn't happen..

He barely hit him hard enough that it didn't even SHUT Masons mouth up.. Mason kept at it...
Posted By: SaintDawg Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/16/19 10:17 PM
Originally Posted By: DeisleDawg
Quote:
What I'm stating is this was 100% wrong. But the media showing this over and over as stating that this was a weapon that could have killed Rudolf. IS SIMPLY WRONG.



You are so VERY RIGHT...

The media saying what if he hit him with the other side of the helmet.. what if he hit him in the temple...what if he hit him with the crown of the helmet to the top of his head could of seriously injured him..

Guess what Media asses... the what if's didn't happen..

He barely hit him hard enough that it didn't even SHUT Masons mouth up.. Mason kept at it...



Very true! He threw his hands up and signaled Touchdown!!
Posted By: DeisleDawg Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/16/19 10:18 PM
Quote:
Hitting a player wearing no helmet with a helmet is using it as a weapon.



Yes it is... and as Rule 12 in the NFL rule book states.. It's a 15 yd penalty and automatic ejection..

Not to be Crucified like MG is being... Once again Goodell is using his power to screw the Browns... You know like he did with Josh Gordon... But not like when Josh Gordon was in New England.
Posted By: slick Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/16/19 10:57 PM
Originally Posted By: DeisleDawg
Quote:
Hitting a player wearing no helmet with a helmet is using it as a weapon.



Yes it is... and as Rule 12 in the NFL rule book states.. It's a 15 yd penalty and automatic ejection..

Not to be Crucified like MG is being... Once again Goodell is using his power to screw the Browns... You know like he did with Josh Gordon... But not like when Josh Gordon was in New England.



Very true very true. And as I have already said, just like he only suspended ray rice for 4 games after knocking a woman unconscious and spitting on her
Posted By: BCbrownie Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/16/19 11:43 PM
It was:
A cowardly act from a despicable human being.He should be banned from professional sports.
And every one you of condoning,or excuse making,your hypocrisy is shining thru ever so brightly.
Posted By: Knight_Of_Brown Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/16/19 11:53 PM
I also want to say I think the Haslam are gutless

No way in hell should they have apologized to the Steelers or Mason Rudolph. Why would you apologize? They are just as much at fault as Garret is perceived to be.

No way in hell Al Lerner would have apologized not would Carmen Policy & Butch Davis throw Garret under the bus the way the current Browns have. No way in hell Al Lerner would have apologized, he would have had Garrets back and would already be ******** at the NFL league office to get Garret re-instated and asking why the **** Rudolph is not being punished.

This is nonsense the way Browns ownership has rolled over in this. They are acting like beta makes scared of the alpha males Steelers, old man Al Lerner would tell the Steelers and the league office to get ****** because the guy cared. This team hasn’t had any heart since old Al Lerner passed away.

Anyone remember how Al Lerner told the league to get bent over Bottle Gate?

https://m.youtube.com/watch?feature=youtu.be&v=wk6NKmFP0pEt

Go to 7:13 in that video and listen to Al Lerner and Carmen Policy, they were not going to roll over and apologize for BottleGate, **** with that! They said the fans did nothing wrong!!

The Browns need another Al Lerner in the worse way to stick up for this city and it’s football. Haslam has no spine at all, and it’s a slap in the face to this city and EVERY Cleveland Browns fan to apologize to the Steelers, Mason Rudolph, and roll over the way the Haslams have....it’s akin to peeing on Al Lerner Legacy and he deserves better than that, he is a big reason we even got the Browns back after the move in the first place. Without Al Lerner there probably is no expansion Browns.
Posted By: Knight_Of_Brown Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/17/19 12:03 AM
Originally Posted By: BCbrownie
It was:
A cowardly act from a despicable human being.He should be banned from professional sports.
And every one you of condoning,or excuse making,your hypocrisy is shining thru ever so brightly.


Your ate up!

After being kicked and punched the groin that Steeler QB is lucky a helmet to the head was all he got!

Myles Garret is the Browns!!! He is the guy that single handily changed the tone of the Browns Steelers matchup in our favor. We no longer get pushed around, Myles Garret has changed that . We do the pushing around now

Because of Garret we beat the living **** out of the Steeler in all aspects of football and I can’t wait till he is back to do it again!!!

This has been a long time coming for the Steelers. James Harrison and Joey Porter purposely head hunting our guts and bashing us for years. Garret is going to shelve Rothlisberger for the year next year and I can’t wait.

Did you see the way Garret tossed All Pro Villanova around like rag doll Thursday night. You kidding me!?

The Steelers are SCARED of Myles Garret. What you saw wasn’t Rudolph being mad, Rudolph was flat out scared that why he needed two lineman to hold Garret back while he screamed like a scared child.

Garret has revived the rivalry. Before Garret the Browns were a pushover, now we do the pushing . Myles Garret will be back I assure you, and he is playing with a rage and fire to get retribution for all these years of Bs by the Steelers.
Posted By: SaintDawg Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/17/19 12:18 AM
The players know Jimmy is a spineless thief and a weasel. Dee has the pants in that outfit.

Dee needs to stand up and apologize for their premature apology, tell them to review the tape, isolate the instigator, blame the right person, suspend Rudy 4 games, reduce Myles to 4 games for retaliation, up Pouncey's to 4 games (same as Garrett) for kicking and punching a played held on the ground as opposed to a opponent standing up and able to defend himself, reduce Ogunjobi's to 0 and say well done young man.
Posted By: CalDawg Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/17/19 12:36 AM
Tweet @NFL and let them know how bush-league this is. Tweet them their own rules. Tweet them the photo of Rudolph punching Myles in the groin. Point out the hypocrisy. Let them know that you know this is reactive nonsense. They're acting like politically correct media pandering a-holes and they need to be called out on it. What Myles did was wrong. What Rudolph did was wrong. They both need to be punished. Only one of them getting suspended is BS.
Posted By: Ballpeen Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/17/19 02:04 AM
Originally Posted By: PrplPplEater
All I know is that I hope that this is the beginning of Pittsburgh seeing Garrett as the Boogeyman, and I want a Garrett jersey for Christmas.

The more I watch the video and see how their QB started everything, the more I'm in Garrett's corner. Including the helmet swing, even though it was colossally stupid to do it because of how it hurt the team.... but, let me be clear, the fact that it hurts the team is the only reason I'm down on it. Dude earned it.


I agree. We have the punks in 2 weeks. Every defensive player needs to have Rudolph in their sights.

Stay clean, but batter him. I hope to heck we blitz the hell out of the sissy.
Posted By: SaintDawg Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/17/19 02:16 AM
Originally Posted By: Ballpeen
Originally Posted By: PrplPplEater
All I know is that I hope that this is the beginning of Pittsburgh seeing Garrett as the Boogeyman, and I want a Garrett jersey for Christmas.

The more I watch the video and see how their QB started everything, the more I'm in Garrett's corner. Including the helmet swing, even though it was colossally stupid to do it because of how it hurt the team.... but, let me be clear, the fact that it hurts the team is the only reason I'm down on it. Dude earned it.


I agree. We have the punks in 2 weeks. Every defensive player needs to have Rudolph in their sights.

Stay clean, but batter him. I hope to heck we blitz the hell out of the sissy.


ALL OUT from the first play on!
Posted By: Ballpeen Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/17/19 02:30 AM
Originally Posted By: SaintDawg
Originally Posted By: Ballpeen
Originally Posted By: PrplPplEater
All I know is that I hope that this is the beginning of Pittsburgh seeing Garrett as the Boogeyman, and I want a Garrett jersey for Christmas.

The more I watch the video and see how their QB started everything, the more I'm in Garrett's corner. Including the helmet swing, even though it was colossally stupid to do it because of how it hurt the team.... but, let me be clear, the fact that it hurts the team is the only reason I'm down on it. Dude earned it.


I agree. We have the punks in 2 weeks. Every defensive player needs to have Rudolph in their sights.

Stay clean, but batter him. I hope to heck we blitz the hell out of the sissy.


ALL OUT from the first play on!



My hope is for at least that day, we can look like the 85 Bears and just smother them.

I want Steeler children brought to the game by their parents crying by games end.
Posted By: Ballpeen Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/17/19 02:42 AM
I'd like to see all of our players put a #95 on some part of their uniform, even if out of sight to keep the NFL from stepping in....but make it known..

Just speaking for me, I want the Browns to have a bad ass image. The pansy look we have had for a long times just doesn't do it for me.
Posted By: s003apr Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/17/19 03:44 AM
Originally Posted By: eotab

...

This is an obvious reaction from the NFL to the Browns organization, they will do whatever they can to penalize the Browns organization...
...


There is no good way to explain the way the NFL makes their decision.
Why does the person who started the whole thing not get a suspension? Why does the person who did nothing more than shove another player (Probably happens after 55% of plays) get a suspension? Why did only the black participants involved get suspensions?

The pundits keep pretending to be legal experts, talking about how Garrett's action are criminal. Their idiots... It was a fight engaged in by mutually consenting adults, Garrett could argue self defense since he didn't start it, but the fact of the matter is all parties had multiple opportunities to de-escalate and get out of the situation. The fact that Garrett used a blunt object to hit another participant is pretty much a non-factor. This is generally considered disorderly conduct and a waste of time for prosecutors.

Other pundits say it is about player safety. But that is also idiotic. This was not part of the game. This was a fight among adults that were choosing to fight. They are grown men and could have chosen not to fight. If they get hurt, that's not on the NFL. That has nothing to do with the game of football or the rules put into place to ensure safety. Each participant in the fight that chose to be involved has personal responsibility for any injuries they suffer as a result.

So how then does the NFL make a decision on how to dole out punishment? Their own rulebook specifically says that Garrett should get a 1 game suspension... so obviously the rule book is not consulted in this decision...

The answer is that the NFL, NBA, and MLB all make decisions based on the perception created by the media (traditional and social). They will adopt whatever position allows them to minimize outrage for the least amount of lost revenue. That's why the NBA doesn't care about protests in Hong Kong until they are receiving bad publicity. That is why the NFL doesn't care about domestic violence until the media makes it an issue. That is why the NFL doesn't care about concussions until they begin receiving bad publicity for turning a blind eye to it for so long.

So if the media is mischaracterizing Garrett's actions as criminal, then the NFL is going to come up with a punishment that reflects that extreme level of outrage.

If the media makes Rudolph out to be a victim, then the NFL is not going to punish him, because punishing a victim looks bad.

And to your point. Cities like Cleveland and Detroit do get the short end of the stick when it comes to how the media treats their sports franchises. Part of that bias stems from how media centers on the coasts see the middle of the country and old industrial cities and the fact that consistent losing has created a loser image of the team that the media love to keep talking about. It makes life easier for lazy reporters.

But I truly beleive that the Browns had the opportunity to flip the script this season with the excitement around the team. Unfortunately, that opportunity may have been wasted by an organization that has failed in all aspects of football.

Right now, the Browns need to be working to manage the narrative that is being spread. That involves speaking the truth and defending Garrett while demanding fair punishment for Rudolph. Not allowing the media to continue to spread a biased and ill informed narrative unchecked.
Posted By: HotBYoungTurk Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/17/19 04:16 AM
Originally Posted By: Ballpeen
I'd like to see all of our players put a #95 on some part of their uniform, even if out of sight to keep the NFL from stepping in....but make it known..

Just speaking for me, I want the Browns to have a bad ass image. The pansy look we have had for a long times just doesn't do it for me.


This would be dope. The way Baker spoke about his teammate though, I don't think he'd do it. poke
Posted By: Clemdawg Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/17/19 04:27 AM
Quote:
I agree. We have the punks in 2 weeks. Every defensive player needs to have Rudolph in their sights.

Stay clean, but batter him. I hope to heck we blitz the hell out of the sissy.
_________________________


^This, right here.^

I've been preaching the gospel of 'Culture Change' at this website for as long as I've been here. My posts are my evidence- and they go back at least a decade.

Earlier in a Myles thread, I mentioned that it was heartening to see a player in orange & brown punch a bully back. To be honest, I'm actually OK with seeing multiple Browns players fined/suspended over the course of this season, if it sends the message to the entire AFCN that these Browns ain't YaDaddy's Browns.

To further talk much s# on the For Real, I'll also say this:

It would be worth it for CLE to become the 70's Oakland Raiders for 1.5 season to set the stage for a new AFCN paradigm. Here's why:

The Cleveland Browns are tasked with much more than changing their own internal culture. They are also tasked with changing the culture of the entire division, as well. Because the AFCN culture, since 1999 has looked like this: Pittsburgh Steelers and Baltimore Ravens duke it out, while both step on Orange Teams every year. Black, yellow and purple have been the colors of the AFCN for 20 f#ng years. To disrupt 20 years of geologic inertia, a seismic event must occur.

All apologies offered, all improprieties accounted for, all mea culpas offered, this happened above all else:

A Cleveland Browns player took shots to his groin.
A Cleveland Browns player took on 3 PIT players at once.
A Cleveland Browns player snatched a punk's hat off his head, and used it to establish an indentation where common sense should have already resided.

This is the kind of statement that begins a true cultural revolution.

Understand this: Myles went far beyond the limits that guide my actions. He set himself up for disciplinary action that is out of his control- and we now see what that punishment looks like. He earned what he got. Pure and simple.

I also stated in another thread that his punishment is not beyond what I'm willing to accept. I'm an accountability guy all the way. It's how I was raised, it's how I've lived as an adult, and it's what I expect/respect when I witness it in real life.

That said, I'm also OK with casting Myles as the agent of change, if he signals to PIT and BAL that the game is changing.

_________________________


In every movie where The Bully runs s# for two whole reels, we eventually reach that point when he looks someone in the eye, and sees someone who simply isn't intimidated. Someone who will sack him, pressure him, harass him... and then dent his mf'n skull with his own 'safety equipment,' because: poetic justice.

Browns players and fans just witnessed that moment. On national TV.
And Clemdawg is actually OK with it.

I mean, really: if you're going to make a statement, you might as well go big:

1. Browns ain't your punx no more.
2. Play Elves/get hurt. Bad. (check the PIT injured roster)
3. Monday after a Browns game requires Ibuprofen. And Corticosteroids. And ice. And therapeutic deep tissue massage. And emotional support dogs.

If Browns are to assert themselves into the AFCN, they must repeatedly punch 2 perennial bullies in their mouths. Step One is compete:

Browns: 2-0 in the division... in two games that were not really close at all.

Time to continue the message Myles sent:
"Play us up-front, and your heads, we will dent."

2019 Browns: 6-0 in the AFCN?
Make it so.


-clemdawg.
Posted By: SuperBrown Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/17/19 04:28 AM
Whoever is left on D better smash that punk Rudolph under the turf!
Posted By: DCDAWGFAN Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/17/19 05:42 AM
Quote:
No way in hell should they have apologized to the Steelers or Mason Rudolph. Why would you apologize?

I wish they had let me write the apology. It would have gone something like this..

The whole Cleveland Browns organization would like to apologize to the Pittsburgh Steelers for our involvement in responding to the fight that Mason Rudolph started. We accept full responsibility and should have been the bigger person and just walked away when he tried to rip Myles Garrett's helmet off and kicked him in the nuts.

Further, on behalf of our organization we feel exceptionally bad that Myles swung the helmet at Rudolph after he chased him down again and tried to get past the people who were in the process of calming Myles Garrett and ending the incident.

We understand the severity of what Myles did and stand ready to suspend him twice as many games as Rudolph gets suspended. We will await your response.

Sincerely, Dee
Posted By: myka Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/17/19 08:04 AM
Sign the petition to reinstate Garrett!

http://chng.it/CdcWvBMdcb

With the closeup photos of Rudolph's deranged face as he attacked Garrett it's clear anyone would've reacted just as Garrett did. Victim of circumstance.

They are also overstating the danger of the helmet swing due to using the cushion part and swinging off his backfoot as he was being pushed backwards by a 3rd party even.

Also with the surfaced footage of the Incognito helmet swing which was WAY worse intentioned that only got 1 game suspension.

I'm fine with a 1 game suspension. (I'd be ok with 2 except we play Steelers again, so if they skip that one somehow 2 is fair) just to appease the masses, but I actually think Rudolph is the bad guy here.

I'm biased tho so I'll leave it up to the NFLPA, agents and lawyers to figure out but I truly hope Myles gets fair representation and not just punished for being a Cleveland Brown.

We all know if he was a Patriot this is only 2 games suspension max.
Posted By: eotab Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/17/19 01:45 PM
Originally Posted By: BCbrownie
It was:
A cowardly act from a despicable human being.He should be banned from professional sports.
And every one you of condoning,or excuse making,your hypocrisy is shining thru ever so brightly.


Be honest BCbrownie...you are playing football and after legally tackling the QB he grabs your face mask and KICKS YOU IN THE NUTS...then as you rip his helmet off in anger and rage two OLmen come down on you rendering you defenseless then the idiot who kicked you in the nuts comes running up to you in a total rage and proceeds to punch you in the nuts.

Be honest what would have done??? dont be a hipocrite about it...what would you have done.

99% of us would have gone bonkers as did Garrett.
We would have been wrong in doing so but never the less would have done it.

Posted By: devicedawg Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/17/19 02:05 PM
I posted this on the Baker thread...

Quote:
I think if anything, Rudolph put the target on himself.



And I'm happy to read that the players in the league seem to take the side of Garrett.

Rudolph comes after Garrett, admits he came after him and then pleads innocence? I can't even imagine his teammates are 100% behind him. I hope Rudolph gets rocked. It will be well deserved, and when it happens the NFL will have to understand they are also at fault.
Posted By: jfanent Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/17/19 02:09 PM
When I first saw it, I was so frickin' angry at Garrett for sucking the joy out of a great Browns moment. Nothing justifies what he did, but after reviewing what the coward, bush league Rudolph did to provoke him....I'm softening my stance. I still have no problem with a 6 game suspension, (you just can't go light on using a weapon), but that should be the end of it and Rudolph should receive a substantial punishment for what he did.
Posted By: PerfectSpiral Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/17/19 02:11 PM
As a lifetime fan of the Browns. And after 20 years or more of pent up frustration mostly at the hands of the Steelers and their obnoxious fans. If I was Myles Garrett I would have beat Rudolf to a pulp and gladly take a lifetime ban.
Posted By: BCbrownie Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/17/19 02:11 PM
I cannot say with 100% certainty what I would have done.But,I can say that in the few opportunities I've had to bash someone's brains out,I restrained myself.And I suspect the same can be said for everyone posting here.
You've coached,you know this is wrong.Him being a Brown,and the other guy a steeler,doesn't make it right,I don't care how many balltaps he got.
i suspect that most of the posters defending him are embarrassed by his actions and that is leading to anger.Misplaced anger at the Haslams,the steelers or the NFL.
Posted By: DeisleDawg Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/17/19 02:24 PM
Quote:
i suspect that most of the posters defending him are embarrassed by his actions


I'm not embarrassed with what he did in any way. I'am embarrassed that Baker ran his mouth and about Garret. Baker needs to learn to stfu.
Posted By: PerfectSpiral Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/17/19 02:30 PM
IMO Myles was restrained pretty damn good when Rudolf ran back after it was calming down and punched him in the balls. Rudolf deserved a knock on the head...call me old fashion.
Posted By: Damanshot Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/17/19 02:30 PM
Originally Posted By: PrplPplEater
Originally Posted By: SaintDawg
They may have to. It's in black and white in the contract w NFLPA


Garrett needs to get the NFLPA to initiate the appeal.
I doubt that they stand with him right now, however.



I agree, the NFLPA won't stand with him. I doubt they have the stomach for it.
Posted By: PerfectSpiral Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/17/19 02:38 PM
I think most of your/our pain would go away if Rudolf was suspended.

We want Rudolf in game 2.

Although nobody seems to be talking about Kitchens coaching discipline vs Williams coaching discipline. Maybe I’m missing something?

On the lighter side.

https://www.dkpittsburghsports.com/2019/...et-steelers-dk/
Posted By: cfrs15 Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/17/19 02:52 PM
Originally Posted By: Damanshot
Originally Posted By: PrplPplEater
Originally Posted By: SaintDawg
They may have to. It's in black and white in the contract w NFLPA


Garrett needs to get the NFLPA to initiate the appeal.
I doubt that they stand with him right now, however.



I agree, the NFLPA won't stand with him. I doubt they have the stomach for it.


It is their job to have the stomach for it.

Posted By: cfrs15 Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/17/19 02:53 PM
I bet Garrett’s suspension gets reduced to a definite number and Ogunjobi gets off with just a hefty fine.
Posted By: s003apr Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/17/19 03:12 PM
Originally Posted By: BCbrownie
It was:
A cowardly act from a despicable human being.He should be banned from professional sports.
And every one you of condoning,or excuse making,your hypocrisy is shining thru ever so brightly.


Mrs. Rudolph? is that you?
Posted By: s003apr Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/17/19 03:15 PM
Originally Posted By: cfrs15
I bet Garrett’s suspension gets reduced to a definite number and Ogunjobi gets off with just a hefty fine.


Garrett will still be out through the end of the year. The league just needs the media to stop talking about it, so they will probably wait until some week in the offseason when everyone is distracted by the draft and then reinstate Garrett.
Posted By: Riley01 Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/17/19 03:32 PM
Actually whats lost in all this wtf was Tomlin thinking running a play ,down by 14, 18 secs left in game and no timeouts JMO
Posted By: GMdawg Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/17/19 03:34 PM
Originally Posted By: Damanshot
Originally Posted By: PrplPplEater
Originally Posted By: SaintDawg
They may have to. It's in black and white in the contract w NFLPA


Garrett needs to get the NFLPA to initiate the appeal.
I doubt that they stand with him right now, however.



I agree, the NFLPA won't stand with him. I doubt they have the stomach for it.


Well then Myles should just kick them and punch them all in the balls. I mean you don't get in any trouble for starting the fight and abusing them. Just for good measure he should put a helmet on them and start twisting it around.
Posted By: CalDawg Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/17/19 03:35 PM
Originally Posted By: Riley01
Actually whats lost in all this wtf was Tomlin thinking running a play ,down by 14, 18 secs left in game and no timeouts JMO


He was thinking and telling his players to, "Go out there and push any buttons you can to see if we can get someone suspended." I am damn sure of this.
Posted By: CalDawg Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/17/19 03:37 PM
Originally Posted By: BCbrownie
I cannot say with 100% certainty what I would have done.But,I can say that in the few opportunities I've had to bash someone's brains out,I restrained myself.And I suspect the same can be said for everyone posting here.
You've coached,you know this is wrong.Him being a Brown,and the other guy a steeler,doesn't make it right,I don't care how many balltaps he got.
i suspect that most of the posters defending him are embarrassed by his actions and that is leading to anger.Misplaced anger at the Haslams,the steelers or the NFL.


Sorry bro, but you don't know what you're talking about.
Posted By: Riley01 Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/17/19 03:38 PM
Pretty close to what I was wondering
Posted By: WSU Willie Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/17/19 03:39 PM
Originally Posted By: cfrs15
Originally Posted By: Damanshot
Originally Posted By: PrplPplEater
Originally Posted By: SaintDawg
They may have to. It's in black and white in the contract w NFLPA


Garrett needs to get the NFLPA to initiate the appeal.
I doubt that they stand with him right now, however.



I agree, the NFLPA won't stand with him. I doubt they have the stomach for it.


It is their job to have the stomach for it.



Exactly. Also, the specific rulebook on swinging a helmet does not call for a suspension. It probably should...but it doesn't. The NFLPA must find their stomach for this.

So all the people out there who believe Garrett to be the primary bad guy here (which I find astonishing) should also in their purity see what are the rules of engagement...not to mention precedent.

The last guy to swing a helmet at another player got a one game suspension. And he was far from retreating when he swung away.

The raging maniacs in that fight were the instigator/escalator/re-starter and his roid raging Center.

Rudolph tried to remove Garrett's helmet. Garrett showed that punk what helmet removal looks like. You don't wanna get bit, don't come at a dog. You start a fight with a better fighter and kick your butt kicked...then cry that you got your butt kicked...and somehow today's mamby pamby world supports YOU. The reporting on this event has been ridiculously lacking in context.
Posted By: Dawgs4Life Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/17/19 03:42 PM
J/C

IMO, the NFL will come back with the 6 game number to effectively end his season.

Pouncey will get reduced to 2 as well IMO
Posted By: PitDAWG Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/17/19 03:45 PM
The sad part in all of this is that Browns fans seem to be using the fact that the league didn't suspend Rudolph as some kind of excuse for Garrett's behavior.

At least Garrett was man enough to admit how bad this was. But it seems that making excuses for terrible behavior has become a normal part of our society these days.

I'm disgusted by the majority of you.
Posted By: BADdog Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/17/19 04:03 PM
Originally Posted By: PitDAWG
The sad part in all of this is that Browns fans seem to be using the fact that the league didn't suspend Rudolph as some kind of excuse for Garrett's behavior.

At least Garrett was man enough to admit how bad this was. But it seems that making excuses for terrible behavior has become a normal part of our society these days.

I'm disgusted by the majority of you.



I am not sure if anyone thinks that but feel free to be disgusted.
Posted By: s003apr Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/17/19 04:03 PM
Originally Posted By: PitDAWG
The sad part in all of this is that Browns fans seem to be using the fact that the league didn't suspend Rudolph as some kind of excuse for Garrett's behavior.

At least Garrett was man enough to admit how bad this was. But it seems that making excuses for terrible behavior has become a normal part of our society these days.

I'm disgusted by the majority of you.


Granted, I don't read every post, I skim quite a few, but I have not noticed a single post that excuses Garrett's behavior because of the NFL's failure to hold Rudolph accountable for his actions.
Posted By: WSU Willie Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/17/19 04:05 PM
Originally Posted By: PitDAWG
The sad part in all of this is that Browns fans seem to be using the fact that the league didn't suspend Rudolph as some kind of excuse for Garrett's behavior.

At least Garrett was man enough to admit how bad this was. But it seems that making excuses for terrible behavior has become a normal part of our society these days.

I'm disgusted by the majority of you.


Name one poster on here who is excusing Garrett's behavior. I'll wait. He should have dropped the helmet and should be penalized for that decision. Every other action he had was appropriate.

I'm disgusted with all - not just the majority - of the people who refuse to see the context of the event and who think the guy who ended a fight is more-bad than the idiot who started the fight. THAT'S what's wrong with 'our society these days'. The instigator is somehow the victim...and the retreat-er is the bad guy.
Posted By: Razorthorns Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/17/19 04:08 PM
With Pouncey out for the rematch there is going to be a big hole in the Steelers' oline for our rematch. I hope Mason gets what he deserves in that big arse hole.
Posted By: CalDawg Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/17/19 04:22 PM
Originally Posted By: CalDawg
Originally Posted By: BCbrownie
I cannot say with 100% certainty what I would have done.But,I can say that in the few opportunities I've had to bash someone's brains out,I restrained myself.And I suspect the same can be said for everyone posting here.
You've coached,you know this is wrong.Him being a Brown,and the other guy a steeler,doesn't make it right,I don't care how many balltaps he got.
i suspect that most of the posters defending him are embarrassed by his actions and that is leading to anger.Misplaced anger at the Haslams,the steelers or the NFL.


Sorry bro, but you don't know what you're talking about.


Sorry, I was refering to this:

Quote:
A cowardly act from a despicable human being.He should be banned from professional sports.
And every one you of condoning,or excuse making,your hypocrisy is shining thru ever so brightly.


I agree some of us are embarrassed by the action and agree he should have restrained himself. However, I don't agree that it was a cowardly act defending himself from the attack, that he is a despicable human being, or that he should be banned from professional sports. All of that is nonsense.
Posted By: Rishuz Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/17/19 06:14 PM
Originally Posted By: DeisleDawg
Quote:
i suspect that most of the posters defending him are embarrassed by his actions


I'm not embarrassed with what he did in any way. I'am embarrassed that Baker ran his mouth and about Garret. Baker needs to learn to stfu.


This is an awful take.
Posted By: GratefulDawg Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/17/19 06:55 PM
Posted By: Rishuz Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/17/19 06:57 PM
Good move by the team.
Posted By: jfanent Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/17/19 07:12 PM
Yep. Nothing good would have come out of that. The vultures were waiting for any crumb they could use.
Posted By: devicedawg Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/17/19 07:21 PM
Originally Posted By: Rishuz
Originally Posted By: DeisleDawg
Quote:
i suspect that most of the posters defending him are embarrassed by his actions


I'm not embarrassed with what he did in any way. I'am embarrassed that Baker ran his mouth and about Garret. Baker needs to learn to stfu.


This is an awful take.



I agree.
Posted By: oobernoober Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/17/19 08:13 PM
Originally Posted By: devicedawg
Originally Posted By: Rishuz
Originally Posted By: DeisleDawg
Quote:
i suspect that most of the posters defending him are embarrassed by his actions


I'm not embarrassed with what he did in any way. I'am embarrassed that Baker ran his mouth and about Garret. Baker needs to learn to stfu.


This is an awful take.



I agree.



There are plenty of examples for the "Baker should shut his mouth" argument. This is not one of them.
Posted By: SuperBrown Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/17/19 08:45 PM
I voted.
Posted By: PitDAWG Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/17/19 08:47 PM
Originally Posted By: WSU Willie

I'm disgusted with all - not just the majority - of the people who refuse to see the context of the event and who think the guy who ended a fight is more-bad than the idiot who started the fight. THAT'S what's wrong with 'our society these days'. The instigator is somehow the victim...and the retreat-er is the bad guy.


There it is! Players start and get into fights in the NFL all the time. Players DON'T hit other players not wearing a helmet, with a helmet.

Those aren't even close to the same thing.

I knew I could count on you to come through for me. wink
Posted By: bonefish Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/17/19 08:52 PM
A couple things.

I don't know if people saw when Kareem and Watt starting jawing? Kareem was walking back to the huddle after he and Watt were exchanging.

Baker noticed. As they went into the huddle Baker put his arm around Kareem's shoulder pads. A leadership move.

Baker when confronted after the game and asked about the incident. His comments were fully appropriate.

The fight.

Not good. Football is a game. There is no room for the actions that took place by all parties.

Emotions boil over. Football brings that out. But players have got to maintain control. You can not allow yourself to be overcome by rage.

What's fair?

Not my decision but the way I see it:

Garrett should get four games. The rest including Rudolph should get one or two games.

Myles was provoked by Rudolph. Rudolph did enough to get suspended. Including, pulling his helmet, kicking, and then charging Myles.

No excuse for Myles to swing the helmet as a weapon. He should get a minimum of four games. Max the end of this season. Eligible for post season.

Pouncey should get 2 games. Ogunjobi one.

Unfortunate event should never have happened.
===============================================

Some of the comments from this Board are disturbing.

Things like. "a great way to end a Steeler game bashing a Steelers head in."

Sick. Anything along that line is representative of a disturbed mind.

What is going to prove? Jarvis taunting almost cost us a game. Myles are best defensive player suspended.
You want to show up a team beat them on the scoreboard.

All this BS macho man talk is ridiculous.

Play the damn game. That is what football is a game.
Posted By: archbolddawg Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/17/19 09:49 PM
I'll say about 12 things here. Garrett had his helmet attempted to be ripped off. The offender failed, so he kicked Garrett in the batteries. Game over. Yet the offender came back (possibly looking for an explanation on how to rip a helmet off?), and had his mind set straight.


Bad move on Garrets part. The issues regarding this have been and will be discussed forever.

At this time, my over riding concern for the next stoolers Browns matchup in pitt is: Will the stoolers attempt to retaliate by taking our players out?

The nfl, and ref's, will certainly have a hair trigger on close calls.
Posted By: DiamDawg Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/17/19 09:56 PM
I agree with all u said .... one difference ...

I didn’t think Mason attacked him ... i thought he was running at MG and then “lunged” for his helmet ...
Posted By: BADdog Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/17/19 09:59 PM
Originally Posted By: DiamDawg
I agree with all u said .... one difference ...

I didn’t think Mason attacked him ... i thought he was running at MG and then “lunged” for his helmet ...


Was MG holding his helmet between his legs?
Posted By: DiamDawg Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/17/19 10:13 PM
Nope he wasn’t ... Mason was also on the right hand side of MG who had his helmet in his left hand .... Mason “lunged” or was off balance falling short of his target ...

I’m out ... u guys see things differently than what i did ... im not gonna try and change your minds and your not gonna change mine with sarcastic bs questions like u just asked ... i saw what i saw ...

Posted By: Dawg Citizen Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/17/19 10:31 PM
If the Browns keep winning will Dorsey trade Garrett? I just have a funny feeling Garrett played his last game for the Browns.
Posted By: PrplPplEater Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/17/19 10:39 PM
No way.
Posted By: BADdog Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/17/19 10:41 PM
I thought it was pretty funny. Would you like one of my chill pills? That's what I've been doing today.
Posted By: BADdog Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/17/19 10:42 PM
Originally Posted By: Dawg Citizen
If the Browns keep winning will Dorsey trade Garrett? I just have a funny feeling Garrett played his last game for the Browns.
What are you smoking. I dont want any
Posted By: SaintDawg Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/17/19 10:47 PM
Originally Posted By: devicedawg
Originally Posted By: Rishuz
Originally Posted By: DeisleDawg
Quote:
i suspect that most of the posters defending him are embarrassed by his actions


I'm not embarrassed with what he did in any way. I'am embarrassed that Baker ran his mouth and about Garret. Baker needs to learn to stfu.


This is an awful take.


I agree.



Baker needs to stfu. He needs to pass that on to Coach Kitchens or Dorsey.
Posted By: SaintDawg Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/17/19 10:52 PM
Originally Posted By: DiamDawg
I agree with all u said .... one difference ...

I didn’t think Mason attacked him ... i thought he was running at MG and then “lunged” for his helmet ...


Lunged for his precious helmet? So.. let me ask this, if MG had stepped back and played keep away for 8 seconds while his precious...

Nah I just cant do that ridiculous sheep.
Posted By: SaintDawg Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/17/19 10:55 PM
Seriously, Garrett should have played keep away and passed that helmet around to the Browns for 8 seconds and told Rudy "I'll see you in 2 weeks child" and grinned.
Posted By: Dawg Citizen Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/17/19 10:57 PM
Originally Posted By: BADdog
Originally Posted By: Dawg Citizen
If the Browns keep winning will Dorsey trade Garrett? I just have a funny feeling Garrett played his last game for the Browns.
What are you smoking. I dont want any
Not saying it's going to happen but think about it. Lets say Dorsey is offered a block buster deal for Garrett. He gets rid of a player who could be one more bad incident away from a permeant ban. Once again, not saying it's going to happen, just throwing that possibility out there.
Posted By: Dawg Citizen Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/17/19 10:59 PM
Originally Posted By: SaintDawg
Seriously, Garrett should have played keep away and passed that helmet around to the Browns for 8 seconds and told Rudy "I'll see you in 2 weeks child" and grinned.
Would've been funny to see Garrett holding the helmet over Rudolph's head and him trying to jump up to get it.
Posted By: cfrs15 Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/17/19 11:01 PM
Originally Posted By: Dawg Citizen
Originally Posted By: BADdog
Originally Posted By: Dawg Citizen
If the Browns keep winning will Dorsey trade Garrett? I just have a funny feeling Garrett played his last game for the Browns.
What are you smoking. I dont want any
Not saying it's going to happen but think about it. Lets say Dorsey is offered a block buster deal for Garrett. He gets rid of a player who could be one more bad incident away from a permeant ban. Once again, not saying it's going to happen, just throwing that possibility out there.


Dorsey probably likes Garrett more now that he has a disciplinary issue.
Posted By: SaintDawg Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/17/19 11:01 PM
Originally Posted By: Dawg Citizen
Originally Posted By: SaintDawg
Seriously, Garrett should have played keep away and passed that helmet around to the Browns for 8 seconds and told Rudy "I'll see you in 2 weeks child" and grinned.
Would've been funny to see Garrett holding the helmet over Rudolph's head and him trying to jump up to get it.


Would have been humiliating.
Posted By: PastorMarc Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/17/19 11:02 PM
Originally Posted By: Dawg Citizen
Originally Posted By: BADdog
Originally Posted By: Dawg Citizen
If the Browns keep winning will Dorsey trade Garrett? I just have a funny feeling Garrett played his last game for the Browns.
What are you smoking. I dont want any
Not saying it's going to happen but think about it. Lets say Dorsey is offered a block buster deal for Garrett. He gets rid of a player who could be one more bad incident away from a permeant ban. Once again, not saying it's going to happen, just throwing that possibility out there.


lol That is NEVER going to happen JD would never trade a #1 pick away that he picked especially as productive as Garrett has been tsktsk
Posted By: jfanent Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/17/19 11:41 PM
Originally Posted By: PastorMarc
Originally Posted By: Dawg Citizen
Originally Posted By: BADdog
Originally Posted By: Dawg Citizen
If the Browns keep winning will Dorsey trade Garrett? I just have a funny feeling Garrett played his last game for the Browns.
What are you smoking. I dont want any
Not saying it's going to happen but think about it. Lets say Dorsey is offered a block buster deal for Garrett. He gets rid of a player who could be one more bad incident away from a permeant ban. Once again, not saying it's going to happen, just throwing that possibility out there.


lol That is NEVER going to happen JD would never trade a #1 pick away that he picked especially as productive as Garrett has been tsktsk


Dorsey didn't draft Garrett.
Posted By: PastorMarc Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/17/19 11:42 PM
Originally Posted By: jfanent
Originally Posted By: PastorMarc
Originally Posted By: Dawg Citizen
Originally Posted By: BADdog
Originally Posted By: Dawg Citizen
If the Browns keep winning will Dorsey trade Garrett? I just have a funny feeling Garrett played his last game for the Browns.
What are you smoking. I dont want any
Not saying it's going to happen but think about it. Lets say Dorsey is offered a block buster deal for Garrett. He gets rid of a player who could be one more bad incident away from a permeant ban. Once again, not saying it's going to happen, just throwing that possibility out there.


lol That is NEVER going to happen JD would never trade a #1 pick away that he picked especially as productive as Garrett has been tsktsk


Dorsey didn't draft Garrett.


Whoops your right still he ain't trading him ...
Posted By: bonefish Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/17/19 11:43 PM

Not trying to split hairs. But I stated that Rudolph "charged him."

My point is Rudolph provoked it then continued to provoke it.

No excuse for a helmet to be swung as a weapon.
Posted By: Rishuz Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/17/19 11:51 PM
Originally Posted By: oobernoober
Originally Posted By: devicedawg
Originally Posted By: Rishuz
Originally Posted By: DeisleDawg
Quote:
i suspect that most of the posters defending him are embarrassed by his actions


I'm not embarrassed with what he did in any way. I'am embarrassed that Baker ran his mouth and about Garret. Baker needs to learn to stfu.


This is an awful take.



I agree.



There are plenty of examples for the "Baker should shut his mouth" argument. This is not one of them.


Exactly.
Posted By: GratefulDawg Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/18/19 12:01 AM
Posted By: DeisleDawg Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/18/19 12:44 AM
Quote:
This is an awful take.



Not as bad as 0-16 or 1-15 the year before... You can...as a browns fan allow the steelers to crap all over a Browns player....

You disgust me
Posted By: DeisleDawg Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/18/19 12:46 AM
Quote:
I agree.


You sucking on that terrible towel also ? you disgust me
Posted By: Rishuz Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/18/19 12:58 AM
The Browns crapped all over the Steelers all night. Physically dominated them and humiliated them.

Then our best defensive player got suspended because he's either dumb or has anger issues. But he got suspended for reasons that were entirely under his control.

Enough is enough. I'm glad our QB called him out. I'm glad he called him out in public. If the other players don't like it, hit the road.

Someone needs to change the culture in Berea.
Posted By: DeisleDawg Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/18/19 01:05 AM
Rishuz..you been one of my good friends on this board and I respect your posts...


I don't want us friends and Browns fans to become angry at each other... But Baker should have just said...Talk to Myles...
Posted By: Knight_Of_Brown Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/18/19 01:33 AM
Garret was justified in what he done.

Rudolph hit him in the family jewels twice and was going for a 3rd shot while Garret had two guys holding him. Im surpised Garret didn't cave his skull in to be honest because thats probably what Rudolph deserved, but Garret is a good guy and held back.

Any man on here would pummel someone if they took two shots to the groin from some punk.

Garret has single handily brought back the rivalry. He changed the tone of the Browns vs Steelers even last year you could feel the tone changing. Garret is more important to this team than even the QB, even Baker.

Garret is the best DE to come out of the draft since Bruce Smith/Reggie White...He is to us what Reggie White was to Green Bay...he is the cog in the wheel that makes everything work here, and he isn't someone who can be replaced.

Sure, Garret lost his cool, but lets not make this out to be more than it is. Micheal Strahan said he clubbed a guy in the head with a helmet like Garret did in practice and the guy missed weeks over it...things happen, its a physical game, heat of the moment.

Garret will be back much sooner the media thinks...2-3 games is what he is looking at, anymore than that, and the NFLPA will get involved because its a violation of the CBA and the NFL Rulebook the players union agreed upon..the indefinite thing was just for show till they sit down with Garret and the NFLPA reps....i'll be suprised if he gets more than that.

a 16 game suspension would break all precedent, if this was so bad why wasn't Rudolph taken off the field and evaluated by medical staff.

this whole thing reeks of liberal ****** foot media trying to turn society into a bunch of whiney babies...no one was seriously injured in the altercation, the only thing that should happen is just fines and move on.

the news and social media need to let men play football and everyone else STHU about things they don't know anything about...
Posted By: lampdogg Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/18/19 01:49 AM
I'm getting tired of society's wussifiecation. We are becoming very weak.
Posted By: bonefish Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/18/19 02:30 AM
Normally I let your crap go.

But not this time.

Fights happen on football fields. Lots of pushing, jawing, and some punches with guys in full gear.

Not good but it happens. Normally they get separated and the game goes on.

This was not the case. There are no innocents here.

All parties were wrong.

You cross the line when you swing a NFL helmet at a guy with no helmet on.

Think about that if possible.

Myles Garrett is a monster human being. Look at the guy. If he were to hit another person clean with a helmet in a fit of rage. Dire consequences could happen.

If a professional boxer punches someone outside of a ring. He can be charged with assault and battery.

So you think it is "liberal bs macho man?"

Yes. Thankfully in this case nothing did happen. But if you shoot a gun at someone and miss? I guess that is ok because nothing happened.

"so let real men play football."

Real men know what the meaning of sport is.
Posted By: jaybird Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/18/19 02:42 AM
Nothing justifies hitting a guy in the head with a helmet... mason deserves to be suspended a couple games but Garrett should not have hit him with the helmet...

I wish he would have dropped the helmet or thrown it rather than hitting mason with it... bad look...

Hopefully his suspension will be lowered but doubt NFL will do it...
Posted By: oobernoober Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/18/19 02:52 AM
The thing I'm hoping happens with the appeal is to remove the indefinite part of the suspension. The more I think about it, the more I understand the longer length of the suspension. The thing I can't understand is doing this whole dance with goodell at some point in the future.

Just give him a bunch of games, and let's be done with it.
Posted By: CalDawg Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/18/19 03:01 AM
Myles bears the responsibility for swinging the helmet, but this was Rudolph's fault. He should be suspended as well.
Posted By: CapCity Dawg Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/18/19 03:18 AM
Originally Posted By: CalDawg
Myles bears the responsibility for swinging the helmet, but this was Rudolph's fault. He should be suspended as well.


Right. If Rudolph would have held his tantrum for 15 seconds, none of this happens. Fines, suspensions. None of it. Not saying the helmet swing is justified, it’s not.

And Pitts still throwing the ball?
Posted By: jfanent Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/18/19 03:29 AM
I wish Myles would have dropped the helmet and throat punched the weasel.
Posted By: Rishuz Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/18/19 03:32 AM
Rudolph has a very punchable face.
Posted By: Clemdawg Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/18/19 04:05 AM
I want our entire team to punish him.

If he scrambles from a pass rush and runs out of bounds on CLE's sideline, I want someone to clothesline his ass.

I'm fired up in a way I haven't been in YEARS. I hope our team feels the same way.

This punk got pwned by Myles the entire day, and took his shots out of frustration. I want him to feel frustrated- and totally helpless in 2 weeks.

#nowhere2run
#nowhere2hide
Posted By: devicedawg Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/18/19 04:20 AM
Quote:
But Baker should have just said...Talk to Myles...



You've never been more wrong.

(Actually and honestly, I don't know if you've ever been this wrong before, but you're definitely wrong here)
Posted By: Ballpeen Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/18/19 09:32 AM
Originally Posted By: Clemdawg
I want our entire team to punish him.

If he scrambles from a pass rush and runs out of bounds on CLE's sideline, I want someone to clothesline his ass.

I'm fired up in a way I haven't been in YEARS. I hope our team feels the same way.

This punk got pwned by Myles the entire day, and took his shots out of frustration. I want him to feel frustrated- and totally helpless in 2 weeks.

#nowhere2run
#nowhere2hide


Too obvious. When you get in a pile, pinch his leg or rip hair out. Get him kicking to draw the flag. Do it every chance possible.
Posted By: Bard Dawg Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/18/19 12:27 PM
Hope everybody tells him it his day to be a target. Not necessarily dirty, but pound him and beat him up. Punk him all day long. Time to return some favors.
Posted By: GratefulDawg Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/18/19 01:30 PM
Posted By: devicedawg Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/18/19 01:31 PM
Best case scenario for Pittsburgh would be they struggle and lose to the Bengals, so they bench Rudolph for the Browns game. We face Hodges.

We would beat Rudolph. We have a leg up on him mentally.
Posted By: Dawgs4Life Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/18/19 01:57 PM
Originally Posted By: Rishuz
Rudolph has a very punchable face.
Indeed. Screams frat boy.
Posted By: Clemdawg Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/18/19 04:25 PM
Like I said before, break a thumb in a scrum.
Step on his neck after a sack.
Barely-controlled barbarism.

He needs this lesson.
Elves should be his teachers.
Posted By: YTownBrownsFan Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/18/19 04:33 PM
Send him home as a eunuch.
Posted By: CapCity Dawg Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/18/19 05:57 PM
Originally Posted By: Ballpeen
Originally Posted By: Clemdawg
I want our entire team to punish him.

If he scrambles from a pass rush and runs out of bounds on CLE's sideline, I want someone to clothesline his ass.

I'm fired up in a way I haven't been in YEARS. I hope our team feels the same way.

This punk got pwned by Myles the entire day, and took his shots out of frustration. I want him to feel frustrated- and totally helpless in 2 weeks.

#nowhere2run
#nowhere2hide


Too obvious. When you get in a pile, pinch his leg or rip hair out. Get him kicking to draw the flag. Do it every chance possible.


In the pile, go for the junk, as Rudolph did. And Ben before him.

Do they teach that in Pitts?
Posted By: ExclDawg Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/18/19 06:10 PM
Originally Posted By: Clemdawg
Like I said before, break a thumb in a scrum.
Step on his neck after a sack.
Barely-controlled barbarism.


Why? I want him healthy, in the game, and still throwing completion after completion to our defense, like he did in the last game.
Posted By: mgh888 Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/18/19 06:11 PM
Originally Posted By: CapCity Dawg
Originally Posted By: Ballpeen
Originally Posted By: Clemdawg
I want our entire team to punish him.

If he scrambles from a pass rush and runs out of bounds on CLE's sideline, I want someone to clothesline his ass.

I'm fired up in a way I haven't been in YEARS. I hope our team feels the same way.

This punk got pwned by Myles the entire day, and took his shots out of frustration. I want him to feel frustrated- and totally helpless in 2 weeks.

#nowhere2run
#nowhere2hide


Too obvious. When you get in a pile, pinch his leg or rip hair out. Get him kicking to draw the flag. Do it every chance possible.


In the pile, go for the junk, as Rudolph did. And Ben before him.

Do they teach that in Pitts?


I am not averse to getting revenge and punking them ....

1. Biggest way to punk them is to simply physically dominate them all game and win. By multiple TDs

2. If anyone is going to punch MR in the balls - or otherwise illegally hurt them ... for heaven's sake don't get caught. Not by the refs and not on a slow mo replay camera somewhere.

Sure it sucks that we see Pit and other teams get preferential treatment (Josh Gordon is perhaps the single most blatant proof you'll ever need) .... but at the end of the day the best way to shut Pittsburgh up and make a point it to figuratively punch them in the face - legally - and dominate them.
Posted By: DCDAWGFAN Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/18/19 06:19 PM
Friday was a horrible day to be on vacation.. my wife would talk to me for 10 minutes and I would be totally thinking about my anger over this incident..

Garrett should get 4-5 games
Pouncey 1-2
Rudolph 1
Ogunjobi a fine.

It kills me that after watching it, they suspended Ogi for bumping Rudolph to the ground with his shoulder but not Rudolph who started it, kicked a guy in the nuts, then restarted it...

I also bet (I even think) the NFL should clear up this rule for next season..

If the video shows you trying to rip a guys helmet - 1 game
If you get the helmet off - 2 games
If you swing it - 6 games

Just make it automatic for first offenses then it can get more severe after that. If the NFL wants to show they are serious about safety and not just about protecting their image, which is what we saw with these immediate suspensions, they will codify the rule.
Posted By: PitDAWG Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/18/19 06:29 PM
I agree with you on making clear penalties for such a thing moving forward.

Yet I also think that this is one of those things you never dreamed you would need in the first place.
Posted By: Milk Man Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/18/19 06:57 PM
Lol...NFL and CBS concerned about what might happen in the Browns vs Steelers game 2.0. Moved from the nationally televised game at the 4:25pm slot to 1pm.

Posted By: willitevachange Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/18/19 07:05 PM
Quote:
Yet I also think that this is one of those things you never dreamed you would need in the first place.
To be fair though, it is addressed in the NFL rule book. So they most def thought about it. It also happened with a player in 2013. Smith from the Texans hit Incognito with his helmet.

Link

Smith received 1 Regular Season game. So a precedent has already been set by the NFL.
Posted By: PitDAWG Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/18/19 07:23 PM
So you mean it happened before a billion dollar lawsuit settlement over brain trauma? Yes, you're right, it did.

That lawsuit and the PR campaign over player safety has changed everything since then. And everyone in the game and paying attention to what went on knows that.
Posted By: PitDAWG Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/18/19 07:25 PM
I think the Oakland vs Kansas City game is simply what the NFL sees as a better match up for the late game. I mean I guess people can come up with their own conspiracies though.
Posted By: DCDAWGFAN Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/18/19 07:37 PM
Originally Posted By: PitDAWG
I think the Oakland vs Kansas City game is simply what the NFL sees as a better match up for the late game. I mean I guess people can come up with their own conspiracies though.

Oh I can absolutely believe that both can be true.. the KC game is a good matchup but I don't doubt for a second that the NFL is trying to bury the Browns vs Steelers game out of fear for what might happen.
Posted By: OldColdDawg Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/18/19 07:40 PM
I hate 4 o'clock games so I'm happy about it.
Posted By: willitevachange Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/18/19 07:42 PM
Originally Posted By: PitDAWG
So you mean it happened before a billion dollar lawsuit settlement over brain trauma? Yes, you're right, it did.

That lawsuit and the PR campaign over player safety has changed everything since then. And everyone in the game and paying attention to what went on knows that.
I didn't see it change the rulebook.
Posted By: DCDAWGFAN Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/18/19 07:45 PM
Originally Posted By: PitDAWG
So you mean it happened before a billion dollar lawsuit settlement over brain trauma? Yes, you're right, it did.

That lawsuit and the PR campaign over player safety has changed everything since then. And everyone in the game and paying attention to what went on knows that.

Which is why I'm fine with a solid 4 game suspension and a fine.. things are more serious than a 1 game suspension...

But that's why I also said they should update the rule book, or not even the rule book, this is something that should be worked into the CBA. All the rule book needs to say is 15 yards and ejection.
Posted By: jacksondawg Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/18/19 07:52 PM
If this is addressed somewhere else delete it ref
Myles Garrett hearing is set for Wednesday
Posted By: GratefulDawg Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/18/19 08:05 PM
Posted By: GratefulDawg Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/18/19 09:54 PM
Posted By: Bard Dawg Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/18/19 10:45 PM
That would be sweet indeed. But I want to add some insult to the injury of losing. WE need to be plasma-intense. Cut it loose!
Posted By: DiamDawg Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/18/19 10:47 PM
Originally Posted By: bonefish

Not trying to split hairs. But I stated that Rudolph "charged him."

My point is Rudolph provoked it then continued to provoke it.

No excuse for a helmet to be swung as a weapon.


Like i said ... i agreed with everything u said except that ... and i agree with that .. i would have just added ... he charged him to retrieve his helmet ....

He did charge him but it wasn’t to attack him ... u could tell he rushed up off balance and was lunging for his helmet ...
Posted By: WSU Willie Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/18/19 11:26 PM
Originally Posted By: DiamDawg
Originally Posted By: bonefish

Not trying to split hairs. But I stated that Rudolph "charged him."

My point is Rudolph provoked it then continued to provoke it.

No excuse for a helmet to be swung as a weapon.


Like i said ... i agreed with everything u said except that ... and i agree with that .. i would have just added ... he charged him to retrieve his helmet ....

He did charge him but it wasn’t to attack him ... u could tell he rushed up off balance and was lunging for his helmet ...



Diam,

Look at the roid rage on Rudolph's face and tell me he was just interested in getting back his helmet...c'mon man! As if he'd have to play the next snap without his helmet.

That's like saying MG ripped off his helmet simply in an effort to teach the punk what helmet extraction really looks like...and that MG was just doing him a favor.
Posted By: Tulsa Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/18/19 11:50 PM
He charged him on Garretts left side, the helmet was in his right hand. He made no move to get back his helmet, short of grabbing Garrett’s junk. Then Myles tried to give it back to him.
Posted By: Dave Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/19/19 12:11 AM
Originally Posted By: Tulsa
He charged him on Garretts left side, the helmet was in his right hand. He made no move to get back his helmet, short of grabbing Garrett’s junk. Then Myles tried to give it back to him.


I make the same mistake as Rudolph made all the time. Helmet / ballsack, ballsack / helmet. I just can't tell them apart! Tell you one thing; it has lead to more than one awkward situation in my life.
Posted By: SuperBrown Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/19/19 12:17 AM
Originally Posted By: Milk Man
Lol...NFL and CBS concerned about what might happen in the Browns vs Steelers game 2.0. Moved from the nationally televised game at the 4:25pm slot to 1pm.



I wonder why?... rofl
Posted By: Brownoholic Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/19/19 12:26 AM
I think they think less alcohol will be consumed by 1 pm.
Posted By: DeputyDawg Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/19/19 01:39 AM
Good thing for Rudolph that this game is in Pittsburgh. I would have bribed the bus driver to play a video of bottle-gate on the ride here followed by a clip on how the first 5000 lucky Browns fans will get a full size Mason Rudolph helmet.
Posted By: DCDAWGFAN Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/19/19 03:43 AM
Originally Posted By: DiamDawg
Originally Posted By: bonefish

Not trying to split hairs. But I stated that Rudolph "charged him."

My point is Rudolph provoked it then continued to provoke it.

No excuse for a helmet to be swung as a weapon.


Like i said ... i agreed with everything u said except that ... and i agree with that .. i would have just added ... he charged him to retrieve his helmet ....

He did charge him but it wasn’t to attack him ... u could tell he rushed up off balance and was lunging for his helmet ...





Does that look like a guy who just wants his helmet back?
Posted By: DCDAWGFAN Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/19/19 03:55 AM
I am very happy that calmer heads have started to prevail, that public opinion, especially among former NFL players has started to turn... NOBODY is condoning what Myles did but more and more former players are on Myles side in that he shouldn't be totally vilified for this, that this is a bad thing he did but it shouldn't define him or undo all of the good he does...

25 years from now, when Myles is going into the Hall of Fame, this should be a distant memory that he learned from and a footnote to a great long career..
Posted By: JPPT1974 Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/19/19 03:58 AM
Just hope that Garrett will live and learn. And take this to make sure others will not break this rule. He is a classy guy who just made one dumb and costly mistake!
Posted By: TrooperDawg Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/19/19 04:09 AM
Baker won his appeal, and doesn't have to pay the $12,500 fine for his comments on officiating. Maybe that bodes well for Myles getting some relief on his penalty. Doesn't Larry O. go tomorrow to plead his case?
Posted By: Bard Dawg Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/19/19 01:11 PM
Jim Brown wasn't spotless. His achievements are not set aside.

I want to hear what the punk gets for starting this, bagging MG, and prolonging it. The discipline is vague and lopsided. Guilty until proven, extreme prejudice in the terms of discipline from the outset.

Who hands those down? Because the package rolled out quickly and conveniently ignored some other stuff that give MG some context. Not condoning, but a "fairer" discipline for the group is indicated.
Posted By: DevilDawg2847 Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/19/19 04:57 PM
J/c

Not sure where else to put this but I know Baker is taking some flak about his postgame interview. I don’t think he was throwing anyone under the bus. Even if the situation hadn’t escalated, it was a late hit and should have gotten a flag. Which I would be fine with because 15yrds is so worth rubbing their noses in dawg poop.

More importantly Baker was taking responsibility for his team in a way (I hope) he has yet to do this season. He’s talked about What he needs to do but I think some of the discipline issues this season stem from Baker abdicating his leadership role. He hasn’t been the same leader he was last year and I think it finally was apparent to him that he has a bigger role he must play. It sucks that we won’t have Myles for a bit, but to me looks like this whole incident is actually going to be a net positive for us.
Posted By: DiamDawg Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/19/19 05:01 PM
So he “punched” him in the nuts with an open hand as opposed to a clenched fist ... and he had to reach across his junk to get to the helmet ... he rushed up off balance and lunged at him ...

Willie we’ll just have to agree to disagree ...

Ya’all can continue to view ‘tis through your orange and brown colored glasses and come to the conclusion the browns once again were victims in this ... great country this america (it used to be anyhow) ....

I’m out ... ya’all enjoy ... im starting to prep the isle for next year ... thumbsup
Posted By: DiamDawg Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/19/19 05:07 PM
Originally Posted By: PitDAWG
I think the Oakland vs Kansas City game is simply what the NFL sees as a better match up for the late game. I mean I guess people can come up with their own conspiracies though.


If the nfl does not have a strong crew on that game they’ll switch ... and by strong i mean put up with nada from the players ...

The crew will be under orders to call everything and at the first sign of trouble to lay the hammer down ...

The players need to be choir boys or they wont be around long ...
Posted By: DevilDawg2847 Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/19/19 05:19 PM
Originally Posted By: DiamDawg
So he “punched” him in the nuts with an open hand as opposed to a clenched fist ... and he had to reach across his junk to get to the helmet ... he rushed up off balance and lunged at him ...

Willie we’ll just have to agree to disagree ...

Ya’all can continue to view ‘tis through your orange and brown colored glasses and come to the conclusion the browns once again were victims in this ... great country this america (it used to be anyhow) ....

I’m out ... ya’all enjoy ... im starting to prep the isle for next year ... thumbsup


Just to be clear, is it your intention that Rudolph was not punching him in the nads, but rather he was groping Myles??? Sounds to me like that theory only makes Myles more justified in what he did... just sayin
Posted By: PitDAWG Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/19/19 05:21 PM
There is no justification for hitting a player not wearing a helmet, with a helmet. None.

No matter how hard people go to make excuses for it.
Posted By: DCDAWGFAN Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/19/19 06:09 PM
Originally Posted By: PitDAWG
There is no justification for hitting a player not wearing a helmet, with a helmet. None.

No matter how hard people go to make excuses for it.

On the bell curve of opinions, those who think Myles was justified in hitting him in the head with his own helmet is very few and on the fringe...

The vast majority fall into the category of...

Rudolph started it
DeCastro and Garrett were calming down
Rudolph re-escalated it
Myles was justified in smacking Rudolph (just should have been the old fashioned way, not on his bare head with a helmet)
Garrett is absolutely wrong for swinging a helmet
Steelers were right for taking Garrett to the ground
Pouncey was wrong for kicking him in the head while he was down

Almost every rational person I know believes something very similar to that... even Steeler fans.
Posted By: PitDAWG Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/19/19 06:26 PM
My response was directly to this......

Quote:
makes Myles more justified in what he did
Posted By: willitevachange Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/19/19 06:44 PM
Originally Posted By: DevilDawg2847
J/c

Not sure where else to put this but I know Baker is taking some flak about his postgame interview. I don’t think he was throwing anyone under the bus. Even if the situation hadn’t escalated, it was a late hit and should have gotten a flag. Which I would be fine with because 15yrds is so worth rubbing their noses in dawg poop.

More importantly Baker was taking responsibility for his team in a way (I hope) he has yet to do this season. He’s talked about What he needs to do but I think some of the discipline issues this season stem from Baker abdicating his leadership role. He hasn’t been the same leader he was last year and I think it finally was apparent to him that he has a bigger role he must play. It sucks that we won’t have Myles for a bit, but to me looks like this whole incident is actually going to be a net positive for us.
It was NOT a late hit.
Posted By: willitevachange Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/19/19 06:48 PM
Originally Posted By: PitDAWG
There is no justification for hitting a player not wearing a helmet, with a helmet. None.

No matter how hard people go to make excuses for it.


When I grew up, if you got hit in the nuts in a fight, all rules were off. Would I have hit him with a helmet, nope. Should he have been hit with a helmet, nope. Did he deserve to get hit with a helmet - well, he may not have deserved it, but it wouldn't have happened if he wouldn't have kicked him in the nuts.
Posted By: PitDAWG Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/19/19 07:00 PM
Now I don't disagree with you about what children do when they get into fights. But this is another one of those times when context means something. It's when it seems some aren't looking at things big picture but through a narrow lens.

When "we were growing up" we weren't getting paid millions of dollars and on national TV. "When we grew up" we weren't working for a multi billion dollar corporate entity that just settled a concussion lawsuit for a billion dollars.

What I find the most odd thing about this is that Myles took full responsibility. Baker didn't make excuses for Myles behavior after the game.

Yet our fan base seems to be the one's going, "yeah but".
Posted By: willitevachange Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/19/19 07:10 PM
Quote:
When "we were growing up" we weren't getting paid millions of dollars and on national TV. "When we grew up" we weren't working for a multi billion dollar corporate entity that just settled a concussion lawsuit for a billion dollars.
Good for the company. Come kick me in the nuts and see what happens.

No ones kicking me in the nuts for a lot less than millions of dollars, so that point doesn't even make sense.

Quote:
What I find the most odd thing about this is that Myles took full responsibility. Baker didn't make excuses for Myles behavior after the game.
And?

Do we not feel bad about dropping a nuke on Japan, but realized that they instigated and deserved it?

You realize you can feel bad for you actions, even if they are warranted, right? Are you so cold hearted that everything is black and white like that? No gray area huh?

I can feel bad the dude got blasted, I can feel myles should not have used a helmet to hit him, AND get this, I can still feel that it was somewhat deserved ALL AT THE SAME TIME! thumbsup
Posted By: DevilDawg2847 Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/19/19 07:26 PM
Originally Posted By: PitDAWG
My response was directly to this......

Quote:
makes Myles more justified in what he did




It’s funny a couple posts down you talk about context after clearly taking my comment out of it lol Typical. clearly purple font is more necessary than many think.
Posted By: DevilDawg2847 Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/19/19 07:32 PM
We’ll have to disagree I guess which is fine. My observation was that it would have been an unnecessary roughness call underscored by the controlled way Myles took him down. The correct thing to do at that time for Rudolph would to have been to chill for a second and accept the penalty.

But maybe you are correct. A flag wasn’t immediately thrown when he took him down. A flag wasn’t thrown while Rudolph clearly tried to twist Garrett’s helmet off which I think we’ve come to expect when playing the Steelers. It wasn’t until Myles went to show him how it was done did the flag come out.
Posted By: willitevachange Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/19/19 07:38 PM
Originally Posted By: DevilDawg2847
We’ll have to disagree I guess which is fine. My observation was that it would have been an unnecessary roughness call underscored by the controlled way Myles took him down. The correct thing to do at that time for Rudolph would to have been to chill for a second and accept the penalty.

But maybe you are correct. A flag wasn’t immediately thrown when he took him down. A flag wasn’t thrown while Rudolph clearly tried to twist Garrett’s helmet off which I think we’ve come to expect when playing the Steelers. It wasn’t until Myles went to show him how it was done did the flag come out.




I don't see how it was late, when the ball is right out his hand when he makes contact.

He also didn't drive him to the ground, as Mason landed on top of him.

Actually if you watch, it wasnt a late hit or a hard hit, it was a LONG tackle. What I mean by that is Myles took awhile to bring him down because he was actually LETTING up and trying not to get a flag for roughing.
Posted By: DevilDawg2847 Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/19/19 07:41 PM
I gotcha. And what you are saying about the ‘long tackle’ makes sense. That’s probably why it appeared to me to be late.

Unlike with Steven Crowder, my mind is changed
Posted By: PitDAWG Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/19/19 07:43 PM
I must have made my points too obvious for you.
Posted By: willitevachange Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/19/19 07:44 PM
Originally Posted By: DevilDawg2847
I gotcha. And what you are saying about the ‘long tackle’ makes sense. That’s probably why it appeared to me to be late.

Unlike with Steven Crowder, my mind is changed
Wasn't trying to be a dolt, honestly I just saw this early today myself. I had agreed before seeing these photos it was a late hit. Then I rewatched the tape of the play, and the ball came out just a split second before MG made initial contact. Then you can see Myles trying to twist him and pull him down so not to take a Roughing call like he did against Ben last year that cost us the game.

I think people may have watched the game full speed, and haven't actually looked at anything else, except for the few seconds that the media keeps running over and over again, IMO
Posted By: PitDAWG Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/19/19 08:08 PM
Originally Posted By: willitevachange
Come kick me in the nuts and see what happens.


rofl

You're an odd little fellow.
Posted By: willitevachange Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/19/19 08:20 PM
Originally Posted By: PitDAWG
Originally Posted By: willitevachange
Come kick me in the nuts and see what happens.


rofl

You're an odd little fellow.
So I posted that, you replied, and then 20 min later replied to that again...…

odd that you keep going back to my post looking for things. you should charge me rent for the space I take up in your head, but nah.
Posted By: PitDAWG Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/19/19 08:22 PM
rofl

Just because you made a dumb comment that's not my fault.
Posted By: willitevachange Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/19/19 09:12 PM
Posted By: DCDAWGFAN Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/19/19 09:59 PM
Originally Posted By: willitevachange
Originally Posted By: PitDAWG
There is no justification for hitting a player not wearing a helmet, with a helmet. None.

No matter how hard people go to make excuses for it.


When I grew up, if you got hit in the nuts in a fight, all rules were off. Would I have hit him with a helmet, nope. Should he have been hit with a helmet, nope. Did he deserve to get hit with a helmet - well, he may not have deserved it, but it wouldn't have happened if he wouldn't have kicked him in the nuts.



When I grew up, even if a kid hit you in the nuts, you weren't allowed to bash his head in with a baseball bat. There is never a situation (except life or death) where "all rules are off"... retaliation, which is proportional to the original incident, is usually ok with me. This was not proportional.
Posted By: GMdawg Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/19/19 10:19 PM
Originally Posted By: DiamDawg
So he “punched” him in the nuts with an open hand as opposed to a clenched fist ... and he had to reach across his junk to get to the helmet ... he rushed up off balance and lunged at him ...

Willie we’ll just have to agree to disagree ...

Ya’all can continue to view ‘tis through your orange and brown colored glasses and come to the conclusion the browns once again were victims in this ... great country this america (it used to be anyhow) ....

I’m out ... ya’all enjoy ... im starting to prep the isle for next year ... thumbsup


Yo Bro I am wearing a pair of yellow and black glasses and I still see Rudolph starting and continuing to carry on with this crap. If you can't s ee that you need to take a course in braile since your as blind as a bat. frown
Posted By: GMdawg Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/19/19 10:23 PM
Originally Posted By: PitDAWG
There is no justification for hitting a player not wearing a helmet, with a helmet. None.

No matter how hard people go to make excuses for it.


Your 110 percent correct. HOWEVER there is also no justication in Rudolph starting and continueing the fight including the kicks to the balls, and the helmet twisting and ripping. Myles should have been suspended for 2 to 4 games AND Rudolph should have been suspended for at least 2 games. If you don't agree well then we have nothing to discuss on this subject bro frown
Posted By: DevilDawg2847 Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/19/19 10:25 PM
I know you weren’t trying to be a dolt. And I do appreciate the differing viewpoint. I don’t have a problem with taking a position and being corrected. My only issue is when i take a position and others try to correct me on a position I haven’t taken.
Posted By: DeputyDawg Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/19/19 11:00 PM
Myles was wrong.

Mason was wrong and the aggressor.

Myles was punished.

Mason went on camera talking about "bush league" Myles and will be playing on Sunday.

A grown man that kicks another man in the nuts doesn't know what "bush league" is.
Posted By: DiamDawg Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/19/19 11:02 PM
Gotcha ... glad to know your the be all end all on this and that if i disagree with u I’m blind ...

I’m blind and u da man ... Thats easy enough to remember ... thumbsup

Tabber and I could use some help getting the isle ready for next year if u could help my blind ass out that’d be awesome bro .... wink
Posted By: CleVeLaNd_sTrife Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/19/19 11:11 PM
Here's a question nobody has asked...

If Mason Rudolph was a black quarterback, would he have been suspended?
Posted By: EveDawg Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/19/19 11:13 PM
Originally Posted By: CleVeLaNd_sTrife
Here's a question nobody has asked...

If Mason Rudolph was a black quarterback, would he have been suspended?


He would have been given a bonus and a statue made.
Posted By: EveDawg Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/19/19 11:18 PM
Originally Posted By: EveDawg
Originally Posted By: CleVeLaNd_sTrife
Here's a question nobody has asked...

If Mason Rudolph was a black quarterback, would he have been suspended?


He would have been given a bonus and a statue made.


Tomlin gave a pregame interview where he was asked about OBJ and Landry, and he gave a big hand over mouth yawn. To describe his feelings about his opponent. Extremely disrepectful, coming from a head coach.


If Freddie had done that, he would have been burned at the stake.

Posted By: CapCity Dawg Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/20/19 12:10 AM
Originally Posted By: EveDawg
Originally Posted By: EveDawg
Originally Posted By: CleVeLaNd_sTrife
Here's a question nobody has asked...

If Mason Rudolph was a black quarterback, would he have been suspended?


He would have been given a bonus and a statue made.


Tomlin gave a pregame interview where he was asked about OBJ and Landry, and he gave a big hand over mouth yawn. To describe his feelings about his opponent. Extremely disrepectful, coming from a head coach.


Same coach who wandered onto the field of play and disrupted a kick return. I have 0 respect for him.
Posted By: SunDawg Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/20/19 12:48 AM
Geez, are you guys still talking about this crap? The team is a train wreck, can't you see it? Garret deserved everything he got...it was his fault for being STUPID ENOUGH to ROUGH THE PASSER with EIGHT SECONDS left in a game his team had one. OBJ is out talking about how Tomlin DISRESPECTED him by yawning in an interview? WTF! These guys are total prima donna's...give me a team of Chubs, players who let their work on the field do the talking for them. My gosh, I am so SICK of watching OBJ and Landry hold the ball out to signal first down when they make a catch. Damn, the team has a losing record. ACT LIKE YOU'VE DONE IT BEFORE BRO! I can't stand to watch it.

Again I say, THIS FIASCO IS ON DORSEY! He broke up the end of season chemistry by jettisoning the coaching staff, and Zeitler, and replacing them with TWO MAJOR headaches and salary cap problems from the Giants, plus Frederick Kitchens.

BOTTON LINE: This is not a team, but a group of selfish individuals...no way we win out to make the playoffs...no way.

My $0.02.
Posted By: EveDawg Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/20/19 12:50 AM
I hear Cincy needs some fans. Maybe you should go root for them.
Posted By: jacksondawg Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/20/19 01:15 AM
Listening to sounds like we lost to Baltimore and Pittsburgh
Oh buy the way the browns have 50000000 more to spend this year plus 10draft choices
Posted By: YTownBrownsFan Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/20/19 01:23 AM
All I have to say is this: Rudolph is extremely lucky that it wasn't me standing over him when he decided to do his infamous kick ..... because if he kicked me in the nuts, he'd still be trying to scrub the puke out of his clothes and off his face and body.

He might still reek of it, and be smelling it even today.
Posted By: Rishuz Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/20/19 01:26 AM
Originally Posted By: SunDawg
Geez, are you guys still talking about this crap? The team is a train wreck, can't you see it? Garret deserved everything he got...it was his fault for being STUPID ENOUGH to ROUGH THE PASSER with EIGHT SECONDS left in a game his team had one. OBJ is out talking about how Tomlin DISRESPECTED him by yawning in an interview? WTF! These guys are total prima donna's...give me a team of Chubs, players who let their work on the field do the talking for them. My gosh, I am so SICK of watching OBJ and Landry hold the ball out to signal first down when they make a catch. Damn, the team has a losing record. ACT LIKE YOU'VE DONE IT BEFORE BRO! I can't stand to watch it.

Again I say, THIS FIASCO IS ON DORSEY! He broke up the end of season chemistry by jettisoning the coaching staff, and Zeitler, and replacing them with TWO MAJOR headaches and salary cap problems from the Giants, plus Frederick Kitchens.

BOTTON LINE: This is not a team, but a group of selfish individuals...no way we win out to make the playoffs...no way.

My $0.02.




I agree with everything you said except the win out part. I think we can.
Posted By: BADdog Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/20/19 01:36 AM
Originally Posted By: EveDawg
I hear Cincy needs some fans. Maybe you should go root for them.


Buffalo is doing pretty good
Posted By: PDXBrownsFan Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/20/19 01:39 AM
I haven't been in here since Thursday's game as I figured everybody would have been going crazy. I also needed my own time to disseminate and break things down. Like everybody else I went from excitement of knowing the game was over to a WTF moment of what am I watching during those last 8 seconds. I spent many hours and days wracking my head around the whys and the hows that it happened. I want a team that can win and lose with dignity and respect. I understand football is a violent game, but I am not here to watch an medieval battle or gladiators fighting to the death. This is a game. IT is sport. Nothing more and nothing less. I love the chess match of the sport and I love the strategy and battle of wills as well as how prideful I am of my hometown city when we win.

This season has been hard. Very hard. Mainly because we all came into this season expecting far too much and believing the hype. I count myself as one of them. There has been far too much talking and not enough true results. There have been media tantrums, player drama, suspensions, waivings, Players Twitter tirades threatening fans and reporters, inane uniform issues that take up far too much media time, an undisciplined and highly penalized team taking the field, player ejections, embarrassing losses and horrible game time coaching issues and now MG going ballistic on National TV with only 8 sec left and to the point where in all honesty it could have been really bad had he connected on the temple or top of the skull with the crown of the helmet. I have questioned Freddie and the coaches and the culture that is being instilled and seriously worry if this is beyond rookie mistakes for FK.

As coaches and players have said...unfortunately that is all that will be remembered from the game that we totally dominated. Chubb broke a 1000, Shobert had a great game, hodge came out of nowhere and our recently signed TE made an unbelievable catch, our defense dominated and Baker played a solid game...none of that is remembered. Had Myles dropped that helmet and swung a fist it would all be bygone by now and most people would have moved on.

BUT...I have also spent much time wracking my brain and realizing that we put so many expectations on these players to be mean, nasty and violent for this game and then expect them to just switch off after every play, when they go to the sidelines or when the game is over. Clearly he was mad. Clearly his emotions got the better of him, and clearly for a split second he saw red and didn't think about his actions or the aftereffects of it. We are all capable of going to that place and we have probably all had moments in our lives where we know we could have handled things better. I believe MG immediately thought that after the fact and felt awful. He deserves a suspension of games, what he did was totally wrong, but I am not going to paint him as some terrible person who is a dirty player and should be cut from the team or kicked out of the league. That is asinine and totally over the top. The NFL also needs to look themselves in the mirror and look at their suspension policy for both on the field and off the field issues because the league often looks absurd in these big, overriding issues.

That said, I want to be proud of my team and I walked away not feeling that on Thursday and it definitely felt like a loss even though we had won. I now hope the team can rally behind each other...stay focused on the goal and continue to play well and win with dignity and respect.

Orange & Brown Forever, GO BROWNS!
Posted By: dawgpound101 Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/20/19 02:59 AM
Doesn't the CBA state that an indefinite suspension cannot take place for on the field actions? Sorry didn't bother to read the whole thread
Posted By: PDXBrownsFan Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/20/19 03:35 AM
Originally Posted By: dawgpound101
Doesn't the CBA state that an indefinite suspension cannot take place for on the field actions? Sorry didn't bother to read the whole thread


That is exactly the loophole MG is looking to appeal tomorrow re: his "indefinite" suspension and to get a specific number and hopefully reduction.
Posted By: SuperBrown Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/20/19 04:12 AM
Did yall know MG is suspended?

Couldn't tell.
Posted By: dawgpound101 Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/20/19 04:41 AM
Uh...yup
Posted By: GMdawg Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/20/19 09:42 AM
Originally Posted By: DiamDawg
Gotcha ... glad to know your the be all end all on this and that if i disagree with u I’m blind ...

I’m blind and u da man ... Thats easy enough to remember ... thumbsup

Tabber and I could use some help getting the isle ready for next year if u could help my blind ass out that’d be awesome bro .... wink


Would you prefer a white cane or a guide dog for Christmas wink
Posted By: eotab Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/20/19 12:58 PM
Originally Posted By: BCbrownie
I cannot say with 100% certainty what I would have done.But,I can say that in the few opportunities I've had to bash someone's brains out,I restrained myself.And I suspect the same can be said for everyone posting here.
You've coached,you know this is wrong.Him being a Brown,and the other guy a steeler,doesn't make it right,I don't care how many balltaps he got.
i suspect that most of the posters defending him are embarrassed by his actions and that is leading to anger.Misplaced anger at the Haslams,the steelers or the NFL.


Just a note, I never said it was "RIGHT" I've maintained that he did the deed and should be punished.

I think the stiffest penalty that the NFL can make on a player with no defense allowed is wrong.

I think the NFL is showing some sort of Bias, is the bias to a White Guy? Is the Bias to the position he plays? Is the Bias for the Team that he plays for. Don't know don't care, what I DO KNOW!!! Is there is a definite Bias being given to Rudolf.

He was being quickly propped up as a poor bystander in all of this. Garrett was being quickly propped up by the Media and NFL office as some crazed Animal.

the truth should come out from the MEDIA and NFL OFFICE and instead of showing Garrett wielding a helmet in hand hitting the top of the head of Rudolf. They should repeatedly show Rudolf kicking Garrett in the nuts...and btw he did so before Garret ripped the helmet off of Rudolf...which tells me that is why he got angry and ripped the helmet off - He was kicked in the NUTZ!

Then show how Garrett was rendered calm and not in an aggressive mental phase or physical and then like a Crazy mad man Rudolf approaches Garret and now PUNCHES HIM IN THE NUTZ...This is what ESPN and NFL Network should be showing Over n over n over again.

jmho
Posted By: superbowldogg Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/20/19 01:02 PM
I think the NFL made so many mistakes intentionally because of the PR mob mentality and Twitter rage.

Once people cooled down and moved on from that incident, MG will have his chance to appeal it and only end up with 3-4 games.

Maybe that's my hope? I think the NFL admins are slimy, sneaky, and now give into peer pressure. This is their sleazily way of getting around it and saving face for both sides.
Posted By: s003apr Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/20/19 01:13 PM
Nobody is saying that Myles does not deserve a suspension or is not wrong, but the individuals defending a non-suspension for Rudolph or assaulting Garrett's character or calling him a criminal are just plain wrong.

I don't care how good a person someone thinks that they are, everyone has a boiling point where the parts of their brain responsible for regulating emotions and performing cognitive tasks completely shutdown. It is not a conscious choice, it is physiology.

It bothers me that people keep carrying on about "composure", because talking and thinking about composure is not going to prevent a physiological response.

It is a violent and emotional game already. Enduring cheap shots can send players over the edge and the Steelers have been the masters of cheap shots for decades. It just doesn't feel right to me that someone should be able to push another person to their boiling point through illegal actions on the field and then bear no responsibility for the things that follow.
Posted By: willitevachange Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/20/19 01:20 PM
Originally Posted By: DCDAWGFAN
Originally Posted By: willitevachange
Originally Posted By: PitDAWG
There is no justification for hitting a player not wearing a helmet, with a helmet. None.

No matter how hard people go to make excuses for it.


When I grew up, if you got hit in the nuts in a fight, all rules were off. Would I have hit him with a helmet, nope. Should he have been hit with a helmet, nope. Did he deserve to get hit with a helmet - well, he may not have deserved it, but it wouldn't have happened if he wouldn't have kicked him in the nuts.



When I grew up, even if a kid hit you in the nuts, you weren't allowed to bash his head in with a baseball bat. There is never a situation (except life or death) where "all rules are off"... retaliation, which is proportional to the original incident, is usually ok with me. This was not proportional.
Your acting like he hurt Mason. He didn't. He gave him a tap. Myles is 280lbs, and a freak. IF he wanted to hurt Mason with that, he could have and would have. Mason immediately looks at the ref with his hands up. He wasn't hurt, it wasn't hit hard, and I think a lot of people are putting it out of proportion.
Posted By: GratefulDawg Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/20/19 01:21 PM
Posted By: oobernoober Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/20/19 01:32 PM
Originally Posted By: s003apr
Nobody is saying that Myles does not deserve a suspension or is not wrong, but the individuals defending a non-suspension for Rudolph or assaulting Garrett's character or calling him a criminal are just plain wrong.

I don't care how good a person someone thinks that they are, everyone has a boiling point where the parts of their brain responsible for regulating emotions and performing cognitive tasks completely shutdown. It is not a conscious choice, it is physiology.

It bothers me that people keep carrying on about "composure", because talking and thinking about composure is not going to prevent a physiological response.

It is a violent and emotional game already. Enduring cheap shots can send players over the edge and the Steelers have been the masters of cheap shots for decades. It just doesn't feel right to me that someone should be able to push another person to their boiling point through illegal actions on the field and then bear no responsibility for the things that follow.


Garrett deserves to be suspended for a long time. No, he didn't hurt Rudolph, but he very easily could have. With how he was locked up with the Steelers Olineman, Mason could've sustained massive facial/cranial injuries just as easily and Garrett could've missed entirely. The outcome of the swing and where he swung is irrelevant because the fact is he swung.

But folks that somehow equate Rudolph needing to be suspended with letting Garrett off the hook is maddening. I'm aware that the court of public opinion allows for a single heinous act (hitting a guy in the head with a hard object used as a weapon) to overshadow everything else that happened before and after, but official disciplinary processes aren't supposed to work this way.
This may fly over some peoples' heads, but it is possible to be both outraged by Rudolph's lack of suspension and simultaneously hold Garrett fully responsible for the helmet swing.
Posted By: eotab Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/20/19 01:50 PM
But folks that somehow equate Rudolph needing to be suspended with letting Garrett off the hook is maddening.

Huh??? the majority here is saying Garrett did wrong and should have some pay...some disagree like I do that the should get the highest possible penalty given out. He was more than provoked he was hit in the nutz twice. Would Garret have been suspended if not for the actions of Rudolf...no after the kick in the nuts Garrett was fine with just holding the helmet for that Cowardly act but he pursued Garrett not the other way around and then proceeded to punch him once again in the NUTS...It doesn't take away the wrong doing by Garrett but the fact that he has never shown any negative behavior prior to this and now the NFL NOWS how he did lose his mind in this.
I think his sentence should be softened not lifted totally.

But what most of us are stating is that Rudolf should get an Equal penalty in all of this for if it wasn't for him none of this would happen. They go bonkers when a player spits in the face of another....but its OK to kick and punch an opposing player in the nuts cause we are playing too hard. ??? This wrong by the NFL and we should demand that he pays for his total control in this happening!
Posted By: oobernoober Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/20/19 02:21 PM
I think Garrett's suspension should be changed to not be indefinite. This whole... having Garrett crawl back to the league and beg forgiveness at some unclear point in the future is silly, imo. I hope that part, at least, gets corrected.

Re: the main point of my post... I get the feeling that some on here are unable to separate what Garrett did and what Rudolph did. That arguing that Rudolph had a part in the situation and deserves a suspension somehow equates to defending what Garrett did. It doesn't.
Posted By: Punchsmack Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/20/19 02:27 PM
Originally Posted By: oobernoober
I think Garrett's suspension should be changed to not be indefinite. This whole... having Garrett crawl back to the league and beg forgiveness at some unclear point in the future is silly, imo. I hope that part, at least, gets corrected.


Right, lock it in at 6 games and move on. I'm fine with him not playing another down this season. Sure, it'd be nice to have it at 4 games, but I just don't see that happening. Goodell has already came out and said Myles is done for the year, so that's going to stick. Also, I don't think they have to worry about "6 games + the playoffs".

I'm more interested to see if Ogunjobi's suspension is reduced to just a big fine. I still don't think he hit Mason all that hard and it's not like he followed up with punches. He stood there flat-footed like, "What the heck is going on? I knocked the guy charging at Myles, but what the hell did I just see?" Like he was half defending Myles and half confused on the helmet swing. Again, he barely knocked him over. That's a fine.
Posted By: oobernoober Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/20/19 02:37 PM
With it not appearing that Rudolph will be suspended, I hope Pouncey's suspension sticks at at least 2 games.
Posted By: YTownBrownsFan Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/20/19 02:52 PM
Originally Posted By: GMdawg
Originally Posted By: DiamDawg
Gotcha ... glad to know your the be all end all on this and that if i disagree with u I’m blind ...

I’m blind and u da man ... Thats easy enough to remember ... thumbsup

Tabber and I could use some help getting the isle ready for next year if u could help my blind ass out that’d be awesome bro .... wink


Would you prefer a white cane or a guide dog for Christmas wink


I asked GM Santa for a guide dog last year ,..... but instead I got a scroungy old opossum. crazy
Posted By: PitDAWG Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/20/19 03:01 PM
Originally Posted By: willitevachange
Your acting like he hurt Mason. He didn't. He gave him a tap.


rofl

This has devolved to the point of desperation.
Posted By: WSU Willie Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/20/19 03:13 PM
Originally Posted By: PitDAWG
Originally Posted By: willitevachange
Your acting like he hurt Mason. He didn't. He gave him a tap.


rofl

This has devolved to the point of desperation.


I bet MG's sack was more sore after the game than was MR's head.
Posted By: PitDAWG Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/20/19 03:24 PM
The helmet was used as a weapon. It's really pretty simple here.

There's no doubt that Rudolph started it. There's no doubt that Rudolph was the aggressor not just once, but twice. There's no doubt that Rudolph should have also have been suspended.

The problem came when Myles decided to use that helmet as a weapon to hit an opposing player wearing no helmet with it. Like I've said before, people can make excuses for that all they like but there's no room for that in the game.

Myles went over the top when he did that. He admitted it, understands it and owned up to it. Sadly some fans can't seem to do the same thing.

Calling it "giving him a tap" is a perfect example of that.
Posted By: DevilDawg2847 Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/20/19 04:00 PM
Originally Posted By: oobernoober
I think Garrett's suspension should be changed to not be indefinite. This whole... having Garrett crawl back to the league and beg forgiveness at some unclear point in the future is silly, imo. I hope that part, at least, gets corrected.

Re: the main point of my post... I get the feeling that some on here are unable to separate what Garrett did and what Rudolph did. That arguing that Rudolph had a part in the situation and deserves a suspension somehow equates to defending what Garrett did. It doesn't.


To separate what they did only misrepresents what actually occurred. There was a clear back and forth escalation of one thing leading to another. People keep harping in the ‘deadly weapon’ Myles used. If this were to be investigated as a criminal matter, their actions wouldn’t be looked at as wholly separate things. Just because Garrett’s actions finished the fight doesn’t mean Rudolph is a victim. At the end of that criminal investigation Rudolph would be charged with as equal an offense as Garrett for the torquing of his helmet and targeted punches to the ballz.

Oob, if this occurred say 5 or 10 years ago you might see more fans more critical of Myles. But people are tired of the double standards. We see this in our society, our culture, our politics. Regardless of where you sit amongst all that, people are tired of the double standards. Institutions who enforce those double standards are no longer seen to be credible. If that institution is going to fail to be fair , then people are going to fall back on a much more rudimentary form of fairness: if he’s not going to get punished for his part then our guy shouldn’t be punished for his.

Maybe that’s the not the right way to view things. Maybe it’s not as ‘refined or dignified’ as we are capable of as a society. But it’s real. At least that part is honest. I’m not a proponent of that way of thinking but i understand it and I think it’s a more defensible position to take then anyone who is calling for a serious penalty for Myles while simultaneously excusing Rudolph for his actions
Posted By: DevilDawg2847 Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/20/19 04:02 PM
Originally Posted By: PitDAWG
The helmet was used as a weapon. It's really pretty simple here.

There's no doubt that Rudolph started it. There's no doubt that Rudolph was the aggressor not just once, but twice. There's no doubt that Rudolph should have also have been suspended.

The problem came when Myles decided to use that helmet as a weapon to hit an opposing player wearing no helmet with it. Like I've said before, people can make excuses for that all they like but there's no room for that in the game.

Myles went over the top when he did that. He admitted it, understands it and owned up to it. Sadly some fans can't seem to do the same thing.

Calling it "giving him a tap" is a perfect example of that.


I could be wrong but didn’t Rudolph take the 4th down snap after the fight? If he had taken such a. Vicious blow he should have been sifdelined for at least one play and evaluated for a concussion.
Posted By: PitDAWG Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/20/19 04:30 PM
Yes, since it didn't land in such a way that he had brain damage, it's all good!

I didn't think I needed purple for that one.

I guess since he didn't suffer an injury that means a helmet was not used as a weapon?
Posted By: Milk Man Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/20/19 04:35 PM
Originally Posted By: PitDAWG
I guess since he didn't suffer an injury that means a helmet was not used as a weapon?


The helmet was merely a defense system against Rudolph's testicle tearing talons!
Posted By: PitDAWG Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/20/19 04:39 PM
Sort of like the Patriot missiles?
Posted By: Milk Man Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/20/19 04:43 PM
Yes. Scud missile(s) had been fired.
Posted By: PitDAWG Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/20/19 04:57 PM
So you are saying it's fine to use a weapon against a weapon. I agree. But not a weapon against no weapon.

Hell, a guy just got 15 days for throwing a drink on someone.

Why excuse using a weapon against an unarmed person? Does an NFL uniform blind you that much?
Posted By: s003apr Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/20/19 05:09 PM
Originally Posted By: PitDAWG
The helmet was used as a weapon. It's really pretty simple here.

There's no doubt that Rudolph started it. There's no doubt that Rudolph was the aggressor not just once, but twice. There's no doubt that Rudolph should have also have been suspended.

The problem came when Myles decided to use that helmet as a weapon to hit an opposing player wearing no helmet with it. Like I've said before, people can make excuses for that all they like but there's no room for that in the game.

Myles went over the top when he did that. He admitted it, understands it and owned up to it. Sadly some fans can't seem to do the same thing.

Calling it "giving him a tap" is a perfect example of that.


The point of the suspension is to act as a deterrence. So the question is, do you focus squarely on the use of the helmet as a weapon, or do you focus on all of the events leading up to that point and try to deter all of the unwanted behaviors.

I think Myles knew it was wrong to swing a helmet at someone before the game. Does a suspension really help anyone think about the consequences in the heat of the moment?

Expecting someone to make the split second decision in a scenario that has gotten out of control is not a very effective prevention strategy because at a certain point the part of the brain responsible for emotion regulation and thinking logically shuts down and hands the reins to the part of the brain responsible for fight or flight.

It is important to focus prevention on all of the unwanted behaviors because players are more likely to take consequences into consideration before a fight escalates. Once a boiling point is reached, nobody is going to think logically enough to consider the consequences.
Posted By: PitDAWG Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/20/19 05:12 PM
According to your scenario, every person issued a CCW would automatically shoot people in a hand to hand combat scenario.

That isn't so.
Posted By: Milk Man Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/20/19 05:13 PM
My initial reaction was that I could not believe a completely out of control Mason Rudolph was using his talons in an attempt to sever Myles' reproductive organs from his body.

Myles might never have been able to have children had Rudolph kept wrenching at his testicles. Just horrible!

This photo is haunting!....

Posted By: cfrs15 Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/20/19 05:23 PM


I am going to go out on a limb here and say that Roger Goodell doesn't know what he's doing when it comes to suspensions.
Posted By: Milk Man Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/20/19 05:26 PM
Posted By: Dawgs4Life Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/20/19 05:27 PM
Originally Posted By: cfrs15


I am going to go out on a limb here and say that Roger Goodell doesn't know what he's doing when it comes to suspensions.
based on CBA language and precedent, this would be correct IMO
Posted By: AlwaysABrownsFan Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/20/19 05:27 PM
I wonder.....If Miles had dropped the Helmet.. Would Mason have been suspended for HIS endangerment ?
Posted By: FATE Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/20/19 05:30 PM

And now we have Rudolph expressing his remorse:

Facing dozens of cameras and media members with his back against a nondescript white wall, Rudolph read aloud from the paper, saying he should've done a better job maintaining his composure during the late-game fight that, so far, has resulted in three suspensions.

"I should've done a better job handling that situation," Rudolph said. "I have no ill will towards Myles Garrett. Great respect for his ability as a player. And I know that if Myles could go back, he would handle the situation differently."

"For my involvement last week, there's no acceptable excuse. The bottom line is I should've done a better job keeping my composure in that situation and [not] fall short of what I believe it means to be a Pittsburgh Steeler and a member of the NFL."


https://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/28122780/mason-rudolph-regrets-actions-ok-myles-garrett


And Tomlin as well:

Steelers coach Mike Tomlin opened his weekly news conference by accepting responsibility for his team's role in Thursday night's melee with the Cleveland Browns.

"It was ugly," said Tomlin, who had refused to take any questions about the incident directly after the game. "It was ugly for the game of football. I think all of us that are involved in the game, particularly at this level, want to safeguard and protect the game, its integrity. And in that instance, it was compromised, obviously, with an unfortunate incident."

"None of us want those incidents to transpire. It did. We were a part of it. We accept responsibility for our actions within it."


https://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/2811...le-browns-melee
Posted By: s003apr Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/20/19 05:37 PM
Originally Posted By: PitDAWG
According to your scenario, every person issued a CCW would automatically shoot people in a hand to hand combat scenario.

That isn't so.


I didn't provide a scenario, so I am not following how this connects to what I wrote...
Posted By: PitDAWG Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/20/19 05:43 PM
Originally Posted By: s003apr
I think Myles knew it was wrong to swing a helmet at someone before the game. Does a suspension really help anyone think about the consequences in the heat of the moment?


The justice system seems to think so. You are suggesting people do not think about consequences in the heat of the moment. Thus my response.

Quote:
Expecting someone to make the split second decision in a scenario that has gotten out of control is not a very effective prevention strategy because at a certain point the part of the brain responsible for emotion regulation and thinking logically shuts down and hands the reins to the part of the brain responsible for fight or flight.


This too seems to be excusing the use of a weapon in response. I simply turned the scenario up a notch.

Quote:
It is important to focus prevention on all of the unwanted behaviors because players are more likely to take consequences into consideration before a fight escalates. Once a boiling point is reached, nobody is going to think logically enough to consider the consequences.


People do think logically enough to consider consequences. It's what everyone with a CCW doesn't shoot people every time there is a conflict.
Posted By: DCDAWGFAN Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/20/19 05:49 PM
Originally Posted By: SunDawg
Geez, are you guys still talking about this crap? The team is a train wreck, can't you see it? Garret deserved everything he got...it was his fault for being STUPID ENOUGH to ROUGH THE PASSER with EIGHT SECONDS left in a game his team had one. OBJ is out talking about how Tomlin DISRESPECTED him by yawning in an interview? WTF! These guys are total prima donna's...give me a team of Chubs, players who let their work on the field do the talking for them. My gosh, I am so SICK of watching OBJ and Landry hold the ball out to signal first down when they make a catch. Damn, the team has a losing record. ACT LIKE YOU'VE DONE IT BEFORE BRO! I can't stand to watch it.

Again I say, THIS FIASCO IS ON DORSEY! He broke up the end of season chemistry by jettisoning the coaching staff, and Zeitler, and replacing them with TWO MAJOR headaches and salary cap problems from the Giants, plus Frederick Kitchens.

BOTTON LINE: This is not a team, but a group of selfish individuals...no way we win out to make the playoffs...no way.

My $0.02.



Ok, boomer.
Posted By: Milk Man Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/20/19 06:12 PM
j/c...

The Juice weighing in....

Posted By: superbowldogg Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/20/19 06:15 PM
https://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/2812...mith-ban-appeal


Source: Browns' Myles Garrett points to '13 Antonio Smith ban during appeal
play
12:56 PM ET
ESPN
Facebook
Twitter
Facebook Messenger
Pinterest
Email
print
Cleveland Browns star Myles Garrett used a precedent-based argument on Wednesday during his suspension appeal hearing, citing the NFL's punishment of a former Houston Texans player in 2013, a source told ESPN's Dan Graziano.

Five days after being suspended indefinitely for ripping off Pittsburgh Steelers quarterback Mason Rudolph's helmet and clubbing him in the head with it, Garrett and the NFLPA met with league officials Wednesday morning in New York.

ADVERTISEMENT

Garrett and the NFLPA contended, the source told Graziano, that the worst punishment any player received for a similar incident was Houston's Antonio Smith, who was suspended in 2013 for two preseason games and one regular-season game for swinging his helmet at then-Dolphins offensive lineman Richie Incognito.

The NFL suspended Garrett for the remainder of this season, including any potential postseason games, and announced last Friday that he will have to meet with the commissioner's office before being reinstated for 2020.

EDITOR'S PICKS

Rudolph regrets his actions, is OK with Garrett

Kitchens: Browns standing by suspended Garrett

Tomlin: Steelers accept role in melee with Browns
Garrett argued that six games -- the remainder of the regular season -- is excessive under the precedent established by Smith's suspension, especially because Smith only missed one game check since players aren't paid for preseason games, the source told Graziano.

Garrett and the NFLPA also argued that an indefinite suspension is not permitted under the league's collective bargaining agreement, according to the source.

Meanwhile, a representative of the Steelers joined Maurkice Pouncey's appeal hearing by phone Tuesday in support of the center, who was suspended three games.

A source told Graziano that the Steelers believe Pouncey received the three-game ban in order to avoid him playing in the Week 13 rematch against the Browns.

According to Graziano, Pouncey's side contends that no other on-field fight in NFL history has resulted in a suspension longer than one game, so that would have been an appropriate punishment.

Even if reduced from three games to two on appeal, Pouncey's suspension would still run through the Steelers' second game against the Browns.

Garrett's hearing started at approximately 9:30 a.m. ET on Wednesday morning, and the Pro Bowl defensive end was seen leaving less than two hours later. A source told ESPN's Dianna Russini that the NFL wants to make a decision quickly on Garrett's appeal.

Browns coach Freddie Kitchens reiterated his support for Garrett earlier Wednesday morning but acknowledged that the team has no "control" over whether the league reduces his suspension.


"We can't control that. ... We're just gonna control what we can control," Kitchens said. "We have nothing to do with that. Myles has great representation, but more importantly, Myles will represent himself well."

Rudolph called Garrett's actions "bush league" and "cowardly" during his postgame news conference after Pittsburgh's 21-7 loss to Cleveland last Thursday night.

But the second-year quarterback said Wednesday that he regretted his role in the brawl, saying he "should've done a better job handling that situation."

"I have no ill will towards Myles Garrett," said Rudolph, who was not suspended but is expected to be fined. "Great respect for his ability as a player. And I know that if Myles could go back, he would handle the situation differently.

"As for my involvement last week, there's no acceptable excuse. The bottom line is I should've done a better job keeping my composure in that situation and [not] fall short of what I believe it means to be a Pittsburgh Steeler and a member of the NFL."
Posted By: FATE Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/20/19 06:22 PM
Originally Posted By: Milk Man
j/c...

The Juice weighing in....


And as crazy as it may seem, OJ makes as much sense out of the fiasco as anyone.

I know the NFL wants to make Garrett a poster child, but the severity of the punishment simply doesn't fit the crime, at least there is no precedent that says it does...
Posted By: oobernoober Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/20/19 06:22 PM
I agree with your second and third paragraphs. No need for me to say anything, as you already state that better than I would.

Re: your first paragraph... I think it IS that simple (separating each person's actions) when it comes to handing out punishments. Swinging a helmet at another person's unprotected head is punishable with a lengthy suspension. I don't really see the point (again, in terms of assigning punishment) in hanging on what did or did not happen before said action. Rudolph kicked and punched Myles in the balls. That is a suspendable offense (apparently the NFL doesn't agree, which I wish I could understand).

Long story short...
-Garrett did something wrong, he deserves a certain punishment.
-Rudolph did something wrong, he deserves a certain punishment.

How those 2 things are linked together doesn't make either action any more or less unacceptable.
Posted By: DevilDawg2847 Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/20/19 06:54 PM
Originally Posted By: PitDAWG
According to your scenario, every person issued a CCW would automatically shoot people in a hand to hand combat scenario.

That isn't so.


I feel like your perception is guided by a believe that just because one person is ‘armed’ and the other not that it implies the unarmed person can’t or doesn’t have the potential to be a serious danger. If that dude who had his bare hands around OBJs throat (hand to hand combat) was not wearing a helmet at the time, OBJ would have in the legal sense he 100% justified in hitting him upside the head with a helmet.

And since we still want to sensationalize this incident and use words like deadly weapon, Rudolph not only instigated the fight by committing an aggravated assault I.e. torquing Garrett’s helmet which and the potential to cause serious neck injury as well as kicking him in the groin with cleats which also had the potential to cause serious lasting injury, Myles then responds with the SAME level of force when he grabs Rudolph by his face mask, easily considered self defense. THEN when Myles is separated from Rudolph, Rudolph continues the assault HE is committing and goes after Myles, again targeting his groin. Yes it is taking Decastro to intervene but Myles IS in retreat from the situation and no one is even attempting to prevent Rudolph from continuing HIS assault on Garrett. Garrett has zero obligation to allow himself to be attacked by Rudolph. Decastros intervention is what limits Garrett to what he can do to prevent the assault.

Take this court and Myles gets off on self defense all day long.

Iistening to more and more players, this kind of thing happens all the time in practices all across the league. It’s probably why the rule book punishment is what it is and not more severe.
Posted By: willitevachange Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/20/19 06:57 PM
Originally Posted By: FATE
Originally Posted By: Milk Man
j/c...

The Juice weighing in....


And as crazy as it may seem, OJ makes as much sense out of the fiasco as anyone.

I know the NFL wants to make Garrett a poster child, but the severity of the punishment simply doesn't fit the crime, at least there is no precedent that says it does...

If the Helmet doesn't fit, you must acquit!

Myles proved that by trying to putting the helmet back on Mason for him.
Posted By: MemphisBrownie Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/20/19 07:02 PM
If the Helmet doesn't fit hit (hard enough), you must acquit!
Posted By: DevilDawg2847 Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/20/19 07:03 PM
Originally Posted By: oobernoober
I agree with your second and third paragraphs. No need for me to say anything, as you already state that better than I would.

Re: your first paragraph... I think it IS that simple (separating each person's actions) when it comes to handing out punishments. Swinging a helmet at another person's unprotected head is punishable with a lengthy suspension. I don't really see the point (again, in terms of assigning punishment) in hanging on what did or did not happen before said action. Rudolph kicked and punched Myles in the balls. That is a suspendable offense (apparently the NFL doesn't agree, which I wish I could understand).

Long story short...
-Garrett did something wrong, he deserves a certain punishment.
-Rudolph did something wrong, he deserves a certain punishment.

How those 2 things are linked together doesn't make either action any more or less unacceptable.


I think what happened before is relevant to the swing because this isn’t a situation where Myles ran up and ambushed a defenseless Rudolph. It wasn’t something blind sided like what Larry O did. Once Rudolph let go of his helmet Myles could have walked away and ended it there. I won’t argue that. But he retaliated. Once Decastro separated him Rudolph could have not gone after him and ended it there. But he didn’t.

Most people believe the helmet part was excessive. But that doesn’t mean there isn’t equal responsibility for the fight. They should both be suspended equally for the fighting, then if you want to tack on an extra game or two for the helmet, fine. Say 4 games each for the fight plus 2 for Myles.

Had Myles just walked up and cold cocked him with the helmet when he wasn’t looking I do t think anyone would defend that. But that’s not what happened.
Posted By: DevilDawg2847 Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/20/19 07:05 PM
Originally Posted By: MemphisBrownie
If the Helmet doesn't fit hit (hard enough), you must acquit!


It’s like trying to fit a square head in a round helmet...
Posted By: DevilDawg2847 Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/20/19 07:10 PM
At the crux of it Oob I really think the only thing people are asking for is for this incident to be accurately, factually, and fairly. If this is such a serious incident, then everything that led up to it needs to be addressed and appropriate and proportional punishments given. If the league isn’t going to take the incident serious enough to appropriately punish all parties involved, then Myles doesn’t deserve to be rail roaded over it either. That’s all
Posted By: PitDAWG Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/20/19 07:13 PM
I didn't use the term "deadly weapon", you did. Hitting a player without having a helmet on with a helmet is wrong and actually you already know that. So does everyone else. Trying to rationalize bad behavior is quite unbecoming.
Posted By: oobernoober Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/20/19 07:41 PM
Originally Posted By: DevilDawg2847
At the crux of it Oob I really think the only thing people are asking for is for this incident to be accurately, factually, and fairly. If this is such a serious incident, then everything that led up to it needs to be addressed and appropriate and proportional punishments given. If the league isn’t going to take the incident serious enough to appropriately punish all parties involved, then Myles doesn’t deserve to be rail roaded over it either. That’s all


On this we agree. You'll notice that I didn't leave out Rudolph from my explanation. I don't understand why the multiple crotch hits are not only going relatively unpunished, but also unreported in all of the large media outlet articles (ESPN, CBS Sports, etc). Literally no mention of what Rudolph did.
Posted By: PastorMarc Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/20/19 07:42 PM
Not the first time for this ...

https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=...Gub4DbxbPQR5O2t
Posted By: Dave Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/20/19 07:43 PM
Meanwhile, Carmen Policy has been quoted as saying that those 4-1/2 pound Riddell helmets apparently "don't pack much of a wallop" without a head in them.

grin
Posted By: PastorMarc Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/20/19 07:51 PM
Here is another One I found:

https://twitter.com/dandalyonsports/status/1195219094292893697/photo/1
Posted By: PitDAWG Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/20/19 07:57 PM
It's a good thing the NFL didn't settle a billion dollar concussion lawsuit before that one happened.

This isn't 1954.
Posted By: Southwestdawg Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/20/19 08:03 PM
Originally Posted By: Milk Man
j/c...

The Juice weighing in....


Says the guy that killed his wife with a knife and her date.
Posted By: PitDAWG Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/20/19 08:08 PM
Well when he says something people agree with, suddenly nobody cares about that.
Posted By: FATE Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/20/19 08:18 PM
So if Charles Manson says dogs make great pets, we should all just disagree based on principle?
Posted By: PitDAWG Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/20/19 08:26 PM
I think we should all take into consideration the people we decide to put up in the public light as a reference of who we are agreeing with.

I'm sure there are several more examples of people that are speaking out in support of Myles that aren't the scum of the earth.
Posted By: FATE Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/20/19 08:31 PM
Doesn't change the fact that he said it as clearly and succinctly as anyone in the universe so far. Everything always get twisted around here... Not a soul would say that the message is good because it came from OJ, merely that the message was good despite the fact.
Posted By: PrplPplEater Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/20/19 08:34 PM
well, he knows what a deadly weapon really is, so yeah, his word probably cuts a little more through things
Posted By: PitDAWG Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/20/19 08:34 PM
I'll stand by it. I also wouldn't use Charles Manson in regards to supporting having a dog for a pet. But that's just me.
Posted By: PitDAWG Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/20/19 08:35 PM
Originally Posted By: PrplPplEater
well, he knows what a deadly weapon really is, so yeah, his word probably cuts a little more through things


From his experience I would say his wit is as sharp as yours. I know that was a little weak but I was just taking a stab at it.
Posted By: DCDAWGFAN Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/20/19 08:49 PM
Originally Posted By: PitDAWG
I'll stand by it. I also wouldn't use Charles Manson in regards to supporting having a dog for a pet. But that's just me.

that's fine. I wouldn't hold his opinion in too high regard if he was say... giving marital advice. But talking football, the dude was a HoF running back for a long time. His opinion is as valid as anybody elses.
Posted By: PitDAWG Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/20/19 08:58 PM
Well I will say he was good when it came to the cut and run. wink

There's pre concussion lawsuit settlement and post concussion law suit settlement.

I don't think trying to use anything pre settlement for things that occurred post settlement hold any merit. We both know that changed everything.
Posted By: Bard Dawg Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/20/19 09:17 PM
Thanks for this. Wondering about the appeal and when we might know something. NFL very lopsided against MG and also blind to Rudolph as he escalated things or kept them going.

These arguments seem to be cogent and valid to me.
Posted By: GratefulDawg Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/20/19 09:45 PM
Posted By: GratefulDawg Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/20/19 09:46 PM
Posted By: slick Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/20/19 09:50 PM
I said it before on here and I'll say it again. The punishment should fit the crime. Ray rice knocked a woman unconscious and spit on her before dragging her limp body from a elevator. He only was suspended 4 games. He could have killed her. So how can you give Garrett a harsher punishment ?
Posted By: s003apr Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/20/19 10:11 PM
Originally Posted By: PitDAWG
Originally Posted By: s003apr
I think Myles knew it was wrong to swing a helmet at someone before the game. Does a suspension really help anyone think about the consequences in the heat of the moment?


The justice system seems to think so. You are suggesting people do not think about consequences in the heat of the moment. Thus my response.

Quote:
Expecting someone to make the split second decision in a scenario that has gotten out of control is not a very effective prevention strategy because at a certain point the part of the brain responsible for emotion regulation and thinking logically shuts down and hands the reins to the part of the brain responsible for fight or flight.


This too seems to be excusing the use of a weapon in response. I simply turned the scenario up a notch.

Quote:
It is important to focus prevention on all of the unwanted behaviors because players are more likely to take consequences into consideration before a fight escalates. Once a boiling point is reached, nobody is going to think logically enough to consider the consequences.


People do think logically enough to consider consequences. It's what everyone with a CCW doesn't shoot people every time there is a conflict.


The justice system definitely takes circumstances and a person's emotional state into mind.

as far as the rest, I am still not seeing how what your saying relates.
Posted By: bonefish Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/20/19 10:14 PM

Expected result.

Just my guess but I think Myles gets 4 or 5 games.

"indefinitely" will not stand.
Posted By: s003apr Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/20/19 10:15 PM
Originally Posted By: slick
I said it before on here and I'll say it again. The punishment should fit the crime. Ray rice knocked a woman unconscious and spit on her before dragging her limp body from a elevator. He only was suspended 4 games. He could have killed her. So how can you give Garrett a harsher punishment ?


Judging from other responses, I think others on here would say that Garrett deserves to be kicked out of the NFL because he used a helmet as a weapon and Ray Rice did not.

In their minds, the fact that Rice was hitting a girl in a comparatively low stress situation in which he wasn't attacked, does not factor into things.
Posted By: Frenchy Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/20/19 11:40 PM
The idiots saying he should be banned for life are stupid. Sure he should be suspended 2-3 games, missing the Steelers. But the NFL has set precedent on a player swinging a helmet. There is not wiggle room in that! I can bet in the CBA, something harsher will be clearly added for this, meaning a minimum of like 6 games or something.

I can'tbelieve Obi's 1 game was upheld, all he did was push Randolp to the ground.
Posted By: Ballpeen Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/20/19 11:56 PM
Originally Posted By: SunDawg
Geez, are you guys still talking about this crap? The team is a train wreck, can't you see it? Garret deserved everything he got...it was his fault for being STUPID ENOUGH to ROUGH THE PASSER with EIGHT SECONDS left in a game his team had one. OBJ is out talking about how Tomlin DISRESPECTED him by yawning in an interview? WTF! These guys are total prima donna's...give me a team of Chubs, players who let their work on the field do the talking for them. My gosh, I am so SICK of watching OBJ and Landry hold the ball out to signal first down when they make a catch. Damn, the team has a losing record. ACT LIKE YOU'VE DONE IT BEFORE BRO! I can't stand to watch it.

Again I say, THIS FIASCO IS ON DORSEY! He broke up the end of season chemistry by jettisoning the coaching staff, and Zeitler, and replacing them with TWO MAJOR headaches and salary cap problems from the Giants, plus Frederick Kitchens.

BOTTON LINE: This is not a team, but a group of selfish individuals...no way we win out to make the playoffs...no way.

My $0.02.





No flag was thrown for roughing the passer.
Posted By: Ballpeen Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/21/19 12:03 AM
In 1985...I think, Randy White swung a helmet at hit another player in the head. He was suspended 1 game and fined maybe $1000.
Posted By: Tulsa Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/21/19 12:18 AM
Originally Posted By: Ballpeen
Originally Posted By: SunDawg
Geez, are you guys still talking about this crap? The team is a train wreck, can't you see it? Garret deserved everything he got...it was his fault for being STUPID ENOUGH to ROUGH THE PASSER with EIGHT SECONDS left in a game his team had one. OBJ is out talking about how Tomlin DISRESPECTED him by yawning in an interview? WTF! These guys are total prima donna's...give me a team of Chubs, players who let their work on the field do the talking for them. My gosh, I am so SICK of watching OBJ and Landry hold the ball out to signal first down when they make a catch. Damn, the team has a losing record. ACT LIKE YOU'VE DONE IT BEFORE BRO! I can't stand to watch it.

Again I say, THIS FIASCO IS ON DORSEY! He broke up the end of season chemistry by jettisoning the coaching staff, and Zeitler, and replacing them with TWO MAJOR headaches and salary cap problems from the Giants, plus Frederick Kitchens.

BOTTON LINE: This is not a team, but a group of selfish individuals...no way we win out to make the playoffs...no way.

My $0.02.





No flag was thrown for roughing the passer.


Did they have any left to throw?
Posted By: slick Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/21/19 12:33 AM
Originally Posted By: s003apr
Originally Posted By: slick
I said it before on here and I'll say it again. The punishment should fit the crime. Ray rice knocked a woman unconscious and spit on her before dragging her limp body from a elevator. He only was suspended 4 games. He could have killed her. So how can you give Garrett a harsher punishment ?


Judging from other responses, I think others on here would say that Garrett deserves to be kicked out of the NFL because he used a helmet as a weapon and Ray Rice did not.

In their minds, the fact that Rice was hitting a girl in a comparatively low stress situation in which he wasn't attacked, does not factor into things.


Which is ridiculous. However Goodell seems to play favorites with certain organizations.
Posted By: Ballpeen Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/21/19 01:12 AM
Originally Posted By: Tulsa
Originally Posted By: Ballpeen
Originally Posted By: SunDawg
Geez, are you guys still talking about this crap? The team is a train wreck, can't you see it? Garret deserved everything he got...it was his fault for being STUPID ENOUGH to ROUGH THE PASSER with EIGHT SECONDS left in a game his team had one. OBJ is out talking about how Tomlin DISRESPECTED him by yawning in an interview? WTF! These guys are total prima donna's...give me a team of Chubs, players who let their work on the field do the talking for them. My gosh, I am so SICK of watching OBJ and Landry hold the ball out to signal first down when they make a catch. Damn, the team has a losing record. ACT LIKE YOU'VE DONE IT BEFORE BRO! I can't stand to watch it.

Again I say, THIS FIASCO IS ON DORSEY! He broke up the end of season chemistry by jettisoning the coaching staff, and Zeitler, and replacing them with TWO MAJOR headaches and salary cap problems from the Giants, plus Frederick Kitchens.

BOTTON LINE: This is not a team, but a group of selfish individuals...no way we win out to make the playoffs...no way.

My $0.02.





No flag was thrown for roughing the passer.


Did they have any left to throw?




That would have been the first one thrown if it was a foul. All the other fouls happened after the tackle.

Just saying
Posted By: PDXBrownsFan Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/21/19 02:29 AM
Can we all put this issue to rest (the fight/Rudolph started it/Myles finishing it etc.)? This is going in circles...let's just wait until the appeal decision is made, accept it and MOVE ON.
Posted By: HotBYoungTurk Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/21/19 03:53 AM
Myles Garrett should be nervous.. the fact that Ogunjobi got suspended 1 game for just pushing a guy on the ground, and even with the appeal they still are suspending him!!??.. that doesn't make me feel very confident that the league is going to grant Garrett any leniency based on precedent. Seems like they want to set a new precedent. As a Browns fan, I wouldn't be surprised. Smh. The 'Myles Garrett rule' is coming.

Posted By: tru_dawgs Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/21/19 04:24 AM
Originally Posted By: HotBYoungTurk
Myles Garrett should be nervous.. the fact that Ogunjobi got suspended 1 game for just pushing a guy on the ground, and even with the appeal they still are suspending him!!??.. that doesn't make me feel very confident that the league is going to grant Garrett any leniency based on precedent. Seems like they want to set a new precedent. As a Browns fan, I wouldn't be surprised. Smh. The 'Myles Garrett rule' is coming.



Highly agreed...they will prevent this from happening again...thus massive suspension.
Posted By: Frenchy Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/21/19 10:40 AM
Maybe someone can explain this. How can he appeal an indefinite suspension, if the league can't suspend him indefinitely? On this appeal, he wins, now instead of indefinite, they give him a 6 game suspension according to the CBA, giving him games instead of indefinite, can he now appeal the 6 game suspension?
Posted By: Rishuz Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/21/19 11:07 AM
Originally Posted By: tru_dawgs
Originally Posted By: HotBYoungTurk
Myles Garrett should be nervous.. the fact that Ogunjobi got suspended 1 game for just pushing a guy on the ground, and even with the appeal they still are suspending him!!??.. that doesn't make me feel very confident that the league is going to grant Garrett any leniency based on precedent. Seems like they want to set a new precedent. As a Browns fan, I wouldn't be surprised. Smh. The 'Myles Garrett rule' is coming.



Highly agreed...they will prevent this from happening again...thus massive suspension.


Agree. I think the absolute best case scenario is he's able to play week one next year. Best case. But I could see 12 to 16 games.

You have a combination of national outrage, a corrupt and inconsistent commissioner, and it's the Browns. The punishment would be different if it were the Patriots or the Steelers.

I do think if it does end up going into next year, Garrett will sue the NFL. He may end up setting some of his own precedent.
Posted By: AlwaysABrownsFan Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/21/19 01:24 PM
Can u imagine if Greg was still the Head coach here.. The Bounty Gate crap would have exploded into epic proportions.
Posted By: slick Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/21/19 02:39 PM
As another posted said ogbah gets one game for pushing a guy down....ridiculous. so Garrett is done for. AMD just like another poster said, the commissioner plays favorites. Only suspended ray rice 4 games for knocking a woman out cold but will probably suspend Garrett for 12 games.
Posted By: GratefulDawg Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/21/19 03:52 PM
Steve Wilks:
Garrett's hit on Rudolph was not late.
"The activity after that was inexcusable.
"On both sides, if you ask me."
Posted By: TrooperDawg Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/21/19 04:00 PM
Originally Posted By: AlwaysABrownsFan
Can u imagine if Greg was still the Head coach here.. The Bounty Gate crap would have exploded into epic proportions.


Obligatory "But Greg would have exerted the discipline necessary so this wouldn't have happened," reply.
Posted By: PitDAWG Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/21/19 04:00 PM
Originally Posted By: Ballpeen
In 1985...I think, Randy White swung a helmet at hit another player in the head. He was suspended 1 game and fined maybe $1000.


And yet again, this was decades before the billion dollar concussion settlement paid by the NFL. Decades before the NFL felt compelled to go on their "player safety" campaign.

Anyone comparing this incident to anything that occurred before the concussion issue became front and center in the NFL simply can't see the forest for the trees here. This is a different era and time in the NFL.

Now we can debate whether that's a good thing or a bad thing. We can debate whether that's the right way moving forward. But there's certainly no real debate about the fact that it's certainly the way it is.

I think the length of the suspension is going overboard as well. I'm hoping it will be reduced. This was seen on national TV on the field of play. It was a blow to the head to a player without a helmet. If people can't understand how hard the NFL has been pressing the message how they are doing everything to prevent head injuries, I'm not sure how they don't understand the gravity and impact that plays into this.
Posted By: DevilDawg2847 Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/21/19 04:13 PM
So is the real issue the act, or that the act was committed in view of millions? John Greco on CBD earlier in the week was talking about how this very kind of thing happens more often than people realize in practice (particularly in preseason and camp). Maybe a precedent needs to be set, I don’t know. But if the league is going to go that route, will they make it mandatory for teams to report incidents like this that happen in practice and then hand down suspensions/fines? And if they aren’t obligated to report it, how can they then claim this is about player safety?
Posted By: PitDAWG Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/21/19 04:36 PM
You're asking questions I don't have the answer to. And I'm not actually trying to say it's about player safety. I'm saying it's about the perception of player safety. I'm saying since the NFL is currently paying out up to a billion dollars in a concussion lawsuit settlement, they're going to cover their azzes in such situations.

We see things through the eyes of a fan. We see this as a sport. We see when a similar incident that happened before this lawsuit as the same as something that happens after this lawsuit. From the fan perspective it's much harder to wrap our minds around the fact that when it comes to the area above the neck, EVERYTHING has changed in the NFL since that lawsuit.

Do I think most multi billion dollar corporations actually care about their employees? For the most part, no. So IMO it's debatable. But the image and impression they must present is that they do.

A billion dollars can change a lot of things. And in this case it most certainly did. I'm just surprised it wasn't more expected by the fans.
Posted By: GwarriorScumDawg Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/21/19 04:57 PM
An interesting counterfactual would be how it would have been handled had the Browns just been one of a dozen or so 1pm games on Sunday last week and not a stand alone Thursday nighter. Obviously more people were watching and it gave sports media and mainstream media two days to talk about it rather than if it had been covered up by all the other Sunday headlines. We'll never know, but it may not have been quite as big a discussion as it is
Posted By: oobernoober Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/21/19 05:31 PM
Honestly, I think it was an outrageous enough situation that it would've floated to the top (in terms of attention) regardless of when the game was slotted. I do wonder if the fervor would have reached the level it did, and if the cooling off going on now in the media would've therefore happened sooner.
Posted By: WSU Willie Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/21/19 05:32 PM
Originally Posted By: GwarriorScumDawg
An interesting counterfactual would be how it would have been handled had the Browns just been one of a dozen or so 1pm games on Sunday last week and not a stand alone Thursday nighter. Obviously more people were watching and it gave sports media and mainstream media two days to talk about it rather than if it had been covered up by all the other Sunday headlines. We'll never know, but it may not have been quite as big a discussion as it is


Not to mention Aikman and Buck overreacting to what happened...and Aikman saying Rudolph 'got his hand stick in Garrett's helmet'...rather than noting who started it, escalated it and then re-started it.

A Steeler fan friend of mine said that yesterday (hand-stuck-in-helmet)...and actually BELIEVES it.
Posted By: oobernoober Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/21/19 05:35 PM
I thought I saw a headline today where Mason stated he grabbed Garrett's helmet in order to get him off, not to pull on the helmet.

These 9 pages of this thread have had some downright ridiculous explanations of the fight, but that might take the cake.

Edit: Found it
https://fox8.com/2019/11/20/steelers-qb-...-him-off-of-me/
Posted By: Punchsmack Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/21/19 05:50 PM
Originally Posted By: GwarriorScumDawg
An interesting counterfactual would be how it would have been handled had the Browns just been one of a dozen or so 1pm games on Sunday last week and not a stand alone Thursday nighter. Obviously more people were watching and it gave sports media and mainstream media two days to talk about it rather than if it had been covered up by all the other Sunday headlines. We'll never know, but it may not have been quite as big a discussion as it is


You serious? It was an on-field brawl where, well, you know what happened. That incident would lead Sportscenter, CNN, FOX and every Twitter, IG and Facebook trending list regardless of when the game was played. It's a big controversy 7 days a week.

After seeing Larry's suspension being upheld, which I'm surprised at that ruling, I think that clinches my prediction that Myles is out for part of next year as well. No way they soften up and just give him a hard 6 games. They want him to be out a looooong time AND to grovel his way back into the league, and I don't disagree. Outside of any of the off-field incidents, that was the worst thing we've seen from the NFL (my opinion). The only other incident was OBJ's hit on Norman, which I was quite angry over. OBJ launched himself at Norman's head like a missile with the lone intent of hurting him as much as possible devoid of a football act (again, my opinion). Gronk's hit is up there as well.

Garrett is going to be out a long time.
Posted By: YTownBrownsFan Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/21/19 06:03 PM
Originally Posted By: WSU Willie
Originally Posted By: GwarriorScumDawg
An interesting counterfactual would be how it would have been handled had the Browns just been one of a dozen or so 1pm games on Sunday last week and not a stand alone Thursday nighter. Obviously more people were watching and it gave sports media and mainstream media two days to talk about it rather than if it had been covered up by all the other Sunday headlines. We'll never know, but it may not have been quite as big a discussion as it is



Not to mention Aikman and Buck overreacting to what happened...and Aikman saying Rudolph 'got his hand stick in Garrett's helmet'...rather than noting who started it, escalated it and then re-started it.

A Steeler fan friend of mine said that yesterday (hand-stuck-in-helmet)...and actually BELIEVES it.


He had one hand in Garrett's facemask, and the other under the back of his helmet, pulling. It was not accidental on
Red Nose's part.
Posted By: GratefulDawg Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/21/19 06:25 PM
Posted By: oobernoober Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/21/19 06:26 PM
There it is.
Posted By: devicedawg Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/21/19 06:30 PM
Originally Posted By: oobernoober
There it is.



I would say at this point, it's much easier to believe what Garrett has said. With Rudolph's obvious lies in press conferences, hard to believe anything he says...
Posted By: Pdawg Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/21/19 06:31 PM
If true, Rudolph needs to be gone for some time. No place in sports for that.
Posted By: mgh888 Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/21/19 06:35 PM
Would love love love there to be some audio proof of this. The way Garrett reacted I believe him 100% ... but if it comes down to 'he said she said' his testimony won't change anything.
Posted By: PitDAWG Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/21/19 06:41 PM
Hearing this directly from Myles certainly makes it credible for me.
Posted By: Batman Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/21/19 06:43 PM
It shouldn't be hard for them to see if something was said, they have mics everywhere now.
Posted By: Dawgs4Life Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/21/19 06:50 PM
Yep, release the tapes and try to prove it
Posted By: Punchsmack Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/21/19 06:51 PM
Originally Posted By: Batman
It shouldn't be hard for them to see if something was said, they have mics everywhere now.


Not a criticism towards you. If they had it, it would have been found by now.

Assuming Mason said 2-3 horrifying words to Myles, even the really bad triggering words you can't say to certain groups, you're still supposed to control yourself. It may add context to why this happened, but it shouldn't lessen Garrett's punishment.

I know a real-world example might be pointless here, but if someone came up to me and my girls and said X, Y and Z...I'm supposed to control myself to ensure me going home with them. Me attacking someone for words puts me jail and takes me away from them. Words from another person shouldn't be able to control me and make me react in ways the police and lawyers get involved. I lose in that situation, even if I win the fight. "But he called me and my wife a _______. I had to break his jaw and give him partial blindness in his left eye." Nope, that doesn't fly.

Escape, deescalate and avoid.
Posted By: GratefulDawg Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/21/19 06:51 PM
Posted By: GratefulDawg Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/21/19 06:54 PM
Posted By: willitevachange Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/21/19 06:57 PM
Originally Posted By: GratefulDawg
I said this at the time of the incident, Mason is a alt right racist.
Posted By: Dawgs4Life Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/21/19 06:58 PM
Sounds like Thrash already had an inkling
Posted By: CapCity Dawg Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/21/19 07:00 PM
He denied it? Good enough for me.

/sarcasm.

Seriously, who ever admits to something like that?
Posted By: Punchsmack Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/21/19 07:06 PM
Originally Posted By: willitevachange
[/quote]I said this at the time of the incident, Mason is a alt right racist.


Assuming he did say THE word and is also a card-carrying member of the KKK, does that change what Myles did? Does it make it right?

Myles wins if he pulls off the helmet and then goes to the press with, "I pulled his helmet off to punch him because he called me a _______ but I couldn't get to him. He started pulling my helmet off, that's when he said it, so I wanted to make a point."

The second he swung the helmet, in my opinion, anything and everything that started it becomes a footnote. He went level 10 crazy and it's indefensible. It doesn't matter what was said or what/who started it. If you go level 10 crazy, you're the bad guy and nobody cares.
Posted By: OrlandoDawg Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/21/19 07:08 PM
Except for the fact we arent talking about court, we are essentially talking about a workplace. That wouldn't fly in a workplace without you losing your job for saying it and you bet your ass the NFL wouldn't let it fly either.
Posted By: PrplPplEater Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/21/19 07:10 PM
The last thing the NFL would want is that in transcripts and on the record. It lights such a crapstorm.

I firmly believe Myles; his character is of the sort that if he says it, you can believe it. That said, I don't see the NFL allowing this to have such a significant impact because they cannot afford to give the appearance that such a claim allows a player to justify any sort of behavior.

So, at absolute best, I expect Garrett to still be handed a minimum of four games, but more likely the remainder of the 2019 season.
I would not be surprised to see Rudolph with some form of suspension, but I also will not be remotely surprised if he doesn't get anything. Because... NFL.
Posted By: willitevachange Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/21/19 07:15 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted By: Punchsmack
Originally Posted By: willitevachange
I said this at the time of the incident, Mason is a alt right racist.


Assuming he did say THE word and is also a card-carrying member of the KKK, does that change what Myles did? Does it make it right?

Myles wins if he pulls off the helmet and then goes to the press with, "I pulled his helmet off to punch him because he called me a _______ but I couldn't get to him. He started pulling my helmet off, that's when he said it, so I wanted to make a point."

The second he swung the helmet, in my opinion, anything and everything that started it becomes a footnote. He went level 10 crazy and it's indefensible. It doesn't matter what was said or what/who started it. If you go level 10 crazy, you're the bad guy and nobody cares./quote]


IN the eyes of the NFL, yes it may matter.

1. Myles had his helmet ripped at by Mason
2. Myles was kicked in the groin, by Mason
3. Myles was the called a racial slur by Mason
4. Then a racist, who had attacked you once, was running at you again to do what?

Yes, actually it does change the fact. You have a snarling, violent, racist running at you. In my eyes, and the law as written, say it would have been self defense.

Posted By: BustkeviousMingo Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/21/19 07:19 PM
I said from the start something very derogatory was said or done to Myles to get that reaction.Myles was punched in the face by a fan and never retaliated.For him to snap like that was completely out of character for a person with his disposition
Posted By: Punchsmack Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/21/19 07:19 PM
Originally Posted By: OrlandoDawg
Except for the fact we arent talking about court, we are essentially talking about a workplace. That wouldn't fly in a workplace without you losing your job for saying it and you bet your ass the NFL wouldn't let it fly either.


Sure, Mason would get exposed as a racist, like Riley Cooper (And didn't Riley Cooper get a big extension soon after?). But what would the NFL really do after? Fine him? Suspend him one game? It's a slap on the wrist. He's a backup QB. He's not for long in the NFL anyway.

How does that change Myles actions and punishment? Ultimately, he was called a name, assuming that's true, and overreacted in the biggest way possible. He brought unwanted bad attention to the NFL and they will drop the hammer on him. They're punishing him for the swing. In my mind, it doesn't matter what provoked him. You HAVE to control yourself. If he just pulled the helmet off, if he just punched Mason....this would all be different. He went 42 steps over the line and that's the thing the NFL cares about. One bad word would barely move the needle.
Posted By: Milk Man Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/21/19 07:22 PM
j/c...

Going to be interesting to see how this plays out.

I do not believe Myles would make this up. Too much at stake to make it up and get caught lying about it.

This could have career implications for Rudolph if found out to be true, particularly in today's climate. There's no pace for that in football and Rudolph isn't nearly good enough to be a distraction to the team.

Riley Cooper was the last player I recall being ousted for using such language.
Posted By: GratefulDawg Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/21/19 07:41 PM


If nothing else, the NFL has multiple dish microphones on the sidelines during a game that would likely be able to catch the language used by Mason Rudolph during the
@browns
vs
@steelers
game

https://twitter.com/joethomas73/status/1197599931386777600
Posted By: PrplPplEater Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/21/19 07:43 PM
I find it hard to believe that NFL hasn't already reviewed the tapes and was already aware.
Posted By: GratefulDawg Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/21/19 07:49 PM
Posted By: Milk Man Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/21/19 07:49 PM
j/c...

Posted By: Milk Man Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/21/19 07:51 PM
Pittsburgh catches a break......again...

Posted By: DCDAWGFAN Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/21/19 07:52 PM
Originally Posted By: Pdawg
If true, Rudolph needs to be gone for some time. No place in sports for that.

There are 4 ways to prove it is true:

1. Rudolph confesses - not going to happen.
2. DeCastro/Villanueva say it happened - also not likely to happen
3. Field mic picked it up - possible but hard time believing thats not out yet
4. The ref standing over the initial fight say it happened - best possibility
Posted By: YTownBrownsFan Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/21/19 07:52 PM
Originally Posted By: Milk Man
j/c...



What the hell?

So the Browns players have their punishments upheld, but the Steeler gets his reduced, after he punched and kicked Myles in the head??????

I am just about done with the NFL.
Posted By: DCDAWGFAN Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/21/19 07:54 PM
So both Browns suspensions upheld
One Steelers suspension reduced
Steeler who should have been suspended just gets fined.

Got it. When Roger Goodell gets out from under Rooney's desk I'd like to ask him a few questions.
Posted By: oobernoober Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/21/19 07:59 PM
If the CBA doesn't allow for indefinite suspensions, you would think the PA would have something to say about this, right?
Posted By: leadtheway Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/21/19 07:59 PM
I literally hope every player involved on steelers side have career ending injuries, and that godell gets hit by a bus. The favoritism and blatant way they don't even try to hide is baffling in professional sports
Posted By: GratefulDawg Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/21/19 08:06 PM
Posted By: Dave Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/21/19 08:06 PM
If the NFL upheld an indefinite suspension for an on-field violation, isn't it in violation of the CBA? If so, where is the NFLPA?
Posted By: Punchsmack Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/21/19 08:07 PM
Told ya. This is 100% about Myles swing and Pouncey's reaction. It doesn't matter who or what happened prior. You can't have a player swinging a helmet as a weapon or punching and kicking a guy in the helmet. That's what went viral and they're being punished for it.

I figured two games for Pouncey because that keeps him out of the Browns game. And as I predicted, Myles is gone for all of this season and probably part of next too.
Posted By: Punchsmack Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/21/19 08:08 PM
Originally Posted By: leadtheway
I literally hope every player involved on steelers side have career ending injuries, and that godell gets hit by a bus. The favoritism and blatant way they don't even try to hide is baffling in professional sports


That's so out of character for you to post something like this. [/sarcasm]
Posted By: oobernoober Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/21/19 08:09 PM
Well, recent events have shown that what I think should happen (common sense) isn't guiding these decisions...

but I see them reinstating him during the lull of the offseason, when fervor has all but died.
Posted By: bonefish Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/21/19 08:11 PM

Hard to understand this ruling.

So it looks like they are blaming the whole incident on Myles.

I get he crossed the line with swinging the helmet.

However, I thought now that some time has passed that they would see all the circumstances and factors involved.

To reduce Pouncey and not Myles is disturbing. Then top it off with zero time for Rudolph is not a good look.

They wanted a villain and they wanted to set an example.

Obviously they didn't look at precedence.
Posted By: leadtheway Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/21/19 08:13 PM
Originally Posted By: Punchsmack
Originally Posted By: leadtheway
I literally hope every player involved on steelers side have career ending injuries, and that godell gets hit by a bus. The favoritism and blatant way they don't even try to hide is baffling in professional sports


That's so out of character for you to post something like this. [/sarcasm]



really not out of character for you to not know how html works..I think its funny you think I give a rats ass what a keyboard warrior thinks
Posted By: DCDAWGFAN Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/21/19 08:13 PM
Originally Posted By: leadtheway
I literally hope every player involved on steelers side have career ending injuries, and that godell gets hit by a bus. The favoritism and blatant way they don't even try to hide is baffling in professional sports

I'm not going there but I have no problem hoping Rudolph gets hit hard.. early and often in every game he plays, forever. Especially if it's us.
Posted By: leadtheway Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/21/19 08:14 PM
Originally Posted By: bonefish

Hard to understand this ruling.

So it looks like they are blaming the whole incident on Myles.

I get he crossed the line with swinging the helmet.

However, I thought now that some time has passed that they would see all the circumstances and factors involved.

To reduce Pouncey and not Myles is disturbing. Then top it off with zero time for Rudolph is not a good look.

They wanted a villain and they wanted to set an example.

Obviously they didn't look at precedence.



its simple...served two purposes, satisfies the mob mentality and the love in america for denial of due process, while screwing the browns.. Thats what helps Roger have sex with his wife
Posted By: PitDAWG Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/21/19 08:14 PM
Precedence was the concussion lawsuit settlement. Nothing that happened before that matters anymore.
Posted By: BADdog Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/21/19 08:19 PM
TOTAL BS
Posted By: DCDAWGFAN Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/21/19 08:19 PM
Originally Posted By: PitDAWG
Precedence was the concussion lawsuit settlement. Nothing that happened before that matters anymore.

Can you point me to the changes in the CBA at that time? Legal documents don't change just because public opinion changes or an unrelated lawsuit happens...
Posted By: FrankPitts Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/21/19 08:21 PM
I predict NFL will leave the suspension as indefinite until about a week before the start of the 2020 season, and then they will tell us Garrett is out an additional 4 weeks to start the season. They want groveling and they want to screw us per usual.

NFL violates their own rules routinely. If Garrett is not re-instated by the time they want my money for next year's season tickets, they can kiss my A.
Posted By: PitDAWG Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/21/19 08:29 PM
Originally Posted By: DCDAWGFAN
Originally Posted By: PitDAWG
Precedence was the concussion lawsuit settlement. Nothing that happened before that matters anymore.

Can you point me to the changes in the CBA at that time? Legal documents don't change just because public opinion changes or an unrelated lawsuit happens...


We both know this isn't about the CBA. The NFL is ran by a lawyer. This could fall under conduct detrimental to the league and the personal conduct policy. You know the NFL can and will spin this any way they wish and the odds of a court reversal will be virtually non existent.
Posted By: waterdawg Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/21/19 08:40 PM
Unfortunately we have ownership ( like many other teams )that will just slink away now.

Needed is a " Fighting Mad Dawg " to start a fund raising campaign to lease as Many Build-boards in the Cleveland area and express how the Fans feel about the NFL treatment and Goodnut .. Get a few Boards up and watch the Media feed of it ...lol
Posted By: Punchsmack Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/21/19 08:42 PM
Originally Posted By: leadtheway
Originally Posted By: Punchsmack
Originally Posted By: leadtheway
I literally hope every player involved on steelers side have career ending injuries, and that godell gets hit by a bus. The favoritism and blatant way they don't even try to hide is baffling in professional sports


That's so out of character for you to post something like this. [/sarcasm]



really not out of character for you to not know how html works..I think its funny you think I give a rats ass what a keyboard warrior thinks


I know "[/sarcasm]" isn't real HTML. I did it on purpose, maybe that's too high brow for you to pick up. I never liked using a colored font to denote sarcasm.

Also, I'm not sure how I'm the "keyboard warrior" when you're the one wishing injury on people. Remember, you wished Tyronn Lue back into the hospital because you didn't like his in-game rotations. Yeah, good one.

But you did read my reply and respond, so you do give a rat's ass what I think.
Posted By: PrplPplEater Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/21/19 08:47 PM
Note to all Browns DLine: It is Ok to kick opponents in the head repeatedly while they are on the ground.
Posted By: Punchsmack Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/21/19 08:52 PM
Originally Posted By: PrplPplEater
Note to all Browns DLine: It is Ok to kick opponents in the head repeatedly while they are on the ground.


Yeah, if they want a 2-game suspension. It's not like Pouncey got off completely.

People were calling for Pouncey to get nothing because he was simply coming to the aid of his QB. I thought that was crazy talk. Again, it's optics. The helmet swing and Pouncey's attack is what went viral and those are the two that got punished the most. I still don't get Larry's suspension, other than maybe he could have caused a bigger brawl to start up, but I guess that's what you get by coming into a brawl and pushing people over.

And he didn't really kick Myles in the head, he attempted to. The foot barely made contact with his helmet.
Posted By: Milk Man Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/21/19 08:57 PM
Originally Posted By: PrplPplEater
Note to all Browns DLine: It is Ok to kick opponents in the head repeatedly while they are on the ground.


Open season on testicle wrenching and cleating them, too! Won't even get suspended for it.

Posted By: SuperBrown Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/21/19 09:01 PM
You need to chill little fella.
rofl
Posted By: The Beast Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/21/19 09:02 PM
Originally Posted By: PrplPplEater
Note to all Browns DLine: It is Ok to kick opponents in the head repeatedly while they are on the ground.


It will only get you two games anyway. SMH
Posted By: BustkeviousMingo Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/21/19 09:06 PM
Originally Posted By: PrplPplEater
Note to all Browns DLine: It is Ok to kick opponents in the head repeatedly while they are on the ground.
Note to Baker it's fine to kick and punch any opposing defensive player in the junk and try to make some olde fashioned nuttbutter and you will just be fined
Posted By: Dave Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/21/19 09:24 PM
Posted By: OrlandoDawg Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/21/19 09:29 PM
Originally Posted By: Dave


No way the NFL would want that out there if true, sorry I dont believe them...I bet any evidence has been misplaced.
Posted By: willitevachange Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/21/19 09:29 PM
Originally Posted By: Dave
Weird, seeing ho the allegation just happened and broke - what type of "investigation" could have been done so quickly?
Posted By: Knight_Of_Brown Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/21/19 09:32 PM
What a crock a ****!!!

I’m certainly going to voice my displeasure to the NFL over this nonsense.
Posted By: cfrs15 Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/21/19 09:33 PM
Originally Posted By: willitevachange
Originally Posted By: Dave
Weird, seeing ho the allegation just happened and broke - what type of "investigation" could have been done so quickly?


Garrett brought it up in the meeting yesterday. They had time. With that said, if the NFL says one thing, believe the other thing.
Posted By: Rishuz Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/21/19 09:33 PM
If I were Garrett I would retire. I would not grovel to any man or organization. He's going to have to meet with Goodell at some point and beg to get his job back and maybe have to agree to do something dumb like anger management classes. I'd tell the NFL to go and pound sand.
Posted By: FL_Dawg Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/21/19 09:35 PM
Good point.
Posted By: Rishuz Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/21/19 09:35 PM
Originally Posted By: cfrs15
Originally Posted By: willitevachange
Originally Posted By: Dave
Weird, seeing ho the allegation just happened and broke - what type of "investigation" could have been done so quickly?


Garrett brought it up in the meeting yesterday. They had time. With that said, if the NFL says one thing, believe the other thing.


I'll go on the record and say I think Garrett was lying about this. If this were true there's no way it wouldn't have come out already. This was a ploy to tilt the decision in his favor that likely backfired.
Posted By: OrlandoDawg Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/21/19 09:38 PM
You really think the NFL would want that to get out?
Posted By: superbowldogg Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/21/19 09:38 PM
Originally Posted By: Rishuz
Originally Posted By: cfrs15
Originally Posted By: willitevachange
Originally Posted By: Dave
Weird, seeing ho the allegation just happened and broke - what type of "investigation" could have been done so quickly?


Garrett brought it up in the meeting yesterday. They had time. With that said, if the NFL says one thing, believe the other thing.


I'll go on the record and say I think Garrett was lying about this. If this were true there's no way it wouldn't have come out already. This was a ploy to tilt the decision in his favor that likely backfired.


idk man... Garrett might be one of the quietest best players I have seen in the NFL. He hates attention. literally... Chubb too
Posted By: Punchsmack Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/21/19 09:40 PM
Originally Posted By: willitevachange
Weird, seeing ho the allegation just happened and broke - what type of "investigation" could have been done so quickly?


The NFL has high-priced and smart lawyers. They knew this might happen and I'm sure they checked the audio long before the appeal.

It could be possible that they're covering it up because that would only make the media circus worse. Plus, they're trying to kill this story and move on. I'd doubt an on-field mic would have picked that up anyway.

Oh well. It's all over but waiting to hear when Rodger wants to take the meeting with Myles. My bet, he waits until just before the preseason games start, leaving Garrett out of training camp, and re-instates him after an additional 4-6 games of 2020.

Like Ron Artest, this will follow Garrett around for the rest of his life. It will always be the first thing people think about when referring to him (unless he gets a Super Bowl MVP next year).
Posted By: DCDAWGFAN Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/21/19 09:41 PM
Originally Posted By: Rishuz
Originally Posted By: cfrs15
Originally Posted By: willitevachange
Originally Posted By: Dave
Weird, seeing ho the allegation just happened and broke - what type of "investigation" could have been done so quickly?


Garrett brought it up in the meeting yesterday. They had time. With that said, if the NFL says one thing, believe the other thing.


I'll go on the record and say I think Garrett was lying about this. If this were true there's no way it wouldn't have come out already. This was a ploy to tilt the decision in his favor that likely backfired.

Fair enough.. and I'll go on record that anybody who is so anti-Kaepernick, anti-Jemele Hill, and pro-Tomi Lahren.. might be capable of racist language..
Posted By: Swish Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/21/19 09:41 PM
jc

bringing up the racial slur now seemed like a desperate attempt to get the suspension reduced.

yea, it sucks that pouncey got his suspension reduced, but everyone here would be supporting the guy had that been hubbard beating up watt after assaulting mayfield.

Myles has no one else to blame but Myles.
Posted By: FL_Dawg Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/21/19 09:44 PM
I guess we are just supposed to take the NFL on their word, and dismiss the word of MG.

I say show us this evidence, or lack thereof.
Posted By: BADdog Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/21/19 09:48 PM
Originally Posted By: Dave


So MG is also a liar
Posted By: DCDAWGFAN Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/21/19 09:49 PM
Originally Posted By: BADdog
Originally Posted By: Dave


So MG is also a liar

No, Myles says that he said it.. the NFL says they can't find any proof of that.. both can be true.
Posted By: Punchsmack Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/21/19 09:51 PM
Originally Posted By: FL_Dawg
I guess we are just supposed to take the NFL on their word, and dismiss the word of MG.

I say show us this evidence, or lack thereof.


Maybe that's fair to want, but the NFL isn't going to host a press conference to walk us through the 15 cameras and all the different audio feeds. Plus, it would most likely be so unintelligible that some people on here would swear they heard it while others would say it was a grunt.

Swish brings up an interesting point. Making the claim now looks odd. Had Myles said in his locker right after the game, "Nobody calls me the _______ word and attempts to rip my helmet off and doesn't get hurt. I'm sure I'll get suspended, but if you say that to me, it's go time!", maybe it plays out differently. Not sure.
Posted By: Dave Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/21/19 09:53 PM
Originally Posted By: cfrs15
Originally Posted By: willitevachange
Originally Posted By: Dave
Weird, seeing ho the allegation just happened and broke - what type of "investigation" could have been done so quickly?


Garrett brought it up in the meeting yesterday. They had time. With that said, if the NFL says one thing, believe the other thing.


Given what Joe Thomas said about QBs always being mic'd, it shouldn't have been too hard to find out what, if anything, Rudolph said to Garrett. For them to hide it if Myles' allegation is true would mean they are willing to give up Myles Garrett as a liar - feeding him to the alligators - just to protect their precious shield, not to mention a marginal, career backup type QB.

Yeah, they would totally do that. That's not sarcasm, btw. I really think these people are reptilian - I have come to really despise the NFL. Love the game, but I hate the league.
Posted By: Rishuz Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/21/19 09:53 PM
Originally Posted By: Swish
jc

bringing up the racial slur now seemed like a desperate attempt to get the suspension reduced.

yea, it sucks that pouncey got his suspension reduced, but everyone here would be supporting the guy had that been hubbard beating up watt after assaulting mayfield.

Myles has no one else to blame but Myles.


I agree with this 100%.

I also disagree with the NFL's ruling on this. The punishment was not doled out in a fair and equitable way.

Again, if I were Myles I would retire. No man or organization is going to hold me captive. Which is essentially what the NFL is doing on a completely arbitrary basis.

But at the end of the day Myles is in this position because of Myles.
Posted By: The Beast Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/21/19 09:53 PM
Originally Posted By: DCDAWGFAN
No, Myles says that he said it.. the NFL says they can't find any proof of that.. both can be true.


As soon as the NFL explains what they did to determine taking such a position on upholding the indefinite suspension, I will give them some credibility. And I want an explanation on why the Pouncey suspension got reduced. The NFL can suck it.
Posted By: GratefulDawg Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/21/19 09:57 PM
Posted By: oobernoober Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/21/19 09:58 PM
Originally Posted By: GratefulDawg


Oh jeez...

That did make me chuckle, though.
Posted By: PastorMarc Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/21/19 10:03 PM
Both Myles Garrett and Larry Ogynjobis suspensions were upheld yet Pounceys was reduced 1 game talk about team bias by the NFL ... superconfused
Posted By: The Beast Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/21/19 10:05 PM
Originally Posted By: GratefulDawg


Just another Goodell puppet kissing Pittsburgh's butt like usual. Nobody will miss him when he's gone either.
Posted By: PortlandDawg Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/21/19 10:07 PM
Originally Posted By: GratefulDawg


What outcome?! We still don’t know when our player gets to return.
Posted By: DCDAWGFAN Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/21/19 10:08 PM
Originally Posted By: GratefulDawg

No, it's not.

Nobody is more instrumental to a fight that could get players hurt than the person who starts it. And that person has received the least severe punishment of the 4...
Posted By: Dave Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/21/19 10:11 PM
Originally Posted By: GratefulDawg


I don't have a Twitter machine, but if I did I would tweet to James Thrash:

Dear JT (may I call you JT?) - here in Cleveland we are quite familiar with "grueling processes". Ours has lasted over 20 years, with no end in sight. Yours lasted 24 hours. So do me a favor and blow it out your O-ring.
Regards,
Dave
Posted By: PortlandDawg Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/21/19 10:11 PM
We should make a back room deal with the Patriots.
Trade him there. The moment he steps into Foxboro Goodell will reinstate him. Then trade back for him. Problem solved. Anyone got Kraft’s number?
Posted By: Bard Dawg Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/21/19 10:20 PM
Hey, James. You look all gruel up. Thanks for sucking up to Pukesborgs. We will, in the spirit of fairness you have shown, suspend Twitter attacks on you for personal lousy decisions at some point in the future. That date is indefinite as of now, but runs approximately concurrent with some suspension of no determined length. So enjoy it all. You have earned it. Look for more on Twitter. Grueling, eh? How?
Posted By: EveDawg Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/21/19 10:42 PM
I hope there is a lawsuit against the NFL.
Posted By: Milk Man Re: Garrett part 2 - 11/21/19 10:49 PM
Originally Posted By: Dave
Originally Posted By: GratefulDawg


I don't have a Twitter machine, but if I did I would tweet to James Thrash:

Dear JT (may I call you JT?) - here in Cleveland we are quite familiar with "grueling processes". Ours has lasted over 20 years, with no end in sight. Yours lasted 24 hours. So do me a favor and blow it out your O-ring.
Regards,
Dave


Too many character to tweet!
© DawgTalkers.net