BRH

I remember him juking his butt in front of the end zone cameras after catching the TD to go up 28-3. I took special pleasure in watching his reaction during the second half implosion. I also enjoyed how Talley held him with no call, allowing Nate to make the OT interception that won it. Let's face it, we got some gift calls. That one and Beebe's TD after running out of bounds for 10 yards come to mind. But we've paid for them dearly since.

No they wouldn't have. Perhaps they would have robbed us of the record for points overcome in a comeback. But they wouldn't have robbed us of the greatest comeback in history.

No it isn't. In the Colts' case, they alone tanked to get Luck. In the Penguins' case, there isn't enough money in the world to convince me that the Crosby draft wasn't fixed. It was just too perfect, like Ewing ending up with the Knicks.

Aaron Maybin in crunch time: Two tackles. Zero sacks. Zero forced fumbles. Finished the season with fewer tackles than he had in his rookie season in Buffalo.

I know, I know. I have a 12-year-old daughter too. But I can tell you that I've seen plenty of 9-year-olds who very obviously have never been told to listen to their coaches or to display good sportsmanship. I've seen kids hit home runs and do the "Jet move" as they run around the bases, arms spread like Sanchez or Holmes. Makes me sick. Fortunately in baseball there is the great equalizer. It's called a fastball in the ribs. In a few years they'll learn.

I really don't disagree with anything you say. My problem is that he was thinking this week about what he could do to get attention without getting a flag, and he came up with the t-shirt thing, To me, you score two or three touchdowns and get 150 yards receiving, you'll get all the attention you need. But that's just me.

We are conflating two arguments here. Bottom line is the rule is the rule. It's not Stevie Johnson's role to challenge it, no matter how stupid it may be. The inanity of the rule does not excuse Stevie's willful ignorance of it. Period.

I will say again, as I did earlier in this thread, that my nine-year-old son (who plays travel baseball at a high level) had zero problem with Stevie being sat down for the game. Perhaps this is because I have always told him, from the very start when he was playing tee ball as a four-year-old, that I had exactly two rules for him. The first was "Listen to your coach." The second was "Have fun." I told him it was quite possible to do both, and I also told him that the minute he could not do both was the minute he was done playing. Stevie seems to have internalized the second rule but not the first. There is a reason I put those rules in that order. My kid gets it, and I thank Chan Gailey for reinforcing it.

Have to disagree. Usually when someone is fined it is precisely because (a) a penalty that should have been called was not called, or (b) the conduct was so egregious it warranted more than jut an on-field penalty. The only thing I've seen them get fined for that isn't an on-field penalty is improper uniform wearing (i.e., low socks, etc, stupid **** like that). I don't think that was the justification for the first fine on SJ.

You had me until the bold part. The word prop may come from the word property, but it does not mean "property."

I prefer to have people working for me whose first thought isn't "but the policy doesn't SAY I can't do that." A thousand times this.

And by the way, I agree that he was not trying to hurt the team. I just think that he was more concerned about doing something clever that would get him on tv than about whether it would hurt the team, and that is just as inexcusable to me.

The Pats stunt last year may not have been CALLED a penalty, but it should have been, not because of the cannon but because he fell to the ground. That's why he got fined afterward. The shirt with a message on it? That's a prop, and is a penalty.

Yes, some really dumb **** goes unpunished, but the players know exactly where the line is. Go to the ground, get flagged. Use a prop, get flagged. Dunk the ball or jump in the stands, no flag. Run to the center of the field, no flag. Taunt in someone's face, flag. It's very simple even if the rules and exceptions are stupid. Kind of like in-the-crease. It was a monumentally stupid rule, but it was the !@#$ing rule and should have been called. Sometimes guys will get away with doing stuff that should be flagged (though rarely are those the guys with a history of doing it). But you never see a guy get flagged for dunking or leaping. That's the point. They know what's legal and they do that instead of something that isn't.

I'm going to hope that if the game meant anything to the Bills SJ would have worn a plain white t-shirt.

Why are we behind Miami? Did they trade for a pick?

Let me ask this then. What do you think Gailey might have said to Stevie if SJ went to him before the game and said "coach, I want to flash my t-shirt after I score. That's cool, right? I mean, I only got fined for it last year." More to the point, what do you think Stevie thought Chan would say?

Lighten up Francis. I'm on your side here. His celebration by definition merited a penalty; therefore it was a me-first celebration.

Also, Edelman hit Fitz late out of bounds on one run - no call. You can bet if it was Brady it would have been 15.

Any celebration that by definition merits a penalty is a me-first celebration.

When a little kid gets hurt because 250 pounds of player and pads landed on him, you'll see the Leap go to the ash heap pretty damn quick.

And I'm missing something. Did Stevie actually tweet pregame that he might be fined?

Mike Pereira already tweeted today that the goalpost dunk and Lambeau Leap are "grandfathered." Which is completely stupid, of course, but is also the rule. As players, theirs is not to reason why. Theirs is to follow the GD rules.

Exactly. How many other players have flashed t-shirt messages this year? Arguing over what is worse is pointless. The point is what is legal. Stevie doesn't care.

Unfortunately there aren't any.