HalftimeAdjustment

Sometimes, players are not penalized for holding either. That does not mean it should never be called. Also, wasn't he fined (not penalized), where a fine usually indicates the league thought it should have been a penalty? Sometimes, players are penalized for "driving" Tom Brady into the ground when all they did is shove him. That is a bad call, but does not mean actually driving a quarterback into the ground is OK. The rules actually explicitly allow certain celebrations including jumping into fans (which I think is fine). Apparently, dunking the ball is allowed as well (I think it should not be). If you use a goalpost and ball to simulate filming the Pats, that can be fined. Even though it is funny.

That's an issue for the league, not for Chan. Because SJ had already received one penalty this year (Jets) and there were tweets before the game indicating he knew he might be fined, one has to conclude he knew he was walking the line. Whereas, Clay Matthews having done the same celebration multiple times can be pretty sure he is in the clear. If you are arguing that the league should lighten up on celebrations with a prop, I have mixed feelings. A Happy New Year T-Shirt is not a big deal to me. Neither is Why So Serious for that matter, nor do I think that (for example) someone making a camera motion with the ball is a big deal, nor for that matter signing it with a Sharpie. Pulling out a cell phone and making a call before reaching the sidelines seems like a bit much. On the other hand, the examples of running to the middle of the field and freaking out seem over the top. The main problem is, drawing a line is not that easy. For now, there is a line drawn: No celebrations where you fall down in the end zone and no celebrations using a prop until you get back to the sideline (apparently). Not my favorite rule but it is a rule. Any reason SJ could not have run over to the Bills' sideline, then pulled up his shirt???

And, if any of these drew penalties, do you think that Sean Payton and/or Mike McCarthy would not try to nip it in the bud, rather than allowing it to continue? How many times has Clay Matthews drawn a penalty? Whether the rules are fair or not is a different issue. I agree that the taunting level of the other celebrations is higher than that of a "Happy New Year" shirt. However, if Clay Matthews drew a 15-yard penalty after his sacks, would Mike McCarthy try to stop it from occurring again??

Has Rob Gronkowski or Aaron Hernandez drawn multiple celebration penalties this season for going outside the rules? Yes, Hernandez celebrated - he did not draw a penalty and if he did would it have been premeditated and repeated? How about the Green Bay Packers, do their players celebrate? Yes, they do. Do they draw multiple unsportsmanlike conduct penalties in a single season? New Orleans Saints? Forget the 1970 NFL and preconceived notions. Please identify the teams in the NFL, in the current year, that have both a playoff record and a culture that allows me-first celebration. Please identify the showboats on the divisional leaders. Please point at the coaches of playoff teams that are not known for running a tight ship. That would make a stronger argument that the team should overlook this behavior.

You mean, offer him a contract worth $5M base with options to get to 7.5, then watch him leave as another team offers him at least 6.5 per? Just clarifying.

Agreed about the 49 but it might have helped us answer. Fitz has chemistry with SJ. Might have seen fewer INTs. Would not gave resulted in a win most likely but we will never know.

Yes... 1 TD. Then it went in the toilet.

I think he is a malcontent because he knows they were not ready to pay him so he did not care anymore. He forced the issue and avoids injury.

If they were not signing a deal at 7.5 per year then you have to think Nix and Bills upper management had no intent of bringing SJ back. Chan is on solid ground here.

No, I think he is clearly the best receiver and the offense is suffering without him. But he is a selfish player who cannot be relied on to be part of a winning culture. He will need to be replaced so we shpuld sign someone else with his money. Having said that, if he did not say anything else I would have put him back on the 2nd half. He is under contract now and enough message has been sent to other players. No need to worry about the message to SJ he will never hear it. He will get the message from his agent at 430 today when they discuss whether he helped his market value.

He is headed to Washington, Tampa Bay, Jacksonville, or Minnesota after this. Some other teams will not touch him.

We also do nt know what was said on the sideline. That could be an aggravating factor.

They can put Johnson back after the half and act like he got a stern talking to at halftime.

Let's hope the next kicker is named Lindell.

Even the announcers made fun of it. I think one asked "what did he give him a boo-boo?" At least that's whatI thought.

If he had previously been told by Belichek NOT to do that... he wouldn't have. Patriots do not allow insubordination. See Wes Welker and feet.

Every player needs to follow the rules set down by the team and coach. If Chan had told him to lay off the celebrations then he is not a team player. Green Bay and New Orleans score a lot of TDs. How often do you see thier players getting fined for repeated celebration?

I have been an advocate for re-signing Stevie but that might have changed my mind.

I generally agree that "age is the most important factor", but you don't think the impact forces are less per tackle in the indoor and arena leagues, based on the fact that the players hitting you are slower, smaller, and possibly not as strong? NFL Europe was probably very similar to the NFL, but seasons were 10 games long. Also, a factor more important than age is specific injury history. For example, Shawne Merriman has had a serious knee injury and Achilles injury among many others. Despite his relatively "middling" age he is considered to be almost done. By contrast, Fred Jackson has had injuries such as a broken hand or fractured fibula which are generally not as difficult to recover from as a torn Achilles, multiple ligament tear, or niggling soft tissue injuries (groin, shoulder). End result: Fred Jackson is a viable RB for the 2012 season because he did not incur a major soft-tissue/career-threatening injury in 2011 and was near the top of the league in his first 9 games. No one can say for sure after that, but at some point in the next few years age will catch up with him. That's why he (personally) needs guaranteed money more than total contract value. In my opinion teams will not give up a high draft pick for any player who is not going to have a 5-year (or more) career. Even a team that "needs a RB" will not want to cash in a high draft pick for fewer years of production. Given a 2nd rd draft pick, the team is better off picking a college RB or BPA and getting a lesser RB who is younger. That's because if (for example) the college RB breaks his leg in year 1, he will have a very good chance of being productive in years 2-5. Whereas, if FJ breaks his leg again next year, his career is just about over. The value proposition is just not there for a 1st-3rd round pick, I think we cannot get more than a 4th for him. Sign FJ to a reasonable RB contract with a 3-4 year length and a high % guarantee in exchange for lesser total value. I think he will go for it based on the fact that this will put money in the bank for his post-football career. He cannot afford to risk the 2012 season on his current contract as the likelihood of getting a big payoff afterwards is not much higher than the likelihood of a career-ending or diminishing injury.

Since he will probably not get "premier" RB $ ($8M+) from any other team, this is not a very relevant scenario. Can you identify a team who is likely to be willing to sign a 30yr old RB to a 3yr $20-25M contract, when he has only had 1 season near the top of the league and is not known for elite speed? On the other hand, another team is highly likely to give him a 3yr $15M contract with a guarantee in the $9M range. I also think you are wrong about his trade value (again, name a team), and I do not agree that we do not need the 2 backs. It is unlikely for a team with 1 premier back to have that RB make it through the entire NFL season. If we go with Spiller and Choice, we'll have to accept Choice as our starting RB for 2-3 games a season on average.

How about the organization discusses the prospects of Merriman and Easley based on the informed opinions of their medical staff, instead of whatever is in the press, and then makes a decision on whether to cut them? Which could be made any time during camp. There is no public basis for deciding that Easley will get re-injured or have heart problems again. Merriman on the other hand has a fairly clear history of significant injury, but he is under contract. I think you have to trust that the team will judge this based on being closer to the situation than we are. As for Parrish, the team can make an offer that appears suitable for a player that has a relatively high injury risk, and if he does not sign it, move on. If they decline to offer him anything, that means they believe he will not contribute enough to warrant a minimum salary and/or roster spot.

He might want that, but not only is he still under contract for much less, on top of that the market will not give him 8-10M/year due to his age. What he should (and probably will) want the most, is substantial guaranteed money so that he can take care of his family after football. With the right amount of guaranteed money and a 3 year contract he can be signed for much less than $8M/year I would suspect. Anything non-guaranteed, he will probably never see beyond 2012 or 2013... so the guarantee is probably the determining factor. Having said that if the Bills are offered an attractive trade I expect they will take it. I hope they do not, but they probably would. If they are not offered a good trade I think they will get the deal done if for no other reason than they have a lot of leverage.

I think that people who are in favor of not re-signing Stevie Johnson, should explain who they would like to sign to play receiver, what they will pay them, and what (if anything) they would spend any money saved on. As for "signing" SJ for $5-6 million a year, you can offer him that but you cannot sign him for that unless no other team offers him more. That's the reality.

So what happens in 2013 when the deal sets a minimum personnel budget, effectively? Or do you think the people running the team have assumed they are done before then?

But he wasn't picked up by the current regime, Pears was.