chris heff Posted September 26, 2014 Share Posted September 26, 2014 Does anyone else remember the penalty against the Bills for a defender pushing Brady with one hand after he threw a interception? It was a couple of years ago. Brady was moving in the direction of the return. http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/eye-on-football/24724332/chip-kelly-on-baker-hitting-foles-thats-news-to-me-if-thats-a-legal-hit Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ko12010 Posted September 26, 2014 Share Posted September 26, 2014 Was Foles receptive or does he not swing that way? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chris heff Posted September 26, 2014 Author Share Posted September 26, 2014 Was Foles receptive or does he not swing that way? At the very least I think he would have preferred a gentler approach. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KD in CA Posted September 26, 2014 Share Posted September 26, 2014 Isn't that almost exactly what Warren Sapp did to that OL (was it Chad Clifton?) that prompted a rule change? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RJ (not THAT RJ) Posted September 26, 2014 Share Posted September 26, 2014 Isn't that almost exactly what Warren Sapp did to that OL (was it Chad Clifton?) that prompted a rule change? Yes and no. In the Sapp case, the player getting hit was far away from the play. In this one, Foles was wandering generally in the direction of the INT returner, thus making him part of the play. A hard hit, yes, but this one looks legal to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nanker Posted September 26, 2014 Share Posted September 26, 2014 The Rule is: You can't hit a QB named Brady. Anything else goes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted September 26, 2014 Share Posted September 26, 2014 It's hard to argue that Foles wasn't part of the play, just by proximity. I thought it was a legal hit when it happened, I still do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chris heff Posted September 26, 2014 Author Share Posted September 26, 2014 It's hard to argue that Foles wasn't part of the play, just by proximity. I thought it was a legal hit when it happened, I still do. Then the "hit" on Brady would be legal and yet a penalty was called. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RJ (not THAT RJ) Posted September 26, 2014 Share Posted September 26, 2014 Then the "hit" on Brady would be legal and yet a penalty was called. Well, we all know the reason for that! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chris heff Posted September 26, 2014 Author Share Posted September 26, 2014 Well, we all know the reason for that! I'm not really one for conspiracy, but when you see plays like Brady trying to spike one of the Bills (can't remember who) it makes you wonder. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RJ (not THAT RJ) Posted September 26, 2014 Share Posted September 26, 2014 I'm not really one for conspiracy, but when you see plays like Brady trying to spike one of the Bills (can't remember who) it makes you wonder. It certainly does. I'm also not a fan of conspiracies, and won't take it too far. I will say that I'm surprised there was no flag on that play by the Slurs--not because I think it was an illegal hit, but because I was under the impression that the zebras would err on the side of over-protecting the QBs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kirby Jackson Posted September 26, 2014 Share Posted September 26, 2014 It was a dirty play. Was it legal, I guess. Was it unnecessary, absolutely. I loved the way that Peters responded and I would hope that my guys would do the same thing. If that guy wants to play like that then he shouldn't mind it when some lineman holds him up as a back cuts him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted September 27, 2014 Share Posted September 27, 2014 Then the "hit" on Brady would be legal and yet a penalty was called. No ****. Ya think? Brady gets special treatment. That's hardly news. Remember when JP Losman was taken out at the knees by Wilfork and nothing happened, but when Brady was taken out at the knees they changed the rules of the game??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PO'14 Posted September 27, 2014 Share Posted September 27, 2014 Gotta earn your stripes. JP LOSMAN was a big loser! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted September 27, 2014 Share Posted September 27, 2014 Gotta earn your stripes. JP LOSMAN was a big loser! Refresh my memory. Do I think you're an idiot? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RuntheDamnBall Posted September 27, 2014 Share Posted September 27, 2014 Gotta earn your stripes. JP LOSMAN was a big loser! I forgot the part of the game where they check to see if you're a loser before enforcing the rules. DC Tom nailed this one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Miyagi-Do Karate Posted September 27, 2014 Share Posted September 27, 2014 It was a dirty play. Was it legal, I guess. Was it unnecessary, absolutely. I loved the way that Peters responded and I would hope that my guys would do the same thing. If that guy wants to play like that then he shouldn't mind it when some lineman holds him up as a back cuts him. I agree with this. Dirty. Ever since Kurt Warner's career was ended on a bush league play like this, I am against these shots on the QB. That said, the rule should be after a pick, the QB has to take himself out of the play...ie, fall to the ground basically. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boyst Posted September 27, 2014 Share Posted September 27, 2014 What?! No one has mentioned EJ yet Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chandemonium Posted September 27, 2014 Share Posted September 27, 2014 The only issue I have with it is the runner was down before contact was made with foles, but it was close enough that I'm not sure how much baker could've let up at that point. If you're going to try to make a tackle, you should expect to get blocked. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
machine gun kelly Posted September 27, 2014 Share Posted September 27, 2014 Yes and no. In the Sapp case, the player getting hit was far away from the play. In this one, Foles was wandering generally in the direction of the INT returner, thus making him part of the play. A hard hit, yes, but this one looks legal to me. It was ruled a legal hit. If the QB doesn't want to get hit, don't run towards the play. He hit him in the numbers and not with his helmet. Foles should have pulled a Marino and ran to the sidelines if he doesn't want to get hit. Although, I didn't see any interview where Foles was complaining about the hit. He was tough and took it. Are you telling me if Fitzpicktrick throws one this week (we hope), and then runs towards the play to tackle the DB who intercepts is fair game. Wouldn't you like to see Spikes lay a legal in the numbers hit to him. I would. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts