BuffaloWings Posted October 16, 2008 Share Posted October 16, 2008 'Pansy' league "When you see guys like Dick Butkus, the Ronnie Lotts, the Jack Tatums, these guys really went after people," Polamalu told reporters. "Now, they couldn't survive in this type of game. They wouldn't have enough money. They'd be paying fines all the time and they'd be suspended for a year after they do it two games in a row. It's kind of ridiculous." Yeah...poor players. Those $15K fines really take away from the millions in salary. I know what he means about Butkus, Lott, Tatum, et al not being able to play their game, but c'mon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drnykterstein Posted October 16, 2008 Share Posted October 16, 2008 "I like to believe that my best hits border on felonious assault." -Jack Tatum Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theesir Posted October 16, 2008 Share Posted October 16, 2008 So he shouldn't complain about it being a pansy league where you are no longer allowed to hit people because he makes too much money? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cody Posted October 16, 2008 Share Posted October 16, 2008 So he shouldn't complain about it being a pansy league where you are no longer allowed to hit people because he makes too much money? Exactly, back in the day they were hitting guys making a few thousand dollars a year. Now they are hitting multi-million dollar investments. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuffaloWings Posted October 16, 2008 Author Share Posted October 16, 2008 So he shouldn't complain about it being a pansy league where you are no longer allowed to hit people because he makes too much money? No, he has every right to complain about that and I agree with him that the league is getting too pansy-ish. Either that or the league is simply trying to bring in more money by levying more fines for hits that are part of the game. But to say these guys "wouldn't have enough money" after paying the fines is a bit ludicrous. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cody Posted October 16, 2008 Share Posted October 16, 2008 Either that or the league is simply trying to bring in more money by levying more fines for hits that are part of the game. The $15-30K the NFL brings in from fines every week is a drop in the bucket. This isn't the Town of Kenmore giving out fines to meet it's payroll. The fines are to discourage players from hurting QBs. That way, guys like Farve can play for 20 years. When big name players (QBs) are playing the NFL makes more $. The NFL will probably make more $ in Farve Jerseys this year than in fines. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SageAgainstTheMachine Posted October 16, 2008 Share Posted October 16, 2008 No, he has every right to complain about that and I agree with him that the league is getting too pansy-ish. Either that or the league is simply trying to bring in more money by levying more fines for hits that are part of the game. But to say these guys "wouldn't have enough money" after paying the fines is a bit ludicrous. I think he's exaggerating about the money thing to get his point across, a point which I agree with particularly when it comes to hitting quarterbacks. QBs are football players just like everybody else on the field, but they aren't allowed to get hit like everybody else? Why is it encouraged for a special teams gunner to plant the punt returner into the ground, while a LB who blitzes and hits the QB solidly beneath the chin gets a fine and suspended? On a similar note, how many times has Ladainian Tomlinson facemasked the man he's stiff arming without being penalized? Why the double standard when it comes to big name players? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cody Posted October 16, 2008 Share Posted October 16, 2008 Why the double standard when it comes to big name players? Big name players = Big time $ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buffaloboyinATL Posted October 16, 2008 Share Posted October 16, 2008 I think he's exaggerating about the money thing to get his point across ding ding, we have a winner. His complaint has nothing to do with money. He is just saying that the players that used to be praised for their toughness would be constantly penalized in today's NFL. I've heard people complain that these guys are too pampered and wouldn't be able to hang with the guys of the 70's and 80's but his point is it isn't their fault. The league has restricted the ability of defensive players to "play tough" like they used to. I'm not saying I disagree with the NFL, if my son was playing in the league I'd want them to take every possible precaution to ensure his safety. That being said, I get where Polamalu is coming from. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steely Dan Posted October 16, 2008 Share Posted October 16, 2008 ding ding, we have a winner. His complaint has nothing to do with money. He is just saying that the players that used to be praised for their toughness would be constantly penalized in today's NFL. I've heard people complain that these guys are too pampered and wouldn't be able to hang with the guys of the 70's and 80's but his point is it isn't their fault. The league has restricted the ability of defensive players to "play tough" like they used to. I'm not saying I disagree with the NFL, if my son was playing in the league I'd want them to take every possible precaution to ensure his safety. That being said, I get where Polamalu is coming from. It is a money issue, for the NFL. Nobody is going to watch the equivalent of strike games due to so many injuries. I wonder how Troy boy would feel if it was his kid out there? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NicholasCal1 Posted October 17, 2008 Share Posted October 17, 2008 i agree with polomalu. its all about money nothing to do with saftey. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave mcbride Posted October 17, 2008 Share Posted October 17, 2008 Jack Tatum. Nice. Now there's a model to idealize. http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/06/sports/f...land%20Patriots Stingley and Tatum never met or talked after the injury. In 1983, Stingley said: "He has not contacted me, not even a mystery postcard. The bottom line is that I feel sorry for him. He's a man that can't bend to really be a man. Sitting in my wheelchair, I'm taller than he is." Tatum always defended himself, saying, "This is the way the game is played." In Tatum's 1980 autobiography, he said: "I like to believe that my best hits border on felonious assault." He also said he was going for "an intimidating hit" against Stingley, and proposed that the league outlaw quick slant-in patterns like the one on which Stingley was hurt. Dave Anderson wrote in The Times, "It's almost as if John Wilkes Booth's autobiography glorified his murder of Abraham Lincoln while suggesting that thereafter a president be prohibited from attending the theater." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drnykterstein Posted October 21, 2008 Share Posted October 21, 2008 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=23hFKCzD5n0 Looked pretty clean to me. Ended up in a broken jaw though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stuckincincy Posted October 21, 2008 Share Posted October 21, 2008 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=23hFKCzD5n0 Looked pretty clean to me. Ended up in a broken jaw though. Yes - a helmet to the jaw will do that. Hines definitely caught Rivers not looking. Rich Gannon was doing the color, and he wondered why no flag. Given Hines' recent history, I wouldn't be surprised to see a fine assessed later this week. Polamalu whacked Cedric Benson with his helmet in that game, but got the worst of it. PGH has put him on their PUP list. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GTSuzFs57ds Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts