Along these lines, is handing out punishment the following week the norm or will it become the norm?

 

If this hit had taken place during the regular season, would they have waited until after the Bengals' next game to rule on the play?

 

I believe it is already the norm. If I am not mistaken the NFL has punished many players with fines etc who were not penalized for the play during the game.

No flag on the play. So has the NFL become the LPGA? Did a fan call in? Should the refs be suspended for missing sure a horrific call that resulted in a 5 game suspension?

 

These kinds of plays are reviewed by a committee of mothers. Then they decide if the hit was illegal, unnecessary, dirty, or just plain mean. The penalty they decide is final.

Five games is a little steep, but he continues to do these things.

 

He continues to play the game the way a lot of guys did growing up, aggressively looking to make plays.

 

I had a running backs coach in high school that used to always say, you've gotta keep your head on a swivel. Sherman did not keep his head on a swivel......

Is the "head on a swivel" coaching point that everyone keeps reciting really applicable here? The FB is coming out of the backfield as a receiver. He's looking backwards toward the QB because he might be getting the ball. As the ball is released, he is following the ball over his head and then gets hit. I've only coached at a low level of football but isn't he supposed to come out of his break and look back for the ball? At any rate, an unnecessary hit that is going to be penalized in today's game.

If Alex Smith had thrown the ball to Sherman instead of the receiver downfield, Burfict would have committed the worst pass interference penalty any of us has ever seen. He would probably have been flagged for a personal foul penalty in addition to pass interference because he would have hit Sherman so far in advance of the ball ever getting there. I don't see how anyone can justify that hit. I can understand people questioning the severity of the penalty but questioning that hit is looking through Bengal striped glasses

If Alex Smith had thrown the ball to Sherman instead of the receiver downfield, Burfict would have committed the worst pass interference penalty any of us has ever seen. He would probably have been flagged for a personal foul penalty in addition to pass interference because he would have hit Sherman so far in advance of the ball ever getting there. I don't see how anyone can justify that hit. I can understand people questioning the severity of the penalty but questioning that hit is looking through Bengal striped glasses

I haven't seen anyone say the hit was necessary, but the hit was within the rules of football. Even if it was pass interference, it would have just been 15 yards and we're on our way never to be heard from again. The hit was textbook as far how and where to hit someone.

Hey @Footballforever74 I noticed you've skipped over replying to this one...

 

Mitchell is not the one suspended.

I haven't seen anyone say the hit was necessary, but the hit was within the rules of football. Even if it was pass interference, it would have just been 15 yards and we're on our way never to be heard from again. The hit was textbook as far how and where to hit someone.

 

As stated before, not in today's NFL it's not

The NFL just sucks. Period.

As stated before, not in today's NFL it's not

I understand that the NFL views it that way. They are very clearly making an example of Burfict with this suspension.

Mitchell is not the one suspended.

 

It's only a matter of time the way he plays.

Mitchell is not the one suspended.

 

That wasn't part of the question but of course you won't answer the actual question. You don't know how to be partial.

I found this and it gives points on both sides but the last sentence sums it up pretty good.

 

UPDATE: Independent of the defenseless player rule, the NFL prohibits "unnecessarily running, diving into, cutting, or throwing the body against or on a player who (1) is out of the play or (2) should not have reasonably anticipated such contact by an opponent, before or after the ball is dead." It is considered unnecessary roughness, and could qualify as a penalty in this instance. But it does not require defenseless player protection and, frankly, it would be preposterous to think that it alone could lead to a five-game suspension even for a multiple offender.

 

So, in the dark of the night, we have suddenly plummeted into a classic NFL story of a player removed from the field for debatable reasons. Coleman and his crew were forced to make a split-second decision and can be excused for failing to flag a hit that took place away from the ball. But the league office has the advantage of controlled and timeless video analysis. We can only hope it has seen, in a definitive manner, more than what we have just discussed.

 

Burfict's reputation is both well known and well deserved. But this suspension would eliminate a third of his season. Even if the league has chosen to make an example of him, the evidence must be clear. At this moment, at least, it is not.

 

For sure the Bengals will appeal this I hope. I think it should go down to one or no more than two.imo I personally think it should have been no more than a fine. Has the league ever suspended a player any for a play that wasn't even flagged. I know they have given fines was just curious if they had done suspensions.

^ Who are you quoting?

ESPN saying this will be reduced to 3 games.