Suh
Posted: Mon Aug 30, 2010 11:48 am
WOW, he's got some anger issues.
GOOD LAWD! The-Hogs.net - Washington Football Discussion, Redskins to Commanders Era
Washington football community discussions spanning the Redskins to Commanders era. 20+ years of game analysis, player discussions, and fan perspectives.
https://the-hogs.net/messageboard/
Suh
Page 1 of 2
Posted: Mon Aug 30, 2010 12:32 pm
GOOD LAWD! Posted: Mon Aug 30, 2010 1:46 pm
Delhome is lucky he doesn't have a broken neck.
Posted: Mon Aug 30, 2010 11:28 pm
Wowsers! LOL I would have never imagined it was that bad from how people describe it. LOL
I agreed to just fine him but after seeing it, man, that warrants a suspension.
I agreed to just fine him but after seeing it, man, that warrants a suspension.
Posted: Tue Aug 31, 2010 1:23 pm
A hunter only brings what he needs for the hunt.
What are we hunting?
Quarterback.
What are we hunting?
Quarterback.
Posted: Tue Aug 31, 2010 6:32 pm
brad7686 wrote:A hunter only brings what he needs for the hunt.
What are we hunting?
Quarterback.
He should have been tossed and suspended. There's the flow of the game penalties that maybe warrant 15 and no more, but anyone can grab and throw a QB like he did. You can't defend yourself against that. It needs to come with severe penalties.
Posted: Tue Aug 31, 2010 7:22 pm
If I'm the Lions, I'm so happy to see that...the Lions haven't had that kind of attitude in a long time. Football is a violent sport, having violent people playing for your team makes a real difference. They'll want to talk to him about controlling it a little, but you can't teach that kind of anger and attitude...the goal is to teach the player when it needs to appear and when it needs to back off. That can be taught...
I remember a game vs the 49'ers where Darrell picked up (no kidding) Rice in the first series and threw him to the ground, on his head...of course, a 15 penalty was assessed and Rice did little that day. I attribute it to that early play by Darrell. It was well worth it!
I remember a game vs the 49'ers where Darrell picked up (no kidding) Rice in the first series and threw him to the ground, on his head...of course, a 15 penalty was assessed and Rice did little that day. I attribute it to that early play by Darrell. It was well worth it!
Posted: Tue Aug 31, 2010 9:40 pm
fredp45 wrote:If I'm the Lions, I'm so happy to see that...the Lions haven't had that kind of attitude in a long time. Football is a violent sport, having violent people playing for your team makes a real difference. They'll want to talk to him about controlling it a little, but you can't teach that kind of anger and attitude...the goal is to teach the player when it needs to appear and when it needs to back off. That can be taught...
I remember a game vs the 49'ers where Darrell picked up (no kidding) Rice in the first series and threw him to the ground, on his head...of course, a 15 penalty was assessed and Rice did little that day. I attribute it to that early play by Darrell. It was well worth it!
There have to be limits. As I said above, Suh almost broke the guy's neck.
Remember, this is a GAME!
Posted: Tue Aug 31, 2010 10:18 pm
fredp45 wrote:If I'm the Lions, I'm so happy to see that...
Why? The Lions need someone who makes plays, not who doesn't stop when the plays are over. It's easy to attack someone after the play's done. Anyone can do it. And it doesn't establish anything but that you are a thug.
Posted: Wed Sep 01, 2010 8:11 am
KazooSkinsFan wrote:fredp45 wrote:If I'm the Lions, I'm so happy to see that...
Why? The Lions need someone who makes plays, not who doesn't stop when the plays are over. It's easy to attack someone after the play's done. Anyone can do it. And it doesn't establish anything but that you are a thug.
He said he thought the QB still had the ball. What he did was wrong, granted, but I'd rather have a player that keeps playing when it's over than gives up when the play isn't done. It happened to Osi a few years back after he got burned with a personal foul. He gave up and allowed the QB to complete a deep pass b/c he stopped on b/c he was too cautious.
Posted: Wed Sep 01, 2010 8:37 am
KazooSkinsFan wrote:brad7686 wrote:A hunter only brings what he needs for the hunt.
What are we hunting?
Quarterback.
He should have been tossed and suspended. There's the flow of the game penalties that maybe warrant 15 and no more, but anyone can grab and throw a QB like he did. You can't defend yourself against that. It needs to come with severe penalties.
It's a commercial. It involves him.
Posted: Wed Sep 01, 2010 9:04 am
VetSkinsFan wrote:KazooSkinsFan wrote:fredp45 wrote:If I'm the Lions, I'm so happy to see that...
Why? The Lions need someone who makes plays, not who doesn't stop when the plays are over. It's easy to attack someone after the play's done. Anyone can do it. And it doesn't establish anything but that you are a thug.
He said he thought the QB still had the ball. What he did was wrong, granted, but I'd rather have a player that keeps playing when it's over than gives up when the play isn't done. It happened to Osi a few years back after he got burned with a personal foul. He gave up and allowed the QB to complete a deep pass b/c he stopped on b/c he was too cautious.
So you watch the play and you can see it as "keeping playing?" He as practically on the ground when Suh picked him up and threw him. It's preposterous. If he'd continued to push him down then this would be perfectly reasonable. Picking him up from practically being on the ground and throwing him you can't.
Posted: Wed Sep 01, 2010 9:34 am
What I don't understand is how come Jake's teammates didn't come and push Suh or something.. shoooooot... do that to my QB and I'm on the field we're fighting
Posted: Wed Sep 01, 2010 9:58 am
KazooSkinsFan wrote:VetSkinsFan wrote:KazooSkinsFan wrote:fredp45 wrote:If I'm the Lions, I'm so happy to see that...
Why? The Lions need someone who makes plays, not who doesn't stop when the plays are over. It's easy to attack someone after the play's done. Anyone can do it. And it doesn't establish anything but that you are a thug.
He said he thought the QB still had the ball. What he did was wrong, granted, but I'd rather have a player that keeps playing when it's over than gives up when the play isn't done. It happened to Osi a few years back after he got burned with a personal foul. He gave up and allowed the QB to complete a deep pass b/c he stopped on b/c he was too cautious.
So you watch the play and you can see it as "keeping playing?" He as practically on the ground when Suh picked him up and threw him. It's preposterous. If he'd continued to push him down then this would be perfectly reasonable. Picking him up from practically being on the ground and throwing him you can't.
First take a breath. I was NOT condoning his specific actions. I was commenting on his fire as a rookie. I explicitly and purposelt said what he did was wrong BEFORE I said anything else. And I wouldn't oppose whatever punishment the league gave him, but I'm not the one doling that out, so I'll let Goodell handle that.
Posted: Wed Sep 01, 2010 10:06 am
VetSkinsFan wrote:First take a breath
Um...OK...
VetSkinsFan wrote:I was NOT condoning his specific actions. I was commenting on his fire as a rookie. I explicitly and purposelt said what he did was wrong BEFORE I said anything else. And I wouldn't oppose whatever punishment the league gave him, but I'm not the one doling that out, so I'll let Goodell handle that.
I think my point was actually pretty specific in response to this statement, "What he did was wrong, granted, but I'd rather have a player that keeps playing when it's over than gives up when the play isn't done."
Posted: Wed Sep 01, 2010 10:07 am
that is not 'playing' IMO - hopefully he gets what he deserves - that is BS
maybe an offensive lineman takes out Suh's knee with a very aggressive, quasi-legal block - treat the other players as you would have them treat you
maybe an offensive lineman takes out Suh's knee with a very aggressive, quasi-legal block - treat the other players as you would have them treat you
Posted: Wed Sep 01, 2010 10:19 am
SkinsJock wrote:maybe an offensive lineman takes out Suh's knee with a very aggressive, quasi-legal block - treat the other players as you would have them treat you
Now that sounds like a great plan!
Posted: Wed Sep 01, 2010 11:28 am
SkinsJock wrote:that is not 'playing' IMO - hopefully he gets what he deserves - that is BS
maybe an offensive lineman takes out Suh's knee with a very aggressive, quasi-legal block - treat the other players as you would have them treat you
Oh, right, b/c MORE violence is the answer.
Posted: Wed Sep 01, 2010 11:29 am
KazooSkinsFan wrote:VetSkinsFan wrote:First take a breath
Um...OK...VetSkinsFan wrote:I was NOT condoning his specific actions. I was commenting on his fire as a rookie. I explicitly and purposelt said what he did was wrong BEFORE I said anything else. And I wouldn't oppose whatever punishment the league gave him, but I'm not the one doling that out, so I'll let Goodell handle that.
I think my point was actually pretty specific in response to this statement, "What he did was wrong, granted, but I'd rather have a player that keeps playing when it's over than gives up when the play isn't done."
And there was more to the quote, but go ahead and quote only the part that fits your agenda. I'm not arguing b/c you use partial quotes tofor an agenda.
Posted: Wed Sep 01, 2010 12:56 pm
SkinsJock wrote:maybe an offensive lineman takes out Suh's knee with a very aggressive, quasi-legal block
Exactly. Dirty is dirty. There is no virtue in it and anyone on the field can do it. It has nothing to do with being aggressive or following through. It's just cheap and can't be tolerated.
Posted: Wed Sep 01, 2010 1:46 pm
SkinsJock wrote:that is not 'playing' IMO - hopefully he gets what he deserves - that is BS
maybe an offensive lineman takes out Suh's knee with a very aggressive, quasi-legal block - treat the other players as you would have them treat you
Hopefully, that won't be possible as Goodell will boot him for a long time. It's not just that it was after the whistle, but that it was p prolonged attack to his head & neck.
Posted: Thu Sep 02, 2010 7:34 am
yupchagee wrote:SkinsJock wrote:that is not 'playing' IMO - hopefully he gets what he deserves - that is BS
maybe an offensive lineman takes out Suh's knee with a very aggressive, quasi-legal block - treat the other players as you would have them treat you
Hopefully, that won't be possible as Goodell will boot him for a long time. It's not just that it was after the whistle, but that it was p prolonged attack to his head & neck.
Does he have a history of this sort of behavior from college? I'm not familiar with any ongoing behavior that this is a pattern for. Why would you 'boot him for a long time?' He's a rook and his first incident in the NFL. I prefer to think critically than emotionally.
Posted: Thu Sep 02, 2010 8:11 am
yupchagee wrote:.. Goodell will boot him for a long time. It's not just that it was after the whistle, but that it was prolonged attack to his head & neck.
I'm not sure that the NFL will suspend him "for a long time" but based on what we saw and the apparent effort to try and hurt a QB - IMO this should result in a suspension
Suh's prior play has no bearing here - defensive players understand how the NFL feels about defensive players trying to take a QB out of the game = not allowed - Suh went a little beyond "the limit" IMO
I think he gets a suspension for that
Posted: Thu Sep 02, 2010 11:59 am
VetSkinsFan wrote:yupchagee wrote:SkinsJock wrote:that is not 'playing' IMO - hopefully he gets what he deserves - that is BS
maybe an offensive lineman takes out Suh's knee with a very aggressive, quasi-legal block - treat the other players as you would have them treat you
Hopefully, that won't be possible as Goodell will boot him for a long time. It's not just that it was after the whistle, but that it was p prolonged attack to his head & neck.
Does he have a history of this sort of behavior from college? I'm not familiar with any ongoing behavior that this is a pattern for. Why would you 'boot him for a long time?' He's a rook and his first incident in the NFL. I prefer to think critically than emotionally.
Because, it is but by the grace of God that there isn't a veteran NFL quarterback lying in a hospital bed, unable to feel or use his arms and legs. That was agregious, and unacceptable. It was the kind of behavior that you send a message about. You send that message by sitting him. Thinking critically also suggests that you seek to ensure the behavior doesn't happen again... and do so forcefully.
Posted: Thu Sep 02, 2010 12:46 pm
VetSkinsFan wrote:yupchagee wrote:SkinsJock wrote:that is not 'playing' IMO - hopefully he gets what he deserves - that is BS
maybe an offensive lineman takes out Suh's knee with a very aggressive, quasi-legal block - treat the other players as you would have them treat you
Hopefully, that won't be possible as Goodell will boot him for a long time. It's not just that it was after the whistle, but that it was p prolonged attack to his head & neck.
Does he have a history of this sort of behavior from college? I'm not familiar with any ongoing behavior that this is a pattern for. Why would you 'boot him for a long time?' He's a rook and his first incident in the NFL. I prefer to think critically than emotionally.
Because he attempted to end the man's career & possibly his life.