The Rule Isn't Bad ... Some Of The Calls Are ...?

Question

I have no problem with the so called Brady Rule. It's ok to protect the QB in some way against malicious hits that might destroy a career and certainly can end a players season.

The hit/blocked into shot by the Ravens player was kind of not a penalty. (New England fans hold your sphincters! I'm not done yet)

The rule is ok.

I'm serious ... some of the calls are just down right silly. The Ravens player barely touched him and it was after being blocked into him.

Say what you want ... the rule is being enforced too liberally.

Does anyone agree?

Does anyone disagree?

Whether you like Ray Lewis or not was he right in expressing his thoughts on the referees judgment in the game? (which was a great game ...)

Fines be damned ... the rule has problems.

Why don't they protect the other players the same way they protect the quarterback?

Thanks and thumb up to all who answer! Just give me time to get back and read the answers.

P.S. I know there's a lot of anger in the football section .. almost as much as it is in the Religious section. I just want to know how fans feel.

I'm not trying to argue with anyone You may loosen your bowels now ... (laughing)

Answer 1

This is the first year of the "Brady Rule" and the refs are just trying to do everything they can to get it through players heads, you can't hit the quarterback low, or hit him in the head with your hand. While many of these calls may be "ticky tack", they need to continue to call them when it comes close, because that's the only way they're going to get players to abide by these new rules. When Brady went down last season, the NFL just wasn't the same... it lost a huge piece of the puzzle, and suddenly Sunday's just weren't as exciting. The NFL knows that quarterbacks like Tom Brady, Peyton Manning, and Brett Favre is what brings in the money, so they are doing everything they possibly can to keep them healthy and keep the fans happy. It's bad now, but eventually players will begin to do everything they can to stay away from the QB's knees and head, and these calls wont happen as often. Many people just need to realize that it's not just Brady that is getting these calls in his favor... EVERYBODY is being hit with these penalties.

Answer 2

The rule is the rule, I see so many people whining about it, its annoying, I know you may not be one. But this is not one of those rules that is a judgment call, it is black and white, if you hit a QB below the knees, it is a penalty, any QB period it is a penalty. I do not get why people have a hard time understanding this, Suggs went low and Brady semi moved to avoid it being worse, it was a penalty. Even though he barely touched him, he still hit him at the knees. The rule was put place because of the number of QBs who have suffered knee injuries. Want to avoid the penalty? Do hit a QB low, he has no reason to go low anyway. Like it or not it was a good call by the rule, like the rule or not it is in place and won't be going away. This is not a matter of BRady being a wimp like people are trying to say, it is the rule and it was called like it should have been. It didn't cost the Ravens the game, they had 40 more yards to try and stop the Pats and didn't. I hate these rules as well but I have had to deal with them screwing my team over as well, look at week 1 when the Pats had to deal with a junk roughing the passer call on a sack.

Answer 3

I agree the rule is flawed, there are times when a flag should be throw on roughing the passer. The hit to the face on both QBs early in the game should both have been called.. What I have a problem with is a player of FOOTBALL. Meaning a guy who signed up for a contact sport knowing the risks involved to manipulate a official into calling a penalty for something that didnt happen.. And then later saying hey he barely touched me.. IF he barely touched you why did you jump up looking to the official for the penalty.???



The Brady rule is allowing the Pats extra chances with the ball.. Maybe we should just give them 6 downs instead of 4 will that be enough ??

Answer 4

<<

Say what you want ... the rule is being enforced too liberally.

>>

too liberally would be the opposite of your point.



But anyways to say I agree with some of what your saying but not all of it.

The ravens didn't get a bad call. The fact is the rule states, and its pretty clear - you can't hit a qb at the knee - and he wasn't blocked into him he swung his arm delibrately at his knee. Stupid play by a stupid player -- period.



But I would say that I think they should have 2 levels of roughing calls, just like they do with facemasks where you have a 5 yard and a 15 yard variety.



The NFL is a business, this wasn't a brady rule, its a protect your investment rule - no NFL team wants their qb who is their biggest investment to have his career ended prematurely and all teams want these rules in place. Even the ravens. You think they want Flacco's knee taken out? Of course not. They are more concerned with QB's than any other position, because they are the ones that bring in the money.

Answer 5

I agree with you in that the rule is a good one but some discretion should be used in calling the play a foul. The rule as it stands now is being enforced too strictly.

Answer 6

I don't like it because it cheapens what Favre has done while playing TOUGH football his whole career. If his Ironman record gets broken- I'll cry FOUL!

Answer 7

Brady's gotta pull his skirt up and grow a set!!!

Answer 8

BRADY NEEDS TO MAN UP!! GETTING HIT IS PART OF GAME