Jump to content
Indianapolis Colts
Indianapolis Colts Fan Forum

Burfict's Hit On Doyle


King Colt

Recommended Posts

Getting a little tired of the what-about-ism floating around in some corners of the 'Net trying to compare the Burfict hit on Doyle to the Jones hit on Allen which isn't going to be suspended 

 

The Burfict hit was clearly deliberate, Doyle was vulnerable as a result of the play, burfict he lined Doyle up and launched his head into Doyle's helmet. 

 

The intent on Jones hit is anything but clear, the hit honestly looked incidental to me and even looked kinda like Jones was trying not to hit Allen in the head with his hlemet (he seems to be trying to pull his head back).  It's because intent is debatable that the 15 yard penalty was deemed sufficient, even though Allen got hurt.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Chloe6124 said:

Thankfully Doyle didn’t end up with a concussion. That would of been a huge loss for the colts Sunday.

You mean thankfully Doyle didn't have obvious symptoms of a concussion.  If you read the medical science it's not the big ones that get players in trouble with CTE later in life, it's the hundred little ones.

 

 

I would be shocked if Doyle didn't walk away from that hit with a bit of physical damage and it just didn't reach the threshold of the Protocol.

 

Would not be surprised if this is part of what happened to Andrew Luck.  Depression is a possible symptom of CTE, and it seemed pretty clear that our boy was struggling with depression later in his career. You can only get your bell rung so many times before your brainmeats start tenderizing

Link to post
Share on other sites

https://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/27750699/derek-carr-vontaze-burfict-heart-broken-suspension

 

(Tahir) Whitehead, who wore a hat with Burfict's No. 55 on it when addressing reporters Wednesday, compared Burfict to a "brother."

"Understanding and knowing how hard he worked, with the perception that was out there about him, how hard he worked to not be that guy, it's really frustrating for me to see the penalty that's been handed down to him," Whitehead said.

 

The entire story is just laugh-worthy, made-up news. Burfict was extremely proud of himself, taunting the fans immediately after his headshot on Doyle. Now the Raiders are trying to spin the story 180 degrees. Absolute nonsense. Good luck with that!

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/30/2019 at 11:58 AM, Gramz said:

He's done for the year.  

 

Hopefully he's done for good.  

 

He doesn't seem to "get it" or he just flat out doesn't care that He plays dirty and could seriously injure someone.   

 

He should be done!  He is the dirtiest player ever. 

 

I hope Doyle is okay.

My sentiments exactly Gramz. I couldn't believe what he did to Doyle either. Jesus.

 

Just when I start to feel sympathy for defensive players who get too many penalty flags by refs on the field, this lowlife keeps breaking the rules, laying guys out, thinks his cheap shots are funny, & he makes it harder for LBs with their heads screwed on right to be given the benefit of the doubt. Wow, what a...

 

At this point, VB must be banished from the NFL permanently. He's run out of second chances. Bye Felicia. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/30/2019 at 2:33 PM, Imgrandojji said:

That hit was terrible, it is worse than it looks and it looks hellabad. 

 

Burfict is on his feet he's in complete control of himself.  He could have easily shoulder tackled the guy.  Could have easily done a diving tackle, lowered his shoulders and made a clean hit. Or wrapped him up and dropped his weight on him for a stop.  Nope.  GO FOR THE HEAD.  Because somehow that made sense to him.

 

  No excuses for what he chose to do.  He simply headbutted Doyle.  He wasn't even close to out of options either. Outrageous.  There is no room for that in the NFL. 

 

Doyle is lucky that wasn't way worse. Haven't heard of any serious complications for him from that hit, seems to have dodged a bullet.  Wish he could have dodged Burfict though

Kick the Piece of crap out of the league he is a low life scumbag.

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, southwest1 said:

Uh huh. Jack isn't meant to be a human pretzel broken in half. I was furious when I saw that hit WM. Unbelievable man. 

Well, i did date a yoga instructor for a while but thats an ENTIRELY different story.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It’s one if the dirtiest plays I’ve ever seen in football.

 

Burfect did all of the following....

 

1.  He had a 3 stride run up to hit Doyle who was defenseless.

 

2.   He lowered his head to use as a weapon.

 

3.   He targeted Doyle’s head.

 

4.  He launched himself into Doyle.

 

All four issues are highly illegal.   This was one of the easiest decisions the NFL has ever made.   My only concern is the possibility (even remote) that the suspension might somehow get shortened.   I heard some media type say they thought it might be possible.  I sure hope not.  This should stick.

Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:

It’s one if the dirtiest plays I’ve ever seen in football.

 

Burfect did all of the following....

 

1.  He had a 3 stride run up to hit Doyle who was defenseless.

 

2.   He lowered his head to use as a weapon.

 

3.   He targeted Doyle’s head.

 

4.  He launched himself into Doyle.

 

All four issues are highly illegal.   This was one of the easiest decisions the NFL has ever made.   My only concern is the possibility (even remote) that the suspension might somehow get shortened.   I heard some media type say they thought it might be possible.  I sure hope not.  This should stick.

Not only all of those things but he was bringing his forearm around as well.  The only thing that prevented that was Doyle's head got stopped by hitting the helmet of the second defender (an inadvertent helmet to helmet hit).

 

Basically, IMO, Burfect not only tried to take Doyle out of the game, he tried to permanently injure him.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/1/2019 at 7:10 AM, Valpo2004 said:

 

Their job is generally to appeal any suspensions no matter what the cause.  

One of the reasons unions get a bad rap.  It's not their job to appeal any suspension - it's their policy.

 

They could take a case by case approach.  But that would take work on their part to determine what is good football and what isn't.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/8/2019 at 12:28 PM, gspdx said:

One of the reasons unions get a bad rap.  It's not their job to appeal any suspension - it's their policy.

 

They could take a case by case approach.  But that would take work on their part to determine what is good football and what isn't.

 

I actually think it's a good policy.  Without that policy they would have to form a committee to specifically review everything and decide if they are going to back it or not.   Then the committee takes the heat from both sides.  This can cause disunity in their membership which would limit their leverage in negotiations.  

 

Instead let those judging the appeals determine what has merit and what doesn't.  That's their job anyways.  

 

Think of it like a criminal trial.  The union is essentially just the lawyer for the accused.  In our system when it comes to criminal matters, everyone gets a lawyer, no matter what their crime or how obvious it is that they are guilty.  

 

You don't look down on a lawyer because he's defending a person who obviously guilty of a horrible crime do you?  Just look at the union as the player's lawyer.  Even if they are horrible and obviously guilty like Burfict is, they still get a lawyer.  It's up to those judging the case to make the right call.  Not the union to decide who gets a defense and who doesn't. 

 

I don't blame OJ's lawyers for him getting away with murder.  I blame the prosecutors for presenting a poor case and the jury for not seeing the forest for the trees.  His lawyers just did their job and they where way better at their jobs than the opposition. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/8/2019 at 12:28 PM, gspdx said:

One of the reasons unions get a bad rap.  It's not their job to appeal any suspension - it's their policy.

 

They could take a case by case approach.  But that would take work on their part to determine what is good football and what isn't.

It is their job.  The union works for the members.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, jvan1973 said:

It is their job.  The union works for the members.  

Yes, but that goes back to the point made much earlier in this thread: Doyle is also a member that the union should be working for/protecting. Thus, should the union back one bad apple (Burfukt) or the multitude of other union members that he continues to try to maim? 

tumblr_mz2i1piKtM1svlvsyo7_r2_250.gifv

(....or the one.)

Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, Dogg63 said:

Yes, but that goes back to the point made much earlier in this thread: Doyle is also a member that the union should be working for/protecting. Thus, should the union back one bad apple (Burfukt) or the multitude of other union members that he continues to try to maim? 

tumblr_mz2i1piKtM1svlvsyo7_r2_250.gifv

(....or the one.)

They aren't working against doyle.   They are pleading a case for Burfict.   They know they are going to lose,   but they have to appeal.    We had a guy where I work sucker punch a fellow employee.  Knocked a tooth out.    The company obviously fired him,  but the union had to appeal.   Union members pay the union.   If they don't appeal punishments they can be sued by the member that was punished.    They have to fight unwinnable battles so they don't get sued

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, jvan1973 said:

They aren't working against doyle.   They are pleading a case for Burfict.   They know they are going to lose,   but they have to appeal.    We had a guy where I work sucker punch a fellow employee.  Knocked a tooth out.    The company obviously fired him,  but the union had to appeal.   Union members pay the union.   If they don't appeal punishments they can be sued by the member that was punished.    They have to fight unwinnable battles so they don't get sued

Yep.  It's about due process.  If due process doesn't exist for everyone, then it doesn't exist for anyone.

Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, Valpo2004 said:

 

I actually think it's a good policy.  Without that policy they would have to form a committee to specifically review everything and decide if they are going to back it or not.   Then the committee takes the heat from both sides.  This can cause disunity in their membership which would limit their leverage in negotiations.  

 

Instead let those judging the appeals determine what has merit and what doesn't.  That's their job anyways.  

 

Think of it like a criminal trial.  The union is essentially just the lawyer for the accused.  In our system when it comes to criminal matters, everyone gets a lawyer, no matter what their crime or how obvious it is that they are guilty.  

 

You don't look down on a lawyer because he's defending a person who obviously guilty of a horrible crime do you?  Just look at the union as the player's lawyer.  Even if they are horrible and obviously guilty like Burfict is, they still get a lawyer.  It's up to those judging the case to make the right call.  Not the union to decide who gets a defense and who doesn't. 

 

I don't blame OJ's lawyers for him getting away with murder.  I blame the prosecutors for presenting a poor case and the jury for not seeing the forest for the trees.  His lawyers just did their job and they where way better at their jobs than the opposition. 

 

I get it - but it is also one of the reasons unions in general get a bad rap and have lost influence.  I know way too many people who have worked for unions or around union employees and get disgusted by the union supporting scum bags that break the rules.

 

The system is imperfect, but when union members - athletes or regular workers in a union - are getting abused by other union members the union should protect the other workers also.

 

And there are many lawyers that will do anything - legal/illegal, ethical or not - to get their client "off".  I do look down on lawyers like that.  That isn't the law, that isn't justice.  That is just about winning at all costs.

Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, jvan1973 said:

They aren't working against doyle.   They are pleading a case for Burfict.   They know they are going to lose,   but they have to appeal.    We had a guy where I work sucker punch a fellow employee.  Knocked a tooth out.    The company obviously fired him,  but the union had to appeal.   Union members pay the union.   If they don't appeal punishments they can be sued by the member that was punished.    They have to fight unwinnable battles so they don't get sued

 

Could I sue the union for "backing" the guy that assaulted me in that case since the union is doing nothing to protect me?  The argument can go both ways.  If the guy assaulted someone he could easily be outside the union's protection.  

 

I am not saying I am right or anyone else is wrong - but there are many sides to these kinds of situations.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/10/2019 at 10:40 AM, gspdx said:

 

Could I sue the union for "backing" the guy that assaulted me in that case since the union is doing nothing to protect me?  The argument can go both ways.  If the guy assaulted someone he could easily be outside the union's protection.  

 

I am not saying I am right or anyone else is wrong - but there are many sides to these kinds of situations.

They aren’t saying what he did to Doyle was ok.  They are saying the NFL was too heavy handed with their punishment.  That’s the difference and again that’s what unions do.  They represent their members to their employers.  That’s who they have the issue with, not the other union member who happens to be involved.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Thread of the Week

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • I wouldn't be too disappointed.  There are several factors here, not the least of which him being thrust into the starting role 1st half of Game 1.  But he is a rook, which means he's a work in progress.  Heck even Blackmon, who everybody is slobbering over, is still a work in progress.  We just don't have a large enough body of work to say he is going to be _____.  I agree, he is missing some yards out there.  But as I stated above, I think some of that is he is just trying to establish a rhythm, find cohesion with his OL and the QB, remembering the playbook, etc.  I think he is just trying to run where the play is designed right now, maybe even being coached to do so.  None of these rooks even had a pre-season.  These things take time no matter how much we fans want them to come out and dominate week 1.  It just very rarely happens.   But the talent is there.  You can't coach speed and toughness and his yac has been one of the best in the league thus far.  And remember when everyone was questioning his receiving skills?  Not been a problem thus far.  Same with the fumbling issues.  I'm glad we have Rathman here, he is a great teacher and motivator for this RB group, and I think he will continue to develop Taylor's skills.  I would love to have Mack back but we will all just have to see on that.
    • Jim Sorgi made his money without ever having to wash his uniform. Brissett wants to play but on a junk team? Maybe he will progress this year and next to the point Reich will see him as the starter. Who knows, way too early.
    • At total of 6, one more the a few AFC teams individually. Dallas & Philly tide for first each with 2 wins.
    • Agreed.  And safety looks to be one of the strengths of the team right now.  So much so that we may not even bring back a first round pick from just a few years ago.  Blackmon has been a (I say this cautiously) revelation thus far.
  • Members

×
×
  • Create New...