Good description, LB. And I'll buy that the judgement could be "unnecessary roughness". I will not buy the shot to the head or with the head judgement.Lord_Byron wrote:Basically, officials have the "unnecessary roughness" rule at their disposal for cases just like this.HuskieDan wrote:I'll say it again - it was a bad call. Smith wasn't going for his head and he did not lead with his head. He was trying to separate the ball from the man, not tackle him. That's what safeties do - Ronnie Lott would have been proud.
Player intent doesn't need to enter into the equation. The only thing that matters is did the player use unnecesary force against a defenseless player? In many cases it will prevent escalation an retaliatory hits by the opponent.
The play in question could have gone either way. If it hadn't been called, we wouldn't be going back to it today. The fact that it was called, doesn't make it a cheap-shot, or indict either the player or the NIU program. The hit was done in the heat of the moment, but it was a perfectly acceptable call.
A question about Smith's hit on Chuck...
drama major?This will be an interesting exercise.....
Flip on the copy of the game (that you swore you'll never watch). Forward until about 10:15 left in the fourth quarter. Wolfe runs the ball for about 6 yards, and takes a vicious hit to the head by a BG defender running head first at him. The commentators give a "YOW!" when they see Wolfe's head snap back.
Now, compare that to Smith's hit. Let me know which is more a violation of the rule.
Flip on the copy of the game (that you swore you'll never watch). Forward until about 10:15 left in the fourth quarter. Wolfe runs the ball for about 6 yards, and takes a vicious hit to the head by a BG defender running head first at him. The commentators give a "YOW!" when they see Wolfe's head snap back.
Now, compare that to Smith's hit. Let me know which is more a violation of the rule.
HuskieDan wrote:This will be an interesting exercise.....
Flip on the copy of the game (that you swore you'll never watch). Forward until about 10:15 left in the fourth quarter. Wolfe runs the ball for about 6 yards, and takes a vicious hit to the head by a BG defender running head first at him. The commentators give a "YOW!" when they see Wolfe's head snap back.
Now, compare that to Smith's hit. Let me know which is more a violation of the rule.
The rule is that you cannot go up high on a receiver in a "defenseless position" This rule doesn't apply to a running back in any way. Watch Sunday's Browns-Giants game, there was a hit called this way against both teams. You just cannot go after a defenseless WR up high. If you're going to hit him you take his legs out from under him. I've watched a lot of football and know that they'll make that call 9 times outta 10. Not saying I necessarily agree with the thought, but its the way its called in both college & NFL. Had your boy made that hit on a Sunday he woulda been mailing a check to the league office on Monday morning as well as the 15 yards.
