Myles
-
So, Troy... wasn't the ripping on Garrett's helmet, kicks to Garrett's groin.. an "escalation" ???
Wasn't Garrett, allowing himself to be restrained with no animosity towards DeCastro, and pulled away from sissy mason....
the victim of sissy mason's attacking Garrett AGAIN? Is not the latter ANOTHER RE-ESCALATION ?
And why, if Ogunjobi gets suspended one game for a re-escalation...why not sissy mason?
For the integrity? of the NFL, I believe somebody needs to ask Troy Vincent just what the hell is going on with his logic of not suspending sissy mason, who STARTED the entire fiasco, who RE-ESCALATED the entire fiasco.
No freaking wonder refs aren't held accountable, eh, Troy?
****************************************
part of my beef is, the serious lack of fairness. Ogunjobi - suspended for one game for an action they called "re-escaltion".
So why...in...the...hell..... isn't what sissy mason did, in going after Garrett again... not deescalation???
It's a simple freaking good question. Try answering it, instead of bitching some smart ass stuff at me.
See my previous post. I think you bring up some fair questions ...which I think I have addressed there a bit.
I mean, I hate to keep harping on about how this would be handled in a court of law.....but as I said, in a court the arbiter cannot be whimsical. He must take into account all factors. Certainly the egregious actions of the accused must be dealt with....but those other factors of provocation and victim impact would also be required to be taken into consideration. But not, apparently, by the NFL.
-
The NFL is all about $$$$$$$$$$. It's gotten far, far worse these days. The refs are showing favoritism towards superbowl teams that make a lot of money. I don't see any other explanation for the incredible contradictions and flagrant no-calls. It all comes down to what team the players play for, so much of the time. But it isn't only the Browns...
From 2010:
"Josh Cribbs of the Browns suffered a concussion on a helmet-to-helmet hit by James Harrison of the Steelers on Sunday. No flag was thrown. Later in the same contest, Mohamed Massaquoi of the Browns left the field with a head injury after a helmet-to-helmet hit by Harrison. No flag. DeSean Jackson of the Eagles sustained a "severe" concussion on a flagrant helmet-to-helmet hit by Dunta Robinson of Atlanta. Robinson was flagged but not ejected, as he should have been. (Robinson left the game with his own concussion, but disqualification sends a much stronger message about behavior than just a penalty.) Zack Follett of Detroit lay motionless for several minutes on the field after a helmet-to-helmet hit by Jason Pierre-Paul of the Giants. No flag. Sam Bradford's helmet was knocked off by a helmet-to-helmet hit by Kevin Burnett of San Diego. No flag. "
That, folks - is pittsburg...and Atlanta....and the Giants. ALL SUPERBOWL TEAMS. Even San Diego..long past, though...Superbowl team.........
then there's the old hit on Josh Cribbs. The fumble stood..meaning...NO FLAG?
https://www.sbnation.com/nfl/2012/9/27/3420734/josh-cribbs-hit-browns-ravens-game
Cribbs was already being tackled, for God's sakes. Yep. Ratbuzzards- Superbowl team.
-
so am I. But I'm also intelligent - i also hate the steelers and how they get away with garbage. I never once excused Garrett at all.
What do you call a freakin pro nfl qb that throws a hissy fit over being legally sacked on the last play of a game, tries to rip off the helmet of the great DE who just easily sacked him cleanly, and tries to scratch his eyes out??? whatever, and then kicks the DE in the groin twice WHILE THE DE IS BEING RESTRAINED, then after that, said quarterback goes after to punch the DE AGAIN, while the DE is still being RESTRAINED?
I'll delete my other post that got moved and buried... read this:
*********************************************
I have a few questions for Troy Vincent, NFL guy who decided punishments.
"Vincent also explained his thinking on suspending Browns defensive end Larry Ogunjobi, who ran up to a stationery Rudolph from behind and shoved him to the ground just moments after he had been struck in the head by Garrett with the helmet. Rudolph had already suffered one concussion this season, when he was knocked out cold by Earl Thomas in the Ravens games last month. He missed one game with it.
"This is an individual who, in our view, was going out of his way to escalate this situation," Vincent said. "This is an action that could start another melee. It is a potential re-escalation."
**********************************************************
So, Troy... wasn't the ripping on Garrett's helmet, kicks to Garrett's groin.. an "escalation" ???
Wasn't Garrett, allowing himself to be restrained with no animosity towards DeCastro, and pulled away from sissy mason....
the victim of sissy mason's attacking Garrett AGAIN? Is not the latter ANOTHER RE-ESCALATION ?
And why, if Ogunjobi gets suspended one game for a re-escalation...why not sissy mason?
For the integrity? of the NFL, I believe somebody needs to ask Troy Vincent just what the hell is going on with his logic of not suspending sissy mason, who STARTED the entire fiasco, who RE-ESCALATED the entire fiasco.
No freaking wonder refs aren't held accountable, eh, Troy?
****************************************
part of my beef is, the serious lack of fairness. Ogunjobi - suspended for one game for an action they called "re-escaltion".
So why...in...the...hell..... isn't what sissy mason did, in going after Garrett again... not deescalation???
It's a simple freaking good question. Try answering it, instead of bitching some smart ass stuff at me.
*********************************************
Fact, the guy that started it all, mason is a white dude and got a fine. You saw the video. The three that got suspended are all brothers. Might seem fair to roger but not me.
Fact, the guy that started it all, mason is a white dude and got a fine. You saw the video. The three that got suspended are all brothers. Might seem fair to roger but not me.
Well....I would say that that would be considered a wholly extraneous, irrelevant factor. It would NOT be given any credence....in a real court. But as I said, this is not a real court. And obviously if they are going to make their decisions based on optics....the fact that the person that provoked the encounter....and escalated it (which is a fair argument)....is white, and the people who all suffer from the consequences of his action are black, ....well, lets just say it is a nefarious, but perhaps useful tactic.
I do not however think that Cal's interstitial argument that team's that have been in Super Bowl's get preference is at all a factor.
-
So, Troy... wasn't the ripping on Garrett's helmet, kicks to Garrett's groin.. an "escalation" ???
Wasn't Garrett, allowing himself to be restrained with no animosity towards DeCastro, and pulled away from sissy mason....
the victim of sissy mason's attacking Garrett AGAIN? Is not the latter ANOTHER RE-ESCALATION ?
And why, if Ogunjobi gets suspended one game for a re-escalation...why not sissy mason?
For the integrity? of the NFL, I believe somebody needs to ask Troy Vincent just what the hell is going on with his logic of not suspending sissy mason, who STARTED the entire fiasco, who RE-ESCALATED the entire fiasco.
No freaking wonder refs aren't held accountable, eh, Troy?
****************************************
part of my beef is, the serious lack of fairness. Ogunjobi - suspended for one game for an action they called "re-escaltion".
So why...in...the...hell..... isn't what sissy mason did, in going after Garrett again... not deescalation???
It's a simple freaking good question. Try answering it, instead of bitching some smart ass stuff at me.
See my previous post. I think you bring up some fair questions ...which I think I have addressed there a bit.
I mean, I hate to keep harping on about how this would be handled in a court of law.....but as I said, in a court the arbiter cannot be whimsical. He must take into account all factors. Certainly the egregious actions of the accused must be dealt with....but those other factors of provocation and victim impact would also be required to be taken into consideration. But not, apparently, by the NFL.
So, Troy... wasn't the ripping on Garrett's helmet, kicks to Garrett's groin.. an "escalation" ???
Wasn't Garrett, allowing himself to be restrained with no animosity towards DeCastro, and pulled away from sissy mason....
the victim of sissy mason's attacking Garrett AGAIN? Is not the latter ANOTHER RE-ESCALATION ?
And why, if Ogunjobi gets suspended one game for a re-escalation...why not sissy mason?
For the integrity? of the NFL, I believe somebody needs to ask Troy Vincent just what the hell is going on with his logic of not suspending sissy mason, who STARTED the entire fiasco, who RE-ESCALATED the entire fiasco.
No freaking wonder refs aren't held accountable, eh, Troy?
****************************************
part of my beef is, the serious lack of fairness. Ogunjobi - suspended for one game for an action they called "re-escaltion".
So why...in...the...hell..... isn't what sissy mason did, in going after Garrett again... not deescalation???
It's a simple freaking good question. Try answering it, instead of bitching some smart ass stuff at me.
See my previous post. I think you bring up some fair questions ...which I think I have addressed there a bit.
I mean, I hate to keep harping on about how this would be handled in a court of law.....but as I said, in a court the arbiter cannot be whimsical. He must take into account all factors. Certainly the egregious actions of the accused must be dealt with....but those other factors of provocation and victim impact would also be required to be taken into consideration. But not, apparently, by the NFL.
My Wife recorded "Tailgate 19" - with Bob Golic, Eric Metcalf, Josh Cribbs, and Tony Zarella. I love listening to these guys. Cribbs said the suspension can't stand upon review, and the question was raised about a lawsuit. Cribbs is a very smart guy - he said bring it on, because in a court of law, the instigator is the assaulter, and clearly that was, obviously, Rudolph. He said it was football - Garrett had every right to sack him, and as Golic noted, Garrett went way, way careful to not land on him, and had Rudolph land on him instead, to not draw a penalty, etc and then the qb went ballistic. My paraphrase.
-
Fact, the guy that started it all, mason is a white dude and got a fine. You saw the video. The three that got suspended are all brothers. Might seem fair to roger but not me.
Well....I would say that that would be considered a wholly extraneous, irrelevant factor. It would NOT be given any credence....in a real court. But as I said, this is not a real court. And obviously if they are going to make their decisions based on optics....the fact that the person that provoked the encounter....and escalated it (which is a fair argument)....is white, and the people who all suffer from the consequences of his action are black, ....well, lets just say it is a nefarious, but perhaps useful tactic.
I do not however think that Cal's interstitial argument that team's that have been in Super Bowl's get preference is at all a factor.
Well....I would say that that would be considered a wholly extraneous, irrelevant factor. It would NOT be given any credence....in a real court. But as I said, this is not a real court. And obviously if they are going to make their decisions based on optics....the fact that the person that provoked the encounter....and escalated it (which is a fair argument)....is white, and the people who all suffer from the consequences of his action are black, ....well, lets just say it is a nefarious, but perhaps useful tactic.
I do not however think that Cal's interstitial argument that team's that have been in Super Bowl's get preference is at all a factor.
I don't think race plays any part in it at all. I do see some circumstantial evidence of superbowl team favoritism.
"interstitial" ??? I have a huge vocabulary but.... I had to go look up the definition of that one. LOL. and I still don't understand....
-
One thing about it, this has the possibility to forge this team like few things can..... it can also do the opposite too, as that knife cuts both ways.
The dudes in the locker room are no different than their fans and while they're pissed and disappointed of Myles, they may be even more pissed at Rudolph, the NFL and the world..... We'll all know really soon if they've become forged, or shattered.
Maybe this was Myles' ingenious plan all along?
Too soon?
-
So, Troy... wasn't the ripping on Garrett's helmet, kicks to Garrett's groin.. an "escalation" ???
Wasn't Garrett, allowing himself to be restrained with no animosity towards DeCastro, and pulled away from sissy mason....
the victim of sissy mason's attacking Garrett AGAIN? Is not the latter ANOTHER RE-ESCALATION ?
And why, if Ogunjobi gets suspended one game for a re-escalation...why not sissy mason?
For the integrity? of the NFL, I believe somebody needs to ask Troy Vincent just what the hell is going on with his logic of not suspending sissy mason, who STARTED the entire fiasco, who RE-ESCALATED the entire fiasco.
No freaking wonder refs aren't held accountable, eh, Troy?
****************************************
part of my beef is, the serious lack of fairness. Ogunjobi - suspended for one game for an action they called "re-escaltion".
So why...in...the...hell..... isn't what sissy mason did, in going after Garrett again... not deescalation???
It's a simple freaking good question. Try answering it, instead of bitching some smart ass stuff at me.
See my previous post. I think you bring up some fair questions ...which I think I have addressed there a bit.
I mean, I hate to keep harping on about how this would be handled in a court of law.....but as I said, in a court the arbiter cannot be whimsical. He must take into account all factors. Certainly the egregious actions of the accused must be dealt with....but those other factors of provocation and victim impact would also be required to be taken into consideration. But not, apparently, by the NFL.
My Wife recorded "Tailgate 19" - with Bob Golic, Eric Metcalf, Josh Cribbs, and Tony Zarella. I love listening to these guys. Cribbs said the suspension can't stand upon review, and the question was raised about a lawsuit. Cribbs is a very smart guy - he said bring it on, because in a court of law, the instigator is the assaulter, and clearly that was, obviously, Rudolph. He said it was football - Garrett had every right to sack him, and as Golic noted, Garrett went way, way careful to not land on him, and had Rudolph land on him instead, to not draw a penalty, etc and then the qb went ballistic. My paraphrase.
My Wife recorded "Tailgate 19" - with Bob Golic, Eric Metcalf, Josh Cribbs, and Tony Zarella. I love listening to these guys. Cribbs said the suspension can't stand upon review, and the question was raised about a lawsuit. Cribbs is a very smart guy - he said bring it on, because in a court of law, the instigator is the assaulter, and clearly that was, obviously, Rudolph. He said it was football - Garrett had every right to sack him, and as Golic noted, Garrett went way, way careful to not land on him, and had Rudolph land on him instead, to not draw a penalty, etc and then the qb went ballistic. My paraphrase.
Garrett should have landed on him......and crushed his arse. I mean....it was like the last play of the game! What would happen? Were the Steelers going to score two TDs in 8 second?
I guess he didn't want to get fined....(how did that work out?) Another question: does the league somehow hold it against you if you have multiple roughing the passer penalties? Did Garrett like not to want to hit some sort of imposed limit on such a thing?
-
Well....I would say that that would be considered a wholly extraneous, irrelevant factor. It would NOT be given any credence....in a real court. But as I said, this is not a real court. And obviously if they are going to make their decisions based on optics....the fact that the person that provoked the encounter....and escalated it (which is a fair argument)....is white, and the people who all suffer from the consequences of his action are black, ....well, lets just say it is a nefarious, but perhaps useful tactic.
I do not however think that Cal's interstitial argument that team's that have been in Super Bowl's get preference is at all a factor.
I don't think race plays any part in it at all. I do see some circumstantial evidence of superbowl team favoritism.
"interstitial" ??? I have a huge vocabulary but.... I had to go look up the definition of that one. LOL. and I still don't understand....
I don't think race plays any part in it at all. I do see some circumstantial evidence of superbowl team favoritism.
"interstitial" ??? I have a huge vocabulary but.... I had to go look up the definition of that one. LOL. and I still don't understand....
It simply means putting something in between something else.
Maybe a better word, and perhaps the one I was really thinking of was "interpose"
-
So, Troy... wasn't the ripping on Garrett's helmet, kicks to Garrett's groin.. an "escalation" ???
Wasn't Garrett, allowing himself to be restrained with no animosity towards DeCastro, and pulled away from sissy mason....
the victim of sissy mason's attacking Garrett AGAIN? Is not the latter ANOTHER RE-ESCALATION ?
And why, if Ogunjobi gets suspended one game for a re-escalation...why not sissy mason?
For the integrity? of the NFL, I believe somebody needs to ask Troy Vincent just what the hell is going on with his logic of not suspending sissy mason, who STARTED the entire fiasco, who RE-ESCALATED the entire fiasco.
No freaking wonder refs aren't held accountable, eh, Troy?
****************************************
part of my beef is, the serious lack of fairness. Ogunjobi - suspended for one game for an action they called "re-escaltion".
So why...in...the...hell..... isn't what sissy mason did, in going after Garrett again... not deescalation???
It's a simple freaking good question. Try answering it, instead of bitching some smart ass stuff at me.
See my previous post. I think you bring up some fair questions ...which I think I have addressed there a bit.
I mean, I hate to keep harping on about how this would be handled in a court of law.....but as I said, in a court the arbiter cannot be whimsical. He must take into account all factors. Certainly the egregious actions of the accused must be dealt with....but those other factors of provocation and victim impact would also be required to be taken into consideration. But not, apparently, by the NFL.
My Wife recorded "Tailgate 19" - with Bob Golic, Eric Metcalf, Josh Cribbs, and Tony Zarella. I love listening to these guys. Cribbs said the suspension can't stand upon review, and the question was raised about a lawsuit. Cribbs is a very smart guy - he said bring it on, because in a court of law, the instigator is the assaulter, and clearly that was, obviously, Rudolph. He said it was football - Garrett had every right to sack him, and as Golic noted, Garrett went way, way careful to not land on him, and had Rudolph land on him instead, to not draw a penalty, etc and then the qb went ballistic. My paraphrase.
My Wife recorded "Tailgate 19" - with Bob Golic, Eric Metcalf, Josh Cribbs, and Tony Zarella. I love listening to these guys. Cribbs said the suspension can't stand upon review, and the question was raised about a lawsuit. Cribbs is a very smart guy - he said bring it on, because in a court of law, the instigator is the assaulter, and clearly that was, obviously, Rudolph. He said it was football - Garrett had every right to sack him, and as Golic noted, Garrett went way, way careful to not land on him, and had Rudolph land on him instead, to not draw a penalty, etc and then the qb went ballistic. My paraphrase.
The instigator was the assaulter which would be a consideration. And Not only did he instigate he pursued Garrett later as Garrett was retreating.
Did Cribbs mention Garrett’s use of reasonable force the question would be did Garrett use reasonable force to protect himself from round two of the assault?
Garrett was faced with the following:
-two on one fight he was being subdued by one individual and the threat of attack was coming. Garrett was already assaulted by Rudolph it would be reasonable for Garrett to believe he was going to be assaulted again- he’s justified in protecting himself but The question hinges upon: Was his show of force excessive given the circumstances?
-
One thing about it, this has the possibility to forge this team like few things can..... it can also do the opposite too, as that knife cuts both ways.
The dudes in the locker room are no different than their fans and while they're pissed and disappointed of Myles, they may be even more pissed at Rudolph, the NFL and the world..... We'll all know really soon if they've become forged, or shattered.
Maybe this was Myles' ingenious plan all along?
Too soon?
One thing about it, this has the possibility to forge this team like few things can..... it can also do the opposite too, as that knife cuts both ways.
The dudes in the locker room are no different than their fans and while they're pissed and disappointed of Myles, they may be even more pissed at Rudolph, the NFL and the world..... We'll all know really soon if they've become forged, or shattered.
Maybe this was Myles' ingenious plan all along?
Too soon?
So he planned to also get fined, suspended and labeled for the remainder of his career? And now right or wrong he’s a target to every official. All in the name of spurring a run to the playoffs where we would meet our glorious end quickly by some stupid penalty or ill timed Freddie play call.
-
Posting in this thread because some may not have seen this in the game thread.
Second-by-second analysis of the Garrett video
Worth a read regardless of your judgement.. you are guaranteed to learn something new if you read it all the way through.
-
Posting in this thread because some may not have seen this in the game thread.
Second-by-second analysis of the Garrett video
Worth a read regardless of your judgement.. you are guaranteed to learn something new if you read it all the way through.
Posting in this thread because some may not have seen this in the game thread.
Second-by-second analysis of the Garrett video
Worth a read regardless of your judgement.. you are guaranteed to learn something new if you read it all the way through.
Good read thanks.
-
And for that reason, I find it funny, in a 3 Stooges kind of way. Luckily, no one was seriously hurt, but it could have gone very bad, but it didn't. ?
Precisely....it did NOT go bad at all. It just LOOKED bad.....we all agree on that.
But the NFL does not seem to know the difference (in legal terms) between intention and reality.
Certainly I have seen it in a number of situations. Take Domestic Violence. A man...or a woman, can get enraged at their spouse....and do something stupid like swing at that other person...or use some household device as a makeshift weapon.....a rolling pin? frying pan...whatever. If the makeshit weapon is swung, and just a glancing blow occurs that causes no real harm or injury, that doe NOT excuse the action.....but the fact that the victim is not hurt at all or seriously hurt absolutely affects what the actual charges would be that are brought...and would absolutely affect the punishment that is administered. In a proper legal setting, that is. But, as we know, the NFL disciplinary process is basically a kangaroo court....the punishment being based purely on the whim of the person who applies it. In many or most circumstances there are no guidelines. Or if there are, they have come by them with great difficulty, and even then, those guidelines may not be adhered to.
Precisely....it did NOT go bad at all. It just LOOKED bad.....we all agree on that.
But the NFL does not seem to know the difference (in legal terms) between intention and reality.
Certainly I have seen it in a number of situations. Take Domestic Violence. A man...or a woman, can get enraged at their spouse....and do something stupid like swing at that other person...or use some household device as a makeshift weapon.....a rolling pin? frying pan...whatever. If the makeshit weapon is swung, and just a glancing blow occurs that causes no real harm or injury, that doe NOT excuse the action.....but the fact that the victim is not hurt at all or seriously hurt absolutely affects what the actual charges would be that are brought...and would absolutely affect the punishment that is administered. In a proper legal setting, that is. But, as we know, the NFL disciplinary process is basically a kangaroo court....the punishment being based purely on the whim of the person who applies it. In many or most circumstances there are no guidelines. Or if there are, they have come by them with great difficulty, and even then, those guidelines may not be adhered to.
In short, there are little "standards" and it's really just Roger reacting to what the owners want. People forget: His enormous salary ($31. mill a year) is PAID FOR by the owners and they give him his marching orders, way too many fans think these decisions are all on Roger himself. They are not. He does what the owners tell him to do, trying to make as many as possible happy with him. But the owners love Roger taking the heat for what they want, and most fans buy into him being the primary decision maker on unpopular policies.
-
My Wife recorded "Tailgate 19" - with Bob Golic, Eric Metcalf, Josh Cribbs, and Tony Zarella. I love listening to these guys. Cribbs said the suspension can't stand upon review, and the question was raised about a lawsuit. Cribbs is a very smart guy - he said bring it on, because in a court of law, the instigator is the assaulter, and clearly that was, obviously, Rudolph. He said it was football - Garrett had every right to sack him, and as Golic noted, Garrett went way, way careful to not land on him, and had Rudolph land on him instead, to not draw a penalty, etc and then the qb went ballistic. My paraphrase.
Garrett should have landed on him......and crushed his arse. I mean....it was like the last play of the game! What would happen? Were the Steelers going to score two TDs in 8 second?
I guess he didn't want to get fined....(how did that work out?) Another question: does the league somehow hold it against you if you have multiple roughing the passer penalties? Did Garrett like not to want to hit some sort of imposed limit on such a thing?
Garrett should have landed on him......and crushed his arse. I mean....it was like the last play of the game! What would happen? Were the Steelers going to score two TDs in 8 second?
I guess he didn't want to get fined....(how did that work out?) Another question: does the league somehow hold it against you if you have multiple roughing the passer penalties? Did Garrett like not to want to hit some sort of imposed limit on such a thing?
Garret, of course, was talked to about the landing on crap- which has been done for decades..... so Garrett tried desperately to cleanly sack him. Rudolph the Pink-nosed Peabrain threw a hissy fit. I still suspect....doot doot dooooo..... it was planned by the squeaders trashy tomlin.
Who, btw, Kitchens and co. OUTCOACHED hUGELY and KICKED TOMLIN and CO.'s arse.
Ergo, the provocation by the urine stained pukesburg qb again and again until Garrett made his mistake.
Advantage, squealers when they play the Browns in two weeks.
-
My Wife recorded "Tailgate 19" - with Bob Golic, Eric Metcalf, Josh Cribbs, and Tony Zarella. I love listening to these guys. Cribbs said the suspension can't stand upon review, and the question was raised about a lawsuit. Cribbs is a very smart guy - he said bring it on, because in a court of law, the instigator is the assaulter, and clearly that was, obviously, Rudolph. He said it was football - Garrett had every right to sack him, and as Golic noted, Garrett went way, way careful to not land on him, and had Rudolph land on him instead, to not draw a penalty, etc and then the qb went ballistic. My paraphrase.
The instigator was the assaulter which would be a consideration. And Not only did he instigate he pursued Garrett later as Garrett was retreating.
Did Cribbs mention Garrett’s use of reasonable force the question would be did Garrett use reasonable force to protect himself from round two of the assault?
Garrett was faced with the following:
-two on one fight he was being subdued by one individual and the threat of attack was coming. Garrett was already assaulted by Rudolph it would be reasonable for Garrett to believe he was going to be assaulted again- he’s justified in protecting himself but The question hinges upon: Was his show of force excessive given the circumstances?
The instigator was the assaulter which would be a consideration. And Not only did he instigate he pursued Garrett later as Garrett was retreating.
Did Cribbs mention Garrett’s use of reasonable force the question would be did Garrett use reasonable force to protect himself from round two of the assault?
Garrett was faced with the following:
-two on one fight he was being subdued by one individual and the threat of attack was coming. Garrett was already assaulted by Rudolph it would be reasonable for Garrett to believe he was going to be assaulted again- he’s justified in protecting himself but The question hinges upon: Was his show of force excessive given the circumstances?
Being restrained put Garrett at a serious disadvantage when rudolph charged him the last time. Garrett could have gotten an injured eye, broken nose, or his nuts damaged. I wish Garrett had dropped the helmet, grabbed rudolph by the jaw...and head butted him in the nose in self defense. Ok, so... maybe better, grabbed him by the wrist and spun him around like Shirley Temple in an old movie...
-
In case no one saw the Myles Garrett spoofiness in Saturday Night Live. It’s towards the end.
-
In case no one saw the Myles Garrett spoofiness in Saturday Night Live. It’s towards the end.
In case no one saw the Myles Garrett spoofiness in Saturday Night Live. It’s towards the end.
Remember when SNL was at least a little funny?
-
In case no one saw the Myles Garrett spoofiness in Saturday Night Live. It’s towards the end.
Remember when SNL was at least a little funny?
-
Browns' Garrett to appeal, taking shot at junk defense
https://sports.yahoo.com/browns-garrett-appeal-taking-shot-203246115.html
According to ESPN's Jeremy Fowler, Garrett intends to argue he was provoked by a shot to the groin from Pittsburgh Steelers quarterback Mason Rudolph.
-
You know, l literally typed “it’s not really that funny” but backspaced it. And yes, l do remember when it was funny. I did chuckle at the fainting woman. A latin phrase...
Yea, like most times they pull off a skit that borders on funny (due to something in the news that's funny) you can be rest-assured there won't be anything funny in the remainder of the show. I don't know how it's on the air, I know almost no one who watches it.
Oh, and the stuff they did on Tebow, back when he was taking Denver by storm, was funny, but rest of shows still sucked.
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better 💗
Register Login