Fan in Chicago Posted December 1, 2013 Posted December 1, 2013 (edited) intentional or not he should not have been standing where he was. What? the only view of the GIANT jumbotron could only be seen by standing in the FOP? That is all that matters. I dont give a flying hoot what Tomlin's reasons were or the circumstances around him not knowing his own location on the field. He was wrong and should have been flagged. Edited December 1, 2013 by Fan in Chicago
NoSaint Posted December 1, 2013 Author Posted December 1, 2013 True, but we can nonetheless make reasonable conclusions based on the facts and circumstances. Our legal system, for example, does that all the time. Just because we can't be absolutely sure what his intent was does not mean he should not be severely punished. I don't think BB argued otherwise.
mannc Posted December 1, 2013 Posted December 1, 2013 OK, tell you what, give it a try. List all the reasons you believe it was intentional. No one else is standing near Tomlin. There is no conceivable reason for him to be standing there during that play, other than to potentially interfere with the returner. The entire white area is plainly marked as a "no go" zone; it's not like he just crossed a white line. Tomlin was looking directly at Jones during the return and did not move back until Jones was almost past him, and when Jones got close to him, Tomlin's first move was to step onto the field before he moved back. Tomlin's reaction afterward also leads me to believe that he was playing games and that this was not an innocent mistake. Those are some of the things. Contrary to popular belief, the prisons are filled with people who got convicted based on circumstantial evidence. The fact that no one can read Tomlin's mind will not prevent him from getting hammered by the league.
Beerball Posted December 1, 2013 Posted December 1, 2013 No one else is standing near Tomlin. There is no conceivable reason for him to be standing there during that play, other than to potentially interfere with the returner. The entire white area is plainly marked as a "no go" zone; it's not like he just crossed a white line. Tomlin was looking directly at Jones during the return and did not move back until Jones was almost past him, and when Jones got close to him, Tomlin's first move was to step onto the field before he moved back. Tomlin's reaction afterward also leads me to believe that he was playing games and that this was not an innocent mistake. Those are some of the things. Contrary to popular belief, the prisons are filled with people who got convicted based on circumstantial evidence. The fact that no one can read Tomlin's mind will not prevent him from getting hammered by the league. Nope, didn't work. (why do people keep bringing up courtrooms and now prisons?) If you read my previous posts I do say that he deserves a hefty fine. Intent has nothing to do with that.
ExiledInIllinois Posted December 1, 2013 Posted December 1, 2013 No one else is standing near Tomlin. There is no conceivable reason for him to be standing there during that play, other than to potentially interfere with the returner. The entire white area is plainly marked as a "no go" zone; it's not like he just crossed a white line. Tomlin was looking directly at Jones during the return and did not move back until Jones was almost past him, and when Jones got close to him, Tomlin's first move was to step onto the field before he moved back. Tomlin's reaction afterward also leads me to believe that he was playing games and that this was not an innocent mistake. Those are some of the things. Contrary to popular belief, the prisons are filled with people who got convicted based on circumstantial evidence. The fact that no one can read Tomlin's mind will not prevent him from getting hammered by the league. No. I explained above a valid reason why he was standing away from the group. 12 came to him. He's not going to move. He's got a wireless headset... He can break away from the chaos of the sideline group and run the show in peace out there. Honestly, I thinks he looks weak if he immediately turns to the play and moves... He's "Joe Cool." The League will hammer him though.
l< j Posted December 1, 2013 Posted December 1, 2013 No. I explained above a valid reason why he was standing away from the group. 12 came to him. He's not going to move. He's got a wireless headset... He can break away from the chaos of the sideline group and run the show in peace out there. That's a reason. I wouldn't call it valid, though. More of a rationalization. Intent doesn't matter. Big fine and/or suspension and he will intend to be away from the play for the rest of his coaching career. Can't have someone other than the 22 players impacting the game in this way. No gray area for me. kj
Chef Jim Posted December 1, 2013 Posted December 1, 2013 No one else is standing near Tomlin. There is no conceivable reason for him to be standing there during that play, other than to potentially interfere with the returner. No coach has EVER been standing on the white sideline without having malicious intent. No, not ever. Good job Sherlock.
mannc Posted December 1, 2013 Posted December 1, 2013 Nope, didn't work. (why do people keep bringing up courtrooms and now prisons?) If you read my previous posts I do say that he deserves a hefty fine. Intent has nothing to do with that. That's fine. We disagree about what his intent was, but intent does matter. Don't you think the league would come down harder on Tomlin if after the game he admitted trying to interfere with Jones? As it is, the league has to infer Tomlin's intent from his actions. And by the way, we should be clear what we mean by intent. Is it intent to interfere with the play, or is it intent to occupy a spot in the white, no-go zone? Hard to believe Tomlin did not have the latter intent, wouldn't you agree?
ExiledInIllinois Posted December 1, 2013 Posted December 1, 2013 That's a reason. I wouldn't call it valid, though. More of a rationalization. Intent doesn't matter. Big fine and/or suspension and he will intend to be away from the play for the rest of his coaching career. Can't have someone other than the 22 players impacting the game in this way. No gray area for me. kj Fair enough... I am all for whacking him for his coolness! It is Pitt! Take a draft pick too!
BADOLBILZ Posted December 1, 2013 Posted December 1, 2013 So its all the talk in the football world - what do you all think? As hard as the NFL punishes people for things that have no bearing on what happens on the field......this should rightfully be heavily disciplined. Tomlin is lucky that no other head coach has ever been so bold/unaware(depending on your take) that they physically influenced a play like that. As a head coach, he needs to be well above anything like that ever happening. It should be more than a monetary fine.....it needs to be an organizational fine and short of being in the millions of dollars a fine alone isn't a deterrent from someone ever doing the same when their season is on the line.
Bufcomments Posted December 1, 2013 Posted December 1, 2013 On the Bell hit: I don't know if this came into play during the review of the TD, or in the writing of the rule and the subsequent training of the refs wrt its enforcement, but I think the NFL is fine with having no "wiggle room" so that it can never come back to bite them. By that I mean that in any subsequent litigation, the NFL can claim that they are crystal clear as far as leaving no calls regarding player safety as judgment calls. "Just giving it to him," even though that would seem to reflect the spirit of the play, would signify an instance where they strayed from the letter of the law. Any instance like that could be used as "evidence" that player safety exists on a slippery slope, and that's not a perception that the NFL wants, at least as far as how its rules are enforced. Personally, I think Bell's TD should've counted, as it's not like he made a choice to continue his progress into the end zone. However, I don't think there is a way to write a rule that would allow for that and that allows for the NFL to maintain its alleged hard stance on player safety. well said and I agree
ExiledInIllinois Posted December 1, 2013 Posted December 1, 2013 (edited) As hard as the NFL punishes people for things that have no bearing on what happens on the field......this should rightfully be heavily disciplined. Tomlin is lucky that no other head coach has ever been so bold/unaware(depending on your take) that they physically influenced a play like that. As a head coach, he needs to be well above anything like that ever happening. It should be more than a monetary fine.....it needs to be an organizational fine and short of being in the millions of dollars a fine alone isn't a deterrent from someone ever doing the same when their season is on the line. Did you see The Chin/Jaw (Cowher) on Fox? Boy did he look grumpy when Sharpe called him out and showed vid clip of what he did as coach. What are they putting in the water in Shittsburgh? It passed to Tomlin... Edited December 1, 2013 by ExiledInIllinois
Mr. WEO Posted December 1, 2013 Posted December 1, 2013 From pft: Adam Schefter of ESPN reports that the NFL is considering a six-figure fine for the Steelers and Tomlin. Per multiple reports, there’s also a chance that the league will strip one or more draft picks from the Steelers. Multiple picks? This is ridiculous
ExiledInIllinois Posted December 1, 2013 Posted December 1, 2013 While they are @ they should go back and upgrade the Pats* penalty for acting like cheating douchebags. I say three picks each. Don't cheat.
Shoto Posted December 1, 2013 Posted December 1, 2013 At least he didn't pull a Woody Hayes and punch the player.
NoSaint Posted December 1, 2013 Author Posted December 1, 2013 Multiple picks? This is ridiculous I've heard rumblings elsewhere that the league was reviewing past tape to see if he's found himself in similar spots on big returns before, as well as how he ended up there Thursday - if they decide they can find it intentional and this was the first time it "worked" I wouldn't be opposed to picks at all. If they have no strong feelings on said intent, I'm not sure how far I'm ok with them going.
ExiledInIllinois Posted December 1, 2013 Posted December 1, 2013 I've heard rumblings elsewhere that the league was reviewing past tape to see if he's found himself in similar spots on big returns before, as well as how he ended up there Thursday - if they decide they can find it intentional and this was the first time it "worked" I wouldn't be opposed to picks at all. If they have no strong feelings on said intent, I'm not sure how far I'm ok with them going. Those tapes are burned... Oh wait, another group of cheaters! My bad!
Mr. WEO Posted December 1, 2013 Posted December 1, 2013 I've heard rumblings elsewhere that the league was reviewing past tape to see if he's found himself in similar spots on big returns before, as well as how he ended up there Thursday - if they decide they can find it intentional and this was the first time it "worked" I wouldn't be opposed to picks at all. If they have no strong feelings on said intent, I'm not sure how far I'm ok with them going. There was no contact and it didn't change the outcome of the game (Steelers lose). The league can't legitimately go back to see where he stood in the past if they never had a problem with it in the past (not previously penalized) and now decide his intent and take away picks. Rooney will simply provide 100 video clips of every coach in the league regularly standing well into the white zone or even the field during plays. This is being totally overblown.
NoSaint Posted December 1, 2013 Author Posted December 1, 2013 There was no contact and it didn't change the outcome of the game (Steelers lose). The league can't legitimately go back to see where he stood in the past if they never had a problem with it in the past (not previously penalized) and now decide his intent and take away picks. Rooney will simply provide 100 video clips of every coach in the league regularly standing well into the white zone or even the field during plays. This is being totally overblown. I think your understating the importance of the sanctity of the boundary and sideline personnel entering the play. If he did go out there and made intentional contact your discussing LONG term suspension, or possible ban in my book. If he was out there trying to distract its still a major deal.
Mr. WEO Posted December 1, 2013 Posted December 1, 2013 I think your understating the importance of the sanctity of the boundary and sideline personnel entering the play. If he did go out there and made intentional contact your discussing LONG term suspension, or possible ban in my book. If he was out there trying to distract its still a major deal. Yeah but there was no contact, so the league would say he's a liar regarding intent if they took away picks. It's just a wildly disproportionate penalty for what he did. He will get a fine and everyone will forget this atrocity in a week.
Recommended Posts