Dan Posted October 6, 2008 Posted October 6, 2008 I thought it was borderline illegal if not illegal, but not so much for leading with the helmet as getting him off the ground and then pile driving him with all of his weight into the turf.QBs that are throwing the ball are vulnerable to that because they can't brace themselves for the hit. I thought he intentionally took advantage of that to get him off his feet and to drive him into the turf. That is simply not necessary to tackle him had he pulled the ball in instead of throwing it. I'm not going to be pissed if they don't fine him, but I won't feel bad for him if they do. That's what I see. He clearly leaves the ground and seems to drive Trent into the ground not to mention the ball was thrown and the dude in no way tried to pull up. Definitely a viscous-looking hit. I've seen far milder hits draw a flag every week it seems; in the Pitt/Jag game tonight, for example. I'd be shocked if there's a fine though.
BuffaloBob Posted October 6, 2008 Posted October 6, 2008 That's what I see. He clearly leaves the ground and seems to drive Trent into the ground not to mention the ball was thrown and the dude in no way tried to pull up. Definitely a viscous-looking hit. I've seen far milder hits draw a flag every week it seems; in the Pitt/Jag game tonight, for example. I'd be shocked if there's a fine though. I don't know. Goodell is clearly very concerned about concussions and protecting the players, and if I were the Bills, I'd be sure to send him some footage just to be sure.
DonInBuffalo Posted October 6, 2008 Posted October 6, 2008 In the slow motion replay, Wilson hits him maybe 1 second after the ball was released. I went back and reviewed the HD frame by frame. Looks to be about 30 frames a second, with the initial contact coming roughly 3-6 frames after the ball was released. IOW, somewhere between 1/10 and 1/5 of a second after Edwards released the ball. Wilson only left his feet after he made contact with Edwards. There's a big difference between finishing a tackle and purposely driving a player into the ground. IMO this falls into the former category.
reddogblitz Posted October 6, 2008 Posted October 6, 2008 Go to the link and stop it at .05. It isn't high def but it looks to me like he's jumping up to tackle him. He was jumping up to tackle him because Trent was jumping up to pass. What's with that jump pass? If he had just stepped into it and thrown the hit would't have been near as bad. Watch. Right before Trent throws the football, he jumps up. He's in mid air when hit. That's part of the reason he got drove in the ground. It was a tough tackle, but I weigh in on the side of legal hit. I don't think any of our guys were trying to get even was because they couldn't get close enough to Warner due to a lack of blitzing.
Steely Dan Posted October 6, 2008 Posted October 6, 2008 That's what I see. He clearly leaves the ground and seems to drive Trent into the ground not to mention the ball was thrown and the dude in no way tried to pull up. Definitely a viscous-looking hit. I've seen far milder hits draw a flag every week it seems; in the Pitt/Jag game tonight, for example. I'd be shocked if there's a fine though. I wouldn't. We'll see. As far as holding up there was a split second between the throw and hit. IMO, he couldn't have slowed down at all. In the slow motion replay, Wilson hits him maybe 1 second after the ball was released. I went back and reviewed the HD frame by frame. Looks to be about 30 frames a second, with the initial contact coming roughly 3-6 frames after the ball was released. IOW, somewhere between 1/10 and 1/5 of a second after Edwards released the ball. Wilson only left his feet after he made contact with Edwards. There's a big difference between finishing a tackle and purposely driving a player into the ground. IMO this falls into the former category. I still think it qualifies as leaving the feet. The feet have to be on the ground at all times. It's really close but since I'm a Bills fan I'll call it leaving his feet.
Recommended Posts