Myles Garrett : NFL 2023 DPOY

[Mr. Orange]

It's gonna get reduced.

Only hysterical types still think this was some crazy, heinous, unprovoked attack. Public opinion has come wildly back on Garret's side since Friday. It helps that this is at minimum the fourth time this has happened in a game. It's far from "unthinkable".

 

[AZ_]

It's gonna get reduced.

Only hysterical types still think this was some crazy, heinous, unprovoked attack. Public opinion has come wildly back on Garret's side since Friday. It helps that this is at minimum the fourth time this has happened in a game. It's far from "unthinkable".

Your hyperbole is irrelevant.

But its certainly likely that they'll put an actual cap on the suspension, and I'd venture to guess it is the remainder of the 2019 regular season at the very least.


Its like folks have even forgot to keep saying "this doesn't excuse what Garrett did," they're basically proud to forget what Garrett did, which is gross.

 

[Cassity14]

Did he hit a helmet-less player from behind well after the play?

Yes. Thus, there is cause for a suspension.

Rudolph grabbing a guy's helmet and getting all aggressive is definitely worthy of a fine, but has never warranted a suspension before.

"Repeatedly struck him in the groin" is also an exaggeration of Rudolph's actions.

I'm under the impression he kicked him twice, which is why I said "repeatedly". Not trying to exaggerate anything here.

You've still yet to address Robinson being ejected for the same motion.

 

[Kbiz]

Nutgate is upon us.

 

[bigfoot5415]

Do players not usually go to appeal hearings? I feel like its a no-brainer to go.

I have a hunch that its going to be reduced to 2 games & a significant fine + some sort of documented anger management. If this lawyer is worth his salt; thats what he should push for. Past precedence usually has some leverage in court cases. This happened a few years ago and the guy got 1 game.

As for not being on Fox. Its worth noting that the NFL does not control or own the pre-game and post-game shows you see on TV. Its networked produced and owned content. Fox probably pushed pretty hard for the interview & the NFL likely asked the Browns to speak with Myles. Considering he is enemy of the state right now; he will comply with their wishes.

 

[Cavatt]

Seems fairly cut and dried. Now that the hype is over, show how similar incidents resulted in shorter suspensions.

 

[Mr. Orange]

Seems fairly cut and dried. Now that the hype is over, show how similar incidents resulted in shorter suspensions.

Also in this instance Myles is the defender, not the aggressor. Had he ripped the helmet off and ran after him and swung it....well then I am thinking a 10+ game ban is appropriate. When he is getting bum rushed by a guy who looks like a mad-dog and defends himself? Shit, I personally think it should be 4 games MAX.

 

[Cavatt]

Also in this instance Myles is the defender, not the aggressor. Had he ripped the helmet off and ran after him and swung it....well then I am thinking a 10+ game ban is appropriate. When he is getting bum rushed by a guy who looks like a mad-dog and defends himself? Shit, I personally think it should be 4 games MAX.

Yeah I think it is the part no one is talking about. The incident was basically over, and then Rudolph comes up on him while 2 of his teammates are holding Garret back. Rudolph essentially restarted the whole thing. He didn't deserve it, but it was over and he made sure it kept going. Put his teammates in a bad position too.

 

[Huber.]

It's gonna get reduced.

Only hysterical types still think this was some crazy, heinous, unprovoked attack. Public opinion has come wildly back on Garret's side since Friday. It helps that this is at minimum the fourth time this has happened in a game. It's far from "unthinkable".

It's an indefinite suspension with a minimum of 6 games and (non-existent) playoff games . What's your definition of reduced in this case?

 

[AZ_]

I'm under the impression he kicked him twice, which is why I said "repeatedly". Not trying to exaggerate anything here.

You've still yet to address Robinson being ejected for the same motion.

But it wasn't the same motion.

He was on the ground kicking upwards at the head of another player.

Stop giving me false equivalencies. They are not equal, stop pretending they are.

If Rudolph were on the ground, kicking at Garrett's face, uninvolved in any scrum, we could equate them.

 

[Binkster]

AZ getting absolutely smashed on the head with a helmet in here.

 

[Soda]

Uhhh... It was a scrum of Rudolph's making. He got pissed about being tackled hard & started a scrum/fight; it didn't begin until he started pulling on a helmet & flailing his legs. What happens after that doesn't absolve him of those very basic poor decisions.

 

[Cassity14]

But it wasn't the same motion.

He was on the ground kicking upwards at the head of another player.

Stop giving me false equivalencies. They are not equal, stop pretending they are.

If Rudolph were on the ground, kicking at Garrett's face, uninvolved in any scrum, we could equate them.

Both were on the ground kicking upward, no? That means it was literally the same motion. That's...not a false equivalency.

You're saying the context and the intent being different makes Rudolph's action more tolerable. Interesting.

Kicking upward is fine as long as it's not at a head. Got it.

 

[AZ_]

Uhhh... It was a scrum of Rudolph's making. He got pissed about being tackled hard & started a scrum/fight; it didn't begin until he started pulling on a helmet & flailing his legs. What happens after that doesn't absolve him of those very basic poor decisions.

Poor decisions don't always warrant a suspension, and they never really have. I notice you've worded that carefully.

The only reason Browns fans seem to be demanding one is because Garrett snapped and trying to bash him with a helmet.

Otherwise we couldn't even be dismissing and deflecting his behavior by whining about Rudolph. Independent of Garrett's response, are you REALLY trying to claim that Rudolph should face a suspension for what he did?

Lol. Absolutely not.

Speaks to a total lack of accountability for Garrett's response.

 

[Cassity14]

Poor decisions don't always warrant a suspension, and they never really have. I notice you've worded that carefully.

The only reason Browns fans seem to be demanding one is because Garrett snapped and trying to bash him with a helmet.

Otherwise we couldn't even be dismissing and deflecting his behavior by whining about Rudolph. Independent of Garrett's response, are you REALLY trying to claim that Rudolph should face a suspension for what he did?

Lol. Absolutely not.

Speaks to a total lack of accountability for Garrett's response.

You've said the bolded multiple times now and it sure is a hell of a straw man to argue against.

Literally nobody has said they want to see Rudolph suspended because of Garrett's actions or the deserved punishment he received for them.