Clay Matthews fined $22,050 for blindside block on Russell

ExBassGuide

New member
Joined
Jun 18, 2015
Messages
89
Reaction score
0
Hello My name is Roger and I live in the Portland area. I love the hawks and would just like to say Clay Mathews is the dirtiest player in the NFL!
After seeing the hit he put on R.W. in the NFC championship game I started looking at other things he has done.
Like hitting 49er QB Kap. out of bounds. And I have seen him turn R.W. so He could fall on him! and It sure looked like he was trying to take R.W. out of the game. When we play G.B. watch for what I am saying. any other thoughts?
Thanks for a GREAT FORUM to learn and talk about The Hawks and the NFL!
Thanks!
Roger :th2thumbs:

5lbTheDallas
 

netskier

New member
Joined
May 13, 2014
Messages
997
Reaction score
0
I favor banning players for a year for those premeditated hits to the head. Intentional concussions are immoral, arguably illegal, and bad for NFL business because they decrease total fan enjoyment by damaging the brains of the quarterbacks. Let them hit quarterbacks in the shoulder as hard as they want, but not in the head.
 
OP
OP
ExBassGuide

ExBassGuide

New member
Joined
Jun 18, 2015
Messages
89
Reaction score
0
♥Seattle Seahawks♥ #1 power ranking☺, #1 most explosive☺ (big play team), #1 defense☺ in the NFL, #1 ☺Pass defense, #1 ☺Rushing Offense, #1 ☺Best Roster in the NFL, #2 ☺best back field in the NFL, #3 ☺Run defense and Vegas's pick to win S.B. 50☺! G0 Seattle Seahawks! ♪We will rock you! ♪ ○ (6 yards per game away from #1 offense! #1 ☺Best QB rating for the first the years for any QB ever!
 

Hawks46

New member
Joined
Apr 30, 2009
Messages
7,498
Reaction score
0
Welcome to .net !

That thing sure is a hawg! You get that in one of the sloughs ?
 

scutterhawk

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 11, 2010
Messages
9,826
Reaction score
1,797
ExBassGuide":3bf40j0e said:
Hello My name is Roger and I live in the Portland area. I love the hawks and would just like to say Clay Mathews is the dirtiest player in the NFL!
After seeing the hit he put on R.W. in the NFC championship game I started looking at other things he has done.
Like hitting 49er QB Kap. out of bounds. And I have seen him turn R.W. so He could fall on him! and It sure looked like he was trying to take R.W. out of the game. When we play G.B. watch for what I am saying. any other thoughts?
Thanks for a GREAT FORUM to learn and talk about The Hawks and the NFL!
Thanks!
Roger :th2thumbs:

I believe that Coach McCarthy got a little taste of his own medicine when the Packers played the Lions, and Ngummykingkong Suh gave Rodgers a heaping helping of his own style of dirty play.
McCarthy needs to callar Mathews, and tell him that he needs to cut the dirty crap plays, or else.
What those asses don't realize, is that they're putting a target on their backs, and that some other player will be told to take them out by dealing them with the same chicken shit type plays that they're constantly dishing out.
And Welcome to the fray Mr. Bass :thirishdrinkers:
 
Joined
Dec 31, 2012
Messages
360
Reaction score
5
netskier":10jio6sq said:
I favor banning players for a year for those premeditated hits to the head. Intentional concussions are immoral, arguably illegal, and bad for NFL business because they decrease total fan enjoyment by damaging the brains of the quarterbacks. Let them hit quarterbacks in the shoulder as hard as they want, but not in the head.

So you're in favor of Kam being banned from football for the a year for his intentional hit too? Can't have you cake and eat it.

http://www.sportingnews.com/nfl/story/2 ... super-bowl
 

Year of The Hawk

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 30, 2012
Messages
1,324
Reaction score
245
Location
Idaho
QuickLightning":1q4xsv90 said:
netskier":1q4xsv90 said:
I favor banning players for a year for those premeditated hits to the head. Intentional concussions are immoral, arguably illegal, and bad for NFL business because they decrease total fan enjoyment by damaging the brains of the quarterbacks. Let them hit quarterbacks in the shoulder as hard as they want, but not in the head.

So you're in favor of Kam being banned from football for the a year for his intentional hit too? Can't have you cake and eat it.

http://www.sportingnews.com/nfl/story/2 ... super-bowl


Nope. Edelman struck first with cheap shot on Lane that put him out big time. That was his "you mess with my family and you pay" hit. I am OK with that.
 
Joined
Dec 31, 2012
Messages
360
Reaction score
5
Year of The Hawk":2mdsrkn0 said:
QuickLightning":2mdsrkn0 said:
netskier":2mdsrkn0 said:
I favor banning players for a year for those premeditated hits to the head. Intentional concussions are immoral, arguably illegal, and bad for NFL business because they decrease total fan enjoyment by damaging the brains of the quarterbacks. Let them hit quarterbacks in the shoulder as hard as they want, but not in the head.

So you're in favor of Kam being banned from football for the a year for his intentional hit too? Can't have you cake and eat it.

http://www.sportingnews.com/nfl/story/2 ... super-bowl


Nope. Edelman struck first with cheap shot on Lane that put him out big time. That was his "you mess with my family and you pay" hit. I am OK with that.

Ah... you're right.

If a player tackles another player, it gives the team that is tackled full reason to go headhunting. You're right.

Make sure they get that worded properly in the rule you guys are making up.

"No headhunting... unless player being headhunted has made a tackle earlier on in the game"

Got it!
 

RolandDeschain

Well-known member
Joined
May 1, 2009
Messages
33,137
Reaction score
968
Location
Kissimmee, FL
QuickLightning":3danlqwm said:
Ah... you're right.

If a player tackles another player, it gives the team that is tackled full reason to go headhunting. You're right.

Make sure they get that worded properly in the rule you guys are making up.

"No headhunting... unless player being headhunted has made a tackle earlier on in the game"

Got it!
So players should never seek revenge? Alrighty, seems legit. Logic is your strong suit, I see. :roll:
 
Joined
Dec 31, 2012
Messages
360
Reaction score
5
RolandDeschain":3t6rmppv said:
QuickLightning":3t6rmppv said:
Ah... you're right.

If a player tackles another player, it gives the team that is tackled full reason to go headhunting. You're right.

Make sure they get that worded properly in the rule you guys are making up.

"No headhunting... unless player being headhunted has made a tackle earlier on in the game"

Got it!
So players should never seek revenge? Alrighty, seems legit. Logic is your strong suit, I see. :roll:

There was nothing dirty about his tackle. That happens all the time. The fact that Lane landed on his wrist and broke his arm is just an unfortunate result.

Are you honestly saying it's okay to go after and intentionally try to injure players in some sort of retaliation?

How would you feel if Vernon Davis intentionally dove at Kam's knees to take out his ACL after the concussions Kam gave him? Totally fine by your standards, right?

Edit to clarify: Neither his hit nor the hit on Lane were intentionally to try to injure those players. Just making plays to stop the guy with the ball. If you say Kam is justified in headhunting by seeking "revenge", you must feel the same way if someone intentionally injured Kam now, right? You would be totally fine with it.
 

Popeyejones

Active member
Joined
Aug 20, 2013
Messages
5,525
Reaction score
0
RolandDeschain":3in5gkw2 said:
So players should never seek revenge? Alrighty, seems legit. Logic is your strong suit, I see. :roll:

Huh? That doesn't make any sense. The argument is if a proposed rule should or should not be enforced based on if the play was intended as an act of revenge (or perceived revenge for an imagined slight) or not.
 

Year of The Hawk

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 30, 2012
Messages
1,324
Reaction score
245
Location
Idaho
Popeyejones":28gkxefo said:
RolandDeschain":28gkxefo said:
So players should never seek revenge? Alrighty, seems legit. Logic is your strong suit, I see. :roll:

Huh? That doesn't make any sense. The argument is if a proposed rule should or should not be enforced based on if the play was intended as an act of revenge (or perceived revenge for an imagined slight) or not.

I am not saying that Kam is innocent of violating league rules just that I am okay with what he did. And yes the Edelman shot on Lane was cheap. Just because the league has its rules and doles out penalties on a very inconsistent basis does not make everything they do "right".
 

jlwaters1

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 11, 2010
Messages
2,986
Reaction score
86
QuickLightning":2df83o5c said:
netskier":2df83o5c said:
I favor banning players for a year for those premeditated hits to the head. Intentional concussions are immoral, arguably illegal, and bad for NFL business because they decrease total fan enjoyment by damaging the brains of the quarterbacks. Let them hit quarterbacks in the shoulder as hard as they want, but not in the head.

So you're in favor of Kam being banned from football for the a year for his intentional hit too? Can't have you cake and eat it.

http://www.sportingnews.com/nfl/story/2 ... super-bowl

Nice Story, Except it wasn't a helmet to helmet shot. Go watch that play it was shoulder to shoulder.
Watch around the 50 second mark.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lgC6LzCa9zA
 

scutterhawk

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 11, 2010
Messages
9,826
Reaction score
1,797
Popeyejones":2oh2urxn said:
RolandDeschain":2oh2urxn said:
So players should never seek revenge? Alrighty, seems legit. Logic is your strong suit, I see. :roll:

Huh? That doesn't make any sense. The argument is if a proposed rule should or should not be enforced based on if the play was intended as an act of revenge (or perceived revenge for an imagined slight) or not.
It's your perception that is messed up Jones, there was NO "Helmet to Helmet", just writing that it was, doesn't make it the absolute truth :141847_bnono: get it right
And by the way, the play on Vernon Davis was also a clean hit, just watch it in Slow Motion, and then just admit that you were errant for jumping the gun on BOTH occasions....just like those writers should have done.
 

ivotuk

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 3, 2007
Messages
23,114
Reaction score
1,827
Location
North Pole, Alaska
QuickLightning":1c86dht6 said:
netskier":1c86dht6 said:
I favor banning players for a year for those premeditated hits to the head. Intentional concussions are immoral, arguably illegal, and bad for NFL business because they decrease total fan enjoyment by damaging the brains of the quarterbacks. Let them hit quarterbacks in the shoulder as hard as they want, but not in the head.

So you're in favor of Kam being banned from football for the a year for his intentional hit too? Can't have you cake and eat it.

http://www.sportingnews.com/nfl/story/2 ... super-bowl


How was that an intentional hit or headhunting? Kam never got fined for those hits either...
 

scutterhawk

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 11, 2010
Messages
9,826
Reaction score
1,797
QuickLightning":2hsebsfi said:
Are you honestly saying it's okay to go after and intentionally try to injure players in some sort of retaliation?
How would you feel if Vernon Davis intentionally dove at Kam's knees to take out his ACL after the concussions Kam gave him? Totally fine by your standards, right?
.
If some of those innocent players :roll: make a habit out of dishing out the dirty plays, I'm perfectly fine with it going a full contact retaliation, else how will those players be made to understand the concept of "Payback Is A Bitch"
And by the way, Vernon Davis himself said that he respected Kam Chancellor for his "balls out" style of play, and that he bears no grudges, because he knows that you can sustain a "Concussion" in a legitimate and clean hit.
Perception.
 

HawkAroundTheClock

New member
Joined
Apr 4, 2010
Messages
2,417
Reaction score
0
Location
Over There
Alright, before this devolves into a bunch of stoopidness, I think the idea behind bans or suspensions for headhunting or dirty play has a lot to do with repeat violations. Since we can't ever prove intent, all we have to go on is performance tendencies. Let's not cherry pick one hit over a 5-year career and pretend we're comparing apples to apples. For anyone actually interested in comparing Chancellor and Matthews, here are the fines and penalty stats.

One of these guys appears to be playing more cleanly as his career progresses. The other, not so much.

FINES

Clay Matthews

2014: NFCCG, blindside block.

2013: Week 13, helmet-to-helmet. Week 10, roughing the passer. Week 1, late hit (This one was ridiculous. He hit Kaep not just when he was out of bounds, but when the QB was beyond the white area. That's 6 FEET out of bounds when Clay launched himself toward Papaki's head.)

2012: none

2011: none

2010: Week 3, facemask

2009: none

That's 4 fines for illegal hits in the past 2 seasons. Source: Spotrac


Kam Chancellor

2014: none

2013: Week 17, late hit (No excuses, but this was an exceptionally testy game against the Rams, which are usually all-out brawls to begin with. Kam's was the only Seahawks fine versus 3 fines – 2 of which were helmet-to-helmet – and an ejection for the Rams.)

2012: none

2011: Week 10, hit on defenseless player. I think there was one in week 11 also, but it was repealed because it was actually his shoulder and not helmet that made contact with Lance Kendricks' head and the contact wasn't initiated at the head.

2010: none

That's 2 fines in 5 years. That's not a repeat offender. Source: Spotrac

–––––––––––––––––––––––

PENALTIES

Clay Matthews hit-related penalties
2014: Week 7, unsportsmanlike conduct. Week 10, unnecessary roughness.
2013: Just the ones that were fined.
2012: none
2011: Week 7, roughing the passer.
2010: The fined facemask.
2009: Week 12, roughing the passer.

Clay has had 4 hit-related penalties in addition to the fined hits. 2 of them last year.
Penalty stats from Pro-Football-Reference.


Kam Chancellor hit-related penalties
2014: none
2013: Week 15, personal foul.
2012: Week 16, unnecessary roughness – this was the soul-stealing hit he put on Vernon Davis, which was shown to be clean.
2011: Week 3, unnecessary roughness. Week 7, unnecessary roughness. Week 11, unnecessary roughness.
2010: none

Kam has had 1 hit-related penalty in the past 3 years and 1 more that was shown on replay to be clean. Penalty stats from Pro-Football-Reference.

He had 3 hit-related penalties in his first year as a starter, then made great efforts to be more precise with his tackling. That's a sign of someone trying and succeeding to play cleanly. Here's an article from NJ.com explaining his conscious efforts to play within the rules.
 
Top