Florio calls Sherman a "cheap shot artist"

[VivaEfrenHerrera]

...I'm not even remotely the smartest guy in the room....

Well, I *did* call it an "act".

 

[RiverDog]

Sherman hit him from behind when the receiver inches away from the end line and when he had already relaxed and not in a football playing mode. You light up a receiver like, one that has already given up on the pass, on the visiting team sidelines and the benches will empty and Sherman likely ejected. Had that ball been catchable, they would have called PI and given NO the ball on the one as Sherman was not looking back for the ball. It was the absolute right call.

Lol. "Football playing mode"? Are you friggen serious? "FOOTBALL PLAYING MODE"!? He's in a football playing stadium, on a football playing field wearing a football playing uniform... perhaps it might behoove him to BE in a football playing mode under those circumstances! SMf'nH... "football playing mode". Shut the front door...

And Sherman hit him in the side. Right on the shoulder. That's not the back. The back is the back. Just stop that noise.

So riddle me this my lovely pacifists... what if Stills was playing possum? You know...The ol rope-a-dope? "Doop a doop doop doo... I'm not in a "football playing mode". Just leave me alone. Pay no attention to silly ol Kenny over here..." then streaks down the end line wide open and snag a touchdown. Dude runs a 4.3 40 so it's TOTALLY possible. Then what? Sherm looks stupid, that's what.

Nope. You're on a football field, so play football. And none of this "just hit him lightly to keep him out of the play" bullshit. Kenny Stills is a professional athleate and if you try that weak shit on somebody like that who's ready for it, YOU are just as likely to wind up inside out. If Kenny got hurt (thank god he didn't, but if he did) it's nobody's fault but Kenny's. Same arguement as with the god damn Golden Tate block on Sean Lee. Between the whistles and between the sidelines, YOU watch what the FUNK you are DOING! There are large men running around who want to HURT YOU! Don't make it easy on them!!!

God damn... whatever happened to personal accountability!?! SMf'nH. "football playing mode"..... Half the people in the bloody STANDS were in a football playing mode!

Get off the "football mode" term, will you? I was trying to describe that the player was completely uninvolved in the play and not prepared for a shot like that.

If Sherman felt the receiver was "playing possum", all he had to do was give him a bump and he's out of the play as he was standing right at the end line of the end zone. It's like touching a guy when he's fallen down on his own power to make contact vs. unloading on him. He didn't have to unload on him to put him out of the play, ie the definition of "unnecessary roughness." Sherman went way over the line.

I disagree with the poster that said if the play happened at the 50 yard line Sherman would be ok. If the ball is in the air, he cannot initiate any contact at all if he's not at least looking for the ball, which it is clear Sherman was not. It would have been pass interference. The play in question would have been PI, too, except that it wasn't catchable.

We'll see what happens when the NFL reviews this play. IMO Sherman will get a fine, perhaps a suspension as well. Those are the types of plays that start bench clearing brawls.

 

[Tical21]

There was zero reason for Sherman to go blindside that guy. Zero. He was 40 yards away from a play that was going nowhere, and not paying attention or really doing anything. Total cheapshot, he should be fined. Was Sherman blocking? I can't understand for the life of me why he would go hit that guy. I can't wrap my head around it. Stupid, stupid play.

If there was a play ending, and Doug Baldwin was 40 yards away from the play and some guy came out of nowhere and tried to take his head off, y'all would be screaming bloody murder.

 

[HawkWow]

I dislike how soft the NFL is getting. I think that if they don't like the hit, than the NFL needs to address it in the rule book.

Not many like this pussification of the league. They're turning it into exactly the opposite of what our forefathers (lol) created for us. The problem is those forefathers can barely tie their shoes or remember their phone numbers now. Today we have a very large sample size, providing the luxury of going back 50 years to see the effects of the game, on players. Technology is now able to (practically) pinpoint cause and effect.

I mentioned in a different thread some time back, when the face of the league, Junior Seau, puts a window in his head and scientists determine that act was football related, you knew change was in the wind. And rightfully so.

I am going to like these new rules less, but I'm just going to have to adjust to them. The refs are basically acting as OSHA these days. Why should football players be exempt from the same protection offered to a welder or mason? Because the money is better? They're selling entertainment, not brain cells. And if these stiffer rules save just 1 Junior Seau, it will be hard to argue their validity, IMO.

Just to be clear, I'm all for player safety. But, per the discussion... I don't think Stills' safety was compromised on the hit being discussed.
A bit of a side note... I had an enjoyable conversation with Paul Johns at the Vikings game about these sorts of penalties and what we're seeing by the NFL. He told me he is the chairman for the "Heads up" program and also talked about the efforts to change the game while preserving the great game we all enjoy (which is relevant to me with a kid playing High School ball and another excelling in youth football with a likely promising future playing the game.)

I totally understand and share your position on the subject. There's not going to be any easy answers to any of this. With that, the officiating may get worse before it gets better. If that's even possible.

I remember Paul Johns! A name I've not heard in decades....thanks for bringing it back. I was at a Packer game (early 80s?) in the dome and sat with he and his family (I think he had a broken leg?). Super nice guy. Short career IIRC. I wish him well and happy he's found something after football.

 

[CANHawk]

There was zero reason for Sherman to go blindside that guy. Zero. He was 40 yards away from a play that was going nowhere, and not paying attention or really doing anything. Total cheapshot, he should be fined. Was Sherman blocking? I can't understand for the life of me why he would go hit that guy. I can't wrap my head around it. Stupid, stupid play.

If there was a play ending, and Doug Baldwin was 40 yards away from the play and some guy came out of nowhere and tried to take his head off, y'all would be screaming bloody murder.

OMG... You guys are fricken KILLING ME!!

Why wasn't he paying attention!? That's like me saying "not my fault that truck drove right into me as i was rolling lazily down the street. I wasn't paying attention." Just like driving a car, you have an obligation to pay attention on the football field.

Whistle to whistle, sideline to sideline, you're there to play football. Sherman was playing, Stills wasn't. End of fricken story. You'll never convince me why that is a foul...

 

[dontbelikethat]

[youtube]sALWxg9jflM[/youtube]

Don't think Sherman needed to do it as it was unnecessary. If a DB did that to our receivers, I would not be happy with it and would hope for the same penalty. Can't see where the ball was at, but judging from ET and Graham letting up, the play was pretty much over. Either way, I don't like that it hurt the team, and I don't know what Sherman was exactly thinking, so it is what it is. He might be fined, but if he gets suspended like some have suggested as a possibility, that would be the dumbest ish ever, considering that other players have done things way more blatant and weren't suspended.

EDIT: Initially thought Sherm might be trying to makea play due to seeing Stills openish and Sherman possibly not seeing where the ball was, but in the beginning of the vid, you can clearly see he's looking at the direction of where the offense was then turning back to hit Stills. I just don't get why he did it.

 

[Popeyejones]

The quarterback being inside or outside of the pocket is completely immaterial. .

This is not correct. Sherman's reason for hitting Stills / being allowed to hit Stills is exactly this that the quarterback had left the pocket which allows him to hit the receiver UNTIL the ball is thrown towards that receiver at which point it would turn into a PI call.

The call was unnecessary roughness. PI doesn't have anything to do with anything and the QBs location in relation to the pocket doesn't have anything to do with anything. What matters are a) if the player being struck is part of the play, or b) if the player being struck can reasonably expect to be struck, or c) both.

By way of example:

The ball is on the 50 yard line with Golden Tate out left and Baldwin out right. The play is a fake bubble screen to draw the safety's to the left with a Badlwin running a 9 (fly route). Wilson throws the ball deep right to Baldwin, and seeing this, Kenny Vaccaro loads up and lays out the unsuspecting Tate as the ball is in the air heading toward Baldwin on the other side. The call is correctly unnecessary roughness, as Tate was not involved in the play (the ball is already heading down field on the other side of the field) AND has given himself up and is reasonably not expecting to get laid the frig out.

In this corollary scenario, it doesn't matter a lick of RW threw the ball from inside or outside of the pocket. That has nothing to do with an unnecessary roughness call.

(worth noting that I've made the scenario clearer in the example and placed the players farther apart because there is the issue of ball advancement at the middle of the field which doesn't apply in the endzone, as you can't advance from the endzone when going into it. As for players not being involved in the play (a) and not reasonably expecting to be laid out (b), see the .gif of the play in my above post and Graham, Stills and Earl Thomas all meeting both of those criteria, and giving up on the play by the time Sherman is beginning his three to four step charge to hit Stills).

RE: if the hit was before or after the pass, from the .gif you can't see the pass, but judging by Graham, Stills, and Earl Thomas' behavior, it quite clearly seems to be after the pass. If it was before the pass the call would be wrong, and it should instead be PI. If it was after the pass as it appears to be and as it was called, UR is the correct call.

 

[Popeyejones]

...I'm not even remotely the smartest guy in the room....

Well, I *did* call it an "act".

:lol: :lol: :lol:

Well done.

 

[Popeyejones]

EDIT: Initially thought Sherm might be trying to makea play due to seeing Stills openish and Sherman possibly not seeing where the ball was, but in the beginning of the vid, you can clearly see he's looking at the direction of where the offense was then turning back to hit Stills. I just don't get why he did it.

Ehh, he's being aggressive. Even as a stupid 9ers fan it's something I really like about him, and one of the things that makes him great.

It's just that on this particular play he was being a bit too aggressive and got flagged for it. Heck, I rooted for Dashon Goldson and he gets this same flag at least once a month.

 

[SalishHawkFan]

It shouldn't have been a penalty. Why is this even 6 pages long?

 

[Throwdown]

He was just saying hi, I dunno what the big deal is

 

[Jville]

Mike Florio & Skip Bayless are celebrated cheap shot artists. Demonizing individuals and groups of individuals is all the national rage.

This sorry state of the nation will continue to plague all of us for as long as this void in national leadership prevails.

 

[253hawk]

It shouldn't have been a penalty. Why is this even 6 pages long?

Because for some reason half of our fans expect all of our players to be choir boys. This isn't the Legion of Patty-Cake.

 

[kearly]

It was dirty, but it was also legal and a terrible call to penalize it. It's the DB equivalent of the cut block.

 

[HawkWow]

It was dirty, but it was also legal and a terrible call to penalize it. It's the DB equivalent of the cut block.

Very true, but what if that cut block was deemed "unnecessary". It too would likely be flagged.

Not to diminish your (excellent) point, Kearly, but I think it's the "unnecessary" part that people are having difficulty with. One poster above suggests "half" of us want our SEVERELY over-penalized team to play "patty cake" if we don't approve of them playing unnecessarily rough. We like rough, dude...it's 15 yd penalties, 1st downs and consequent scores we don't like. It's really that simple.

Sherman did not need to make the hit and it gave the enemy a redzone first down. Sherman is more intelligent than many of us, and if he had it to do over, he would probably hold back. Legal, illegal...it was "unnecessary" by definition.

 

[jdblack]

If it was before the pass the call would be wrong, and it should instead be PI. If it was after the pass as it appears to be and as it was called, UR is the correct call.

I initially thought there was no way it should have been called a penalty. You briefly convinced me it was a good call with your reasoning about Stills not being a future blocker due to the play being in the endzone and not advanceable. Someone else brought up the possibility of a deflection, and I'm back to the opinion that it was a bad call by the refs, and a legal hit by Sherman. You had a good argument nonetheless, and I respect your clarity.

The quote above is surprising though. UR is a judgment call, but why do you think it be PI if the QB is outside the pocket and has not yet thrown the ball? Receivers become blockers in that instance until & if the ball is thrown in their direction.

 

[253hawk]

If Sherman hadn't been flagged, no one would have called it unnecessary or cared. Don't let a ref's judgment call of a clean, legal play make you fall over to the other side of the fence when criticizing a player.

 

[Uthawk]

If it was before the pass the call would be wrong, and it should instead be PI. If it was after the pass as it appears to be and as it was called, UR is the correct call.

I initially thought there was no way it should have been called a penalty. You briefly convinced me it was a good call with your reasoning about Stills not being a future blocker due to the play being in the endzone and not advanceable. Someone else brought up the possibility of a deflection, and I'm back to the opinion that it was a bad call by the refs, and a legal hit by Sherman. You had a good argument nonetheless, and I respect your clarity.

+1 - was going to say the same thing. It's hard to say he wouldn't have been part of the play in some way.

 

[CANHawk]

If it was before the pass the call would be wrong, and it should instead be PI. If it was after the pass as it appears to be and as it was called, UR is the correct call.

I initially thought there was no way it should have been called a penalty. You briefly convinced me it was a good call with your reasoning about Stills not being a future blocker due to the play being in the endzone and not advanceable. Someone else brought up the possibility of a deflection, and I'm back to the opinion that it was a bad call by the refs, and a legal hit by Sherman. You had a good argument nonetheless, and I respect your clarity.

+1 - was going to say the same thing. It's hard to say he wouldn't have been part of the play in some way.

Exactly my point! Which is why you stick him when you have the chance!

 

[HawkWow]

If Sherman hadn't been flagged, no one would have called it unnecessary or cared. Don't let a ref's judgment call of a clean, legal play make you fall over to the other side of the fence when judging a player.

I'm fairly certain nobody in this forum, or from this fan base, is falling to the other side of the fence in regards to Richard Sherman. Matt Hasselbeck was flagged for unnecessary roughness. It happens. Nobody here called him a cheap shot artist, either.

We heart Richard Sherman.