Ndamukong Suh: Dirty or Not?

As long as we hold up those very same players for glory, then their behavior on the field is relevant. Things like this weren’t legal then, either. But they resulted in a penalty, not a suspension.

If we are going to honor these legends and ignore their transgressions, then it is nothing short of hypocritical to treat current players differently for the same sort of actions.

and agree to abide by internal arbitration on punishments. I would imagine to some extent they do have legal recourse but I would think it’s vastly limited compared to a “normal” profession.

I totally agree with you about precedence and the need for uniformity in punishment (I had started to write my opinion on that below right after the post above but got distracted. Robisons infraction is different from Suh’s. The biggest difference is one was in a dominant position and in place to move away where Robison was in a more defenseless position and could (and tried to) claim he was pushing the person away from him in defense. I believe Robison was taking an offensive action but it could still be argued it was defensive. Suh can in no way reasonably make that claim.

The only comparable case I can think of in Goodall’s time is Haynesworth’s. There are still differences in Haynesworth stomped multiple times, and Suh was blatently unrepentant which factors in as well. I believe the punishment should be, and will be on par with his.

Seriously?

I also do disagree with the introduction of class warfare. You make the point that it’s about principles, yet then go on to write about different standards based on income level. You can’t have both. Principles apply regardless of wallet size, and i’m honestly offended that somehow people who don’t make a certain income are implied to have less responsibility for their actions. Last time I checked, principles know no income bracket and people of lower social class are no less capable than those uf the upper class of upholding societal standards. Any other implication is insulting, I’m sorry.

Look man, I would totally agree with you here…BUT you are comparing apples to oranges. What these guys do ON THE FIELD, when they go beyond the whistle and start punching and kicking one another, would get you thrown in JAIL outside of the protection of their profession! Maybe the money point was not the best choice of words…but the point is valid. These professional athletes ARE NOT held to the same standards set forth by society when they are on the field. The fact that they make more money than ANY other profession only makes it more vaild, in my opinion, that they SHOULD be held to a higher standard. Their profession is the only thing protecting them from the LAWS of society!

What Suh did would be assault and battery if he did it on the street. But because he is a pro football player, who makes millions of dollars every year, he can get away with what would be a crime for you or me, regardless of how much money we make. With great power comes great responsibility. These guys make so much money that they have absolute freedom (and tons of power) when they are off the field. It is not imposing on their rights as a member of society, to hold them to a higher standard as a professional. In fact, the very definition of professional practically demands a higher standard. It is no different for a corporate executive or a CPA. They make more money than most people, and they are held to a higher standard because of their professions.

There are are changes that have taken place that are welcomed for player safety. Granted, there are plenty more that are considered bullshit (rightly so imo).

I definitely don’t want to see Suh suspended, from the perspective of a LIONS fan. He is a huge part of our defense. That said, one could easily argue that this is either his 4th or 5th time of losing control. It is entirely possible that a majority of the NFL fan base could disagree…but that would not necessarily make their opinions correct either. The majority of the NFL fan base may actually disagree with any changes made by the NFL executives too, and bloggers everywhere could spout all kinds of incensed opinions, but that still does not mean there were NO NFL fans complaining about the brutality of the sport and the lack of discipline for the professional athletes therein. I agree that it was likely mostly the owners, but I would bet there was fan outcry too.

I am not one of the people who think the sport is too brutal. I grew up playing football, and loved the contact. Like I said above, I agree with you mostly…we just differ in principle and how we each define principle.

but the NFL should verifie why there giving him whatever, not just say he commited a foul and will be fined and suspended or whatever, they should say Suh commited this action and that is what the fine/suspension is for, that way when something like this happens again (and it will someday) whoever does it will know what he can expect.

ok still didn’t come out of my brain as fluidly or concisely as it should and that is where your writing skills come into play my friend! I’m thinking liniar thoughs but they sure don’t come out that way when I’m typing LOL maybe I need to defragment my brain (or start drinking) or something!

I favor the idea of certain areas of the game being tightly enforced, blatant post whistle “assaults” like this for example. Whereas it seems you favor a far more forgiving, but still punished, approach. I suspect neither would have luck convincing the other to change this tho.

One parting thought on this for me is we both resent the softening up of the game and over protection of players.

I have my own meathead moments…;o)

But with different environments encouraged by the administrators and moderators of said sites. SBNation in general and WCG, APC and POD in specific do a great job of fostering an environment where respectful disagreement can occur and is encouraged.

But honestly, I haven’t spent a ton of time there since Thursday to give you an honest opinion of what is being said after everyone had a chance to calm down. I did notice a lot of that here on the game thread when it happened, though. I was watching your thread when the game was on. I do so on occation as I’m a bit of an anthroplogist and I like to compare how different teams’ fans react on in game threads.

For the most part, what I’ve seen from WCG was at it’s worst when Suh’s lame explanation came about. I haven’t been on much since then, though.

And for your poll question… How many and which players were asked? Have they played against Suh, or just read quotes in the paper? If you dont know your source, how canyou possibly know howaccurate the sampling is? You’re right though, I dont care about who is the dirtiest player in the league

And that I’m not a Lions fan or a Suh fan. In fact, I would have no problem with the entire Lions team, including Suh, took a dive into the Rouge River.

But I do believe that people are over-blowing the whole thing. And, as an outsider, I find the race to disassociate themselves from Suh and try to salvage some integrity for Lions fans everywhere to be even more amusing than the antiapologist who think he didn’t do anything wrong in the first place.

Watching the polar extreme’s makes me gigle just a bit. It would be even better if they both existed on the same site, but alas, the POD fans seem to have more class than to outright exonerate Suh even if they support him.

As a Packers fan, you condone a season ending suspension, right? I’m guessing, of course.

Never said Suh was the only a-hole in the NFL. He’s just the the most obvious (and worst) of them at the moment.

I thought his 20k fine should have been heavier, and I remember thinking that I wouldn’t have been bothered by a 1 game suspension, but I didn’t really expect it to happen and I wasn’t surprised when he just got the fine.

I don’t really go to APC all that often. I think it’s a poorly run site, generally speaking, with frequently bad writing that almost uniformly lacks any particular insight at all, so I generally only stop by there once every two weeks or so. And when I do stop by, I read maybe 1-5% of the site content before I end up getting bored and leaving. So I don’t really know if there was much in the way of an uprising in support of a Suh suspension. Heck, I’m not even sure if there’s all that much of an uprising for a Suh suspension, because I haven’t been there (that I can recall) since the initial post game threads right after the Thursday game. Quite frankly, I’m not sure if a lot of Packer fans are thinking about the Lions or Suh at all anymore. I am, obviously, but I might be in the minority.

As for whether there’s a difference, Lang was on his feet when he got kicked in the groin. He wasn’t essentially defenseless while lying on his back on the ground the way Dietrich-Smith was. That’s a big difference in my opinion. As I’ve said before, it’s not unusual or really even all that troubling to me for guys to lose their temper on the field and do something stupid. It is unusual, in my opinion, for that loss of temper to be taken as far as Suh took this incident. And, though I know you folks all think that this is just a creation of the media, I do think that context matters, and Suh’s context isn’t good. When a player asks to meet the commissioner for a 1 on 1 discussion of what’s allowed and what isn’t because he keeps getting flagged and fined, and then he stomps on another player a couple of weeks later, that guy deserves to get hit harder than a 1st time offender in my opinion.

typical class you expect. Say what you want, but the Pack rarely fuel the fire on this kind of stuff.

“I’m sorry for stomping your arm”
then he says
“okay, I’m sorry for holding you and twisting you down on top of me, for continuously holding during the game, and for having my teammate come chop your knees”
then Suh
“cheers, see you end of the season.. or maybe not since you could be back on the bench not due to suspension but because you are not a starter”