RG3 'mild' concussion - now what?

by **Red_One43** » Mon Oct 08, 2012 1:52 pm

4.Corner DeAngelo Hall said Griffin apologized to him for letting the team down. And linebacker Lorenzo Alexander said the players message to Griffin would be, “You have nothing to prove. We need you for the rest of the season.” In other words: get out of bounds.

John Keim's Midday Report

by **welch** » Mon Oct 08, 2012 3:14 pm

Looks, to me, like RG3 should not play next week. That was an ugly hit, probably intended to injure. So:

(a) RG3 has to run out of bounds on those plays. Always.

(b) Might be a reason to allow the crack-back block.

by **Countertrey** » Mon Oct 08, 2012 6:42 pm

welch wrote:Looks, to me, like RG3 should not play next week. That was an ugly hit, probably intended to injure. So:

(a) RG3 has to run out of bounds on those plays. Always.

(b) Might be a reason to allow the crack-back block.

Dude... after 55 years, I'm finally going to stand up to you. :wink:

That was pure, bang-bang, aggressive football. No intent there... just an awkward position to be hit. RG3 was forced to the ground by a strong hit from behind... and as a result, was unable to protect himself from a hit from the side. Nothing dirty about it... it was simply the law of averages catching up to Bob's aggressive play. We all knew it was coming... and it did.

Can I have my milk money back, now?

by **Deadskins** » Mon Oct 08, 2012 7:58 pm

Not only that, but the hit he took on the rebound was probably the one that did the damage.

by **cowboykillerzRGiii** » Mon Oct 08, 2012 8:32 pm

What sucks is he clearly shouldn't have been in that position in the first place... Then on a run to the right, had he kept it he would have had a td.. smh

by **welch** » Tue Oct 09, 2012 2:46 pm

Countertrey wrote:
welch wrote:Looks, to me, like RG3 should not play next week. That was an ugly hit, probably intended to injure. So:

(a) RG3 has to run out of bounds on those plays. Always.

(b) Might be a reason to allow the crack-back block.

Dude... after 55 years, I'm finally going to stand up to you.

That was pure, bang-bang, aggressive football. No intent there... just an awkward position to be hit. RG3 was forced to the ground by a strong hit from behind... and as a result, was unable to protect himself from a hit from the side. Nothing dirty about it... it was simply the law of averages catching up to Bob's aggressive play. We all knew it was coming... and it did.

Can I have my milk money back, now?

Nope.

I'm even older now, and I've gotten a mean-streak in my old age. When Cole Hamels hit Bryce Harper on purpose, I wanted Zimmermann to stick a fast ball in Hamels ear. Then hit somebody else just on principle.

Revenge!!!! (Thus: the crack-back.)

by **ACW** » Tue Oct 09, 2012 5:38 pm

How was the hit not penalized? I know RGIII was the runner, so no defenseless, but it was TO THE HEAD.

by **Countertrey** » Tue Oct 09, 2012 5:59 pm

ACW wrote:How was the hit not penalized? I know RGIII was the runner, so no defenseless, but it was TO THE HEAD.

You need to review the rules... There was nothing to penalize. Bob had no chance of picking up a first down. Bob needs to step out of bounds, to avoid LEGAL contact from opponents unecessarily.

by **Countertrey** » Tue Oct 09, 2012 6:01 pm

welch wrote:
Countertrey wrote:
welch wrote:Looks, to me, like RG3 should not play next week. That was an ugly hit, probably intended to injure. So:

(a) RG3 has to run out of bounds on those plays. Always.

(b) Might be a reason to allow the crack-back block.

Dude... after 55 years, I'm finally going to stand up to you.

That was pure, bang-bang, aggressive football. No intent there... just an awkward position to be hit. RG3 was forced to the ground by a strong hit from behind... and as a result, was unable to protect himself from a hit from the side. Nothing dirty about it... it was simply the law of averages catching up to Bob's aggressive play. We all knew it was coming... and it did.

Can I have my milk money back, now?

Nope.

I'm even older now, and I've gotten a mean-streak in my old age. When Cole Hamels hit Bryce Harper on purpose, I wanted Zimmermann to stick a fast ball in Hamels ear. Then hit somebody else just on principle.

Revenge!!!! (Thus: the crack-back.)

I'm not afraid of you...

I'm at least 300 miles away.

by **ACW** » Tue Oct 09, 2012 6:16 pm

Countertrey wrote:
ACW wrote:How was the hit not penalized? I know RGIII was the runner, so no defenseless, but it was TO THE HEAD.
You need to review the rules... There was nothing to penalize. Bob had no chance of picking up a first down. Bob needs to step out of bounds, to avoid LEGAL contact from opponents unecessarily.

Isn't any hit to the head a penalty? If not, it SHOULD be.

by **Countertrey** » Tue Oct 09, 2012 6:24 pm

ACW wrote:
Countertrey wrote:
ACW wrote:How was the hit not penalized? I know RGIII was the runner, so no defenseless, but it was TO THE HEAD.
You need to review the rules... There was nothing to penalize. Bob had no chance of picking up a first down. Bob needs to step out of bounds, to avoid LEGAL contact from opponents unecessarily.
Isn't any hit to the head a penalty? If not, it SHOULD be.

Seriously??????
:roll:

by **ACW** » Tue Oct 09, 2012 6:32 pm

Countertrey wrote:
ACW wrote:
Countertrey wrote:
ACW wrote:How was the hit not penalized? I know RGIII was the runner, so no defenseless, but it was TO THE HEAD.
You need to review the rules... There was nothing to penalize. Bob had no chance of picking up a first down. Bob needs to step out of bounds, to avoid LEGAL contact from opponents unecessarily.
Isn't any hit to the head a penalty? If not, it SHOULD be.
Seriously??????

Don't roll your eyes at me

by **Bob 0119** » Tue Oct 09, 2012 6:40 pm

Countertrey wrote:
ACW wrote:How was the hit not penalized? I know RGIII was the runner, so no defenseless, but it was TO THE HEAD.
You need to review the rules... There was nothing to penalize. Bob had no chance of picking up a first down. Bob needs to step out of bounds, to avoid LEGAL contact from opponents unecessarily.

I never have a chance of picking up a first down; in or out of bounds. Leave me alone

by **Countertrey** » Tue Oct 09, 2012 6:56 pm

Bob 0119 wrote:
Countertrey wrote:
ACW wrote:How was the hit not penalized? I know RGIII was the runner, so no defenseless, but it was TO THE HEAD.
You need to review the rules... There was nothing to penalize. Bob had no chance of picking up a first down. Bob needs to step out of bounds, to avoid LEGAL contact from opponents unecessarily.

I never have a chance of picking up a first down; in or out of bounds. Leave me alone

You got it...
Just as soon as you change your name to Billy...

by **Red_One43** » Tue Oct 09, 2012 7:56 pm

Griffin Cleared to Practice on Wednesday