Barnett fined ... and fined ... and fined ...

[packers11]

http://www.greenbaypressgazette.com/ic/blogs/insider/index.shtml

Barnett fined ... and fined ... and fined ...

Friday, September 19, 2008

Barnett fined ... and fined ... and fined ...
Nick Barnett is on a bad streak when it comes to keeping his paycheck.

As the Press-Gazette's Pete Dougherty first reported last month, Barnett played the season opener against Minnesota for free, forfeiting his game check because of a violation of the NFL's personal conduct policy.

In the season's first two weeks, Barnett has been fined twice more. An NFL spokesman confirmed this morning that Barnett was fined $7,500 for a play in each game -- a horse-collar tackle of Vikings quarterback Tarvaris Jackson on Sept. 8, and "helmet to helmet contact" on a hit on Lions quarterback Jon Kitna last week. Neither play drew a flag.

Counting the loss of 1/17 of his base salary ($117,647) in Week 1, Barnett now has lost $132,647 in a matter of weeks, pending appeal. He's slated to make $2 million in base salary this season, plus bonuses totaling $775,000.

-- Tom Pelissero, tpelisse@greenbaypressgazette.com

[packers11]

Counting the loss of 1/17 of his base salary ($117,647) in Week 1, Barnett now has lost $132,647 in a matter of weeks, pending appeal. He's slated to make $2 million in base salary this season, plus bonuses totaling $775,000.



I thought he got a new contract extension? How does he only make 2 mill in base salary?

[packers11]

nevermind. I looked it up...

www.rotoworld.com

4/10/2007: Signed a six-year, $34.975 million contract. The deal included a $5.1 million signing bonus. 2008: $2 million (+ $625,000 roster bonus + $150,000 workout bonus - $155,882 for violating NFL's conduct policy), 2009: $3 million (+ $375,000 roster bonus + $150,000 workout bonus), 2010: $4 million (+ $375,000 roster bonus + $150,000 workout bonus), 2011: $5.5 million (+ $375,000 roster bonus + $150,000 workout bonus), 2012: $6 million (+ $375,000 roster bonus + $150,000 workout bonus), 2013: Free Agent

[boiga]

I saw both of those plays live and can't understand why they would be illegal offenses.

In that horse collar sack, he initially grabbed the collar, but then released while holding on to the jersey. He also didn't jerk T-Jack back into the ground but just held on until he was stopped and help arrived. There was no possibility of injury from that action and it was a jersey grab in the end, not a horse collar.

For the hit to the helmet on Kitna, Kitna was out of the pocket and Barnett led with his shoulder. Sure it was a brutal tackle, but leading with a shoulder into a guy how is functionally a running back is not a dirty play.

So, either they have decided to be more ticky tacky about these fines than in the past in order to scare NFL players into playing less dangerously, or this is just a bunch of hooey. Barnett didn't break any rules, so why is he being fined?

[MadtownPacker]

He should have never started jaywalking. It is a gateway crime.

[cpk1994]

He should have never started jaywalking. It is a gateway crime.It was racial profiling and you know it. :lol:

[MadtownPacker]

It was racial profiling and you know it. :lol:I just dont understand why he didnt have his buddy Cole gt him out of trouble with the GB police. :lol:

[BallHawk]

Horsecollar? No.

Helmet-to-helmet? Yes.

[boiga]

Horsecollar? No.

Helmet-to-helmet? Yes. I'm just going by memory, so I might be mistaken, but I remember him leading with his shoulder into kitna's chest. There was incidental helmet to helmet contact as they went to the ground, but he did not lead with his helmet.

I guess my issue is that his tackle against a RB wouldn't have been fined. But even though Kitna was out of the pocket and by the rules effectively a running back, Barnett was still expected to go easy on the guy. They are enforcing a double standard that has no basis in the rules.

[BallHawk]

I remember Marinelli going apeshit when Barnett made that hit. I only saw the replay once or twice, but it looked dirty to me.

[Patler]

The Kitna hit wasn't helmet-to-helmet, but from one angle it sure looked like he put his shoulder pad into Kitna's helmet, which I think can also be a penalty too, can't it? (Blow to the head.)

[mission]

The Kitna hit wasn't helmet-to-helmet, but from one angle it sure looked like he put his shoulder pad into Kitna's helmet, which I think can also be a penalty too, can't it? (Blow to the head.)

Yep. That's exactly what I anticipated when I saw it happen in the game ... no flag tho.

[MJZiggy]

I kinda think it should be no flag, no fine. If it was that bad a hit or against the rules, the field should have a little laundry on it. How can it be a fin-able offense if it wasn't even called a penalty. Fines should be no-brainers not even worth discussing.

[boiga]

I kinda think it should be no flag, no fine. If it was that bad a hit or against the rules, the field should have a little laundry on it. How can it be a fin-able offense if it wasn't even called a penalty. Fines should be no-brainers not even worth discussing. I agree insofar that only egregious non-calls should be fined by the league. If someone delivers a dirty hit away from the action and without the refs noticing, fine the guy. But if a ref is right there with a perfect view of what happened and decides not to call the fine, the referee's opinion should trump that of the league office.

Fines should require a higher degree of malicious intent than a personal foul penalty, not less.

[bobblehead]

The Kitna hit wasn't helmet-to-helmet, but from one angle it sure looked like he put his shoulder pad into Kitna's helmet, which I think can also be a penalty too, can't it? (Blow to the head.)

Ok, I'll lead by saying that if you hit his head you will get fined. That out of the way, when I saw it live I expected a flag. When I saw the slowmo replay I saw a legit hit where Kitna ducked at the last second and lowered his head squarly into Barnettts shoulder....No way barnett avoids that without allowing kitna to make a play.

[texaspackerbacker]

I kinda think it should be no flag, no fine. If it was that bad a hit or against the rules, the field should have a little laundry on it. How can it be a fin-able offense if it wasn't even called a penalty. Fines should be no-brainers not even worth discussing.

Both calls were questionable at best, but if they must do something--send a message or whatever, I LIKE the idea that they don't screw the team with a big penalty. Barnett can certainly afford the fine. He may "only" have a $2 million salary, but he does make $34.9 million for six years.

[SnakeLH2006]

He should have never started jaywalking. It is a gateway crime.

No that's ok. I've got plenty of GB clubbin' buddies that know Nick and say he's done some nasty things with some fatties. Couldn't believe that he would take them home. Hey I love him as a player (as a Packer player) :lol: but those things he did after-bar are a crime against men. Whatever I guess and to each their own, as he looked happy here:

http://images.todaystmj4.com/images/Booking600.jpg

[Merlin]

Does anyone know of a site where they list all of the fines levied for the previous week for the entire NFL? I know when we are watching games here and the refs don't throw a flag on an obvious "illegal" hit, we all say he'll be getting a letter in the mail on Monday. I am curious to see the hits and the fines that are associated with those hits since they are usually flagged and flagrant or ones that don't make the news (probably because the officials in the NFL are blind and they don't want to make them look worse then they are).

[Iron Mike]

I kinda think it should be no flag, no fine. If it was that bad a hit or against the rules, the field should have a little laundry on it. How can it be a fin-able offense if it wasn't even called a penalty. Fines should be no-brainers not even worth discussing.

I'll take the opposing viewpoint. I'm OK with a retroactive fine, but as long as they are reviewing film and fining players after the fact, how about reviewing the film and fining the officiating crew for missed calls???

[MadtownPacker]

He should have never started jaywalking. It is a gateway crime.

No that's ok. I've got plenty of GB clubbin' buddies that know Nick and say he's done some nasty things with some fatties. Couldn't believe that he would take them home. Hey I love him as a player (as a Packer player) :lol: but those things he did after-bar are a crime against men. Whatever I guess and to each their own, as he looked happy here:
Oh let me guess, you are one of those dudes that only bangs supermodels? In other words, that means you aint getting none. :lol:

The only crime against men is turning away free, clean coochie.

[packerbacker1234]

Funny.

The horsecollar penalty is a joke. Just because his hand intially started at the collar, it's about how the tackle was made. Hand grasps shoulder pads, then immediatly let go and went to all jersey and drug him down, without any snapping of the neck motion, or anything apparently illegal.

The "vicous" hit on Kitna was a legal tackle by the rulebook that is the NFL, hence no flag was thrown (ok, it wasn't a tackle, but a knockdown).

They seriously called it a helmet to helmet? There was a guy already at Kitna's feet, so barnett went over the top and layed some wood with HIS SHOULDER into kitna. The fact it was his head is irrelevant once outside the pocket. Plus, it appeared to me, it was indeed his chest that took a majority of the blow, and not the actual head.

It didn't look illegal live, or slowed down, or by the rule book. The QB is a running back in that situation. Those same hits happen ALL THE TIME against not just RB's, but WR's, and they are totally legal. This guy had the ball in his hands by the time Barnett made his move to get the hit, and it was gone JUST BEFORE the hit occured.

No reason for these silly fines. Come on NFL, let the players play. It's just like Barnett joked after getting the fine for the hit on kitna "I guess they just don't want us tackling QB's anymore."