What does Suh get?

[pbmax]

He bagged $40 million as a signing bonus. So he won't lose much from the games and is still making bank.

Yes, that is the problem with going after game checks. Though with the new rookie slots, this will be less of an issue.

[mraynrand]

No, I agree with the 2 games. I am saying Goodell is boxed in by his previous action against Haynesworth and the current resistance to the other League Office dictates about illegal hits, etc. Haynesworth's action was vastly worse and by comparison, Goodell could not offer much more than a 3 game suspension and defend it. I thought he would get 1 game plus time served in the Packer game. The 2 game suspension is an improvement on that option.

I am not claiming that the refs won't call the points of emphasis, though like everything else that has recently gone through the committee, they are calling much of it inconsistently. At least last night's WR hit at least shows that the refs can get the helmet to helmet stuff on receivers correct. The QB hits are still a mess along with catch/not a catch.

I am claiming that a significant portion of the league is currently ignoring the points of emphasis on hitting. And fines and suspensions (though there have been precious few suspensions for hits) aren't winning the battle. Suh's action is outside the scope of the new emphasis, but it illustrates how Goodell has handicapped himself. He can do more to out of game offenders than he can to in game offenders. Its completely backward. The fear of suspending players in a 16 game season is tying his hands.

Good post. I see what you're saying. I think the key is that everyone wants to reduce injuries, but the league just can't bring itself to suspend guys for hard hits and/or hits specifically on vulnerable players - esp. QBs and receivers happening before the whistle. I do think that eventually, the 15 yard penalties, once consistently applied, will change how coaches teach tackling and hitting. But the operative words are 'consistently applied.' All that being said, you still can't prevent injuries like what happened to Collins and Polamalu.

[mraynrand]

Yes, that is the problem with going after game checks. Though with the new rookie slots, this will be less of an issue.

Just write it another way and it looks much more severe: Two game suspension and a $164,000 fine. I think the commish got it right.

[mraynrand]

An interesting idea (at least to me) might be for especially severe (flagrant) penalties to have the player sit out a series.

[pbmax]

Good post. I see what you're saying. I think the key is that everyone wants to reduce injuries, but the league just can't bring itself to suspend guys for hard hits and/or hits specifically on vulnerable players - esp. QBs and receivers happening before the whistle. I do think that eventually, the 15 yard penalties, once consistently applied, will change how coaches teach tackling and hitting. But the operative words are 'consistently applied.' All that being said, you still can't prevent injuries like what happened to Collins and Polamalu.

I meant to post about Polamalu. I can't believe that a player with a history of concussions and who has had two reported incidents of "concussion-like symptoms" will be playing this week. The Steelers alumni have been adversely affected by the brain trauma under discussion and I suppose its both surprising and consistent that they will allow Polamalu to play.

My question is this: since he was suspected of having a concussion (the team specifically said he would have returned if not for league rules) during the game, will he be required to pass the tests this week? Reports out of Pittsburgh already indicate the decision has been made, or at least, expected.

[sharpe1027]

Yes, that is the problem with going after game checks. Though with the new rookie slots, this will be less of an issue.

Maybe they should pro-rate the signing bonus into the suspension. It would be similar to what happened to Vick when the Falcons were going after his bonus.

[gbgary]

Suh does not make $8mil/season in salary.

http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/7286514/at-least-2-game-ban-likely-ndamukong-suh-detroit-lions-sources-say

"Suh makes $82,000 per game. If he's suspended two games, he would lose $164,000 in salary."

plus $50k for being tossed. should have been 3 or more games considering his history and rep.

[mraynrand]

Maybe they should pro-rate the signing bonus into the suspension. It would be similar to what happened to Vick when the Falcons were going after his bonus.

If it were analogous to the Atlanta/Vick deal, it would be Detroit going after a prorated signing bonus, but that would just create animosity between Suh and the Lions. And the league doesn't need to go after this, since they are already essentially fining him $164,000 (am I correctly assuming the league takes his game checks?). That's an enormous fine.

[sharpe1027]

If it were analogous to the Atlanta/Vick deal, it would be Detroit going after a prorated signing bonus, but that would just create animosity between Suh and the Lions. And the league doesn't need to go after this, since they are already essentially fining him $164,000 (am I correctly assuming the league takes his game checks?). That's an enormous fine.

That's one way to look at it, but I'm not suggesting that the lions (vs. the NFL) go after it because it is not 100% analogous. Rather, I'm suggesting that a similar principle be applied. The Falcons went after the pro-rated portion of the signing bonus because it represented money paid for the games Vick was unable to play because he messed up. Arguably, a similar argument could be made for suspended players. They failed to meet their obligations and should not be paid for games they do not play.

You can look at it as fining him $164,000, or you look at it as just not paying for games he doesn't play because he F'ed up. The way I look at it, it is not so much an enormous fine but instead it is an enormous amount of money to pay a guy for doing nothing for two games (when he is doing nothing because he broke the rules).

[Guiness]

I stand corrected, I thought top picks made more than that.

they do, just not in a straight forward fashion.

5 years, $40 million guaranteed, $60 probable, so ya, avg $12mil/year. But like many big contracts, signing and roster bonus' make up a big %age of that.

The league has shot themselves in the foot a bit here with non-guaranteed contracts. They can cut a guy and get out from under the salary, but because of them, players want the money in some other form than game checks - so suspensions like this don't touch it.

edit: looking at the intervening posts...so he essentially gets fined just over $200K. Not sure why anyone thinks this is a big deal to a guy who, over that same stretch of games, will make about $1.5 million if you average out the value of his contract over those games. Shit, the fines are probably even tax deductible.

[hoosier]

Suh's suspension probably won't have any direct affect on the Lions post-season chances. They will lose at NO with or without him, and they probably beat Minnesota without him. At Oakland is the game where they really need him, so I cannot imagine he appeals it.

[RashanGary]

I'm a fan of a little "dirty" in football. Football is played with raw, back against the wall, emotion. Sometimes the guy with the most fear is the guy who plays with the biggest chip. There's nothing like being backed in a corner to bring out the fighter in a person.

I forgive him, but guys who do things like that. . . . . they tend to be a little unstable. Too much of that "back against the wall" edge makes a person over reactionary. We'll see how he pans out. He has a "self destruct" red flag IMO.

[jdrats]

I think Suh should have gotten 3 games because of his pattern of ignorance, and the shitty way he and his coach responded. I can live with 2 games.

Robison should have sat for 1 game because of the potential for injury.

Agree 100% with both points here. NFL made huge mistake not suspending Robison. I'll add that I was leaning towards 2 games until I read his supposed apology from Friday--he still was blaming others, and never really apologized at all.

[retailguy]

they do, just not in a straight forward fashion.

5 years, $40 million guaranteed, $60 probable, so ya, avg $12mil/year. But like many big contracts, signing and roster bonus' make up a big %age of that.

The league has shot themselves in the foot a bit here with non-guaranteed contracts. They can cut a guy and get out from under the salary, but because of them, players want the money in some other form than game checks - so suspensions like this don't touch it.

edit: looking at the intervening posts...so he essentially gets fined just over $200K. Not sure why anyone thinks this is a big deal to a guy who, over that same stretch of games, will make about $1.5 million if you average out the value of his contract over those games. Shit, the fines are probably even tax deductible.

fines and penalties are not tax deductible.

[sharpe1027]

I'm a fan of a little "dirty" in football. Football is played with raw, back against the wall, emotion. Sometimes the guy with the most fear is the guy who plays with the biggest chip. There's nothing like being backed in a corner to bring out the fighter in a person.

I forgive him, but guys who do things like that. . . . . they tend to be a little unstable. Too much of that "back against the wall" edge makes a person over reactionary. We'll see how he pans out. He has a "self destruct" red flag IMO.

This wasn't part of the football play. It was outside of the normal play. It has nothing to do with playing tough.