Jennings suspended for first half of bowl game (merged)

#427
#427
bamawriter said:
So, your ire is based on the assumption that the SEC would not have suspended Davis is Saban hadn't already done so?
Click to expand...

And the fact it is apples and oranges. The tide player undoubtedly threw punches. To lump Jennings in a conversation to that situation is ridiculous.

But it is also reasonable to say yes, I do make that assumption.
 
#429
#429
cobbwebb0710 said:
So I suppose the league office can now rewatch past games and dish out penalties or suspensions. I only played ball through high school and I can’t count the number of times I got stepped on after a play. I think of the vandy players helmet had not been removed, this would be a non issue.
GBO!!
Click to expand...

If the helmet was on then it may not be an issue other than JJ's sprained ankle..
 
#430
#430
bamawriter said:
Why should he have been suspended by the SEC when he was already suspended for the prescribed amount of time by the team?
Click to expand...

Uh...because maybe teams don't get to set discipline in the SEC? Well, maybe except for the Gumps. And if the suspension is a 'he is suspended if we want, but not if we don't', then it really isn't anything at all.

Because, gosh, if teams can just set their own suspensions under their own terms, then JP should announce a Spurrier-like 2 series suspension (if he wants to, but none if he doesn't) for JJ and move on.......
 
#431
#431
At least we get to see him in the second half.........can you imagine how hard is will be for our opponent to tackle him after he has rested the whole first half and has been chomping at the bit to play? Mercy
 
  • Like
Reactions: Vol737 and malinoisvol
#432
#432
allvol123 said:
And the fact it is apples and oranges. The tide player undoubtedly threw punches. To lump Jennings in a conversation to that situation is ridiculous.
Click to expand...

I mean, intentional or not, if you give me the choice between being repeatedly punched in the shoulder pads or taking a cleat to my bare head, I'm taking the punches every time.

But it is also reasonable to say yes, I do make that assumption.
Click to expand...

What are you basing that upon?
 
#433
#433
VolInNW said:
Uh...because maybe teams don't get to set discipline in the SEC?
Click to expand...

What? Teams suspend players all the time for all kinds of reasons.

And if the suspension is a 'he is suspended if we want, but not if we don't', then it really isn't anything at all.
Click to expand...

So, Bama suspended Davis for the usual amount of time the SEC would hand down for that transgression, and the SEC chose to accept the penalty. But your problem is that the SEC didn't come out publicly and say "You don't get to suspend Davis for a half, we do!"? Please correct me if I'm misunderstanding your position.

Because, gosh, if teams can just set their own suspensions under their own terms, then JP should announce a Spurrier-like 2 series suspension (if he wants to, but none if he doesn't) for JJ and move on.......
Click to expand...

If Pruitt had announced on Tuesday that Jennings was suspended for the first half of the bowl game, do you think the SEC would have said "Nope, not good enough,"?
 
#434
#434
Vol737 said:
I've not posted anything on Jennings till now, but a few random thoughts. First, intent v. lack of intent. Can we definitively determine, NOT assume, but definitively determine Jennings' intent was to step on the face of the Vandy player? I don't know and we may never know. I tend to think there's no way I, personally, don't know where someone's head is when I get up from tackling them.

You must not have tackled many people but any decent tackler knows this situation ands does not need to look.

With that being said clear intent is difficult to decipher. I think the punishment comes from the entirety of the situation. Per usual, JJ's biggest problem is JJ.
Click to expand...
 
#435
#435
bamawriter said:
I mean, intentional or not, if you give me the choice between being repeatedly punched in the shoulder pads or taking a cleat to my bare head, I'm taking the punches every time.



What are you basing that upon?
Click to expand...

Take a clear to the head? Did you see his face?
 
#441
#441
allvol123 said:
Take a cleat to the head? Did you see injuries.
Click to expand...

Did he not step on the dude's head? Sure looked like he did. If he didn't, then I'm with everyone who says he shouldn't have been suspended.

And to add your choices are still irrelevant. One was purposeful and the other is inconclusive in terms of intent.
Click to expand...

Like I said last night, I don't believe that a lack of intent precludes any punishment. It could certainly be a mitigating factor, but the SEC hasn't made it clear if that's the case.
 
#444
#444
The Fulmer - Sankey conversation:
Sankey: Phil we've got a problem with this Juan thing. The snowflakes in Connecticut are giving us all kinds of grief and we can't afford to lose any sponsors over something like this. Now I dislike Candy a much as you do, 2000 fans for a game is a reason for a suspension for them, but we've got to do something. How about I suspend Juan for the bowl game but let him go with the team and get the swag bag?
Fulmer: Juan didn't do anything that deserves a suspension, what bowl game?
Sankey: I know he didn't, there was not one glimmer of satisfaction on his face for stomping that boy, but the snowflakes are flying. What bowl game do you want?
Fulmer: Something in Florida, and how about suspending him for the second half of the game.
Sankey: We can probably do that, but we probably should make it the first half. The defense will be worn out and your quarterback has better second half numbers.
Fulmer: You're right, I can live with that, release a statement about the suspension and I'll release one with some drivel about our spirited conversation and a weak statement about support.
Sankey: Thanks Phil, maybe we can keep Hubert Owens away from your games next year....with the exception of BAMA of course.
Fulmer: Of course, and if we pull a strong draw for the Bowl, Juan can sue to play and you'll give in, right?
Sankey: Of course, the snowflakes will have gone to their next victim.
 
  • Like
Reactions: VolsSince78
#445
#445
VolArmy74 said:
Bama was allowed to handle it however they saw fit. Tennessee was not. That is where the bias is clear.
Click to expand...

Bama "saw fit" to handle it with the typical punishment the conference doles out. Do you have some personal knowledge that Tennessee attempted to do the same thing and were preempted by the conference?

Your position is so odd. It doesn't matter that Davis sat out a half; what matters is that the SEC accepted Bama's punishment, even though it was exactly what the SEC would have mandated.
 
#446
#446
bamawriter said:
Did he not step on the dude's head? Sure looked like he did. If he didn't, then I'm with everyone who says he shouldn't have been suspended.



Like I said last night, I don't believe that a lack of intent precludes any punishment. It could certainly be a mitigating factor, but the SEC hasn't made it clear if that's the case.
Click to expand...

If you're not sure, then you dont need to be suspending someone. Surely there were visible injuries if he did.

The SEC does a great job of making very little clear.
 
  • Like
Reactions: VOLSONLY and Behr
#448
#448
VFL-82-JP said:
well, if you wouldn't know...and i would...maybe i'm more of an athlete than you! ;)

p.s. how does standing in the back end of a C-130 flying nap of the earth while the pilots pretend they're evading ground fire, waving and shouting while giving commands to 62 paratroopers, keeping from getting tangled up in your own static line, and paying attention to the open door right beside measure up? That's about the most extreme set of conditions I've faced in the last couple of decades, but I knew where I was stepping--without looking--every time I did that.
Click to expand...
Welp JP, we finally disagree. :)

I can totally see all the pushing, shoving and pulling going on there and losing balance and stepping forward, backward or to the side and not having time to watch where your foot was going. Natural reaction.

Lol, come on, you've never stepped in dog crap by accident, only on purpose?
 
  • Like
Reactions: VOLSONLY and VFL-82-JP
#450
#450
allvol123 said:
If you're not sure, then you dont need to be suspending someone. Surely there were visible injuries if he did.
Click to expand...

So, your position is that Jennings didn't step on his face, at all? Interesting. Even the folks most pissed off about the suspension don't seem to agree with that.

The SEC does a great job of making very little clear.
Click to expand...

On that we agree.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement





Back
Top