I'm kind of surprised...

[kmoose]

Exactly. I've seen way worse happen in lacrosse for God's sake. Not to mention hockey and rugby.

This wasn't a Marcus Vick incident at all and people need to get that through their head. He stepped on someone as he went into the pile and kept playing... I don't see the big deal.

The big deal is that he held the guy down, so that he could step on him. It's not like he was running full speed to the pile, and the guy took a dive in front of him. If you don't think that Neal held the guy down, with the intention of stepping on him, then I'm not sure we watched the same video.

 

[IrishLax]

The big deal is that he held the guy down, so that he could step on him. It's not like he was running full speed to the pile, and the guy took a dive in front of him. If you don't think that Neal held the guy down, with the intention of stepping on him, then I'm not sure we watched the same video.

I just watched it again to double check. You and I have completely different views on the play. I see him keep the man on the ground and I see him step on him going into the pile. I also don't see anything dirty or malicious.

Fact is the only way he goes into the pile is pushing him down and climbing over. If you can tell me a scenario that doesn't involve him pushing him down and climbing over him I'm all ears and will retract my point.

 

[kmoose]

I just watched it again to double check. You and I have completely different views on the play. I see him keep the man on the ground and I see him step on him going into the pile. I also don't see anything dirty or malicious.

Fact is the only way he goes into the pile is pushing him down and climbing over. If you can tell me a scenario that doesn't involve him pushing him down and climbing over him I'm all ears and will retract my point.

Why would a defender take the time to hold a guy down, at the goal line, in order to get to the pile? Don't you think that he would want to get the pile as soon as possible? Plus, watch it again.... When Neal is getting up, he kind of shortsteps, with his left foot. It almost looks like he meant to step on him with that stride, but missed. I'm not saying Neal is some kind of scumbag here. I think what he did was wrong. I think it was probably a result of getting caught up in the moment, and losing his head. But regardless of that, what he did, in my estimation, was intentional. And that makes it wrong. It also means that there should be some kind of consequence for it.

 

[IrishLax]

Why would a defender take the time to hold a guy down, at the goal line, in order to get to the pile?

This is a good point.

Don't you think that he would want to get the pile as soon as possible? Plus, watch it again.... When Neal is getting up, he kind of shortsteps, with his left foot. It almost looks like he meant to step on him with that stride, but missed. I'm not saying Neal is some kind of scumbag here. I think what he did was wrong. I think it was probably a result of getting caught up in the moment, and losing his head. But regardless of that, what he did, in my estimation, was intentional. And that makes it wrong. It also means that there should be some kind of consequence for it.

Yes and no. I've also intentionally tapped someone in the balls with my stick on the crease to get free for a pass if he's holding me. Me doing that and me taking a huge swing at someones nuts away from the play are completely different acts. I think that line needs to be drawn.

When Marcus Vick stomped on a Louisville player well after a play that is very different from Neal stepping on someone. What Neal did was no worse than when players purposely gouge people in the eye in a fumble scrum. This is basically my argument. Intentional? Yeah, maybe. In the course of the game? Yeah. That's why I don't view it as malicious, although after reading you're last post I can definitely see the intent portion.

If I were a coach, I would not suspend him. But it seems we just have a difference of opinion on the matter.

 

[phgreek]

It's moot, not mute. And people got awfully heated, in the previous thread, for not caring.

Neutered...BT...You out there...So am I off the hook now...

 

[kmoose]

This is a good point.



Yes and no. I've also intentionally tapped someone in the balls with my stick on the crease to get free for a pass if he's holding me. Me doing that and me taking a huge swing at someones nuts away from the play are completely different acts. I think that line needs to be drawn.

When Marcus Vick stomped on a Louisville player well after a play that is very different from Neal stepping on someone. What Neal did was no worse than when players purposely gouge people in the eye in a fumble scrum. This is basically my argument. Intentional? Yeah, maybe. In the course of the game? Yeah. That's why I don't view it as malicious, although after reading you're last post I can definitely see the intent portion.

If I were a coach, I would not suspend him. But it seems we just have a difference of opinion on the matter.

If I saw eye gouging on film, as plainly as I see Neal intentionally stepping on a guy, I would suspend that guy, too. I don't want to get all uber-moral here or anything, I just think that you have to hold these guys accountable, for doing "the wrong thing". You don't have to take away his whole season, or just trash him in the media, but I do think you have to at least take away some playing time. Unless you make him run to the New Meadowlands, and then back to South Bend.

 

[irishff1014]

The only reason you are *****ing is because you were in the Navy. It must not be that big of a Deal when NO media outlet has said anything about.

 

[kmoose]

The only reason you are *****ing is because you were in the Navy. It must not be that big of a Deal when NO media outlet has said anything about.

You have no idea what my motivation is, Mr. Freud. I thought I made it clear that I simply believe in holding these guys accountable. The actual act means less to me than the apparent flippant attitude of some people on this board, about it.

 

[irishff1014]

You are beating a dead horse. The officals never threw a flag and Kelly must not have thought it was that bad becasue if he that lod boy would have heard about it on the sidelines.

 

[IrishTimer]

I'm kind of surprised that people were defending Kerry Neal's actions, in the "stomp" thread that was closed. If you watch the video, Neal holds the player down, just before stepping on him. That shows intent. And it's also pi$$-poor sportsmanship. I might just be an old, idealistic guy, but I can't support any pi$$-poor sportsmanship. It flies in the very face of what makes ND different (or is supposed to). That thread degenerated into a bunch of whining and name calling. I'm not trying to revive that, I just can't believe that people are trying to justify intentionally poor sportsmanship.

Thank you.

(1) game suspension is in order from Kelly in my opinion! I hope this is not a sign of things to come at ND...pretending like nothing happened!

Agreed.

Oh, and I'll take that over the cheap shot Navy pulled on Blanton last year any day of the week.

The cheap shot on Blanton was worse. Yes. But that still doesn't excuse Neal's actions.

I like our players to play with class and have good sportsmanship but these kids are also human and in the heat of the moment through obvious frustration neal stepped on the guy. I'm not going to lose sleep over it and I think too much attention is being given to this topic. Should Neal have done that? No. Are there more important matters with the way we played that game or how we didn't play the game? YES. this is like beating a dead horse. I'm sure the coaching staff addressed this particular situation with him already.

I agree it's not the most important topic to be discussed about Notre Dame football and I don't think anyone is treating it as such. But it's a subject that is deinitely worth the discussion in general.

Thats not being tough, or intense. That's being weak. Hurt him when he looking right at you. Its like punching someone who is not looking, you're nothing but a scared weak little girl. Bench him.

Or don't hurt him at all and just line up and beat him. But I get what you're saying.

exactly what I was speaking too before, questionable cut blocking is far more dangerous than what Kerry Neal did!

What happened to Blanton wasn't a "questionable cut block". It wasa dirty cheap shot. Comparing the "cut block" on Blanton to the block the Navy threw at Neal and Neal's reaction is apples and oranges.

The thing is: I don't think you can classify that as a "cut block". That was just an absolute cheap shot.

Still, it in no way justifies what Neal did. If I were the Head Coach at ND, I would publicly announce that Neal was suspended for one or two games, for that play. I don't think he should be hammered, but I do think he needs to be disciplined to the point of sitting out a game or two. Given the circumstances, I think that would be fair.

Excellent post.

 

[kmoose]

You are beating a dead horse. The officals never threw a flag and Kelly must not have thought it was that bad becasue if he that lod boy would have heard about it on the sidelines.

Yes, I apologize to the board in it's entirety for having my own standards and morals, and not letting ESPN, Brian Kelly, or the game officials do my thinking for me.

 

[IrishTimer]

You have no idea what my motivation is, Mr. Freud. I thought I made it clear that I simply believe in holding these guys accountable. The actual act means less to me than the apparent flippant attitude of some people on this board, about it.

Yes, I apologize to the board in it's entirety for having my own standards and morals, and not letting ESPN, Brian Kelly, or the game officials do my thinking for me.

I would agree with this line of thinking. Like I mentioned in the other thread and correct me if I'm wrong but Spikes gouged a Georgia players' eyes and wasn't flagged for it yet even Urban Meyer(who I despise and I think is a slimeball) handed out a punishment. I don't think Kelly is a slimeball if he doesn't punish Neal..at least publicly.... but saying "there was no flag" on the play really doesn't give Neal a pass for his actions IMO.

And just more food for thought..there's nothing saying Kelly didn't punish Neal at practice or behind closed doors etc either.

 

[irishff1014]

I would agree with this line of thinking. Like I mentioned in the other thread and correct me if I'm wrong but Spikes gouged a Georgia players' eyes and wasn't flagged for it yet even Urban Meyer(who I despise and I think is a slimeball) handed out a punishment. I don't think Kelly is a slimeball if he doesn't punish Neal..at least publicly.... but saying "there was no flag" on the play really doesn't give Neal a pass for his actions IMO.

And just more food for thought..there's nothing saying Kelly didn't punish Neal at practice or behind closed doors etc either.

I would agree for all we know he might made him run forever.

 

[Irish Rogue]

I'm sure you probably don't care, but I'm a Navy veteran. I served alongside quite a few Academy grads. If you think that they intentionally attempt to injure people's knees, then you are sadly mistaken.

You are wrong on this. Last years dirty play on Blanton was an obvious attempt to injure. Military or not they are just as dirty as any. Ask Ron Powlus when his arm was broken by a Navy LB who then jumped for joy after this.

 

[DirtySecret]

<object width="480" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/WcTaRThg2mQ?fs=1&hl=en_US"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/WcTaRThg2mQ?fs=1&hl=en_US" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="385"></embed></object>

really KMOOSE?

I am not questioning your loyalty to the NAVY, but....

"What I think is crazy is a lack of imagination for what they do. I don't ever get up here and talk about the illegal cut blocks. They hit (Brian Smith) illegally last year and put him out. They hit (Robert Blanton) on one of the most malicious plays I've ever seen since I've been playing. And I called him about it. And I told him I thought it was very poor. He probably thought I called because we lost; I was going to say something to him before the game but I didn't. Very malicious. And in this game, which we're supposed to be playing for our kids, you don't let your players do something like that.

Comments form Corwin Brown, last years game.

"If you think that they intentionally attempt to injure people's knees, then you are sadly mistaken."

AM I?

<object width="480" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/CAlaRIJOX-w?fs=1&hl=en_US"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/CAlaRIJOX-w?fs=1&hl=en_US" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="385"></embed></object>

 

[PapaIrish37]

I was at the game and from my seat in the 3rd level didn't notice the play.

I just watched the video for the first time.

We don't need to resort to name calling and I do believe the Irish should be held to a high standard.

That said, if he wanted to hurt him he could have. Attributing intent or motive from that clip is next to impossible. He was trying to get up and onto the pile. After the cut block, Howell seems to try to keep him down.

It wasn't violent. It wasn't even particularly dangerous.

I would agree with Kelly and it is a good point we don't know what discipline has already been dispensed.

Time to move on and get ready to really STOMP on Tulsa (hopefully).

 

[Zibby32]

I could post the text of a link all i want...Listen to the anger behind the mans voice!!

 

[IrishJayhawk]

I'll weigh in once.

Here's how I look at it...if I step back and change the uniforms of the two players, I would be really ticked about the stomp. Sure looked like he did it just to stomp on the guy and that getting to the pile was sort of an excuse.

That said, the Blanton hit was worse. No doubt.

That's it. I'm out.

 

[Old Man Mike]

I'm with Jayhawk--one last time into this misery and i'm out. It seems to me that everybody's making some assumptions here. I'd like to ask Coach two things before i start railing on him: 1). what in his coach's discipline parlance does the word "address" a situation mean? Does it mean look at the play and talk to Neal about what he was doing? Or does it mean seriously punishing the player? I'll bet that Kelly means that "addressing" a situation means a severe punishment, and I bet that most coaches mean this. 2). what does he and his staff see when THEY look at the play? It's just possible that they don't see the play like some would like to see it. Until I got some facts from Kelly about these two issues, I can't see the point of all this criticism about Kelly and Notre Dame. [not trying to convince anyone of anything--just my opinions]. End. Out.

 

[phgreek]

I'm kind of surprised that people were defending Kerry Neal's actions, in the "stomp" thread that was closed. If you watch the video, Neal holds the player down, just before stepping on him. That shows intent. And it's also pi$$-poor sportsmanship. I might just be an old, idealistic guy, but I can't support any pi$$-poor sportsmanship. It flies in the very face of what makes ND different (or is supposed to). That thread degenerated into a bunch of whining and name calling. I'm not trying to revive that, I just can't believe that people are trying to justify intentionally poor sportsmanship.

Couple parts to this...we are divining intent based on holding the guy down, but the technique for defeating a blocker who drops his head below your chest is the grap his head/back and drive him into the turf face-first while keeping your head up and feet clear...if you have a situation where you are supposed to set the edge...you gotta hold him there until you get a shot at the ball carrier. If you let him up...even a little..he cuts you again from his knees.

Now, to me the stomp itself is more telling of intent...could be argued he was trying to jam a cleat in the guy...and it is unfortunate it was caught on camera....but I don't think there is a no stomping rule either...maybe I'm wrong...but if you find yourself on the ground between the tackler and the runner...you are going to get stepped on...for sure.

Now...on to my warped sense of justice/fairness...and Moose, being a navy man, you will disagree...but here we go...

I think ANYONE who has stepped onto a field learns quikly that the cut block is the lowest, cheapest technique still allowed by the rules...it results in more injuries than any other technique. To this point I think we'd all agree.

I think while teams are competitive to the extreme, they do not want to see a guy from the other team get hurt...yes they like to ring each other's bells, but no one wants to see a guy go down with a knee or ankle. To this point I think we'd agree.

Navy employs the cut as its staple technique...By inference whats that saying about Navy, and their regard for other teams...

it doesn't say in the rulebook you can't stomp on a guy if he is between you and the ball carrier either...but folks seem to think thats cheap...and you all can recount one instance...to me the cut block is as ill willed as that ONE stomp...how many cuts did Navy do in that game 100, 200, 300?

Now...Navy kicked our ***, and I acknowledge that...but to single out one play that seemed to have some ill will in it, and not recognize the ill will and lack of regard for a competitor from Navy as part of their SCHEME seems way off base to me.

...And by the way I can respect what these men do off the field now and later, and still think Navy's football program is "cheap" on the field.

I know I was offended every time a guy tried to cut me, and it was rare he didn't get some nasty retribution from me...so by virtue of it being a Navy guy probably wouldn't have stopped me from kicking him in the ribs when the ref wasn't looking...so I know I'm not the moral/ethical/spartsmanship beacon on this...

 

[PatsandBostonfan1975]

I proudly served in the Army and I would have kicked a officer if I got the chance. Just saying......

 

[vinnymac2402]

Couple parts to this...we are divining intent based on holding the guy down, but the technique for defeating a blocker who drops his head below your chest is the grap his head/back and drive him into the turf face-first while keeping your head up and feet clear...if you have a situation where you are supposed to set the edge...you gotta hold him there until you get a shot at the ball carrier. If you let him up...even a little..he cuts you again from his knees.

Now, to me the stomp itself is more telling of intent...could be argued he was trying to jam a cleat in the guy...and it is unfortunate it was caught on camera....but I don't think there is a no stomping rule either...maybe I'm wrong...but if you find yourself on the ground between the tackler and the runner...you are going to get stepped on...for sure.

Now...on to my warped sense of justice/fairness...and Moose, being a navy man, you will disagree...but here we go...

I think ANYONE who has stepped onto a field learns quikly that the cut block is the lowest, cheapest technique still allowed by the rules...it results in more injuries than any other technique. To this point I think we'd all agree.

I think while teams are competitive to the extreme, they do not want to see a guy from the other team get hurt...yes they like to ring each other's bells, but no one wants to see a guy go down with a knee or ankle. To this point I think we'd agree.

Navy employs the cut as its staple technique...By inference whats that saying about Navy, and their regard for other teams...

it doesn't say in the rulebook you can't stomp on a guy if he is between you and the ball carrier either...but folks seem to think thats cheap...and you all can recount one instance...to me the cut block is as ill willed as that ONE stomp...how many cuts did Navy do in that game 100, 200, 300?

Now...Navy kicked our ***, and I acknowledge that...but to single out one play that seemed to have some ill will in it, and not recognize the ill will and lack of regard for a competitor from Navy as part of their SCHEME seems way off base to me.

...And by the way I can respect what these men do off the field now and later, and still think Navy's football program is "cheap" on the field.

I know I was offended every time a guy tried to cut me, and it was rare he didn't get some nasty retribution from me...so by virtue of it being a Navy guy probably wouldn't have stopped me from kicking him in the ribs when the ref wasn't looking...so I know I'm not the moral/ethical/spartsmanship beacon on this...

I played football in high school and i thought its one of the cheapest things that can be done. try running full speed and have your knees taken out. But it doesnt excuse any cheap shot either but we werent on the feild and playing in that game

 

[laservet]

Moose isn't talking about plays from last year. He isn't even talking about most plays from this year. He's talking about what Neal did on a single play. It was a low rent move by Neal and there should be no place for it in ND football.

I agree. It was a classless, Marcus Vick-esque act and reflects badly upon the player, but letting it slide as a "boys will be boys" moment reflects badly upon the coach and ND. People are already comparing him with Dantonio and his thugs.

 

[Anchorman]

"Football’s an emotional game. I’m sure he’s a great young man," Niumatalolo said. "He probably wishes it didn’t happen. That’s as far as I’ll go. Our guys have moved on."

From an ESPN Blog post on the subject. Time to let it go methinks.

 

[IrishLax]

I agree. It was a classless, Marcus Vick-esque act and reflects badly upon the player, but letting it slide as a "boys will be boys" moment reflects badly upon the coach and ND. People are already comparing him with Dantonio and his thugs.

I vehemently disagree. It is so very dissimilar from the Marcus Vick incident and letting it slide seems fine as Navy doesn't seem to care nor does ND. People need to get over themselves.

 

[laservet]

I vehemently disagree. It is so very dissimilar from the Marcus Vick incident and letting it slide seems fine as Navy doesn't seem to care nor does ND. People need to get over themselves.

So, you'll be that forgiving when the foul goes the other way, right? ;-)

 

[IrishLax]

So, you'll be that forgiving when the foul goes the other way, right? ;-)

I truly would be.

There is a big difference between what Marcus Vick did and what happened in that play. That's all I'm getting at.

YouTube - Marcus Vick Stomps on Player

Watch the Marcus Vick play and Kerry Neal's play side by side... they are really not that comparable.

 

[phgreek]

I truly would be.

There is a big difference between what Marcus Vick did and what happened in that play. That's all I'm getting at.

YouTube - Marcus Vick Stomps on Player

Watch the Marcus Vick play and Kerry Neal's play side by side... they are really not that comparable.

Ok...so I finally went and looked at this Vick stomp...comparing the two is SOOOO fing absurd it pisses me off...[assume a venom filled string of expletives here]. This is sad and frustrating. The MORONS a bleacher report remind me of the larger scale national press...all I'll say to explain is...you can be credibly impartial without needlessly sacrificing one of your own...done with this stupidity...

 

[IrishinSyria]

Ok...so I finally went and looked at this Vick stomp...comparing the two is SOOOO fing absurd it pisses me off...

Absolutely. Truth is not a tit for tat game, Vick came down hard on the back of the guy's knee with obvious intent, Neal defeated a block then tried to get to the ball. End of story. If anyone watches those two videos and can honestly say that they're same thing...