What about Bob? Glauber's NFL Blog

I totally agree with you. And how about his reaction, throwing his hands up in the air like he is innocent...

Agreed, Bob. His reaction was laughable. His choice of victim did not help his cause. A particularly fragile high profile QB, I think near every viewer expected McNabb's season to end on that play.

If this is the way the NFL is going to work, I expect to see a whole lot of other players suspended after being called for the same penalty three times in one season. Anyone that has three helmet to helmet hits, suspension. Anyone with three blocking below the knees penalties, suspension. Anyone with three roughing the quarterback penalties, suspension. Anyone with three blocking in the back penalties, suspension. All these types of penalties were enacted for player safety. But, I don't see any other players being suspended for any of these. Flag him, fine. Fine him, okay. But suspension???? C'mon.

Brad, given that Roy forced the rule change due to on field injuries he has to expect to be held to a higher standard. That he took down a high profile QB, and reacted like a petulant child, sealed the deal.

Brad:

This guy has been warned REPEATEDLY. And not just this season. He cannot help himself with this tackling technique. Other guys who get fined usually get the message and they don't do it again. If they do - I'm thinking of a guy like former safety Chuck Cecil - they get suspended.

Craig, you're suggesting that NFL rules should be enforced differently based on the players involved? It's inherently dishonest and unsporting to think that way. Neither you or Bob gave any sort of argument as to why other players don't haven't been suspended for multiple infractions. Not only is it yet another bogus defense-crippling rule, but the league is singling out a high-profile player simply because he is high-profile.

Bob, the NFL knew how you felt and did it just to give you a nice Birthday present!

Happy B-Day BG!

"you're suggesting that NFL rules should be enforced differently based on the players involved?"
I am not saying they should, I am saying they are. If you are a repeat high profile offender you are under the magnifying glass. Similarly, fouling a high profile, injury prone QB is begging for suspension. It is NFL reality, regardless of how you feel rules "should" be enforced. For Williams to pull down McNabb in that fashion was remarkably stupid and reckless; the suspension is deserved.

Stephen:

I'm telling you that the vast majority of players who are fined for various infractions DO NOT repeat those habitually like Williams. Do some guys still get fined for repeat offense? Yes. But again, they generally knock it off and behave properly.

Suspending a player is a huge deal, because there are only 16 games. That's why the league needed to send a strong message on this one. For crying out loud, he did it three times, and nearly ripped McNabb's knees out of their sockets. What more proof do you want? Plain and simple, Williams just does not get it.

And that line about a defense-crippling rule? It's designed to prevent players from getting crippled. It's a terrible and dangerous tackling technique and it needs to stop.

The rules still apply to everyone, so I would expect the NFL to do the same to repeat offenders, no matter the infraction. I realize that he was the reason for the rule. So what? I will give you that he is under greater scrutiny, and his reaction to the penalty was pretty ridiculous, but that doesn't mean that the NFL should treat him different than any other player. I'm not talking about the officials, they did their job and correctly called the penalty. The NFL hierarchy is selectively enforcing different rules on different players. Sounds like NASCAR to me.
Now, if it comes out that the NFL told him he would be suspended if he did it again, I have no problem with it. But, I haven't seen that reported. Everyone knows the rules and other players have had repeated penalties without suspension. I'm not talking about off-sides, false starts, etc., but the rules that were enacted to promote safety within the game.
If the NFL really wants to promote safety within the game, they need to enact a rule on offensive lineman taking out defensive lineman's knees. Not trying to change the subject, but far more players are injured on that type play than they are with the so called "horse collar".

Brad:
"Williams had already been fined twice for the horse collar tackle - which was made illegal when he used the technique to bring down Terrell Owens in a 2004 game against the Eagles. Owens suffered a fractured fibula on the play.

---Williams was warned that further infractions could lead to suspension.--- He will appeal the decision, although it's expected the NFL will uphold the punishment."

Learn to read.

Every time he does that tackle I cringe because you can see the player's leg being bent in an unsafe direction. Dawkins on the Eagles is another one to watch out for.

I hope that on Sunday, the Cowboys intentionally tackle EVERY Carolina Panther this way. It is worth the fine money to make a point that the NFL is a Communist Regime and that this is a STUPID rule.

So, what? Is a "Roy Williams special" really any more dangerous than a facemask penalty? I DON'T THINK SO. But when was the last time a player was SUSPENDED W/O PAY for a facemask.

C'mon Gene Williams! We're tired of all this "Big-brother-watches-the-games-and-hands-out-fines" s**t.

Let 'em play football!

Pretty soon, a defensive player will only be able to tackle from the belt to the shoulder pads in front and try not to be too violent or he will be suspended for 4 games.

I'm not kidding, this is getting ridiculous.

ridiculous rule:

You're wrong. It is a gutless tackling technique. Period.

To Brad: you have a point about suspending for 3-time violation of penalties. But some of those penalties can be done unintentionally during the act of tackling, like helmet to helmet, or facemask. Others, such as block below the knees, are usually more intentional, and they should suspend a player does does it 3 times in a season.

Grabbing the back of someone's collar is pretty much always an intentional act. It's not like Williams accidentally slips his hand inside the collar while he's trying to tackle. He's may not be consciously trying to do it, but he's subconsciously doing it out of (bad) habit.

I see this tackle every week. I never see it called against anyone else.

If it's unsafe, then everyone who uses it should get a penalty, and anyone that uses it regularly should get a suspension.

But to single out one player, while allowing everyone else to do it, is unfair.

Jared, I really don't need your sarcasm. This has been a pretty decent discussion until you posted. I stand corrected. That part didn't stand out to me until you so nicely pointed it out. If that's what he was told, then that's what he gets, like I said.

Since that is the rule (It's a stupid rule) then I've got no problem with it. The biggest issue I have is that it is oneof the most inconsistent calls being made on the field. Unlike pass interference it is pretty much black and white. With Sunday Ticket I see a lot of football each week. I see a horse collar about 4-8 times a week. It is called only about 50% of the time. WHY? The most recent was on MNF when Robert Ferguson was brought down with a blatant horse collar at the 1 yrd line and NO FLAG.

One thing to remember with the horse collar tackle: It is permitted at or near the line of scrimmage, since it can often be a reflex move by a defensive player who is trying to grab onto anything he can. It is illegal in the open field.

There was one play against the Giants where I was convinced Williams used the horse collar technique on Amani Toomer, but the league at it very carefully and determined it was not. The player has to be brought down immediately as a result of the tackle - that's where the dangerous part comes in.