Sandrock wrote:I agree, the penalty was way too harsh. I was initially thinking 5 games, 2 games for punching an opposing player and 3 more for going psychotic afterward.
I watched the news conference and he just flip-flopped over and over again. Kelly made a big mistake by not using the term indefinite, but none of it would matter if he just came out and said "The way I handled the initial situation was wrong and here's the plan I have in place to fix my mistake." Nobody would hold that against him and he'd probably be lauded for being able to admit freely when he screws up.
I was at Safeway this morning and heard one guy likening this situation to Nebraska and Lawrence Phillips, which is a shame and hopefully doesn't come to light on a national stage. The reinstatement is similar, the 'crime' definitely is not.
I totally agree. Kelly is making himself look foolish by not "manning up" admitting he passed judgment too swiftly and harshly.
I really don't see how anyone can compare this to the Nebraska and Lawrence Phillips situation. Phillips assaulted a female away from the game, Blount assaulted a player on the field. If anything Blount should have received Phillips punishment while Phillips received Blount's...with no reinstatement of course.
Regardless, in the end I think that most people will view this as doing the right thing by Blount. I've been following the story religiously, so far all of the pundits and commentators have agreed that the decision was too harsh, and that Blount should have been given the right to earn his way back onto the field after a reasonable suspension. Not all have agreed with how Kelly has backtracked and flip flopped, but I think after all is said and done people will agree with the decision to give Blount a second chance.