Chris Simms: "JuJu's Injury is Patrick Mahomes Fault"

[Bl00dyBizkitz]

Around the 0:30 and 3:30 mark. This is quite a wild take from Chris Simms, victim blaming Mahomes for throwing to the open receiver.

[-King-]

Originally Posted by htismaqe

More times than not when you launch yourself like that, it ends up with one of those two things taking place.

It's just plain bad football.

And sometimes it's good to go for the big hit and lead with your shoulder. If your a DB and see an opportunity to make a big hit that dislodges the ball, you should take it. That's just football at that point.

[blake5676]

Originally Posted by Pasta Little Brother

It's not correct. That wasn't a "tight window" throw. NOT EVEN CLOSE. Juju was WIDE OPEN and Cisco was engaged with another WR. He bounced off and hit Juju with a cheap shot.

The point of the OP was that Chris Simms is saying Juju is hurt due to Mahomes. That's somewhat contrary to the actual segment, which seemed to me to be more defending against blaming Cisco for a dirty hit. He claimed that Cisco even let up and didn't truck straight through Juju. And then said "IF" anyone is to blame than Mahomes kinda led him. More of an observation than assigning fault. But he also said its just a football play, not dirty and no one did anything wrong per se.

[blake5676]

10/10 times if a player on the Chiefs landed a shot like that this whole board argue to their deathbeds it was a clean solid tackle and we'd be blaming the receiver for lowering his helmet before getting hit.

[Pasta Little Brioni]

Why are you trolling?

[-King-]

Originally Posted by blake5676

10/10 times if a player on the Chiefs landed a shot like that this whole board argue to their deathbeds it was a clean solid tackle and we'd be blaming the receiver for lowering his helmet before getting hit.

Juju couldn't really do anything about it. It was just an unfortunate play. Cisco wasn't trying to be dirty. He was crouched over and even turned away to brace himself and just trying to make a big hit. Just so happened that Juju was bent over and their helmets collided.

It should have been a penalty but there was nothing dirty or cheap about it at all.

[irafreak]

Originally Posted by Pasta Little Brother

Bullshit. The take is absolute lunacy as is yours

That's what the replay looked like.

[Bearcat]

We haven't debated this enough, more hot takes pls.

[htismaqe]

Originally Posted by -King-

Juju couldn't really do anything about it. It was just an unfortunate play. Cisco wasn't trying to be dirty. He was crouched over and even turned away to brace himself and just trying to make a big hit. Just so happened that Juju was bent over and their helmets collided.

It should have been a penalty but there was nothing dirty or cheap about it at all.

I can agree with this.

[DJ's left nut]

Originally Posted by -King-

And sometimes it's good to go for the big hit and lead with your shoulder. If your a DB and see an opportunity to make a big hit that dislodges the ball, you should take it. That's just football at that point.

Justin Reid made a good point, though.

He's been in the league 5 years - never been penalized for helmet to helmet contact. And he's a formidable hitter.

There's a way to hit guys hard and not be dirty. Honestly, I think Cisco managed it (maybe through blind, dumb luck) against MVS. I know Thornhill did it against Evans.

But the shot on JJSS was a dirty hit and it was a conscious decision by Cisco that put them both in that situation.

[Perineum Ripper]

Originally Posted by RealSNR

Damn. So now Simms also needs to get rhino rape AIDS.

Be careful out there, folks. There seems to be a lot of that going around these days

I’m going to go ahead and put a motion in saying we add “rhino rape AIDS” to the CP lexicon.

[Bearcat]

It was Andy Reid's fault for not running the ball more.

And JuJu mom's fault for taking him to practice all those times when he was younger.

[Bearcat]

Originally Posted by DJ's left nut

Justin Reid made a good point, though.

He's been in the league 5 years - never been penalized for helmet to helmet contact. And he's a formidable hitter.

There's a way to hit guys hard and not be dirty. Honestly, I think Cisco managed it (maybe through blind, dumb luck) against MVS. I know Thornhill did it against Evans.

But the shot on JJSS was a dirty hit and it was a conscious decision by Cisco that put them both in that situation.

I did find that to be an interesting tidbit from Reid. Granted, doesn’t necessarily mean he's never been involved in a hit like that, given not even Cisco was penalized.

[-King-]

Originally Posted by DJ's left nut

Justin Reid made a good point, though.

He's been in the league 5 years - never been penalized for helmet to helmet contact. And he's a formidable hitter.

There's a way to hit guys hard and not be dirty. Honestly, I think Cisco managed it (maybe through blind, dumb luck) against MVS. I know Thornhill did it against Evans.

But the shot on JJSS was a dirty hit and it was a conscious decision by Cisco that put them both in that situation.

I mean unless Cisco got down on his knees, how low can you expect him to go in that situation?

[DJ's left nut]

Originally Posted by Bearcat

I did find that to be an interesting tidbit from Reid. Granted, doesn’t necessarily mean he's never been involved in a hit like that, given not even Cisco was penalized.

And Thornhill's hit that was totally clean WAS penalized.

No, it's not a perfect proxy, but I think over large numbers it means something. Cisco isn't going to get any benefit of the doubt going forward. I'm betting he sees an unnecessary roughness flag in the next 2-3 weeks and it's going to be in part because of the attention surrounding those 2 hits.

[ptlyon]

Originally Posted by Bearcat

We haven't debated this enough, more hot takes pls.

This. Nobody has taken the grassy knoll into account yet.