We see things very differently then as I didn't see anything wrong with the hit on Finley.

Originally Posted by: sschind 

People seem to forget how good the Bengal defense is, they haven't given up 300 yards passing in 17 straight games

Originally Posted by: dhazer 

You mean other than it being against the rules? You can't hit a receiver who is catching a pass in the head. It's as simple as that. The defender didn't hit Finley anywhere BUT his head.

Originally Posted by: steveishere 

The ONLY other option would have been for him not to hit him at all them because they were going straight for each other. I can see the illegality in light of the defenseless receiver rule but I still don't think it was a bad hit. He didn't dive at him and he didn't lead with his helmet. He was leading with his shoulder (isn't that the way tackles are supposed to be made) and his shoulder hit Finley in the helmet. It was an illegal hit by definition of the rules but I don't think it was intentional and I don't think it was worthy of a fine. Yes it should have drawn a penalty because it was against the rules but it wasn't as bad as everyone is making it out to be.

This is exactly the kind of play that so many Packers fans who are bitching about it now would be defending it as perfectly fine if the roles were reversed. Not saying anyone here in particular but a lot of them would be and you know it.

Originally Posted by: sschind