Controversy Surrounds Branch’s Strike on Smith-Schuster

Colts linebacker Zaire Franklin expressed his belief that JuJu Smith-Schuster deserved to be hit by Brian Branch. Franklin made these remarks while guesting on the “Club 520” podcast, where he addressed Branch’s one-game suspension for striking Smith-Schuster after the Chiefs’ recent loss to the Lions.

“JuJu needed to react—like, really,” Franklin commented. “I mean, let’s get real here… He kind of asked for it. Brian Branch is just getting the job done.” It’s an interesting take, isn’t it? Almost makes you think about whether fighting back is part of the game or just a distraction.

Branch had approached Smith-Schuster, hitting him on the helmet after the Chiefs receiver extended a hand. Shortly after, Kansas City running back Isaiah Pacheco intervened, attempting to push Branch away. This led to a chaotic scene as Smith-Schuster lunged at Branch, igniting a brawl on the field.

In the aftermath, Branch reflected on his actions, calling them “childish” and acknowledging that he “shouldn’t have done it.” He explained that he was reacting to what he perceived as an illegal block behind Smith-Schuster.

However, Franklin had a different perspective. He suggested that Smith-Schuster often engages in sneaky tactics, saying, “[Smith-Schuster’s] that kind of player. He’ll pull those sly moves, like pushing you from behind and then acting innocent. It’s just how he plays.”

On a different note, Lions head coach Dan Campbell clearly disapproved of Branch’s actions. He stated, “I love Brian, but that behavior is unacceptable here. It’s not what we stand for, and I apologize to Andy Reid and the Chiefs.” Campbell emphasized that such conduct isn’t representative of the team’s values.

Ultimately, it’s one of those situations that sparks debate—whether players should retaliate or take the high road. What do you think? Is a hit like Branch’s justified, or just a step too far?