Jump to content

Sean Payton suspended for 2012, Tebow a Jet


Brave-Bird 08

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 280
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Pretty sure this hit on Steve Smith in the endzone is pretty good proof of bounty hunting:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wx3gQSk1T54

If you can find an excuse for a hit like this...

No one's looking for excuses. If you've read any of my posts you know I've said again and again that the bounty program and the coverup were very stupid and the Saints deserve the hammer they got. I'm simply annoyed by the media and league hypocrisy.

I thought Harper's cheap shot on Smith was stupid when it happened and I still do, though I don't think it says s*** about bounties. What it says is that Roman Harper is sometimes an idiot. His reasoning was lame and ridiculous (basically, "nobody prances into the end zone against our D").

@ Eye, I'm as objective as any fan of any team can be. Not 100% but I can call it as I see it. I'm not defending the Saints or what they did, simply pointing out that there's hypocrisy and that the whole bounty issue is overblown. Don't take it from me; listen to interviews with players and former players. They're far more mellow about the whole thing than Peter King and the other hysterical types in the media who act like the Saints took out mob contracts on other players.

92512B20-6264-4E6C-AAF2-7A1D44E9958B-481-00000047E259721F.jpeg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm having a very hard time cutting through what can only be regarded as homer-vision, but let's look at one example of what I think is your larger point.

Remember when Leonard Marshall put the crown of his helmet in Montana's helmet bumper and knocked him out for about a season-and-a-half? Did Marshall intend to hurt Montana? You answered below that if he didn't, that hit was okay, but it wouldn't be okay if he intended to injure Montana. But nothing about the hit itself would've changed and Montana would've suffered the exact same injuries either way.

Of course he would have. And please don't mistake "allowable under the rules" for "always a beneficial thing" - Marshall's hit on Montana was the former, but not the latter.

The question is not whether such injuries occur in the normal course of play, but rather whether players are encouraged to deliberately try to inflict such injuries because they have a financial motive to do so.

I maintain that they are. The League agrees, which is (partly) why bounties are illegal. Bounties encourage dirty play, playing to injure rather than playing to the ball. Those kinds of plays which we now are starting to understand have very long-reaching consequences.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And FWIW, it's not like the NFL just abruptly started to care about deliberately inflicting injuries, as some have claimed.

I remember that scumbag Charles Martin with his "hit list" towel:

charles-martin.jpg

For that cheap-shot hit on Jim McMahon, Martin was benched for two games, and forfeited those game checks. At that time, it was the most severe penalty ever handed down for on-the-field actions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@ Everyone...please don't dismiss valid points just because I happen to be a Saints fan.

Isn't there a huge difference between intending to hurt another player to collect a bounty and simply getting a bounty payment if your LEGAL hit happens to put a guy out of the game? For example, McCray absolutely blew up Kurt Warner but media whining aside, that was a clean and legal hit. If they gave him a grand for that, yes, it was against league rules but would it have been morally wrong?

92512B20-6264-4E6C-AAF2-7A1D44E9958B-481-00000047E259721F.jpeg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@ Everyone...please don't dismiss valid points just because I happen to be a Saints fan.

Isn't there a huge difference between intending to hurt another player to collect a bounty and simply getting a bounty payment if your LEGAL hit happens to put a guy out of the game? For example, McCray absolutely blew up Kurt Warner but media whining aside, that was a clean and legal hit. If they gave him a grand for that, yes, it was against league rules but would it have been morally wrong?

Yes. Bounties ex-anti or ex-post are morally wrong, because it's a financial incentive to injure in one game or the next. There should be no additional financial rewards for a guy injuring an opposing player.

If you're getting paid hundreds of thousands of dollars and need additional motivation to play hard...there's something wrong.

Smart is believing half of what you hear. Genius is knowing which half.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@ Everyone...please don't dismiss valid points just because I happen to be a Saints fan.

Isn't there a huge difference between intending to hurt another player to collect a bounty and simply getting a bounty payment if your LEGAL hit happens to put a guy out of the game? For example, McCray absolutely blew up Kurt Warner but media whining aside, that was a clean and legal hit. If they gave him a grand for that, yes, it was against league rules but would it have been morally wrong?

If you know you could receive a bounty if a player you hit is injured, how do you differentiate between the two? The morally wrong part is in two parts, one the payment for injuring a player, and the incentive to injure a player. Both put opposition players at extra risk of injury in an already dangerous game.

Wembley-1.png

2011/12 WFL Champions

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I dont recall any major punishment for Buddy Ryan and the bounty bowl either. The Saints deserved a hit. I have no problem with the loss of some picks, buy I agree with Blue Sky this was overkill.

ecyclopedia.gif

www.sportsecyclopedia.com

For the best in sports history go to the Sports E-Cyclopedia at

http://www.sportsecyclopedia.com

champssigtank.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I dont recall any major punishment for Buddy Ryan and the bounty bowl either. The Saints deserved a hit. I have no problem with the loss of some picks, buy I agree with Blue Sky this was overkill.

The league is currently in litigation over head trauma, something which was not in play on the previous era(s). The league is trying to Insulate themselves.

Also all 32 teams think of their players not as people or sons (but for Coughlin), but as assets. Bounties are simply to destroy assets.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also there was never any proof of any wrong with regards to either 'Bounty Bowl'.

But really, perhaps it should have been investigated and sorted out. But just because it wasn't doesn't mean the NFL should be as cavalier about the health and well being of it's players now.

Wembley-1.png

2011/12 WFL Champions

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And FWIW, it's not like the NFL just abruptly started to care about deliberately inflicting injuries, as some have claimed.

I remember that scumbag Charles Martin with his "hit list" towel:

charles-martin.jpg

For that cheap-shot hit on Jim McMahon, Martin was benched for two games, and forfeited those game checks. At that time, it was the most severe penalty ever handed down for on-the-field actions.

Speaking of that hit, there was a piece on ESPN I saw a few days ago. He's got pretty bad short-term memory loss from concussions he got playing, one of which was from that play. That is why the NFL is coming down so hard on this.

EDIT: Also, it's weird seeing those pants stripes on the Packers. Never seen those before.

Wordmark_zpsaxgeaoqy.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Those were part of Forrest Gregg's ill-considered revamp of the Packers uniform. Same with the logo on the sleeves.

Also there was never any proof of any wrong with regards to either 'Bounty Bowl'.

But really, perhaps it should have been investigated and sorted out. But just because it wasn't doesn't mean the NFL should be as cavalier about the health and well being of it's players now.

And yet that's the excuse so often given.

Frankly, I think the NFL should be applauded for caring more about these issues now than they did in the past. Doesn't matter if they're doing so out of financial interest in their "assets", threat of lawsuits, increased medical knowledge, sincere change of heart or any other reason, they're still doing the right thing now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A couple thoughts:

1. Glad the NFL is being more serious about player safety the last few years. Just reading the description of The Hunger Games freaks me out, and the NFL has been heading in that direction until a year or two ago.

2. I'm also glad they don't force teams to "vacate" seasons like the NCAA does. You cannot unring a bell.

3. While I don't think these penalties are outrageous, I do feel Bill Belichick should have been suspended a couple games for the spygate incident a couple of years ago. IMHO, he got off easy.

"I did absolutely nothing and it was everything I thought it could be." -Peter Gibbons

RIP Demitra #38

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I dont recall any major punishment for Buddy Ryan and the bounty bowl either. The Saints deserved a hit. I have no problem with the loss of some picks, buy I agree with Blue Sky this was overkill.

You should ask Andre Waters's family what they think about Buddy Ryan, his bounty bowl, and if the NFL went overboard trying to protect their players with this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A couple thoughts:

1. Glad the NFL is being more serious about player safety the last few years. Just reading the description of The Hunger Games freaks me out, and the NFL has been heading in that direction until a year or two ago.

2. I'm also glad they don't force teams to "vacate" seasons like the NCAA does. You cannot unring a bell.

3. While I don't think these penalties are outrageous, I do feel Bill Belichick should have been suspended a couple games for the spygate incident a couple of years ago. IMHO, he got off easy.

The taping of the Jets occurred in September 2007, just one year into Goodell's term as commissioner. "Fidel" Goodell is acting harder because he has been in office longer and has longer security.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I dont recall any major punishment for Buddy Ryan and the bounty bowl either. The Saints deserved a hit. I have no problem with the loss of some picks, buy I agree with Blue Sky this was overkill.

You should ask Andre Waters's family what they think about Buddy Ryan, his bounty bowl, and if the NFL went overboard trying to protect their players with this.

Not sure that Andre Waters' situation had anything to do with the bounty bowl nor Buddy Ryan.

"The views expressed here are mine and do not reflect the official opinion of my employer or the organization through which the Internet was accessed."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As other posters have stated, the Saints got nuked because of the lies and the coverup, which was very stupid. They deserved to get some extra punishment for that, but overall this still seems pretty excessive. But ce la vie, it's done. What really bothers me is the hypocrisy by the league and media.

The bounties were stupid but the reaction is more a case of media pantywaists. They're like somebody who loves steak and suddenly one day sees a documentary and says, "Wait, they kill cows to make these, oh my God, I'm so appalled." What a joke. Ask yourself: why is Peter King more upset than Favre or Warner? Does that make one bit of sense?

Remember the scene in Friday Night Lights when the star RB is carried off and the two defenders, kneeling in "respect" to the injured player, give a surreptitious little fist bump? Where was the outrage over that depiction, or when Reggie Bush left the '06 Saints-Ravens game with a re-injured ankle and Bart Scott said he "put a little hot sauce" on Bush? For years players with injuries have made comments like "I'm sure they're going to go after my (fill in the blank)" and nobody even blinked.

The league and the media milquetoasts can squeal and wring their hands all they want but if they want to pretend this doesn't go on in most, if not all, football locker rooms, they're dreaming.

I'm not condoning or advocating it or saying the Saints shouldn't have been disciplined. They're not victims here in any way. I'm just saying "hurt their best player" goes on and has gone on for years and the sudden outrage is so hypocritical it's sickening. And I didn't even touch on the league making money selling videos of big hits. :rolleyes:

And all these "NFL insiders" with "exclusive access" blah blah, they had no idea? That's as ludicrous as Brees' denials that he knew anything.

On another note, the Saints will win some games this year and I guess the opponents won't have any excuses, will they?

@Chawls and other Saints fans, this too shall pass.

Maybe I'm just an idiot, but I just learned 2 new words. Each one teach one. Thx BlueSky.

Quote

If you hadn't noticed, Chawls loves his wrestling, whether it be real life or sim. :D

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If a bounty program really is "no big deal", why did the Saints spend 2-plus years lying about it?

Answer that one, homerific Saints fans.

What Saints fan here said it was no big deal? Do you even read peoples' posts or just come on to drop a baseless comment now and then just to stir the pot?

As other posters have stated, the Saints got nuked because of the lies and the coverup, which was very stupid. They deserved to get some extra punishment for that, but overall this still seems pretty excessive. But ce la vie, it's done. What really bothers me is the hypocrisy by the league and media.

The bounties were stupid but the reaction is more a case of media pantywaists. They're like somebody who loves steak and suddenly one day sees a documentary and says, "Wait, they kill cows to make these, oh my God, I'm so appalled." What a joke. Ask yourself: why is Peter King more upset than Favre or Warner? Does that make one bit of sense?

Remember the scene in Friday Night Lights when the star RB is carried off and the two defenders, kneeling in "respect" to the injured player, give a surreptitious little fist bump? Where was the outrage over that depiction, or when Reggie Bush left the '06 Saints-Ravens game with a re-injured ankle and Bart Scott said he "put a little hot sauce" on Bush? For years players with injuries have made comments like "I'm sure they're going to go after my (fill in the blank)" and nobody even blinked.

The league and the media milquetoasts can squeal and wring their hands all they want but if they want to pretend this doesn't go on in most, if not all, football locker rooms, they're dreaming.

I'm not condoning or advocating it or saying the Saints shouldn't have been disciplined. They're not victims here in any way. I'm just saying "hurt their best player" goes on and has gone on for years and the sudden outrage is so hypocritical it's sickening. And I didn't even touch on the league making money selling videos of big hits. :rolleyes:

And all these "NFL insiders" with "exclusive access" blah blah, they had no idea? That's as ludicrous as Brees' denials that he knew anything.

On another note, the Saints will win some games this year and I guess the opponents won't have any excuses, will they?

@Chawls and other Saints fans, this too shall pass.

Maybe I'm just an idiot, but I just learned 2 new words. Each one teach one. Thx BlueSky.

You're no idiot, man. And I just learned a new phrase: Each one teach one. The circle is complete. :D

92512B20-6264-4E6C-AAF2-7A1D44E9958B-481-00000047E259721F.jpeg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.




×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.