|
|
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 8,660
Hall of Famer
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 8,660 |
Quote:
j/c
To me this issue is really pretty simple.
Either the Saints players were "paid to take cheap shots" outside the context of the rules, or they weren't paid to take cheap shots outside the context of the rules.
I've seen nothing to indicate they were "paid to cheat". Only that they were given an incentive to hit harder.
The term "Bounty Gate" is no more or less of a spin on this than "Pay to Perfrom" is. It's simply a matter of which side of this debate you're on as to which spin cycle you like better and promote.
Unless and until the NFL can show evidence that players were paid to play "outside of the rules", which is something I have not seen, this whole thing is an overblown crock of BS on the part of Goodell....
So you had a seat at the table?
Or just another conspiracy theorist?
To say that The Commissioner fabricated the truth is a pretty far fetched story imo.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 80,596
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 80,596 |
A lot of people use terms to further their agenda. The NFL has shown zero to the public to indicate any of the Saints players were paid to "cheat or make dirty hits".
If and when I see anything to substantiate that, I'll buy into it.
You can knock a guy out of a game with a clean hard hit. The harder you ihit, the better the odds f knocking someone out of a game.
And I'll tell you what I have seen. A comparison of flagged dirty hits by the Saints verses the other teams in the NFL. Nothing stood out as any different than other teams.
So if the hits weren't dirty, where's the violations come from?
Intoducing for The Cleveland Browns, Quarterback Deshawn "The Predator" Watson. He will also be the one to choose your next head coach.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 80,596
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 80,596 |
Quote:
To say that The Commissioner fabricated the truth is a pretty far fetched story imo.
Since you didn't have a seat at the table, maybe you can show me where Goodell has accused them of "pay for illegal hits and cheap shots". I haven't once heard him say these hits were illegal. Only that paying for them was.
Intoducing for The Cleveland Browns, Quarterback Deshawn "The Predator" Watson. He will also be the one to choose your next head coach.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 8,660
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 8,660 |
Quote:
A lot of people use terms to further their agenda. The NFL has shown zero to the public to indicate any of the Saints players were paid to "cheat or make dirty hits".
If and when I see anything to substantiate that, I'll buy into it.
You can knock a guy out of a game with a clean hard hit. The harder you ihit, the better the odds f knocking someone out of a game.
And I'll tell you what I have seen. A comparison of flagged dirty hits by the Saints verses the other teams in the NFL. Nothing stood out as any different than other teams.
So if the hits weren't dirty, where's the violations come from?
They don't need to present their case to the fans ... I'm sure that there are things that they never want to be made public.
There is evidence on tape vs the Vikings and Brett Farve and also vs cards and Kurt Warner.
I find it hard to believe that the NFL would put themselves threw the dirty story and dark chapter on their history with no proof what so ever. Did Greg Williams deny the charges?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 80,596
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 80,596 |
Either goodell will cave or we'll find out in court.
I could see it either way. Why not just say the Saints paid their players to take cheap shots and cheat? Yet they talk about "the bounty", not the hits.
The fans pay the bills and want some accountability either way. The players are trying to force the NFL to present their case.
The only one that seems to be hiding anything here is Goodell. If he could show proof and settle this thing once and for all with the public, he would have done it.
Intoducing for The Cleveland Browns, Quarterback Deshawn "The Predator" Watson. He will also be the one to choose your next head coach.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 8,660
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 8,660 |
Quote:
Either goodell will cave or we'll find out in court.
I could see it either way. Why not just say the Saints paid their players to take cheap shots and cheat? Yet they talk about "the bounty", not the hits.
The fans pay the bills and want some accountability either way. The players are trying to force the NFL to present their case.
The only one that seems to be hiding anything here is Goodell. If he could show proof and settle this thing once and for all with the public, he would have done it.
Having a bounty program is bad enough ... do they need a smoking gun too? I should hope not, but they did take Brett Farve out of that game.
I just find these claims of fabrication to be without merit.
Why would the League open a can of worms that they never wanted in the first place?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 19,264
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 19,264 |
Both the coach and some players said that "cartoffs" received a reward. If you don't think that's a bounty, you've got a screw loose.
And into the forest I go, to lose my mind and find my soul.
- John Muir
#GMSTRONG
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 8,660
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 8,660 |
Quote:
Both the coach and some players said that "cartoffs" received a reward. If you don't think that's a bounty, you've got a screw loose.
I think you have me confused with another poster ... I fully believe that there was a bounty program 
Why would the Commissioner put his job and reputation on the line by making fabrications?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,887
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,887 |
Quote:
Peen...obviously you do not understand the core issues of the lawsuit...
A lawyer and a judge...I think he probably understands it okay...
Blue ostriches on crack float on milkshakes between the sidewalk titans of gurglefitz. --YTown
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 19,264
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 19,264 |
Quote:
Quote:
Both the coach and some players said that "cartoffs" received a reward. If you don't think that's a bounty, you've got a screw loose.
I think you have me confused with another poster ... I fully believe that there was a bounty program
Why would the Commissioner put his job and reputation on the line by making fabrications?
You are correct. I was responding to Pit.
And into the forest I go, to lose my mind and find my soul.
- John Muir
#GMSTRONG
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 80,596
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 80,596 |
Quote:
Having a bounty program is bad enough ... do they need a smoking gun too? I should hope not, but they did take Brett Farve out of that game.
Are you sure they have one? I'm not sure either way. If they do, they sure aren't willing to show the smoke.
I think some are taking this the wrong way. Do I believe there was a bounty? I think that's a term the laugue would like us to all use, yes.
Let's face it, there's are more than one term that easily could apply here. Depending on which term best suits you, that is the term you will use.
If you work for a corporation that is in tough competition with other corporations, (which is exactly what NFL teams are and do), you try to knock the other guys out of the competition.
If a corporation offers you money for knocking other competiton out of business, that's called an incentive, not a "bounty".
So I do believe anyone could use either term in this situation. What confuses me is how we all say that the media sensationalizes everything.... So do politicians and businessmen. So do people with social or financial agendas.
Yet so many on this board are willing to repeat and promote the media and leagues "sensationalized name" for this incident?
Quote:
I just find these claims of fabrication to be without merit.
As Reagan would say, "There you go again Folrida."
I didn't say Goodell lied about anything. I haven't seen anywhere that he's claimed that, "Saints players were paid to violate rules." Or that, "The Saints coaching staff paid their players to injur players from oposing teams by making illegal hits."
Let's look at exactly what we associate with the word "bounty". Bounty is what they put on the heads of criminals in the wild west. Now we call that a reward. So is it a reward for incentives or a bounty?
I haven't heard Goodell elude to anything that implicates Saints players were paid to break the rules or that any Saints players intentionaly broke rules on any of the hits they dished out.
Quote:
Why would the League open a can of worms that they never wanted in the first place?
On the other hand, why would the players want this played out in court on public record for all to see?
There's a ying to the yang here.
From everything I've seen to this point, Goodell wants to garner support from the fans that "wheather a player plays within the confines of the rules or not", there's something wrong with offering a player an incentive to hit another player hard enough to knock him out of a game." And uses the term "bounty" to describe it. Nothing more, nothing less.
Now I'm not going to sit here and say wheather he's right or wrong. However, isn't that the job of the defense? To hit the other team as hard as they can within the confines of the rules?
Sorry Florida, but I don't see any conspiracy in what I'm saying here. I do feel the name "bounty" is sensationalizing it. I think it's an effort to make this sound as bad as possible.
Yet at the same time, I haven't heard Goodell make claims that anyone was paid to cheat or illegaly knock someone out of a game. If you have, please inform me of that.
I will say with a huge lawsuit forthcoming on the concussion issue, it would be in the owners and in the NFL's best interest to show they are being watchfull and concious of player safety. And I do think the timing of this may be more than a coincidence.
Because the same thing the Saints are being heavily penalized for has been going on a lot in a lot of places for a long time.
As they say, timing is everything...............
__________________________________________
Warner also pointed out that the hit from Bobby McCray wasn’t dirty. “It was a violent hit, no question,” Warner said. “But I also believes it was a legal hit.”
As to Warner’s suspicions regarding the existence of bounties well before 2009, he’s right. Whenever past whispers regarding bounties have arisen, inevitably coaches and players have said that these things happen, with or without the knowledge of the coaching staff.
http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/201...or-a-long-time/
Was the hit against Favre dirty? Yes, I believe it was. But before you continue, compare the unnecassary roughness calls against the Steelers and Ravens, compare it to the Saints, then get back to me.
You'll soon find that when it comes to cheap shots, the "smoking gun" simply isn't there.
Intoducing for The Cleveland Browns, Quarterback Deshawn "The Predator" Watson. He will also be the one to choose your next head coach.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 14,147
Legend
|
|
OP
Legend
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 14,147 |
Quote:
Why would the League open a can of worms that they never wanted in the first place?
fl...my take on this question...
Goodell and the NFL thought their Bounty claims would be a great PR move to show that the players were responsible for intentionally hurting each other.
Why is this important?....because there is a huge legal case brewing that stands to cost the NFL owners billions...THE CONCUSSION LAWSUITES.
IMO, Goodell and the NFL believed the Bounty case could be used to their advantage in the Concussion case.
The NFL wants to be able to point to the Bounty case and say, look at how the NFL players pay to hurt each other...how can the owners be blamed (in the Concussion case) if the players are intentionally hurting each other (pointing to the Bounty case as proof).
Would it work?...I have no idea...but would it hurt the NFL in the Concussion Case...NO.
Look at the great PR Goodell and the NFL have experienced since the player's and coaches punishment was handed down.
Not until the players began to fight back, questioning the NFL's evidence and reporters with a legal background, such as Mike Florio at PFT, started asking some very good questions, did the PR opinions begin to change in favor of the players.
Common sense questions...such as...for example...
Were the hits in question, illegal?
Who was responsible for starting the Bounty program?
How widespread are these unofficial Bounty programs?
Do these unofficial "Bounty" programs also go by the name of "pay for performance" programs?
Also, Vilma's lawyer worked to get the Bounty case out of Goodell's control and before a "real" judge, which brings us to this moment where it appears the NFL blinked, trying to offer Vilma a deal before the case goes before a real judge.
GM strong...
Home of the Free, Because of the Brave...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 17,850
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 17,850 |
such a great conspiracy story.
and all they had to do was get the Saints owner to completely undermine his entire post-Katrina feel-good story and taint their only Superbowl win, get Payton to completely destroy his legacy and jeopardize his future in coaching, get Mickey Loomis to look like a completely fool who had no control over the organization, and get Gregg Williams to fall on his sword so hard that he got condolescenses from the Japanese.
Not to mention he had to predicate this by getting GW to have a speech recorded before the 49ers game this past postseason where he told his team to target the injured areas of players and started going through where those injuries were 1 by 1. and, of course talking about "killing the head" on Alex Smith.
And, the players mentioning "cart offs" and explaining how injuring a player and getting paid for it isn't a bounty because it could be deemed a legal hit.
But, you're right, it's all just a giant conspiracy by the NFL. Carry On.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 8,660
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 8,660 |
Pit you just don't comprehend.
There doesn't need to be a smoking gun and know one needs to have been taken out of a game. Just the fact that they had a pot "Bounty" or however you slice it. Is all the proof the League needs.
Who cares if other teams also did the same. Does that make it okay? Hell no it doesn't.
If you truly believe that the League fabricated these allegations, then that's your problem, but don't try and candy coat this for me or anyone else.
It was unsportsmanlike no matter how you spin it.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 8,660
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 8,660 |
Believe that if you like mac, but I don't believe for one second that this League wanted this issue to come to light.
It's not only stains the Saints, but the League itself.
You talk about a hidden agenda, but I have seen not one shred of evidence to support your concussion conspiracy.
To me it's just more of the same ... Deflections to the issue before us.
You really think that all of the players who have passed threw this League where naïve to the fact that they could be injured? I've said it before, that concussions are not confined to the NFL.
Should they be responsible for concussions from pee-wee league on threw to College? I should think not.
I can tell you from my own personal experience that I had them and never made it to the NFL. It's a problem to be sure, but pointing your finger and making the NFL solely responsible is ... Well it's irresponsible and it won't change the past. Finger pointing will not fix the problem and it never has.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 80,596
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 80,596 |
Quote:
Pit you just don't comprehend.
Oh I comprehend. The league wishes to punish players for legal hits because they were paid extra to dish them out.
Quote:
If you truly believe that the League fabricated these allegations, then that's your problem, but don't try and candy coat this for me or anyone else.
You wush to demonize them. As I said, show me where Goodell says they were paid "to cheat or make illegal hits".
You won't but keep spewing the same crap.
Quote:
It was unsportsmanlike no matter how you spin it.
So you're saying a legal hit you get paid extra to make due to the outcome is "unsportsmanlike"?
Or what is it you are saying?
Intoducing for The Cleveland Browns, Quarterback Deshawn "The Predator" Watson. He will also be the one to choose your next head coach.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 8,660
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 8,660 |
Quote:
Quote:
Pit you just don't comprehend.
Oh I comprehend. The league wishes to punish players for legal hits because they were paid extra to dish them out.
Quote:
If you truly believe that the League fabricated these allegations, then that's your problem, but don't try and candy coat this for me or anyone else.
You wush to demonize them. As I said, show me where Goodell says they were paid "to cheat or make illegal hits".
You won't but keep spewing the same crap.
Quote:
It was unsportsmanlike no matter how you spin it.
So you're saying a legal hit you get paid extra to make due to the outcome is "unsportsmanlike"?
Or what is it you are saying?
If you hit someone with the intent to injure, then I would not consider that a clean sportsmanlike hit.
No Sir!
Oh and you do not comprehend, because it's not about the Hit's ... it's about having a system that rewards those who injure their opponent.
Forget the Hit's legal or not.
Last edited by FL_Dawg; 08/07/12 12:59 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399 |
Quote:
You wush to demonize them. As I said, show me where Goodell says they were paid "to cheat or make illegal hits".
You won't but keep spewing the same crap.
If Player A makes a legal bone jarring hit on Player B but player B gets back up and goes to the huddle and Player A receives no compensation..... but if Player B had not gotten up or had gone out of the game, then Player A receives compensation.... then what would you say? Completely hypothetically of course....
yebat' Putin
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 80,596
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 80,596 |
Quote:
If Player A makes a legal bone jarring hit on Player B but player B gets back up and goes to the huddle and Player A receives no compensation..... but if Player B had not gotten up or had gone out of the game, then Player A receives compensation.... then what would you say? Completely hypothetically of course....
I would say player A is being offered an incentive to hit player B as hard as he possibly can. If in fact player A hit player B with the same force and impact on both, and both hits were "legal within the confines of the game", the intent of the hit was the same in both instances. Only the results of the two hits changed.
Last edited by PitDAWG; 08/07/12 06:48 PM.
Intoducing for The Cleveland Browns, Quarterback Deshawn "The Predator" Watson. He will also be the one to choose your next head coach.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 12,065
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 12,065 |
Pattrick Willis recives compensation for hitting offensive players as hard as he can. It's known as his salary and any stat bonuses.
So according to you, if Johnathan Vilma recieved money ON TOP OF THAT, because a player was INJURED from the same hit... That's ok?
Am I the only one that pronounces hyperbole "Hyper-bowl" instead of "hy-per-bo-le"?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,456
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,456 |
So to you, if Tatum was payed extra by his team mates, for intentionally injurying, for his legal hit, to hurt Stingley its ok?
It was a legal hit. You would be good with that?
If you need 3 years to be a winner you got here 2 years to early. Get it done Browns.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 80,596
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 80,596 |
I don't see it as a actually making any difference. The job of a defensive player IMO, is to hit your oponent as hard as you can. To play with intensity and strike fear into your oponent. I played at two positions when I went to school. FB and LB'er. When I played FB I tried to be the one to deliver the hit on the D. To knock the dog poo out of everyone who attempted to tackle me. Often times, after knocking the crap out of someone a few times, their desire to tackle me seemed to lessen. At LB, I actually tried to hit someone so hard they left the game. I felt my job was to hit people as hard as I could in a legal fashion. If I knocked out their RB, I took pride in that. Why? Because it was my job and every players job to win that game. I played hard, vicious and nasty within the confines of the rules. As such, my coaches loved me and treated me well. The players on my team liked me and treated me well. While I never cheated or broke the rules, I knew what my job was. Now I didn't recieve a cash reward, I was given special treatment and some...... I'll just "favors" for doing this. It goes on everywhere. It goes on from the high school level all the way to the pros. It's been going on for decades everywhere. The NCAA knows it and the NFL has known it for decades. Yet nothing was done in the past about it. Now, all of a sudden with a looming lawsuit facing the NFL, all of a sudden the NFL has decided that, "This is a terrible thing and must be addressed. How shocking this is and they must put a stop to it!" I call BS! Most everyone around the league has known this has gone on for decades. The league didn't try to address it in any real public way before. It was pretty much a wide spread thing and nobody made a big deal about it but a few media types. And while I didn't recieve financial rewards for doing these things, just short of that, I was rewarded with favoritism and special privaliges that many players on my team were not. I believe at the pro level, an incentive to hit hard and play nasty within the confines of the rules is simply giving them an incentive to do what their contract is supposed to pay them for in the first place. Something many teams have done for a very long time without causing some major issue. If a D player isn't hitting people as hard as they can any time they can, they're not doing their job in the first place. Many businesses pay bonuses to employees to give them motivation to accomplish goals they should be trying to achieve in the first place with their salaries. It is the kob of every defensive player in the NFL to hit their oponent as hard as they possibly can at any given oppertunity. Most fans know that the rules as of late favors the offense. The NFL wishes to creat high scoring games for excitement. Yet any attempt to even the scales is considered some terrible thing. If you are paying a player to cheat, or break the rules, that is wrong. If you are offering an incentive to players to commit even further to do what they are getting paid to do in the first place, no, I see nothing wrong with that. If you played against me and I had the chance to make a hit on you, I never wanted you to forget it. And if you played QB or RB and I knocked you out of the game with a legal hit, I felt I had achieved my ultimate goal.......
Intoducing for The Cleveland Browns, Quarterback Deshawn "The Predator" Watson. He will also be the one to choose your next head coach.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 12,065
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 12,065 |
Watch the High/Low hit on Favre in te NFC Title game.
Watch the hit on Manning in the preseason against Washington.
If I told you. Those players were PURPOSLEY trying to INJURE Favre and Manning, and you're ok with that? Then in MY opinion. There's something wrong with you.
Feel free to post about the "wussification" or whatever you guys talk about how football is played "in skirts" or whatever.
But purposely trying to injure someone is different then trying to hit them as hard as you can.
Am I the only one that pronounces hyperbole "Hyper-bowl" instead of "hy-per-bo-le"?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 80,596
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 80,596 |
Quote:
Watch the High/Low hit on Favre in te NFC Title game.
Compare the "roughing the passer" calls last year from the Saints to teams like the Steelers and Ravens. You'll soon find that all teams have these type of call and the Saints aren't leading that category.
EVERY team has plays like that from last year. That's what's so funny. I don't see people trying to point that out. If you look at the record, the Saints have fewer than many.
Quote:
Watch the hit on Manning in the preseason against Washington.
And that's just silly. Nobody is paying incentives in "pre-season".
Quote:
If I told you. Those players were PURPOSLEY trying to INJURE Favre and Manning, and you're ok with that? Then in MY opinion. There's something wrong with you.
If you think people are paying incentives in games that don't even count, I'd say there's something wrong with you.
Quote:
Feel free to post about the "wussification" or whatever you guys talk about how football is played "in skirts" or whatever.
I don't have to talk about it. Everyone who has watched the game for decades already knows it.
Quote:
But purposely trying to injure someone is different then trying to hit them as hard as you can.
Are defensive players not supposed to hit people as hard as they can? And if they're not, what's wrong with motivating them to do their job?
Like I said, show me ANYWHERE that the NFL has even suggested that the Saints paid people to take cheap or illegal shots.
They haven't.
Intoducing for The Cleveland Browns, Quarterback Deshawn "The Predator" Watson. He will also be the one to choose your next head coach.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 8,660
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 8,660 |
Quote:
Watch the High/Low hit on Favre in te NFC Title game.
Watch the hit on Manning in the preseason against Washington.
If I told you. Those players were PURPOSLEY trying to INJURE Favre and Manning, and you're ok with that? Then in MY opinion. There's something wrong with you.
Feel free to post about the "wussification" or whatever you guys talk about how football is played "in skirts" or whatever.
But purposely trying to injure someone is different then trying to hit them as hard as you can.
Well said. It's unsportsmanlike and there is no place for it in a civilized game. If you want to injury someone ... join the service and go overseas to fight, but remember they shoot back.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 80,596
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 80,596 |
Show me any NFL team that doesn't have plays like this. Once again, you both wish to point out "one play", when EVERY NFL team commits this exact same thing. Why do you keep avoiding that? Why do you keep avoiding that the Saints have less unsportmanlike calls and roughing the passer calls than a lot of other NFL teams? In 2010 the Saints ranked 24th in uncessary roughness penalties. 8th in roughing the passer. Persoal fouls, only 1. Defensive fines levied..... 40k, ranked 12th
In 2011 the Saints ranked 20th in unnecassary roughness penalties. They ranked 28th in roughing the passer. They ranked 10th in personal fouls with a grand total of 2.http://www.canalstreetchronicles.com/2012/3/12/2862105/saints-defensive-penalty-reviewSo you sit here and buy into the media hype. Keep throwing out one or two examples. Keep ignoring the FACT, that the Saints don't even come close to leading the league in these statistice. Reality bites. And the fact is, for all of this being "such a scandal", the stats plainly show that the Saints aren't the team leading in "playing dirty" as so many people buy into.
Intoducing for The Cleveland Browns, Quarterback Deshawn "The Predator" Watson. He will also be the one to choose your next head coach.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 17,850
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 17,850 |
Quote:
Quote:
Watch the High/Low hit on Favre in te NFC Title game.
Compare the "roughing the passer" calls last year from the Saints to teams like the Steelers and Ravens. You'll soon find that all teams have these type of call and the Saints aren't leading that category.
EVERY team has plays like that from last year. That's what's so funny. I don't see people trying to point that out. If you look at the record, the Saints have fewer than many.
it was that NFC Champ game that caused Childress to put the tape together to send to the NFL offices that re-opened the bounty investigation that led to all of this hub-bub.
so, I would say that there is more to that game than the "standard hitting the QB" as the Vikings and the NFL both thought so.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 8,660
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 8,660 |
Pit I can't stress the fact enough.
The hit's our not the main emphasis, but it's what lead to the investigation.
It's what revealed the bounty system (or however you want phrase it) that is the issue ... not the hit's.
Forget the hits Pit.
Last edited by FL_Dawg; 08/08/12 03:00 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399 |
Quote:
At LB, I actually tried to hit someone so hard they left the game. I felt my job was to hit people as hard as I could in a legal fashion. If I knocked out their RB, I took pride in that.
Why? Because it was my job and every players job to win that game. I played hard, vicious and nasty within the confines of the rules.
As such, my coaches loved me and treated me well. The players on my team liked me and treated me well. While I never cheated or broke the rules, I knew what my job was. Now I didn't recieve a cash reward, I was given special treatment and some...... I'll just "favors" for doing this.
And most people don't have much of a problem with that.. but when somebody draws the line and says, "Pit, the only way you get the "favors" is if the guy gets knocked out of the game." That's when it becomes a problem... because then the incentive is there for you to start breaking the rules... Whether you actually do or not is irrelevant.
yebat' Putin
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 12,065
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 12,065 |
Is it me or does everyone that's on the "players side" consistently ignore everything everybody else says?
Am I the only one that pronounces hyperbole "Hyper-bowl" instead of "hy-per-bo-le"?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 80,596
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 80,596 |
Quote:
And most people don't have much of a problem with that.. but when somebody draws the line and says, "Pit, the only way you get the "favors" is if the guy gets knocked out of the game." That's when it becomes a problem... because then the incentive is there for you to start breaking the rules... Whether you actually do or not is irrelevant.
I understand the assertion of what you are saying. Yet at the exact same time, when you look at the stats, when you rank in the bottom half of the NFL in such calls, it appears that "assertion" of what you say simply doesn't hold up as having any relivancy.
If in fact these incentives had a direct impact on dirty hits and cheap shots, why is it..............
Quote:
In 2010 the Saints ranked 24th in uncessary roughness penalties. 8th in roughing the passer. Persoal fouls, only 1. Defensive fines levied..... 40k, ranked 12th
In 2011 the Saints ranked 20th in unnecassary roughness penalties. They ranked 28th in roughing the passer. They ranked 10th in personal fouls with a grand total of 2.
So actually the bounty as some wish to label it, had LESS impact in penalties rather than more. They actually rated lower in the league in those type of penalties in 2011 than they did in 2010.
Despite the assertions you made about "incentives promoting illegal play", I see no evidence that it has in any way when you look at the league as a whole.
Now if they ranked top 5 in these categories, I would have to seriously consider the merrit of your assertion. If in fact we saw a trend to indicate that with each passing year, they climbed the charts league wide in such penalties it would promote your assertion. But when a team rates in the bottom half of the very categries the teams infraction supposidly supports, I see your assertion as something that sounds as if it may hold merrit if there was a foundation to base it on.
The stats dictate that it really doesn't.
OSU- I see you have ignored every point I have made on this subject yourself. At least I try to address them.
Why is it the Saints rate in the bottom half of the league in these cateogies if, as you claim, they play so dirty and this program promotes cheating and cheap shots as so many here seem to indicate that it does??
Maybe it's because they are just repeating assertions they've heard elsewhere rather than actually looking it up and finding out facts for themselves? I don't know but it does make me wonder......
I've mentioned this in this thread more than once, then provided stats to show the evidence.
And I'm the one ignoring things!
Intoducing for The Cleveland Browns, Quarterback Deshawn "The Predator" Watson. He will also be the one to choose your next head coach.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 80,596
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 80,596 |
Quote:
The hit's our not the main emphasis, but it's what lead to the investigation.
So since the evidence points to the fact that this "program" does not cause peope to play dirty, and since nobody is being accused of taking dirty hits because if this program.....
Exactly what is the point?
Quote:
It's what revealed the bounty system (or however you want phrase it) that is the issue ... not the hit's.
Forget the hits Pit.
So in any other business it would be called an incentive. Over the past two seasons their "questionable hits" have declined, they rank in the bottom half of the league in these penalties, can you explain what harm has been caused by this "program"?
That's the point to me. If anyone can show that this program has caused ANY increase in cheap shots or illegal plays, then I see some harm that relates to it.
Yet when someone provides evidence that the results have been just the opposite, nobody wishes to see the relivence of it?
Intoducing for The Cleveland Browns, Quarterback Deshawn "The Predator" Watson. He will also be the one to choose your next head coach.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 8,660
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 8,660 |
Quote:
Quote:
The hit's our not the main emphasis, but it's what lead to the investigation.
So since the evidence points to the fact that this "program" does not cause peope to play dirty, and since nobody is being accused of taking dirty hits because if this program.....
Exactly what is the point?
Quote:
It's what revealed the bounty system (or however you want phrase it) that is the issue ... not the hit's.
Forget the hits Pit.
So in any other business it would be called an incentive. Over the past two seasons their "questionable hits" have declined, they rank in the bottom half of the league in these penalties, can you explain what harm has been caused by this "program"?
That's the point to me. If anyone can show that this program has caused ANY increase in cheap shots or illegal plays, then I see some harm that relates to it.
Yet when someone provides evidence that the results have been just the opposite, nobody wishes to see the relivence of it?
The point is ... it's unsportsmanlike and it's not within the rules of this game.
You can still be prosecuted for premeditated attempted murder, even if you don't actually follow threw with it.
Same difference.
You can argue that they never meant to take Farve out of that game, because it's harder to prove that.
It's easier to prove intent if they had such a system.
![[Linked Image]](http://www.dawgtalkers.net/uploads/FL_Dawg/Logo5_1.gif)
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 80,596
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 80,596 |
Quote:
The point is ... it's unsportsmanlike and it's not within the rules of this game.
You can still be prosecuted for premeditated attempted murder, even if you don't actually follow threw with it.
Same difference.
So even though it has been shown that the Saints "unsportmanlike activity" has decreased, and even though they are in the bottom half of the league, that has no baring on showing that these "incentives" have no impact on dirty plays?
I agree it;s "against the rules". My point is, what was attempted or how can you justify such harsh penalties on a team when the stats PROVE that dirty play nor dirty hits increased due to not following this rule?
Quote:
You can argue that they never meant to take Farve out of that game, because it's harder to prove that.
It's easier to prove intent if they had such a system.
I keep hearing Favre, Favre, Favre from you. What about the other 27 teams that ranked higher than the Saints in illegal, dirty hits?
I'm not saying they didn't break the rules here. What I am saying is the time and penalties should fit the crime.
The Saints actually raked lower in the league in "dirty play" penalties each season since 2009. There is evidence that shows not only did the "bounty scandal" not incease dirty hits, it has shown they decreased.
So if the Commish wishes to fine some and make some suspensions, fine.
But to the extent he has villified and punished these players and coaches and named it "The Bounty Scandal", is ridiculous!
To enforce the rules is one thing. To manipulate and label things, to over penalize players and coaches......... And right before a major lawsuit like the one coming up about the concussion issue?
If you can't see this for what it is, that's your fault. Did the Saints break the rules? Yes they did.
Is the NFL trying to make player safety look like it's the fault of the players and coaches, and not the NFL?
Yes they are......
Intoducing for The Cleveland Browns, Quarterback Deshawn "The Predator" Watson. He will also be the one to choose your next head coach.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 8,660
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 8,660 |
Look Pit, weather or not we had a separate issue of concussions or not. If the League has the evidence that the Saints had an illegal system in place it would still need to be dealt with by the League. Weather the two issues are related is debatable (and I'm tried of beating a dead horse there). It's speculation not fact at this point. It doesn't mean they should have led the league in penalties either and I don't know where that comes from ... I should hope they did put a target on every QB and team they faced  Oh andf not all penalties where called in the past, but the eye in the sky is watching and handing out penalties after the fact. My hope is we start to see less and less of them. It's bad enough losing guys to injury by accident.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 19,264
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 19,264 |
The bottom line here is that the Saints paid a cash reward for having an opponent carted off the field. Coaches and players admitted it. A cart off = injury, hence they were paid for injuring someone. That is a bounty, no matter how you look at it. I can't believe anyone would argue it isn't.
And into the forest I go, to lose my mind and find my soul.
- John Muir
#GMSTRONG
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 80,596
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 80,596 |
Quote:
The bottom line here is that the Saints paid a cash reward for having an opponent carted off the field. Coaches and players admitted it. A cart off = injury
If you say so. I've seen players carted off that do return. I guess that means when Ray Lewis decks someone, he isn't trying to knock them out.
I think the real difference between myself and many posters is that I have no problem admitting the Saints were in the wrong here. The real difference I see is that the incident was overblown and villified beyond any reasonable degree.
I would and could see the punishments that were handed out if the league could show a direct corilation between this incident an increase in penalties and injuries because of it.
Quote:
hence they were paid for injuring someone. That is a bounty, no matter how you look at it. I can't believe anyone would argue it isn't.
Yet no more injuries occured from the Saints defense than many other teams nor penalties associated with such injuries.
I do believe when someone is punished, the penalty should fit the crime. I do not believe this to be the case here. You have stated the offense they were punished for. I have stated and pointed out that the offense really had no impact in regards to injuries nor penalties.
So the only true difference in opinions here is that I feel the league made it "sound" like the Saints defense turned into some kind of paid assasins which statistics plainly show was not the case here.
And, as many, if not most people who have watched this sport over the decades know, "bounty or incentives", depending on just how badly you wish to make this sound, is nothing new and fairly wide spread in the NFL.
Yet until such time as presuure started being applied to the NFL about the concussion issue, the league never saw fit to launch a full scale investigation involving such a thing. They knew it was going on, yet turned a blind eye to it.
Now, suddenly with former players and the press applying pressure on the NFL about "player safety and concussions", a law suit looming, the NFL decided it was time to shift the blame in another diretion that would indicate it was actually the players and coching that was the main cause of this and the league suddenly was showing it was doing something about it.
Had the NFL truely felt that this type of thing was such massive wrong all along, the "bounty or incentives" we see being so villified now, would have been dealt with a very long time ago.
The timing and severity of the penalties are no accident. And considering how little evidence there is to connect this program directly to more penalties and injuries caused by the Saints compared to other teams, the punishments do not reflct the crime here.
Unless of course it's suddenly in your best interest to try to make it appear far worse than the evidence dictates IMO
Intoducing for The Cleveland Browns, Quarterback Deshawn "The Predator" Watson. He will also be the one to choose your next head coach.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 14,147
Legend
|
|
OP
Legend
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 14,147 |
Dennis Allen sees a distinction between “incentive” and “bounty”
Posted by Michael David Smith on August 8, 2012, 7:07 PM EDT
During two of the three seasons when the NFL says Gregg Williams was running a bounty program in New Orleans, Dennis Allen was the Saints’ defensive backs coach. Allen, who is now the Raiders’ head coach, continues to assert that there was no bounty program in New Orleans.
Allen told Jim Rome on Rome that what the Saints had was an incentive program, not a bounty program, and he suggested that he feels sorry for the people who have been suspended over a program that was merely designed to give incentives for hard play.
“We obviously had an incentive program,” Allen said. “It’s unfortunate the things that have gone down there. I’ve got a lot of great friends there. I really respect those players, those coaches, and that’s some of the best memories I’ve got in the National Football League.”
So what’s the difference between an incentive and a bounty?
“I think when you really look at it, at no time was anybody ever trying to intentionally go out there and hurt anybody,” Allen said. “And that’s the way that we played the game. Our guys were motivated to go out there and play hard, and that’s what we felt like they did on a day in, day out basis.”
And so Allen is saying what many others associated with the Saints in the last three years have said: Yes, there were incentives, but no, there were not bounties. That’s an explanation NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell doesn’t accept.
web page
GM strong...
Home of the Free, Because of the Brave...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 14,147
Legend
|
|
OP
Legend
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 14,147 |
Quote:
So to you, if Tatum was payed extra by his team mates, for intentionally injurying, for his legal hit, to hurt Stingley its ok?
It was a legal hit. You would be good with that?
nick...here is what you don't get...no way in hell did Tatum "intentionally" try to end Stingley's career with that hit.
Did Tatum know he was going to cause an injury on that play...NO WAY.
Did Tatum plan to injure Stingley on that play...NO WAY.
This idea that a football player can dial up an injury to the player they are hitting, whenever they want, is pure "fantasy" thinking by the uneducated fan.
If the Raiders players and coaches had an unofficial pay for performance at that time, no way would Tatum accept payment for a hit that ended another players career. These unofficial pay for performance programs were not created with the intent to end players careers.
I'm ok with Tatum's hit on Stingley...it was a legal hit with a very unfortunate outcome. An outcome that was not planned nor intended.
Anyone who has played organized football knows there is always a possibility of injury...even serious, life threatening injury. It is an accepted risk a player takes when they put on the pads.
GM strong...
Home of the Free, Because of the Brave...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 17,850
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 17,850 |
are we really degraded to the point where people are arguing that Jack Tatum wasn't a dirty player?
#gmstrong
|
|
|
DawgTalkers.net
Forums DawgTalk Pure Football Forum Bountygate, players turn to face
the music?
|
|
