Jump to content
[[Template core/front/custom/_customHeader is throwing an error. This theme may be out of date. Run the support tool in the AdminCP to restore the default theme.]]

Senate committee to investigate NFL bounties


Bronco Billy
 Share

Recommended Posts

You can't make this stuff up

 

I guess Congress has nothing else important to work on.

 

 

Sen. Dick Durbin (D, IL) is setting up a Judiciary Committee hearing about bounties in professional football and other major sports in the wake of news that New Orleans Saints players received extra cash for hits that hurt particular opponents.

 

The assistant Senate majority leader, an Illinois Democrat, said Thursday he wants to examine whether federal law should make such bounty systems a crime.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think this was posted in either the Payton thread or the Bounty thread, but I'll reiterate... This guy is an idiot. What a waste of taxpayers money.

 

 

Agree completely. But lets be honest, they're doing it because they think it makes them popular to their constituents. The same reason that they keep getting involved in various broadcast issues and other topics that they should be no part of. And it spares them the trouble of dealing with the serious issues they should be working on. I just hope the voters who elect these people remember this CHIPS AHOY! when the next election comes around.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I particularly adore this quote:

 

 

 

''Let's be real basic about it here. If this activity were taking place off of a sporting field, away from a court, nobody would have a second thought (about whether it's wrong). `You mean, someone paid you to go out and hurt someone?''' Durbin said in a telephone interview before raising the issue on the floor of the Senate.

 

Hey, DICK, if a person was waiting outside the market, tackled someone walking out with their groceries, stole the groceries, and ran with them, it would be illegal too. Maybe you ought to expand the invesigation to include tackling, and then recovering and returning fumbles.

 

What a freakin' moran.

Edited by Bronco Billy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I particularly adore this quote:

 

 

 

 

 

Hey, DICK, if a person was waiting outside the market, tackled someone walking out with their groceries, stole the groceries, and ran with them, it would be illegal too. Maybe you ought to expand the invesigation to include tackling, and then recovering and returning fumbles.

 

What a freakin' moran.

 

 

Next they'll investigate boxing to determine if it should be a crime for punching other guys. :boxing:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

While I agree that congress has better things to do, I don't think BB made an apt comparison. While there are no shortage of actions within the rules of many sports that would be considered assault if done outside the parameters of that sport, putting a bounty on injuring players is not the same thing. So, I don't think that's as silly a comparison as you're making it out to be.

 

One could construe your argument to mean that, because there are certain things that are made legal because they're happening during a football game that would not be if they weren't, then anything that would be considered illegal outside of a football game must be considered fine if it happens during one. After all, if the notion of prosecuting someone for doing something during a game is so absurd, where do we draw the line? Paying people to inentionally injure another person does not seem like such an absurd place to draw that line.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

While I agree that congress has better things to do, I don't think BB made an apt comparison. While there are no shortage of actions within the rules of many sports that would be considered assault if done outside the parameters of that sport, putting a bounty on injuring players is not the same thing. So, I don't think that's as silly a comparison as you're making it out to be.

 

One could construe your argument to mean that, because there are certain things that are made legal because they're happening during a football game that would not be if they weren't, then anything that would be considered illegal outside of a football game must be considered fine if it happens during one. After all, if the notion of prosecuting someone for doing something during a game is so absurd, where do we draw the line? Paying people to inentionally injure another person does not seem like such an absurd place to draw that line.

 

 

good point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Next they'll investigate boxing to determine if it should be a crime for punching other guys. :boxing:

 

Again, silly comparison. What might be a fair one would be whether or not you could charge a guy with a crime if he managed to slip a metal plate into his boxing glove and truly messed someone up in a manner that was considered outside the rules of boxing. Because, Congress is not looking to punish guys for hitting people in a manner that the NFL condones. Edited by detlef
Link to comment
Share on other sites

good point.

 

 

No, it's not. It is nothing short of idiocy that Congress is investigating this. The NFL knows it is wrong and has taken drastic steps to deter future incidents. There is absolutely no justifiable reason why taxpayer dollars need to go into the morans in Congress looking into this in any official capacity.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Because, Congress is not looking to punish guys for hitting people in a manner that the NFL condones.

 

 

Then why is it logical to make the direct comparison of what happens on the field to what happens in our larger society? I'm guessing you're just spoiling for an argument regardless of logic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Then why is it logical to make the direct comparison of what happens on the field to what happens in our larger society? I'm guessing you're just spoiling for an argument regardless of logic.

 

Because players shouldn't have to forfeit their protection from the law the second they step out on the playing field. Surely a line exists. What should fairly rest inside that line are hits that are considered legal within the framework of the game. And, for that matter, even the vast majority of those not considered legal because, given the speed and uncertainty, you have to give the benefit of the doubt.

 

Now, because you're insisting that it not logical to make any comparison between what you can do on and off the field, this is a fair question. If a guy had a knife in his sock, pulled it out, and stabbed another player during play, could we not consider that "over the line" and something that could be prosecuted? By dog I hope so. So, assuming that's the case, then there is a line. That, despite the fact that there are some actions considered legal, provided they're committed during a football game that would not otherwise be legal, that is not a blanket "stay out of jail" card. So, once you've established that, it becomes a question of where to draw the line.

 

Now, perhaps that line should not be drawn in a manner that makes paying people to purposefully injure another punishable in the legal system. That is a matter of debate. However, the point you seem to be making is that it is absurd to even consider that such a line should exist.

Edited by detlef
Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is absolutely no justifiable reason why taxpayer dollars need to go into the morans in Congress.

 

 

I think this about sums up my philosophy. This is just more "pandering", but I think that they have misread the public's sincere anger at the Saint's organization for allowing this to continue and are trying to jump on the wrong band wagon. The majority of people, football fans or not, will be disgusted with more of the same uselessness from these losers.

Edited by hardway
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think most politicians just wish beyond all reason that they were professional sports team owners. They are constantly looking for the thinest thread of a reason to force their way into the private business of professional sports. It's a waste of time and money. Can't stand it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Remind me again why College players get those neat little stickers on the back of their helmets?

 

 

Ummm - big plays? You aren't really going to equate stickers on college helmets for big plays of all kinds to a NFL team creating an institutional culture of rewarding players for intentionally injuring opponents, being told to stop by the league and refusing to do so, and then lying about the whole thing to cover themselves?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ummm - big plays? You aren't really going to equate stickers on college helmets for big plays of all kinds to a NFL team creating an institutional culture of rewarding players for intentionally injuring opponents, being told to stop by the league and refusing to do so, and then lying about the whole thing to cover themselves?

 

 

Hey, just asking the question. Remember, they can't offer money in college and yes, college players have been asked to hurt players in the past and if you don't think so, there's a bridge in Arizona named "London Bridge" that might be for sale.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

college players have been asked to hurt players in the past

 

And that was advocated by the college's coaching staff and the dean's office, even after being told by the NCAA to cease and desist? Could you please provide a link supporting your claim?

Edited by Bronco Billy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hey, just asking the question. Remember, they can't offer money in college and yes, college players have been asked to hurt players in the past and if you don't think so, there's a bridge in Arizona named "London Bridge" that might be for sale.

 

Tell us again about the good old days when everyone ended up crippled and a guy like Alzado died a shrivled old man from taking enough roids to poison a horse. All for the love of the game.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Det, I think it's tougher to find a hard line here, when even without bounties, these guys are already paid to deliver violent hits to one another... Not to intentionally injure, mind you, but does that stop Suh and Harrison from playing too rough?

 

Not to defend the Saints here, I think they got everything they deserved, but looking into crimes? While I agree with you that there is a line, but it's a violent game that clearly gets exceptions because it's known to the participants that it's going to be violent, and they're paid as such for the risk they take when they step out on the field. As for Williams and Payton, yes they took that too far and refused to stop, but have already been punished accordingly and harshly... To try to turn this into a federal or criminal matter, however, is to overlook the nature and history of the game.

 

It's one thing when the NFL tells you to cut it out, and maybe if the NFL didn't drop the hammer then the Feds should, but the NFL did, and did far more than congress is ever going to accomplish here in deterring it, I can almost guarantee...

 

Further, I'm not sure if there's one person left in America who isn't sick of our tax dollars going to congress to stick their noses where they don't belong like this.

Edited by delusions of granduer
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tell us again about the good old days when everyone ended up crippled and a guy like Alzado died a shrivled old man from taking enough roids to poison a horse. All for the love of the game.

 

 

I was unware that every player ended up crippled. Seems strange that everyone becoming crippled from playing such a rough sport, yet kids try and try and try to become NFL players. Strange days I tell yah!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And that was advocated by the college's coaching staff and the dean's office, even after being told by the NCAA to cease and desist? Could you please provide a link supporting your claim?

 

 

 

Holy cow man, you need to get up from underneath that rock from occassion.

 

http://sports.yahoo....benefits_081611

 

The system is similar to the one reputed fan of the program Campbell was alleged to be running in the 1980s, in which he reportedly paid athletes for big plays. That activity came under NCAA scrutiny during a Pell Grant scandal revealed in a federal investigation in 1994. Fifty-seven Hurricanes football players were named in that scandal.

Three sources, including two former Miami football players, confirmed that Shaprio offered bounties.

 

The booster told Yahoo! Sports he had a number of individual payouts for “hit of the game” and “big plays.” He also put bounties on specific players, including Florida Gators quarterback Tim Tebow and a three-year standing bounty on Seminoles quarterback Chris Rix from 2002 to 2004, offering $5,000 to any player who knocked him out of a game.

Edited by BearBroncos
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

''Let's be real basic about it here. If this activity were taking place off of a sporting field, away from a court, nobody would have a second thought (about whether it's wrong). `You mean, someone paid you to go out and hurt someone?''' Durbin said in a telephone interview before raising the issue on the floor of the Senate.

 

even if this weren't stupid, horribly flawed logic and he had a real point....I still fail to see how it's the business of the US senate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Holy cow man, you need to get up from underneath that rock from occassion.

 

http://sports.yahoo....benefits_081611

 

The system is similar to the one reputed fan of the program Campbell was alleged to be running in the 1980s, in which he reportedly paid athletes for big plays. That activity came under NCAA scrutiny during a Pell Grant scandal revealed in a federal investigation in 1994. Fifty-seven Hurricanes football players were named in that scandal.

Three sources, including two former Miami football players, confirmed that Shaprio offered bounties.

 

The booster told Yahoo! Sports he had a number of individual payouts for “hit of the game” and “big plays.” He also put bounties on specific players, including Florida Gators quarterback Tim Tebow and a three-year standing bounty on Seminoles quarterback Chris Rix from 2002 to 2004, offering $5,000 to any player who knocked him out of a game.

 

 

One story is about a "fan" read - booster, and was 30 years ago. The other involves a booster.

 

If either situation were institutional problems, like what happened with the Saints, I am absolutely certain the NCAA would have invoked the "death penalty" for the program.

Edited by Bronco Billy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information