Square Posted March 7, 2012 Share Posted March 7, 2012 I wonder how much the guy got for taking Payton out this year on the sidelines. About 20K I'll bet. This is seriously scum bag material here. I guess no sport can escape thuggery at this point. I guess I just think that this "thuggery" has been around for quite some time. Goodell is going to try to stomp it out for better PR, but bounty program or not, people would have been trying to knock Favre out of that NFC championship game regardless. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rajncajn Posted March 7, 2012 Author Share Posted March 7, 2012 I guess I just think that this "thuggery" has been around for quite some time. Goodell is going to try to stomp it out for better PR, but bounty program or not, people would have been trying to knock Favre out of that NFC championship game regardless. Exactly, but it's ok as long as there's no money involved. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Furd Posted March 7, 2012 Share Posted March 7, 2012 This is different? Well, you still have that tricky little detail regarding the involvement of the Saints' coaching staff in an institutional program of rewarding players for injuring other players. Unless the Giants' coaches were doing something similar, I'd say that the situations are different. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rajncajn Posted March 7, 2012 Author Share Posted March 7, 2012 (edited) Well, you still have that tricky little detail regarding the involvement of the Saints' coaching staff in an institutional program of rewarding players for injuring other players. Unless the Giants' coaches were doing something similar, I'd say that the situations are different. In breaking the rules, yes, but how can you say that the Giants were not playing with the intent to injure Williams when several players not only admitted it, but boasted about it, stated that it was part of their game plan and lauded their teammates for accomplishing their goal? But, again, that's all OK because they didn't get paid to do it by the coaches. Edited March 7, 2012 by rajncajn Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevegrab Posted March 7, 2012 Share Posted March 7, 2012 Bounty system aside, just what is it you think the defense trying to do on every play of every game? This is different than what the Saints are guilty of? its simple really, I don't think coaches or players at any level of sports should be rewarding the players for trying to injure another player. Rewards for good plays (int, force fumble, fumble recovery, tackles, sack, etc) would be ok. Now the NFL also says it is against the rules to have these cash rewards systems for anything, so the teams that are doing it (apparently many of them) are in the wrong also. And I generally don't accept people breaking the rules, no matter how many do it, or how lame the rules are. (Or to be more clear, if you want to break the rules and are caught, you get punished and don't argue the rules or enforcement are unfair. When I speed I know I am breaking the law, and if caught I pay the fine and move on. I don't argue about it.) You or Tbimm asked at one point what do people want from Saints fans. And somebody said something like "stop rationalizing it, defending it, citing other teams that do it, saying they are being unfairly punished etc." I agree with that. You said earlier (to make an analogy abot how you feel about this as a Saints fan). "Its like finding out your kid is the school bully." And I'd ask, if you found that out, what would you do? Defend the kid, talk about other bullies and how they should be punished. Or any number of other things except "man that sucks, I'll deal with it". I don't think you guys are bad, just too emotional about the issue and not seeing things clearly. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Furd Posted March 7, 2012 Share Posted March 7, 2012 In breaking the rules, yes, but how can you say that the Giants were not playing with the intent to injure Williams when several players not only admitted it, but boasted about it, stated that it was part of their game plan and lauded their teammates for accomplishing their goal? But, again, that's all OK because they didn't get paid to do it by the coaches. I really don't give a rip. I think that NFL players are knuckleheads for participating in those things and for allowing them to exist, and for believing that its ok to try to intentionally injure someone. It seems to me that if the players are going to condone that type of environment, they should stop whining about the league not doing enough to protect them. The Saints situtation is different from the others given that it appears that it was an institutional practice encouraged or condoned by the coaching staff. Hell, coaches provided their players with economic incentitives to injure people. You don't see the significance in that? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bpwallace49 Posted March 7, 2012 Share Posted March 7, 2012 In breaking the rules, yes, but how can you say that the Giants were not playing with the intent to injure Williams when several players not only admitted it, but boasted about it, stated that it was part of their game plan and lauded their teammates for accomplishing their goal? But, again, that's all OK because they didn't get paid to do it by the coaches. No. That is dickish too. But they were not tacitly endorsed by the coaches (at least outwardly) the saints coaches and front office were stupid enough to get involved, so they get punished for abdicating their positions of authority and responsibility. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevegrab Posted March 7, 2012 Share Posted March 7, 2012 Golic simply isn't very bright. He was comparing NFL bounties to side bets in golf (by amateurs) yesterday. Great analogy, Mike. I thought the same thing after listening to him some on Monday. Then I thought, some of these shows on ESPN are just as bad as talk radio (sports or otherwise). They need to have opposing view points so they can argue and create an atmosphere of "discussion". Maybe Golic was just the guy who drew the short straw. (I don't listen to him on the radio or on TV much.) I was much more on the side of Tom Jackson, Steve Young and Herm Edwards. None of the others in the discussion were quite as dismissive of this as Golic was. His "its no big deal attitude was mind blowing". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevegrab Posted March 7, 2012 Share Posted March 7, 2012 This is different? Yes it is, how much money was offered to take him out? The fact that you cannot see that, or need to keep trying to find other "similar" cases to defend the Saints is troubling. You've admited having your homer glasses on, but it continues. You asked before "take the bounty out", well take the bounty out of what the Saints weren't doing and there probably isn't much of a story here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rajncajn Posted March 7, 2012 Author Share Posted March 7, 2012 I really don't give a rip. I think that NFL players are knuckleheads for participating in those things and for allowing them to exist, and for believing that its ok to try to intentionally injure someone. It seems to me that if the players are going to condone that type of environment, they should stop whining about the league not doing enough to protect them. The Saints situation is different from the others given that it appears that it was an institutional practice encouraged or condoned by the coaching staff. Hell, coaches provided their players with economic incentives to injure people. You don't see the significance in that? Absolutely I see the significance, that much we agree on. And we all agree that they should be punished accordingly for it. But this great morale outrage, this riotous indignation, as if the Saints have done something so far outside of the realm of what is typical for the NFL is a bit ridiculous. No. That is dickish too. But they were not tacitly endorsed by the coaches (at least outwardly) the saints coaches and front office were stupid enough to get involved, so they get punished for abdicating their positions of authority and responsibility. How can you say that when it was part of their game plan? Yes it is, how much money was offered to take him out? The fact that you cannot see that, or need to keep trying to find other "similar" cases to defend the Saints is troubling. You've admited having your homer glasses on, but it continues. You asked before "take the bounty out", well take the bounty out of what the Saints weren't doing and there probably isn't much of a story here. Really? So it's OK do do it for a good hard slap on the ass from coach for a job well done, but it's not OK for a relative bit of pocket change. You're right, I think my homer glasses are really screwing up my morality meter here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevegrab Posted March 7, 2012 Share Posted March 7, 2012 Really? So it's OK do do it for a good hard slap on the ass from coach for a job well done, but it's not OK for a relative bit of pocket change. You're right, I think my homer glasses are really screwing up my morality meter here. Did I say that it was ok? I personally think that trying to injure another player just to knock them out of the game is wrong. And rewarding that activity is more wrong, having a system where coaches are involved using their money, collecting money, paying money out is even more wrong. You asked "This is different?" I replied "Yes it is, how much money was offered to take him out?" That makes it different. Translate this to baseball, would it be ok to say "First time player X bats in the first game of the series, throw at his head to knock him out of the game, we'll have a better chance of winning the next few games." That's bush league and cheap IMO. To then reward it, pay the pitcher extra for doing it, have coaches and several players involved in it. Document it. Be told to stop and keep doing it. You're bias towards the Saints, the way you feel this tarnishes their SB run, the respect they earned, etc. is really clouding your judgement. You've admitted that before, yet keep coming back with new points to defend or diminish their actions. Would you be ok if the Saints organization were making statements similar to some of your posts publicly? They may be thinking that, but they manned up, said we're sorry and it won't happen again. (But in some ways that's like the convicted criminal saying they're sorry, really that they got caught.) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azazello1313 Posted March 7, 2012 Share Posted March 7, 2012 rajn, just my personal opinion here, but you're getting a little pathetic and desperate trying to defend this. you sound exactly like a defense attorney who knows his client is guilty as hell...point the finger everywhere else, blame the "culture", blame an unfair system for picking on your guy and ignoring the real culprits. "the government wants you to single out my client for punishment, ladies and gentlemen of the jury, but then what about all these other people who aren't in the courtroom today?" you're not getting paid to defend them. it's just a football team. a dirty, cheating, arrogant bully of a football team that is about to get its comeuppance. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bpwallace49 Posted March 7, 2012 Share Posted March 7, 2012 Absolutely I see the significance, that much we agree on. And we all agree that they should be punished accordingly for it. But this great morale outrage, this riotous indignation, as if the Saints have done something so far outside of the realm of what is typical for the NFL is a bit ridiculous. How can you say that when it was part of their game plan? c'mon man. You have players saying that they were aware of his past injuries and comparing it with coach-led bounties that they have admitted to? One is done by dickish players. The other is done by dickish players with the participation/ring leading of coaches after being told not to Yep. TOTALLY the same thing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rajncajn Posted March 7, 2012 Author Share Posted March 7, 2012 (edited) rajn, just my personal opinion here, but you're getting a little pathetic and desperate trying to defend this. you sound exactly like a defense attorney who knows his client is guilty as hell...point the finger everywhere else, blame the "culture", blame an unfair system for picking on your guy and ignoring the real culprits. "the government wants you to single out my client for punishment, ladies and gentlemen of the jury, but then what about all these other people who aren't in the courtroom today?" you're not getting paid to defend them. it's just a football team. a dirty, cheating, arrogant bully of a football team that is about to get its comeuppance. Speaking of poor analogies, does a defense attorney sit there & tell the jury that his defendant should be punished harshly for committing the crime? You're right though, nothing I say will convince anyone here of anything. You'll just continually accuse me of defending the Saints and being a homer. I should just put my blinders on and accept the fact that my team is "a dirty, cheating, arrogant bully of a football team." They shouldn't have ever been in the position they were in 09, they deserved nothing because they cheated. The Vikings are the true champions of that season and the Saints never should have been there. I'm done... Edited March 7, 2012 by rajncajn Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bushwacked Posted March 7, 2012 Share Posted March 7, 2012 Homerism is a helluva drug Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azazello1313 Posted March 7, 2012 Share Posted March 7, 2012 Speaking of poor analogies, does a defense attorney sit there & tell the jury that his defendant should be punished harshly for committing the crime? you've said they should be punished as long as everyone else in the league is punished for doing "the same thing" (as if anyone else in the league has). again and again and again you have tried to paint these practices as commonplace and typical in the NFL, and what the saints did as not particularly unusual or egregious. and yes, defense attorneys do that kind of thing all the time to try and get the sentence reduced, as it were. "yes, my client is guilty of bad judgment. but how is what my client did different from" so and so. 100% typical. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
delusions of grandeur Posted March 7, 2012 Share Posted March 7, 2012 In breaking the rules, yes, but how can you say that the Giants were not playing with the intent to injure Williams when several players not only admitted it, but boasted about it, stated that it was part of their game plan and lauded their teammates for accomplishing their goal? But, again, that's all OK because they didn't get paid to do it by the coaches. Exactly... We covered this several pages ago... There is a gigantic difference between players in the heat of battle having a killer instinct, and the coaches, who are supposed to be above the simple mindset of "smash this guy" are monetarily incentivizing that. You're really reaching if you're trying to compare the violent nature of the game/players, to what a coach is supposed to do... It is flat-out absurd that we have to keep explaining the difference of players being violent, and setting up monetary pools to incentivize them to injure. Honestly, I don't like the idea that any teams are pooling for any kinds of plays, but when one of the payouts is for knocking a player out of the game, are you kidding me? You've not only crossed the line, you're paying to take the line's knees out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ditkaless Wonders Posted March 7, 2012 Share Posted March 7, 2012 (edited) In breaking the rules, yes, but how can you say that the Giants were not playing with the intent to injure Williams when several players not only admitted it, but boasted about it, stated that it was part of their game plan and lauded their teammates for accomplishing their goal? But, again, that's all OK because they didn't get paid to do it by the coaches. Sometimes when you find yourself in a hole it is best to stop digging. Nobody is missing your point. The problem is it is evident to everyone but you why it is you are so adament about making your point. Edited March 7, 2012 by Ditkaless Wonders Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ditkaless Wonders Posted March 7, 2012 Share Posted March 7, 2012 Are these pools a form of gambling? I hope not because gambling is illegal at Bushwood, Sir! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cdrudge Posted March 8, 2012 Share Posted March 8, 2012 I'm too lazy to read through 11 pages of posts, so appologies if it has been discussed already. If 22-27 players were involved, I'll presume a decent number of them will still be on the team next year. If many suspensions are handed down, which might happen, is there any precident for scheduling those suspensions so that they aren't all on the same week? They might be able to field a defensive team, but it's going to be really shallow. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ditkaless Wonders Posted March 8, 2012 Share Posted March 8, 2012 I'm too lazy to read through 11 pages of posts, so appologies if it has been discussed already. If 22-27 players were involved, I'll presume a decent number of them will still be on the team next year. If many suspensions are handed down, which might happen, is there any precident for scheduling those suspensions so that they aren't all on the same week? They might be able to field a defensive team, but it's going to be really shallow. I know of no precedent. I will say that if you suspend more than two or three players at any one time you not only cripple the defense, which is fine with me, but you also may put other players at risk by having the team that short-handed. When you get guys having to play out of position or playing too many downs in a game that is a problem. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bronco Billy Posted March 8, 2012 Share Posted March 8, 2012 I'm well done... Fixed for accuracy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rajncajn Posted March 8, 2012 Author Share Posted March 8, 2012 Fixed for accuracy Thank you for rubbing it in Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nuke'em ttg Posted March 8, 2012 Share Posted March 8, 2012 Thank you for rubbing it in well, ya made it 10 rounds, that might be worth somethun, you do know there's a pool ta bring ya down right. BB and Az will be hearing from DMD Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bronco Billy Posted March 8, 2012 Share Posted March 8, 2012 Thank you for rubbing it in Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.