nuke'em ttg Posted March 22, 2012 Share Posted March 22, 2012 c'mon man, that's bullchit....Goodell, the new Hoffa, friggin snake lady is on his ass, ba bye Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rajncajn Posted March 22, 2012 Share Posted March 22, 2012 Redskins fans breath easy, Goodell says you're off the hook. Not sure what more evidence they needed other than players & coaches alike saying that they had the same system, but good for the Redskins nonetheless. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevegrab Posted March 22, 2012 Share Posted March 22, 2012 A couple more things. Was watching Jay Leno from last week (Wed 3/14 I believe)when Drew Brees was on, Jay asked him about this. (Keep in mind its before yesterday's announcement.) Brees basically said "There's no place in football for this, at any level. Its wrong to reward people for trying to injure other players." Of course I wouldn't expect him to say it much differently, not going to stand there on national TV and say "well everybody does it, what's wrong with it". But I believe he really feels this way. He also said that it was going on with the defensive team and they didn't really know about it, not sure if I buy that as much, but suppose its a big locker room and possible. (Or maybe the players hid the info from guys they felt might snitch.) Scott Fujita (now with the Browns who was a Saint in the SB year) has admitted that he put money into a fund to reward players. But he only thought that was for big plays like interceptions, fumble recoveries. Not for injurying other players (the knockout & cart-off stuff). Not sure if I buy that, seems unlikely that only certain players on defense would know about those parts of the bounty system. I also think its silly for people to say "this cripples the Saints, they are done this year forget the playoffs". Just missing their coach for the season isn't going to cripple them. If a bunch of other players are suspended including some on offense then maybe that is true. Also somebody said "with Brees in question" what question is there? He's been franchised, do people think he'll hold out for a long term contract and not play? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rajncajn Posted March 22, 2012 Share Posted March 22, 2012 (edited) A couple more things. Was watching Jay Leno from last week (Wed 3/14 I believe)when Drew Brees was on, Jay asked him about this. (Keep in mind its before yesterday's announcement.) Brees basically said "There's no place in football for this, at any level. Its wrong to reward people for trying to injure other players." Of course I wouldn't expect him to say it much differently, not going to stand there on national TV and say "well everybody does it, what's wrong with it". But I believe he really feels this way. He also said that it was going on with the defensive team and they didn't really know about it, not sure if I buy that as much, but suppose its a big locker room and possible. (Or maybe the players hid the info from guys they felt might snitch.) Scott Fujita (now with the Browns who was a Saint in the SB year) has admitted that he put money into a fund to reward players. But he only thought that was for big plays like interceptions, fumble recoveries. Not for injurying other players (the knockout & cart-off stuff). Not sure if I buy that, seems unlikely that only certain players on defense would know about those parts of the bounty system. I also think its silly for people to say "this cripples the Saints, they are done this year forget the playoffs". Just missing their coach for the season isn't going to cripple them. If a bunch of other players are suspended including some on offense then maybe that is true. Also somebody said "with Brees in question" what question is there? He's been franchised, do people think he'll hold out for a long term contract and not play? Considering what was reported, that all this stuff went on in the defensive meetings, I actually find it very plausible that the offensive players & even Sean Payton, since he gave GW full freedom to run the defense, didn't know the extent of what was going on. They may have known that there was some sort of pay for performance system, but not to the extent of knowing about the bounties. Which may have not come to anyone's attention until the league started this last investigation. I still don't think that excuses Payton from being culpable, especially after pay for performance system being brought to his attention by the league. Edited March 22, 2012 by rajncajn Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
detlef Posted March 22, 2012 Share Posted March 22, 2012 Like others have said, I have a hard time faulting the league for covering its ass here. They absolutely need to show that they're doing everything reasonable to protect the safety of the players and that would have to include severely punishing a team that, not only did this, but apparently lied about it as well. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azazello1313 Posted March 22, 2012 Share Posted March 22, 2012 Redskins fans breath easy, Goodell says you're off the hook. Not sure what more evidence they needed other than players & coaches alike saying that they had the same system, but good for the Redskins nonetheless. jiminy cricket, is it really this difficult to comprehend? notice all the past tense in that article? IF they had a similar system at some point in the past, they obviously quit. on their own. either because they were listening to the league warnings or because their slimy DC went to work for the saints or because someone stopped it internally. contrast that with the saints, who did it, were specifically told to stop, kept doing it, were warned again and asked about it later, lied about it, kept doing it, and so on. no other team comes anywhere close to matching that fact pattern. the saints 100% DESERVE to be singled out. why don't you direct some of your anger about this toward the people who are actually responsible for letting you down, rather than this incessant whining about other teams and the poor saints being a victim? 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
detlef Posted March 22, 2012 Share Posted March 22, 2012 why don't you direct some of your anger about this toward the people who are actually responsible for letting you down, rather than this incessant whining about other teams and the poor saints being a victim? This Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rajncajn Posted March 22, 2012 Share Posted March 22, 2012 (edited) jiminy cricket, is it really this difficult to comprehend? notice all the past tense in that article? IF they had a similar system at some point in the past, they obviously quit. on their own. either because they were listening to the league warnings or because their slimy DC went to work for the saints or because someone stopped it internally. contrast that with the saints, who did it, were specifically told to stop, kept doing it, were warned again and asked about it later, lied about it, kept doing it, and so on. no other team comes anywhere close to matching that fact pattern. the saints 100% DESERVE to be singled out. why don't you direct some of your anger about this toward the people who are actually responsible for letting you down, rather than this incessant whining about other teams and the poor saints being a victim? I think you are the one having difficulties comprehending. You consistently keep making this assumption that I'm trying to defend what the team did. I posted the "Redskins can breathe easy because they are off the hook." Where in that did I say that the Saints don't deserve what they got? I still don't understand what specific evidence they were looking for to implicate the Redskins. Maybe if they were still doing it past some specific time frame? I don't know... I guess since I'm a Saints fan I have no right to talk about other teams possibly doing it as well. Maybe I should just put my blinders on like everyone else. I actually just read an article regarding it in the Washington post. Please don't portray this as defending the Saints. New Orleans Saints deserved punishment for bounty system, but Roger Goodell and NFL haven’t gone far enough As for the Saints penalties, I think they deserve every bit of it. I think the penalty against Payton in particular is excessive of the crime, but hey, he IS considered ultimately responsible so I guess it can be justified in that respect. Personally, though, I think his suspension was personal due to Payton either deceiving Goodell and/or dismissing his edict. Where I may differ from some on this board is that I disagree with the way the players are being perceived. Maybe it is a homers point of view, but I believe the players when they say their intent was never to injure other players. That's my opinion though & I really couldn't care less if you agree with it or not. Edited March 22, 2012 by rajncajn Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
delusions of grandeur Posted March 22, 2012 Share Posted March 22, 2012 (edited) jiminy cricket, is it really this difficult to comprehend? notice all the past tense in that article? IF they had a similar system at some point in the past, they obviously quit. on their own. either because they were listening to the league warnings or because their slimy DC went to work for the saints or because someone stopped it internally. contrast that with the saints, who did it, were specifically told to stop, kept doing it, were warned again and asked about it later, lied about it, kept doing it, and so on. no other team comes anywhere close to matching that fact pattern. the saints 100% DESERVE to be singled out. why don't you direct some of your anger about this toward the people who are actually responsible for letting you down, rather than this incessant whining about other teams and the poor saints being a victim? Also note this at the end of the article: "Right now, at this point, is there cause to punish the Redskins? No. Could that change? Yes. [but] the other question is: How far back are you going to go?” So that brings up the point that AZ said above, that if they had a bounty system, they have no indication that it was there after Williams left, or that the other coaches knew about it... Maybe that's naive they didn't know, but you're innocent until proven guilty. But as has been repeated in this thread, it was more that the NFL found out they were doing it, told them to stop, but they continued doing it anyway, conceivably as recently as last year... So jsut because Williams has now left, this has all happened since the Saints were warned, so if you don't like them being singled out for bounties, then that's fine, they really got nailed for insubordination, refusing to comply with the league's requests on a matter that is now giving them a giant black eye with regard to player safety. Edited March 22, 2012 by delusions of granduer Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Furd Posted March 22, 2012 Share Posted March 22, 2012 Like others have said, I have a hard time faulting the league for covering its ass here. They absolutely need to show that they're doing everything reasonable to protect the safety of the players and that would have to include severely punishing a team that, not only did this, but apparently lied about it as well. I don't think that the league is covering its ass here. Its enforcing a policy that for the good of the league has to be enforced. It also appears to be penalizing a team that lied or at least willfully disregarded league rules and instructions, which cannot be tolerated. I think that its a pretty big reach to argue that suspending Payton 1 year vs. 6 months or taking away 2 draft picks instead of 1 or none is indicia of a concern for player safety. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rajncajn Posted March 22, 2012 Share Posted March 22, 2012 Also note this at the end of the article: "Right now, at this point, is there cause to punish the Redskins? No. Could that change? Yes. [but] the other question is: How far back are you going to go?” So that brings up the point that AZ said above, that if they had a bounty system, they have no indication that it was there after Williams left, or that the other coaches knew about it... Maybe that's naive they didn't know, but you're innocent until proven guilty. But as has been repeated in this thread, it was more that the NFL found out they were doing it, told them to stop, but they continued doing it anyway, conceivably as recently as last year... So jsut because Williams has now left, this has all happened since the Saints were warned, so if you don't like them being singled out for bounties, then that's fine, they really got nailed for insubordination, refusing to comply with the league's requests on a matter that is now giving them a giant black eye with regard to player safety. And I can't argue with any of that, but calling me out as defending the Saints because I've posted that other teams may have been guilty as well is making baseless assumptions about my intentions. Assumptions that I have repeatedly tried to refute, but still keep getting accused of. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
delusions of grandeur Posted March 22, 2012 Share Posted March 22, 2012 And I can't argue with any of that, but calling me out as defending the Saints because I've posted that other teams may have been guilty as well is making baseless assumptions about my intentions. Assumptions that I have repeatedly tried to refute, but still keep getting accused of. Well, maybe it wouldn't look like you're defending the Saints if you don't keep posting other circumstantial cases involving the guy Payton let conduct bounties. No one is trying to call you out, but this isn't just about bounties why they got nailed... I assume you don't think this, but there is no conspiracy against the Saints. There's evidence it happened, there's an email Payton acknowledged with a bounty on Rodgers as recently as this year, and all this after they were told to cut it out. Thus, the reason you keep drawing heat is you keep simply bringing it back to a culture of bounties... When I was in college, there was culture of dope-smoking, but if the police came to my door and said, "If we smell pot from this house again, we're coming back with drug dogs", then you realize the risk you're taking in continuing that behavior. There wouldn't have been any penalty if they'd cut it out when they were told to. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Furd Posted March 22, 2012 Share Posted March 22, 2012 And I can't argue with any of that, but calling me out as defending the Saints because I've posted that other teams may have been guilty as well is making baseless assumptions about my intentions. Assumptions that I have repeatedly tried to refute, but still keep getting accused of. Well, maybe its not your intention, and perhaps I'm not reading your posts carefully enough, but my overall impression is that your position is that the penalties against the Saints are unfair because "everyone else was doing it." I'm not busting your balls - just my $.02. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rajncajn Posted March 22, 2012 Share Posted March 22, 2012 Well, maybe its not your intention, and perhaps I'm not reading your posts carefully enough, but my overall impression is that your position is that the penalties against the Saints are unfair because "everyone else was doing it." I'm not busting your balls - just my $.02. Not in the least... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rajncajn Posted March 22, 2012 Share Posted March 22, 2012 Adam Shefter reporting on ESPN that player suspensions will take a while to come out. He said they will focus on 3 to 4 key players and listed Will Smith, Jonathan Vilma and Scott Fujita. The report made it seem as though the penalties would be stiff, but limited in scope. If this is the case then I would be VERY surprised. Considering the magnitude of the penalties given to the franchise I was expecting all the players involved to get staggered suspensions with Vilma & possibly Will Smith and/or Roman Harper getting a full year out. It doesn't really make that much sense to me to come down so hard on the organization and not on the players that were directly involved. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bpwallace49 Posted March 22, 2012 Share Posted March 22, 2012 Not in the least... then what IS your position? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pope Flick Posted March 22, 2012 Share Posted March 22, 2012 Rajn - you do know that Payton received emails discussing bounties, the NFL had said emails and Payton lied about them until they pulled them out at which point he copped to them? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
delusions of grandeur Posted March 22, 2012 Share Posted March 22, 2012 If this is the case then I would be VERY surprised. Considering the magnitude of the penalties given to the franchise I was expecting all the players involved to get staggered suspensions with Vilma & possibly Will Smith and/or Roman Harper getting a full year out. It doesn't really make that much sense to me to come down so hard on the organization and not on the players that were directly involved. Not to keep piling it on you, but I look at it the exact opposite way... If this was a non-sanctioned player-led thing, I wouldn't have nearly as much of an issue with it, because defensive players are paid to deliver violent hits, and so to me it's akin to a soldier in the heat of battle taking it too far. It's their job and so it's a bit more understandable (still obviously doesn't make it right, but it's more understandable and thus I think penalties should be less harsh, particularly when it was sanctioned and influenced by the coaches). The "generals" however, are supposed to be above that, and teach players to do their jobs the right way that doesn't hurt their team. They're paid to instruct, they're paid to lead, and so there's little doubt in my mind that the ones instructing/leading should be held to higher scrutiny than the guys paid to deliver hits. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevegrab Posted March 22, 2012 Share Posted March 22, 2012 If Fujita gets singled out and suspended then I have to seriously question his statement that he didn't know the bounties involved those for injurying other players (knockout/cartoff). Hard to believe any member of the defense didn't really know the full details. But then maybe some of it was only discussed by certain groups of players. And maybe he just threw his money in without knowing everything. And maybe monkeys will fly out of my butt. I guess I'll need to prepare myself and be ready to be outraged over unfair suspensions if/when they happen. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rajncajn Posted March 22, 2012 Share Posted March 22, 2012 then what IS your position? I think you are the one having difficulties comprehending. You consistently keep making this assumption that I'm trying to defend what the team did. I posted the "Redskins can breathe easy because they are off the hook." Where in that did I say that the Saints don't deserve what they got? I still don't understand what specific evidence they were looking for to implicate the Redskins. Maybe if they were still doing it past some specific time frame? I don't know... I guess since I'm a Saints fan I have no right to talk about other teams possibly doing it as well. Maybe I should just put my blinders on like everyone else. I actually just read an article regarding it in the Washington post. Please don't portray this as defending the Saints. New Orleans Saints deserved punishment for bounty system, but Roger Goodell and NFL haven’t gone far enough As for the Saints penalties, I think they deserve every bit of it. I think the penalty against Payton in particular is excessive of the crime, but hey, he IS considered ultimately responsible so I guess it can be justified in that respect. Personally, though, I think his suspension was personal due to Payton either deceiving Goodell and/or dismissing his edict. Where I may differ from some on this board is that I disagree with the way the players are being perceived. Maybe it is a homers point of view, but I believe the players when they say their intent was never to injure other players. That's my opinion though & I really couldn't care less if you agree with it or not. Here is the rest of it as best as I can piece it together. The only thing I have said all along is that the league needs to take an equal look at other teams that may have been guilty as well & not just use the Saints as an example. That is NOT in any way in defense of what the Saints are guilty of, though it has consistently been portrayed that way. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevegrab Posted March 22, 2012 Share Posted March 22, 2012 Here is the rest of it as best as I can piece it together. The only thing I have said all along is that the league needs to take an equal look at other teams that may have been guilty as well & not just use the Saints as an example. That is NOT in any way in defense of what the Saints are guilty of, though it has consistently been portrayed that way. And if other teams are found guilty of doing the exact same things the Saints were (including not stopping when told to, saying they would stop but not doing that, and lying during the investigation) I'd expect similar punishment. If they were only guilty of a bounty system and quit when all teams were warned, I'd expect much lighter punishment. Similar to Spygate, the team found to be repeatedly breaking the rules and not stopping when all teams were warned had the hammer dropped on them. Other teams had little or no punishment. Repeat offender with an attitude vs. first time offender who complies. PS FYI your link didn't work... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bpwallace49 Posted March 22, 2012 Share Posted March 22, 2012 Here is the rest of it as best as I can piece it together. The only thing I have said all along is that the league needs to take an equal look at other teams that may have been guilty as well & not just use the Saints as an example. That is NOT in any way in defense of what the Saints are guilty of, though it has consistently been portrayed that way. So you are totally cool with the punishment the saints received, but you think that all the other teams have equally lied repeatedly to Goodall over a period of years when being investigated? or that other teams when told to "knock it off" specifically from Goodall, hava also conducted cover ups and lied to the commish just like the Saints? Are you still combining the act of the bounties (which other players probably do and have done and that are wrong) with the fact that Peyton and the Saints lied to teh commish during a very specific investigation and after getting caught for having knowledge and (in williams case) participating in the bounty pool tried to cover it up and got caught? 1.) Bounties are bad, should be eliminated/stopped 2.) Lying to the commish during an investigation for bounties and continuing the bounty program while going beyond "good play" bonuses to cart-offs and knock outs to hurt players is way way way beyond bounties, and something that appears to have specifically been a Saints phenomenon. You might as well ignore the bounties and stress that you just dont lie to the league during an investigation, and then continue the behavior you were told to STOP several times Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rajncajn Posted March 22, 2012 Share Posted March 22, 2012 Rajn - you do know that Payton received emails discussing bounties, the NFL had said emails and Payton lied about them until they pulled them out at which point he copped to them? Yes, I saw that and I wasn't thinking about that when I posted that it was possible that Payton didn't know the full extent. That report did conflict with an earlier report that said he denied to the league that he saw the emails, of which if true I think it was kinda stupid so I tend to doubt it. To be clear, Payton got an email from his friend Orenstien with a PS saying that he'd like to put money down on Favre. I don't know if Payton took it as a joke as Orenstien claimed it was intended as, but regardless, it should have gotten Payton's attention. Not to keep piling it on you, but I look at it the exact opposite way... If this was a non-sanctioned player-led thing, I wouldn't have nearly as much of an issue with it, because defensive players are paid to deliver violent hits, and so to me it's akin to a soldier in the heat of battle taking it too far. It's their job and so it's a bit more understandable (still obviously doesn't make it right, but it's more understandable and thus I think penalties should be less harsh, particularly when it was sanctioned and influenced by the coaches). The "generals" however, are supposed to be above that, and teach players to do their jobs the right way that doesn't hurt their team. They're paid to instruct, they're paid to lead, and so there's little doubt in my mind that the ones instructing/leading should be held to higher scrutiny than the guys paid to deliver hits. Understood. I'm just going by the feeling I've gotten by the magnitude of the penalties so far, not necessarily what i think they deserve. Just saying it surprises me a bit that they would go lighter on the players. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azazello1313 Posted March 22, 2012 Share Posted March 22, 2012 hmm, rajn says he's not whining about the saints being treated unfairly because "everyone else was doing it". yet every single post of his seems to be exactly to that effect. so I guess he's right and I do have some sort of reading problem. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rajncajn Posted March 22, 2012 Share Posted March 22, 2012 (edited) And if other teams are found guilty of doing the exact same things the Saints were (including not stopping when told to, saying they would stop but not doing that, and lying during the investigation) I'd expect similar punishment. If they were only guilty of a bounty system and quit when all teams were warned, I'd expect much lighter punishment. Similar to Spygate, the team found to be repeatedly breaking the rules and not stopping when all teams were warned had the hammer dropped on them. Other teams had little or no punishment. Repeat offender with an attitude vs. first time offender who complies. PS FYI your link didn't work... Somewhat, yes. I think we can say with all honesty that some type of pay-for-performance system goes on or has gone on in a lot of clubhouses. No, I don't think they should all get punished or punished in the same way. If coaches were involved (and there is evidence to suggest that including coaches and players admitting to it), then yes, I do think there should be some repercussions depending on how far back it was done. That I think the league needs to take seriously and investigate as fervently as they did with the Saints. Otherwise the league is just being hypocritical IMO. But the way I perceive it is that the league would rather make an example of the Saints and sweep the rest under the rug. I'm sorry if I don't see that as fair, but that's what I'm being accused of being a homer and a whiner about. Sorry about the link. I tried to link a search I did to all my posts in the thread about the Saints bounty program rather than trying to quote everything & not being able to see what i was responding to.. Maybe Big John can help with that. Otherwise you'll just have to go back to that thread & read my posts. So you are totally cool with the punishment the saints received, but you think that all the other teams have equally lied repeatedly to Goodall over a period of years when being investigated? or that other teams when told to "knock it off" specifically from Goodall, have also conducted cover ups and lied to the commish just like the Saints? Not totally cool with the punishment, because I think the punishment to Payton was over the top, which I explained above, but acceptable considering the circumstances. I also think it's a bit unfair to the fans, but again... acceptable. I think it's very plausible considering what multiple players, coaches & media people have come forward and stated and I think the league should take those allegations as seriously as they have the one's against the Saints. Whatever penalties, if any, would depend on the situation as they did with the Saints. Edited March 22, 2012 by rajncajn 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.