Saints Defense maintained a Bounty Program

[EmpireWF]

For the millionth time, it's not about penalties or trying to sack a QB cleanly. It's about trying to collect cash for injuring a player, no other reason.

 

[MrBill]

I bet you masturbate to those pictures you sick fuck. Your love for Favre is disturbing.

Don't get your roided up panties in such a twist there Lattimer. This isn't a discussion about where Favre sits on the GOAT list, this is about the Saints being guilty of illegal hits on QBs during the 2010 playoffs. The mention of Favre's name as a victim of said bounty program is germane to the conversation going on in this thread.

Here are highlights of the hits the Saints put on Favre:

New Orleans Saints put Brett Favre's Pants on the Ground (featuring American Idol's Larry Platt) - YouTube

I don't know if that is all of them or not, but from those hits I see nothing that is clearly and undeniably cheap done by the Saints in any of those plays. Not only that, I could say that on some of the plays it looks like the Saints players are actually trying to do everything they can to make sure they aren't doing anything extra that would risk getting a penalty.

It's a good thing you don't work for the NFLPA or the league office because there were $30,000 in fines in those hits that are in your clip. If you don't think the shots to the knee and ankle area that produced the injuries shown in the photo weren't dirty, then you are just trolling.

So they were probably cheering every time they sacked Favre, hit Favre, or put Favre on the ground then. How weird.

I know what I saw because I was at the game. They were cheering and high fiving each other when Favre took a dirty shot like the one where he was driven to the turf and the high low shot that knocked him out of the game. When that one happened and Favre was limping off of the field the reaction on the Saints sideline made it obvious something was going on. NFL sidelines do not normally cheer for injuries to opponents because it is bad karma.

 

[bucky]

For the millionth time, it's not about penalties or trying to sack a QB cleanly. It's about trying to collect cash for injuring a player, no other reason.

So, like warner, your just making style rants that end up changing nothing and poo-pooing the substance part of the issue? I asked Warner and he was too much of a woman to answer, so I'll ask you.

What's your end game here? What are you trying to accomplish? You just after style issues like NFL PR, and ethics, or do you really want solutions that make these illegal hit bounty's to injure go away?

Really Empire, what's your end game here? Or are you ranting just to rant?

I'm convinced that Warner's a woman, cause that's exactly what woman do.

So tell me Empire, what are you trying to accomplish? Do you want the NFL to do anything to stop these things? Cause apparently, Warner just wants to bitch about them.

 

[EmpireWF]

Endgame? Accomplish? The fuck are you talking about.

The Saints are going to be penalized like they had a one night stand with Mrs. Goodell. HARD.

So hard that coaches, GMs and other officials and people associated with teams are not going to pay bonus money to players TO INJURE ANYONE. And if they do, then ban their ass.

Now quit your psychobabble.

 

[killgod]

I gotta wonder how Goodell is going to handle this. Yes the Saints have been proven to do this, but players from other teams are openly admitting this too. How does that allow him to punish the Saints and only the Saints?

 

[bucky]

Endgame? Accomplish? The fuck are you talking about.

The Saints are going to be penalized like they had a one night stand with Mrs. Goodell. HARD.

So hard that coaches, GMs and other officials and people associated with teams are not going to pay bonus money to players TO INJURE ANYONE. And if they do, then ban their ass.

Now quit your psychobabble.

This may do something to deter it. But it goes further underground where wording makes it harder to prosecute the next time. You really think going after the Saints is really gonna change anything on the field? You seriously think this? I don't. Doesn't it make more sense to significantly increase the penalties for illegal hits? That at least does make game day changes. And you call that psycho babble?

SMH at you thinking that just going after the Saints will make illegal hits and hits to injure go away.

 

[bucky]

I gotta wonder how Goodell is going to handle this. Yes the Saints have been proven to do this, but players from other teams are openly admitting this too. How does that allow him to punish the Saints and only the Saints?

It opens a HUGE can of worms. Other players should have kept their mouths shut.

My guess, but it's just a guess, is the NFL doesn't pursue any others saying they have the evidence for the Saints but don't have the evidence against the other teams, and behind closed doors decide to not try and find evidence against the other teams.

 

[EmpireWF]

I gotta wonder how Goodell is going to handle this. Yes the Saints have been proven to do this, but players from other teams are openly admitting this too. How does that allow him to punish the Saints and only the Saints?

The league told the Saints to quit the program and not only did the organization lie, they continued doing it.

That's why the Saints are getting the book thrown at them.

 

[MrBill]

The league told the Saints to quit the program and not only did the organization lie, they continued doing it.

That's why the Saints are getting the book thrown at them.

Kind of like if the Patriots got caught taping games again :alone:

 

[Warner2BruceTD]

Well, well, well, looks like everybody is going down, just like I said they would.

You see Tailback, Zoneblitz, bucky, dspyder, in civilized society we don't accept concepts like bounties and blood money. Normal people think this is really fucked up and unethical, so Goodell is going to send a message to everybody else that if you bring that thug shit to the the shield, he is going to kick your ass out of his league.

It was never about "good, clean, hard, hits", as you mouth breathing morons continually (and still) miss the point. It's about rouge cash-for-injury operations taking place in locker rooms, and it can't be tolerated for reasons obvious to anybody who isn't mentally retarded.

 

[DSpydr84]

Well, well, well, looks like everybody is going down, just like I said they would.

You see Tailback, Zoneblitz, bucky, dspyder, in civilized society we don't accept concepts like bounties and blood money. Normal people think this is really fucked up and unethical, so Goodell is going to send a message to everybody else that if you bring that thug shit to the the shield, he is going to kick your ass out of his league.

It was never about "good, clean, hard, hits", as you mouth breathing morons continually (and still) miss the point. It's about rouge cash-for-injury operations taking place in locker rooms, and it can't be tolerated for reasons obvious to anybody who isn't mentally retarded.

Yep, I gotta say I'm completely shocked that the NFL is doing anything about this.

For as much as I missed your point, you sure missed mine.

 

[ralaw]

Well, well, well, looks like everybody is going down, just like I said they would.

You see Tailback, Zoneblitz, bucky, dspyder, in civilized society we don't accept concepts like bounties and blood money. Normal people think this is really fucked up and unethical, so Goodell is going to send a message to everybody else that if you bring that thug shit to the the shield, he is going to kick your ass out of his league.

It was never about "good, clean, hard, hits", as you mouth breathing morons continually (and still) miss the point. It's about rouge cash-for-injury operations taking place in locker rooms, and it can't be tolerated for reasons obvious to anybody who isn't mentally retarded.

They're also going down because the NFL knows that once the "ROAR! I'm a football player.....BE A Man or stop playing!" guy retires he'll be trying to sue the league for liability. Much of all of these rule changes that Goodell has implemented are directly influenced by future lawsuits that players will file.

 

[Warner2BruceTD]

Yep, I gotta say I'm completely shocked that the NFL is doing anything about this.

For as much as I missed your point, you sure missed mine.

The idea that bounties don't change the way the players play is not only flawed, but is also irrelevant, even if you are right (which you are not).

Nobody missed your point, your point just sucked.

 

[DSpydr84]

The idea that bounties don't change the way the players play is not only flawed, but is also irrelevant, even if you are right (which you are not).

Nobody missed your point, your point just sucked.

So why is my name put in your previous post when I never said anything about that?

:joeybats:

 

[EmpireWF]

Sounds like Payton will be suspended a few games and a bunch of players on defense will, too. They'd almost have to do it on a tiered basis though or else the Saints may not have enough guys to play a game lol.

 

[Warner2BruceTD]

So why is my name put in your previous post when I never said anything about that?

:joeybats:

Here you go!

It is absolutely unacceptable in every single way, and a tremendously awful PR and ethical decision by the NFL to allow that to happen.

Listen, I'm not naive enough to say that the macho-attitude of the NFL is a good thing for player safety or helps the league in terms of its perception.

What I'm saying is, the way the game is played, I can see how these things would happen. If I pay a guy $50,000 to blitz off the edge and hit the QB in the back as hard as he can to knock the ball out (which is what players essentially get paid for in their contract), is that any less or more acceptable? If I teach my smaller defensive backs to dive at the knees to tackle a bigger running back, or if my teach my huge offensive lineman to throw their bodies at the knees of a linebacker to stop backside pursuit and cut them, is that any less or more acceptable? If my wide receiver is taught to come down inside and blind-side a safety who's chasing the run and crack him, is that any less or more acceptable?

I posted this video earlier, but notice all the cut blocks and bodies on the ground after this carnage. What makes this acceptable? Because nobody had "intent to injure"?


Where is the line? The issue here is that they threw the word "injure" around. But all of the acts mentioned above happen on a regular basis, and in each case, players are at risk for injury.

When does a "good technique" or a good "football play" (the worst phrase in sports) turn into a malicious attempt to hurt someone? Is it because they said it, or is it because it happened?

I think in both cases, the players on the field respond the same.

 

[DSpydr84]

Tailback, bucky, dspyder, answer this for me.

If there was sign in an NFL locker room that read:



Do you think that is something acceptable that the NFL should allow if the team so chooses? Forget the salary cap implications for a moment. No qualifiers like "if it was good, clean, hits...". None of that. Just, would you have a problem with it on a face value level?

Do you not see how this is mental?

It is absolutely unacceptable in every single way, and a tremendously awful PR and ethical decision by the NFL to allow that to happen.

Listen, I'm not naive enough to say that the macho-attitude of the NFL is a good thing for player safety or helps the league in terms of its perception.

What I'm saying is, the way the game is played, I can see how these things would happen. If I pay a guy $50,000 to blitz off the edge and hit the QB in the back as hard as he can to knock the ball out (which is what players essentially get paid for in their contract), is that any less or more acceptable? If I teach my smaller defensive backs to dive at the knees to tackle a bigger running back, or if my teach my huge offensive lineman to throw their bodies at the knees of a linebacker to stop backside pursuit and cut them, is that any less or more acceptable? If my wide receiver is taught to come down inside and blind-side a safety who's chasing the run and crack him, is that any less or more acceptable?

I posted this video earlier, but notice all the cut blocks and bodies on the ground after this carnage. What makes this acceptable? Because nobody had "intent to injure"?

Alabama's Mark Barron levels Vanderbilt's Jordan Rodgers 10/8/2011 - YouTube

Where is the line? The issue here is that they threw the word "injure" around. But all of the acts mentioned above happen on a regular basis, and in each case, players are at risk for injury.

When does a "good technique" or a good "football play" (the worst phrase in sports) turn into a malicious attempt to hurt someone? Is it because they said it, or is it because it happened?

I think in both cases, the players on the field respond the same.

Well, well, well, looks like everybody is going down, just like I said they would.

You see Tailback, Zoneblitz, bucky, dspyder, in civilized society we don't accept concepts like bounties and blood money. Normal people think this is really fucked up and unethical, so Goodell is going to send a message to everybody else that if you bring that thug shit to the the shield, he is going to kick your ass out of his league.

It was never about "good, clean, hard, hits", as you mouth breathing morons continually (and still) miss the point. It's about rouge cash-for-injury operations taking place in locker rooms, and it can't be tolerated for reasons obvious to anybody who isn't mentally retarded.

:joeybats: :joeybats: :joeybats:

 

[ZoneBlitz]

The idea that bounties don't change the way the players play is not only flawed, but is also irrelevant, even if you are right (which you are not).

Obviously everyone associated with the bounties should be penalized, because that isnt and shouldnt be allowed.

But the idea that players played differently because of bounties is wrong and stupid.

 

[Warner2BruceTD]

joey bats


Don't back peddle son, you think bounties are "cool".

You also continually say they don't change the way the game is played, which is not only wrong, but is also missing the point.

I see nothing wrong with it because it's the nature of the game. If I tell a guy to fill the alley at full speed, I don't expect him to get there and play patty-cake with the running back.

Why not have a reward system? A "big hit" is too subjective, so he said if you need to injure a guy. I really don't see why it's a big deal. Every player in the NFL gets some type of ding in every single game. There's not one guy in the league after week 3 that isn't hurt in some way. I think it's cool, actually. Go knock a dude out. That's how we play D.

To me, it's foolish of you to think this doesn't happen everywhere, or if it's not to the extent of paying players, there isn't one guy out there who isn't trying to get a knock-out hit on his resume. Tell me when you played in HS you didn't want to de-cleat a guy. There's no guarantee that he gets hurt, but fuck, if he does, I'm getting paid. I win twice.

Cut the cord, man. Let it go.

 

[nwfisch]

Obviously everyone associated with the bounties should be penalized, because that isnt and shouldnt be allowed.

But the idea that players played differently because of bounties is wrong and stupid.

Players don't play harder for more money and prestige. OK