dsrdsrdsr

I don't quite understand why the original article spends 4 pages on why there's nothing wrong with the bounty system and it's all in the game, and then on page 5 says

"If you’re told you can get paid $2,000 dollars for an interception, that gives you motivation to go out and get that interception."

Doesn't that shoot his entire argument down? Because if it's true of interceptions, it's also true that if you tell a player he can have $2,000 for a game-ending injury, he's more likely to go out and cause that injury.