|
this is a discussion within the Saints Community Forum; Originally Posted by Radical The "token reward," or whatever you want to call it, IS ILLEGAL. If you are paying for people to cause injuries, then that establishes intent. If I put money up for someone to kill someone, and ...
![]() |
|
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
![]() |
#1 |
Merces Letifer
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 4,161
|
Re: NFL re-issues bounty discipline**UPDATED**
Originally Posted by Radical
Again, you really need to step away from the analogies. You are doing them wrong. If you put up money to kill someone, well, killing someone is illegal in on itself. Hitting someone as hard as you can in football within the established rules to hit someone, not illegal. ![]()
And I am not going to tell you that no one got hurt playing against the Saints. That really is just a stupid statement on your part. And no one is denying that the token rewards are illegal under the CBA. Any payment not established within the player's contract with his team goes against the CBA, being $1, $10, $100, $1000. No one is arguing against that. The thing is, those illegal payments, according to the CBA, are salary cap violations, not punishable with suspensions. So enter Goodell with his "conduct detrimental" and his "intent to injure". And again, I have to ask, how can you determine intent to injure, when you are already allowed to hit someone as hard as you possibly can within an established set of rules? Again, the outcome and consequences of legal play are the same, whether there is a reward for any particular outcome or consequence, or not. And that is the part that you don't get, or you refuse to acknowledge. If the case was Saints players were being flagged for vicious illegal hits and fined huge amounts of money (you know, like Dunta), or were declaring they were going to put some hot sauce on this guy or dot this other guy and both end up hurt after illegal hits (you know, like the Jets these past 2 weeks), you could make a case that they intended to injure someone. BUT, when you don't see vicious illegal hits, when you don't see huge amounts of fines being levied against the players because of vicious illegal hits, when you look at the film and all you see is the very same hits you see during every game every Sunday (or Monday, or Thursday) how can you honestly determine there is intent to injure? It is very simple, really. If you are already legally hitting someone l as hard as you can, you know doing so can result in bodily harm to the person you are hitting, any reasonable person would deduct that; well, is there intent to injure? Is a reward going to make you hit harder? You are already legally hitting as hard as you can... If you are punishing the reward/payment, ok. Do so under the CBA guidelines. If you are punishing the intent to injure, show me the intent to injure. And you cannot show me intent to injure without a consistent pattern of illegal hits; you cannot show me intent to injure when the hits you see me make are the very same hits you see every Sunday on every other game. You need to show me Ndamukong Suh grabbing someone's head and smashing it on the ground then stomping on that someone when he's still on the ground. You need to show me Albert Haynesworth stumping Gurode's helmetless head while he's on the ground. you need to show me Jared Allen diving into Matt Schaub's knee from behind well after Schaub had thrown the ball 5 seconds before. And of course, you need to show me Dunta Robinson hitting defenseless receivers. THEN, I will tell you yes, the Saints went out there with the intent to injure someone. |
'Cause the simple man pays the thrills, the bills and the pills that kill
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
#2 |
Falcons Fan
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 148
|
Re: NFL re-issues bounty discipline**UPDATED**
Originally Posted by Tobias-Reiper
And attempted murder isn't murder, but it's still illegal. We know the organization and players wanted to injure players, otherwise people wouldn't be offering money to do it. Lack of injuries doesn't disprove anything.
![]()
|
![]() |
![]() |
#3 |
Merces Letifer
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 4,161
|
Re: NFL re-issues bounty discipline**UPDATED**
Originally Posted by Radical
Jesus.. you kidding right?![]()
Attempted murder is illegal. Murder is illegal. Hitting someone as hard as you can in a football game within the established rules and probably causing an injury is NOT ILLEGAL. That's the freaking game of football. As for lack of injuries not disproving anything, how can you pay money for injuring someone, if no one gets injured? But, it is my fault. I keep on typing and typing, and all I get back is "We know the organization and players wanted to injure players, otherwise people wouldn't be offering money to do it". I should have known better. You just keep on posting pictures of Dunta Robinson's illegal hits and keep telling us how they aren't illegal. |
'Cause the simple man pays the thrills, the bills and the pills that kill
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
#4 |
10000 POST CLUB
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Bossier City, LA
Posts: 26,622
|
Re: NFL re-issues bounty discipline**UPDATED**
Originally Posted by Tobias-Reiper
Now you understand what I have put up with on the AFT board over these last seven months. Heck, Radical is one of the more rational among them.
![]()
|
![]() |
![]() |
#5 |
Merces Letifer
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 4,161
|
Re: NFL re-issues bounty discipline**UPDATED**
|
![]() |
![]() |
#6 |
Falcons Fan
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 148
|
Re: NFL re-issues bounty discipline**UPDATED**
Originally Posted by Tobias-Reiper
Were the Saints not paying for "cart-offs?" If you're putting up money for injuries, that's showing intent, and just because they may not have succeeded in causing injuries, doesn't mean they cannot be punished for displaying intent to do so. ![]()
Never said that Dunta's hits weren't illegal, but it is a fact that he did not launch. Outside of clipping Maclin's chin, both hits were illegal because he was called for hitting a defenseless receiver, which I've already explained that I think it's a BS rule that can't be effectively coached. |
For the fans, by the fans. - AtlantaFalconsTalk
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
#7 |
10000 POST CLUB
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Alexandria, La
Posts: 11,303
|
Re: NFL re-issues bounty discipline**UPDATED**
Where have you seen any evidence where the Saints were being paid for cart-offs?
Seems to me you take what ESPN says as the gospel... ![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#8 |
10000 POST CLUB
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Bossier City, LA
Posts: 26,622
|
Re: NFL re-issues bounty discipline**UPDATED**
Originally Posted by Radical
"Cartoff" was a term used by Gregg Williams to mean a player that missed a play because of a hard legal hit. This has been supported by Vitt and several other players. ![]()
Once again, open your totally closed mind and realize that they were not putting up money for injuries. They were putting up money as a part of the overall pay for performance plan, that reward for large hits that could cause a player to miss a play or even the rest of the game. It specifically stated that it had to be a legal hit (upon review from the league) and not result in a penalty by that player or any other on the same play. It also was dependent upon them winning the game. |
![]() |
![]() |
#9 |
Falcons Fan
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 148
|
Re: NFL re-issues bounty discipline**UPDATED**
Originally Posted by AsylumGuido
Well Mitch says that cart-off was never used, but your very post says it. "Large hit that caused a player to miss a play or even the rest of thee game." That's paying for injuring other players, hence the punishments.
![]()
|
![]() |
![]() |
#10 |
Donated Plasma
|
Re: NFL re-issues bounty discipline**UPDATED**
|
![]() |
![]() |
|
|
![]() LinkBack to this Thread: https://blackandgold.com/saints/51771-nfl-re-issues-bounty-discipline-updated.html
|
||||
Posted By | For | Type | Date | Hits |
NFL re-issues bounty discipline**UPDATED** | This thread | Refback | 10-09-2012 04:38 PM | 10 |
NFL re-issues bounty discipline | This thread | Refback | 10-09-2012 03:35 PM | 7 |