Register All Albums FAQ Community Experience
Go Back   New Orleans Saints Forums - blackandgold.com > Main > Saints

NFL re-issues bounty discipline**UPDATED**

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 ...

Like Tree57Likes

Closed Thread
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 10-11-2012, 12:39 AM   #1
Merces Letifer
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 4,161
Re: NFL re-issues bounty discipline**UPDATED**

Originally Posted by Radical View Post
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 that person ends up dead, guess what? Now I know you're not going to tell me that between late 09 and when this broke that no one was ever injured during a Saints game huh? Sitting around and going, "well everyone else does it" doesn't change that it's illegal. If other teams get caught, then they'll be punished too.
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.
jnormand and AsylumGuido like this.

'Cause the simple man pays the thrills, the bills and the pills that kill
Tobias-Reiper is offline  
Old 10-11-2012, 01:11 AM   #2
Falcons Fan
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 148
Re: NFL re-issues bounty discipline**UPDATED**

Originally Posted by Tobias-Reiper View Post
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 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.
Radical is offline  
Old 10-11-2012, 11:05 AM   #3
Merces Letifer
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 4,161
Re: NFL re-issues bounty discipline**UPDATED**

Originally Posted by Radical View Post
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.
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
Tobias-Reiper is offline  
Old 10-11-2012, 12:24 PM   #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 View Post
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.
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.
AsylumGuido is offline  
Old 10-11-2012, 12:55 PM   #5
Merces Letifer
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 4,161
Re: NFL re-issues bounty discipline**UPDATED**

Originally Posted by AsylumGuido View Post
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.
Given the sample, that isn't exactly what one would call an "endorsement" of that site.
Tobias-Reiper is offline  
Old 10-11-2012, 06:23 PM   #6
Falcons Fan
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 148
Re: NFL re-issues bounty discipline**UPDATED**

Originally Posted by Tobias-Reiper View Post
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.
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
Radical is offline  
Old 10-11-2012, 06:35 PM   #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...
|Mitch| is offline  
Old 10-11-2012, 07:14 PM   #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 View Post
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.
"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.
AsylumGuido is offline  
Old 10-11-2012, 10:16 PM   #9
Falcons Fan
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 148
Re: NFL re-issues bounty discipline**UPDATED**

Originally Posted by AsylumGuido View Post
"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.
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.
Radical is offline  
Old 10-11-2012, 10:24 PM   #10
Donated Plasma
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: San Francisco, CA
Posts: 18,556
Blog Entries: 5
Re: NFL re-issues bounty discipline**UPDATED**

Originally Posted by Radical View Post
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.
Roger? Is that you?
saintfan is offline  
Closed Thread


Posting Rules

LinkBacks (?)
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


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:09 AM.


Copyright 1997 - 2020 - BlackandGold.com
no new posts