2012 NFL Offseason thread

[gstelmack]

Originally Posted by Suburban Rhythm

but to the NFL, Spygate should seem worse.

I don't understand how the NFL can say this is worse than a team willfully disregarding a league mandate to quit something that, theoretically, impacted the competitiveness of the teams.

Well, first off the Saints were told to stop, and they continued anyway. Remember there were allegations a couple of seasons ago, they couldn't prove anything, now they can, and that it continued after the original.

As for this notion that Spygate was "cheating": it's only worse for the NFL in that Bill ignored Goodell and continued to do it. That's what they were punished for, and rightfully so. This notion that it was cheating: it was not against the rules to tape the play and tape the coach's signs. It was only against the rules do it from the location the Patriots were using. The Pats were punished for ignoring a warning to stop, not for gaining some competitive edge by taping plays and coaches.

[Tigercat]

Originally Posted by gstelmack

It was only against the rules do it from the location the Patriots were using. The Pats were punished for ignoring a warning to stop, not for gaining some competitive edge by taping plays and coaches.

As far as the NFL is concerned, the Pats did something that gained a competitive advantage, even if you may think its trivial.



It will be near impossible for the NFL make the case that the Saints gained a competitive edge. The Saints weren't able to cause more injuries by having a bounty. Either they made clean hits or they didn't. If they didn't they were penalized, if the tape showed malicious out of context hits, the NFL could have issued suspensions/fines. I don't see how one can make the case that bounties should be punished as if it affected the actual outcomes of the games.* (In other words, I don't see how you can take away draft picks and make a logical argument for it.) Now, suspensions for and or all coaches and players involved? Sure.

*All that being said Goodell has shown that he won't let logical arguments stop him when he wants to prove a point.

[Grammaticus]

Originally Posted by Suburban Rhythm

I guess this is where I fall. I don't look to the NFL to guide my moral compass. You can be disgusted by what the Saints did as a person, but to the NFL, Spygate should seem worse.

I don't understand how the NFL can say this is worse than a team willfully disregarding a league mandate to quit something that, theoretically, impacted the competitiveness of the teams.

Well, lets see. The NFL already has players suing them for compensation due to not doing enough for the sake of safety in the past. I would say not addressing this issue regarding the Saints with appropriate force would be much worse than any fallout from the Patriots spygate miss hap.

I'm not saying the spygate thing should not have been addressed harshly also. It is just, this Saints thing is not about a moral compass. It is about liability.

[Tigercat]

Originally Posted by Grammaticus

The NFL already has players suing them for compensation due to not doing enough for the sake of safety in the past.

Originally Posted by Grammaticus

I'm not saying the spygate thing should not have been addressed harshly also. It is just, this Saints thing is not about a moral compass. It is about liability.

Do bounties make the game more unsafe? Do NFL players hit softer without bounties? Is there any pattern of totally out of context hits by the Saints under Williams as a result of bounties? And if so, why wasn't this pattern seen by all those cameras, and the players suspended?

And if the answers are no, and the bounties didn't make the game less safe, how is the NFL more liable for a change in safety that isn't occurring?

[molson]

Originally Posted by Tigercat

Do bounties make the game more unsafe? Do NFL players hit softer without bounties?

What's the point of a bounty if not to encourage players to knock other guys out and have them carted off?

But it doesn't matter, I don't think the NFL is in the position to have prove specific harm as the result of this particular bounty program. The bounty itself the illegal thing. "Ya, we had bounties but you can't prove they actually caused anyone to get knocked out" - that isn't going to fly. And if the NFL doesn't go after violations of THAT policy, after all they're claiming to do to make the league safer, well, they can't be sued on that directly, but it'd be pretty compelling evidence for punitive damages in a sentencing phase of another case.

[Tigercat]

Originally Posted by molson

What's the point of a bounty if not to encourage players to knock other guys out and have them carted off?

I can't speak for what they planned to gain, but it appears to be a defensive team unity thing to reward a nasty attitude on the field. But regardless, I think you want to knock out Drew Brees, Kurt Warner, Peyton Manning, Tom Brady, ect, ect, if you have a bounty or not.

You can reward your teammates for TDs, do you really think its necessary? That they wouldn't try to get TDs without the extra money? Or maybe a better within the rules comparison, what about pancake blocks? You can have an incentives for those, but I would think a OL will try his hardest to knock a defender on his ass regardless of reward money.

[MrBug708]

You are rewarding them for trying to hurt someone intentionally. Rather than make a tackle, you are telling them to go after the knees so they can be carted off. You aren't tackling them, but you are ensuring that they can't score.

I would imagine you would feel the same way had it come out that someone was intentionally trying to blow out Brees knees.

[Tigercat]

Originally Posted by molson

"Ya, we had bounties but you can't prove they actually caused anyone to get knocked out" - that isn't going to fly. And if the NFL doesn't go after violations of THAT policy, after all they're claiming to do to make the league safer, well, they can't be sued on that directly, but it'd be pretty compelling evidence for punitive damages in a sentencing phase of another case.

If Bounties can be punished with the assumption that they lead to injuries, I guess we better punish any athlete that admits he is out to injure other players.

Because hey, why can't that be in there for punitive damages too? Look, the NFL's employees (or contractors or whatnot) are saying they were trying to injure my clients! And the NFL did nothing!

What's the difference from an injury/liability standpoint? Nothing, in my mind, because every defender is trying to hurt the opposing player in some fashion. If there is a pattern of going out of context of the game, it is in front of all the cameras, and the NFL has the opportunity to stop a pattern of such. And in this case? Such a pattern didn't exist.

[DaddyTorgo]

Originally Posted by Tigercat

If Bounties can be punished with the assumption that they lead to injuries, I guess we better punish any athlete that admits he is out to injure other players.

Because hey, why can't that be in there for punitive damages too? Look, the NFL's employees (or contractors or whatnot) are saying they were trying to injure my clients! And the NFL did nothing!

What's the difference from an injury/liability standpoint? Nothing, in my mind, because every defender is trying to hurt the opposing player in some fashion. If there is a pattern of going out of context of the game, it is in front of all the cameras, and the NFL has the opportunity to stop a pattern of such. And in this case? Such a pattern didn't exist.

You're sticking up for your team, which is understandable, but it's a pretty simple NFL rule and they are going to get (deservedly) smacked for it.

[Tigercat]

Originally Posted by MrBug708

You are rewarding them for trying to hurt someone intentionally. Rather than make a tackle, you are telling them to go after the knees so they can be carted off. You aren't tackling them, but you are ensuring that they can't score.

I would imagine you would feel the same way had it come out that someone was intentionally trying to blow out Brees knees.

I must have missed all the players the Saints sent to the bench or hospital under Williams. The Saints hurt Favre and Warner badly in '09. But the two worst hits against Favre were bang-bang after the whistle, and Warner got hurt because he was pancaked while trying to make a play after he threw an INT. The only Saints player that has consistently had late hits under Williams is Roman Harper, but he also had 7 sacks as a safety this past year, being a wild blitzer is part of who he is. (Admittedly though, he has also made some cheap hits as well.)

Again, if there was a pattern the NFL only has the most surveillanced workplace in the world to see it with.

[Tigercat]

Originally Posted by DaddyTorgo

You're sticking up for your team, which is understandable, but it's a pretty simple NFL rule and they are going to get (deservedly) smacked for it.

Hell, I think individual players and coaches might get the book throw at them, and why not? It was horrid conduct. Horrid conduct gets employees punished, as it should.

But horrid conduct does not mean that there is a logical case to be made that 1) it actually lead to something dangerous, or 2) that it affected the competitive balance of the game, which is the point where you take away draft picks and such.

[Chubby]

Aren't performance bonuses banned in the NFL anyways?

[Tigercat]

Originally Posted by Chubby

Aren't performance bonuses banned in the NFL anyways?

I think pools and such are. But players make incentive promises to their teammates all the time, legal or not. Can't really do much about that sorta thing, can't stop teammates from giving each other gifts. And of course you have bonuses and incentives in contracts.

[Chubby]

Originally Posted by Tigercat

I think pools and such are. But players make incentive promises to their teammates all the time, legal or not. Can't really do much about that sorta thing, can't stop teammates from giving each other gifts. And of course you have bonuses and incentives in contracts.

I think in the contracts it's roster bonuses and such, I have no idea where to look to validate my hazy rememberance but I thought any performance bonuses were against the CBA in the NFL. I think this is where they can really hammer the Saints if they want to

[Tigercat]

Originally Posted by Chubby

I think in the contracts it's roster bonuses and such, I have no idea where to look to validate my hazy rememberance but I thought any performance bonuses were against the CBA in the NFL. I think this is where they can really hammer the Saints if they want to

There is definitely still some incentives, such as playoff win bonuses. But, that's an interesting point, I hadn't really considered the compensation angle. And if Payton and Loomis did know about it, I suppose they could make a case that as a club they knowingly circumvented cap/compensation rules. That would be reasonable grounds for punishing the entire team as if they did disrupt the balance of the game.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Interesting (I guess) take from former DB/KR Bucky Brooks

NFL.com news: Saints' 'pay for performance' system commonplace in NFL

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by Chubby

I have no idea where to look to validate my hazy rememberance but I thought any performance bonuses were against the CBA in the NFL.

Here's the rule I finally found being cited

The "Pay for Performance" program violates the NFL's rule prohibiting "Non- Contract Bonuses."

The rule states that "No bonus or award may directly or indirectly be offered, promised, announced, or paid to a player for his or his team's performance against a particular team or opposing player or a particular group thereof. No bonuses or awards may be offered or paid for on field misconduct (for example, personal fouls to or injuries inflicted on opposing players)."

Read more here: The News Tribune (Lite) - NFL says Saints used illegal bounty program

[Tigercat]

There are still win bonuses though, they just can't be game specific. Teams can promise win or playoff win $ in contracts , see: Tim Tebow. And the NFL itself gives out bonuses for all players involved in post season wins. But, nope, gone are the day of the Ricky Williams rookie contract, built mainly on yard and TD benchmarks.

[Matthean]

Latest on Brees and Manning

Indianapolis Colts' Peyton Manning throws in Duke University workout, source says - ESPN

New Orleans Saints tag Drew Brees with exclusive rights franchise tag - ESPN

[mckerney]

Originally Posted by Tigercat

There are still win bonuses though, they just can't be game specific. Teams can promise win or playoff win $ in contracts , see: Tim Tebow. And the NFL itself gives out bonuses for all players involved in post season wins. But, nope, gone are the day of the Ricky Williams rookie contract, built mainly on yard and TD benchmarks.

I believe you can still have incentive bonuses for reaching statistical milestones, but they have to be in the contract and count against the cap appropriately. The team can't just say, "$50,000 to any player who gains 100 yards today."

[Grover]

NFL will investigate claims that Redskins had a bounty program for big hits under defensive coordinator Gregg Williams - The Insider - The Washington Post

Perhaps this is a Williams specialty.

[jbergey22]

Originally Posted by albionmoonlight

That said, it did not affect the outcome of any games. The Saints did not receive any material advantage from that unworthy scheme.

Very debatable. Whether or not the bounties had anything to do with the late/low hits of Favre in the championship game cant be proven however when Favre was completely beatup running around on one leg that certainly could have had an effect on a game that was decided in OT.

We cant know for certain what impact these bouties had but they certainly could have effected outcomes.

My comment after the NFC Championship 2010 which had a lot of bitterness in it but also a lot of truth.

Never in a million years did I think Id cheer for the Colts in the Super Bowl against the Saints but after watching how dirty the Saints played today I have no choice. Between cheap shots on Favre and taking out his knees(which wasnt even a penalty???) I lost a lot of respect for how the Saints play.

I just find it interesting with the news of this bounty on Favre in the Championship because I was so pissed watching that game and every single time they got a chance they took a shot on him, even on run plays. May have had nothing to do with any bounties but Favre hadnt been beatup that bad the prior 17 games combined.

[molson]

Originally Posted by Tigercat

I guess we better punish any athlete that admits he is out to injure other players.

I think we're there already. I seem to remember some borderline case last year whether there was some debate about whether a guy was going to be fined or suspended for making comments like that - I think the NFL ended up just saying they were going to "watch him closely", whoever it was, and if he DID end up injuring anyone, they'd take that into account when it came to penalty). But I think if a player clearly came out and said he was looking to knockout Tom Brady or Drew Brees, he probably would be punished at this point. At the very least, if that player did injure a QB, even if it wasn't on purpose, he'd be punished more harshly because of the comments. The NFL is desperately trying to remove that aspect of the game (or at least, make that the perception).

[JPhillips]

I thought they would hit the Saints hard, but now that there are at least three teams being investigated I don't think the teams will lose any first round picks. Williams will get a good suspension (8 games maybe) and the teams will get fined heavily, but I can't see the NFL stripping multiple teams of first rounders. Taking the Redskins first round pick would cut them out of the RG3 race, but if you don't take that pick you can't take first rounders from the Saints or Bills.

When it was just the Saints it was an opportunity for the NFL to look tough by penalizing a team, but if it looks systemic they'll back off a bit rather than cripple a chunk of the league.

[JAG]

Originally Posted by jbergey22

Very debatable. Whether or not the bounties had anything to do with the late/low hits of Favre in the championship game cant be proven however when Favre was completely beatup running around on one leg that certainly could have had an effect on a game that was decided in OT.

We cant know for certain what impact these bouties had but they certainly could have effected outcomes.

My comment after the NFC Championship 2010 which had a lot of bitterness in it but also a lot of truth.


I just find it interesting with the news of this bounty on Favre in the Championship because I was so pissed watching that game and every single time they got a chance they took a shot on him, even on run plays. May have had nothing to do with any bounties but Favre hadnt been beatup that bad the prior 17 games combined.

That's the one game that came to my mind immediately when I heard about this.

[miked]

Reading about this going on in BUF and WAS, could it be possible that Williams is gone for a year?

[Bigsmooth]

This bounty story couldn't be less interesting to me. Regardless of bounties, most defensive players have the same goal...knock out the other teams best players. What's an extra $5,000 to most of these players? Jesus, free agency can't start fast enough so this crap story will fade.

[jbergey22]

Originally Posted by Bigsmooth

This bounty story couldn't be less interesting to me. Regardless of bounties, most defensive players have the same goal...knock out the other teams best players. What's an extra $5,000 to most of these players? Jesus, free agency can't start fast enough so this crap story will fade.

I dont think "most defensive players" have the goal of knocking out the other teams best players. I think it was a Giants player that was asked about knocking Brady out of the game prior to the Super Bowl. His comment was "I respect Brady as a player and respect his livelihood as a man, we are not out their trying to injury players." I hope this is how most defensive players feel.

[NorvTurnerOverdrive]

Originally Posted by Bigsmooth

This bounty story couldn't be less interesting to me. Regardless of bounties, most defensive players have the same goal...knock out the other teams best players. What's an extra $5,000 to most of these players? Jesus, free agency can't start fast enough so this crap story will fade.

+1

can we get some hgh testing please? does anyone look at the size of peyton hillis' head and think, "oh, that's natural.'

[Doug5984]

Looks like I'm in the minority on this one, I don't have a problem with a "bounty" system- if they are legal hits. If there are illegal hits then throw a flag, fine, and suspend the player.

I want to see big hits, legal hits. Sheldon Brown hitting Reggie in the playoffs a few years ago is a great example. I hope that he got paid for that hit, it was beautiful. Pierre Thomas getting rocked against the 49ers is another, that was a game changing play and was a HUGE play in the 49ers winning the game. What is so wrong with having players reward each other for big hits? Is that different than a RB buying his entire line a gift after the season for laying down good blocks? (Linemen block, defenders tackle).

There is nothing wrong with wanting to knock guys out of the game- again, as long as they are legal hits. Any illegal hits- throw the flag, fine the player, suspend the player, hell throw the player out of the game if it is flagrant. I'm good with all that.

They are making this such a huge deal, and I'd be willing to bet this happens on almost every team and every level of football, and probably hockey as well. Big hits are part of the game.

And regarding the Favre NFC Champ game- that should have nothing to do with bounties, that was about winning the NFC Championship game and part of the plan was to continually hit Favre because it would lead to turnovers. (I think most teams say - we need to get the QB to create turnovers, I think that is one of the most common sayings in football, it's the same thing) If there was no bounty in place the game plan remains the same.

I'm not saying I want to see players go for knees and end seasons/careers. That should never be tolerated, and if it is ever deemed intentional that player should have the book thrown at them, and suspensions should be lengthy.

I don't want to see players launch helmet to helmet- I think this has gone a little to far in the other direction this year, but there have been some bad hits like this that have derailed careers, and these should be dealt with harshly.

I do want to see hard hits, I want to see defenders jar the ball lose, and get into a QBs head and make him make mistakes.

I do not have a problem with players rewarding each other for ANY type of play, I do not have a problem with coaches rewarding players for plays, as long as it doesn't start violating the cap, if a coach comes in and slaps 5k on the table and says whoever gets the first turnover takes this home- that's ok in my book, if it gets up to 6 figures then you have cap issues, and IRS problems.

[Grover]

Originally Posted by NorvTurnerOverdrive

+1

can we get some hgh testing please? does anyone look at the size of peyton hillis' head and think, "oh, that's natural.'

Or Peyton Manning's forehead. Jeez.

[jbergey22]

Originally Posted by Doug5984

And regarding the Favre NFC Champ game- that should have nothing to do with bounties, that was about winning the NFC Championship game and part of the plan was to continually hit Favre because it would lead to turnovers. (I think most teams say - we need to get the QB to create turnovers, I think that is one of the most common sayings in football, it's the same thing) If there was no bounty in place the game plan remains the same.

I am sure you would change your attitude if 300 pound defensive ends completely disregarded simple dive plays to shove Brees into the ground as many times as he could. Or on a sweep to Sproles a corner on the other side of the field comes in a lays out Brees for no real reason. Have Brees take 20-25 hits for no purpose and we will see if you like your franchise qb getting pounded on in plays he has no direct involvement in.

Not against the rules but certainly not something the NFL wants.

The great hit the 49ers had on Pierre is really not comparable to cheap shots that serve no purpose other than causing injury or beating a player into submission.

I generally think most of the time the QB is left alone if he doesnt have the ball.

[NorvTurnerOverdrive]

Originally Posted by Grover

Or Peyton Manning's forehead. Jeez.

peyton's head is actually normal. he just wears an ill fitting toupee.

seriously, if the nfl really wanted to neuter some of the sound and the fury™ they should address shs(swollen head syndrome) and rgff(ripped guy fat face)

[JonInMiddleGA]

Far be it from me to seem like the voice of reason on anything, but ... it seems like there's a fairly simple line here.

I'm a hard hits/big hits guy (assuming you actually make the tackle/play of course). I'm in the "football has been overwussified recently" camp.

That said, the line for me is somewhere around rewarding intent to injure - I don't mean knock goofy, I mean take out a knee/detach a retina kind of stuff - versus making a meaningful play that doesn't end a guy's season/career.

Just based on the stuff I've read so far, it appears that the Saints program crossed that line into being less about football and more about decimation.

[albionmoonlight]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

Far be it from me to seem like the voice of reason on anything, but ... it seems like there's a fairly simple line here.

I'm a hard hits/big hits guy (assuming you actually make the tackle/play of course). I'm in the "football has been overwussified recently" camp.

That said, the line for me is somewhere around rewarding intent to injure - I don't mean knock goofy, I mean take out a knee/detach a retina kind of stuff - versus making a meaningful play that doesn't end a guy's season/career.

Just based on the stuff I've read so far, it appears that the Saints program crossed that line into being less about football and more about decimation.

Yup.

If the coaches had simply preached "We are going to win by hitting harder. I expect you to hit the QB as hard as you legally can every time it is legal to do so. Show respect to your Grandma; don't show it to Kurt Warner," then I think that everyone would say that that's just football.

The line that's been crossed (assuming the reports are true--and no one has yet to hint that they are not) is rewarding players for trying to injure other players. That's disgusting, and it is not just good, hard football. To borrow a line from xkcd, setting up a bounty pool that pays out when players get carted off isn't just dirty play; it's the example you give your kids to show them why dirty play is wrong.

From a competitiveness standpoint, I actually wonder if the bounty program hurt the Saints as much as helped them. One of the biggest complaints about the defense from the fans before any of this came out is the fact that guys always seemed to be going for the kill-shot instead of simply wrapping up and tackling. How much of that was so that the guys could have bounty bragging rights for the week?

[SirFozzie]

Wow.. sounds like the NFL's ready to drop a metaphorical bomb on the Saints, the players and the coaches involved:

From the WaPost's Mark Maske's Twitter:

The NFL is considering severe penalties, including lengthy suspensions, in the Saints bounty case. In some cases, the suspensions under consideration could be a half-season or longer, according to a person familiar with the case. Among those who could face significant suspensions are Gregg Williams, Sean Payton, Mickey Loomis and those players most heavily involved. Some of the penalties could be "unprecedented," according to one person familiar with the case.

[BillJasper]

They need to ban Gregg Williams from ever working in the NFL again.

[Apathetic Lurker]

Originally Posted by BillJasper

They need to ban Gregg Williams from ever working in the NFL again.

+1


hxxp://www.nfl.com/news/story/09000d5d8275d670/article/dungy-traces-mannings-injury-to-hit-by-williams-redskins-d?module=HP11_hot_topics

[Doug5984]

I keep hearing that the Saints were trying to injure all these players- I've yet to see examples of how many guys the Saints knocked out because of the bounty system, or just knocked out in general. I think the media got this and is just running wild right now because there is nothing else to talk about.

I posted this question on the Saints board (where there is actually about a 50/50 split on the opinion on this) and I have yet to get a real answer. Who did the Saints injure? More importantly who did the Saints injure with a dirty play? I can't think of any off the top of my head, I know someone had to have a knee injury against us in the past 3 years.

We never had a player suspended for a hit, and I'd guess that our fines were in line with every other team in the league. We keep hearing how horrible it was, I just don't buy it. I could be wrong, but can anyone name a player who was injured due to an illegal hit?

edit re: jbergey
Missed your post yesterday- i wouldn't like it, but it's up to the team and the o-line to protect the QB. None of those were malicious hits to the knees- they just knocked him on his ass a lot.

[Ksyrup]

If I hear/read one more paper towel joke, I am going to kill someone.

[Blackadar]

Originally Posted by Doug5984

I keep hearing that the Saints were trying to injure all these players- I've yet to see examples of how many guys the Saints knocked out because of the bounty system, or just knocked out in general. I think the media got this and is just running wild right now because there is nothing else to talk about.

I posted this question on the Saints board (where there is actually about a 50/50 split on the opinion on this) and I have yet to get a real answer. Who did the Saints injure? More importantly who did the Saints injure with a dirty play? I can't think of any off the top of my head, I know someone had to have a knee injury against us in the past 3 years.

We never had a player suspended for a hit, and I'd guess that our fines were in line with every other team in the league. We keep hearing how horrible it was, I just don't buy it. I could be wrong, but can anyone name a player who was injured due to an illegal hit?

That really doesn't matter.

[Autumn]

Yeah, there's a pretty distinct difference between encouraging big hits, and encouraging injuries. Even my high school team, we got stickers for big hits. That's football, that's part of what we love about it. That's hugely different than encouraging injuries, even if big hits and injuries are related.

To me, you want to hit the guys so hard they have a hard time getting back up. But then they do and go back in the huddle, knowing they just got clocked. If you're trying to send guys to the bench you're basically saying, "We're not good enough to beat your starters, so we'll try some other way of winning."

[Fidatelo]

Originally Posted by Autumn

Yeah, there's a pretty distinct difference between encouraging big hits, and encouraging injuries. Even my high school team, we got stickers for big hits. That's football, that's part of what we love about it. That's hugely different than encouraging injuries, even if big hits and injuries are related.

To me, you want to hit the guys so hard they have a hard time getting back up. But then they do and go back in the huddle, knowing they just got clocked. If you're trying to send guys to the bench you're basically saying, "We're not good enough to beat your starters, so we'll try some other way of winning."

+1

Contact sports like football and hockey are supposed to be about tough competition, not ruthlessness. Ideally you want an opponent to finish the game knowing he played you; Some bruises and soreness, and maybe a bit of apprehension about crossing over the middle or going into the corners the next time you're out there. You shouldn't want him sitting on the bench in the 3rd quarter with a concussion or torn MCL.

Then again, Bobby Clarke has a much-ballyhooed Summit Series victory to show for sheer ruthlessness, so perhaps I'm just a pussy.

[Logan]

Originally Posted by Doug5984

I keep hearing that the Saints were trying to injure all these players- I've yet to see examples of how many guys the Saints knocked out because of the bounty system, or just knocked out in general. I think the media got this and is just running wild right now because there is nothing else to talk about.

I posted this question on the Saints board (where there is actually about a 50/50 split on the opinion on this) and I have yet to get a real answer. Who did the Saints injure? More importantly who did the Saints injure with a dirty play? I can't think of any off the top of my head, I know someone had to have a knee injury against us in the past 3 years.

We never had a player suspended for a hit, and I'd guess that our fines were in line with every other team in the league. We keep hearing how horrible it was, I just don't buy it. I could be wrong, but can anyone name a player who was injured due to an illegal hit?

edit re: jbergey
Missed your post yesterday- i wouldn't like it, but it's up to the team and the o-line to protect the QB. None of those were malicious hits to the knees- they just knocked him on his ass a lot.

When I start to feel bad for 99% of Saints fans when the punishments are announced, I gotta remember to come back and read this post.

[Honolulu_Blue]

While I don't get too bent out of shape about this whole bounty thing, because I feel like it's something that goes on in pretty much every lockerroom and is really just a byproduct of the sport, I totally understand why the NFL should and has to come down hard when something as systemic and wide spread as the Saints bounty program comes to light.

The NFL is always dancing a fine line between glorifying to the brutality and physical nature of the sport and trying to protect the safety and health of its players. This issue has become even more prominent over the last three years as a result of the number and severity of concussions that are happening and the ever evolving medical research as to just what impact these concussions and other injuries are having on players long after they stop playing. Not to mention the current lawsuit being brought by former players for just this.

So, while the NFL will continue to show highlights of big hits and violent collisions, they have to create this idea (fantasy?) that all of that is just part of the sport and done in a clean, competitive way. Once you start paying guys for hurting other players, having them carted off the field and what not that illusion is shattered pretty quickly.

I think in many instances there is a very fine line between what is an acceptable and non-acceptable level of violence on the football field. As a fan of the Lions, a team that this year was considered by many to be one of the dirtier more violent teams in the NFL, it was an issue that paid a lot of attention to. Some stuff, like Suh's post-whistle stomp, were clearly over that line, while some other stuff that happened before the whistle was much harder to say really. The bounty thing is definitely over the line.

The NFL should and hast to come down hard on the Saints. Whether or not any of their players were fined or suspended for physical play is beside the point. Suh got two games for his stomp and it was completely ineffectual. He barely grazed the guy's arm and the guy never even missed a snap. There was no harm, but there was a foul.

[MacroGuru]

I don't know...the question is, do you come down on the Saints, Williams or Both. It's apparent that he has had the bounty with every organization he was with..

And if you come down on the Saints...do you go back and come down on all the teams that have had players come to light with the "Yeah we had it too.."

[cartman]

The bounty news sure puts the hits that McCray put on Warner and Favre in consecutive weeks in 2010 in a new light.

The Hit That Knocked Kurt Warner Into Retirement Sure Looks Different Knowing The Saints Got Paid To Injure Him

[jbergey22]

Originally Posted by Honolulu_Blue

The NFL is always dancing a fine line between glorifying to the brutality and physical nature of the sport and trying to protect the safety and health of its players. This issue has become even more prominent over the last three years as a result of the number and severity of concussions that are happening and the ever evolving medical research as to just what impact these concussions and other injuries are having on players long after they stop playing. Not to mention the current lawsuit being brought by former players for just this.

I think you hit the nail on the head here. They would have a hard time winning any future lawsuit cases if they were to just slap the Saints on the wrist and tell them to not do it again. They need to put the impression out there that they are taking a tough stance against the violence in the sport.

[jbergey22]

Originally Posted by Doug5984

I posted this question on the Saints board (where there is actually about a 50/50 split on the opinion on this) and I have yet to get a real answer. Who did the Saints injure? More importantly who did the Saints injure with a dirty play? I can't think of any off the top of my head, I know someone had to have a knee injury against us in the past 3 years.

NFL Videos: Favre INT and injury


While not flagged for the hit McCray was fined for it.

It probably doesnt look that bad in watching it however he comes in helmet first right at the back of his knee while using his arms to sort of twist at the ankle. Not sure if he was being malicious or not.

And this is some of the crap they were doing on run plays. Simply inexcusable. Its not on the O-Line to protect the QB from getting hit on run plays to the opposite end of the field. Saints were just determined to nail Favre as many times as they could.
http://youtu.be/1aYGO252Bkg

[Honolulu_Blue]

The Lions have slapped the fanchise tag on Cliff Avril.