The Dolphins Make Me Cry.com - Forums

Thoughts on the NFL find that the Saints had a bounty program in effect from 2009-11. How hard do you think Goddell is going to come down on them?
It would be interesting to see them lose draft picks.

i don't get the big deal at all.

illegal hits are already penalized in game. is there now going to be a certain max limit on hits the defense can make on qb's? bounty or no bounty, defensive players still have a mentality to knock the living hell out of someone on offense. it's not a non-contact sport.

The league cannot permit players (or teams) to incentivize injuring other players, period.  (And that's exactly what this bounty was for: injuries that knocked an opposing player out of the game.)

Furthermore, said bounties are non-contract bonuses and are prohibited under the Collective Bargaining Agreement.

the league penalizes players in game for illegal hits.

the game involves hitting and injuries are a consequence of those hits. hitting players hard, within the rules, is what defensive players are paid to do. injuring players on purpose is already against the rules. u can't hit a qb in the knees for example...

now if there are problems with performance based incentives, that is a totally different issue. can't limit that to just the defensive side of the ball. offense skill players treat their linemen and blockers all the time to expensive gifts for performance goals.

Then, the incentives should have been for shutouts, 3 & outs, sacks, ints, etc. Gunning for an injury is plain wrong.

The Saints will get penalized but I can't see it being a huge thing.

What the Pats did with "spygate" in my opinion is worse and they really got off with a slap on the wrist in the eyes of many.  If the Saints lose anything more than a 2nd round pick I would be surprised. And I am not even sure they will lose a 2nd round pick.

Fine the Saints
Fine Sean Payton
Take away a draft pick, what round....who knows. But I don't see anything major coming of this

Maybe Gregg Williams should get with Luther Campbell, the Miami Hurricanes booster who paid former Hurricane players for sacks, interceptions, and to knock opposing star players out of the game.

I've mentioned before on this site that I played against Fabian Washington in high school, who later ran one of  the fastest 40 ever at the combine (4.25) and was a CB for the Ravens (fun fact:  he had one of the 4 INTs against MIA when we played them in the playoffs with Penny, also, we was a RB in high school when I played him).  Our defensive coordinator told us he'd buy us a steak dinner if we injured him.  Our DC was a piece of shit for saying that to a bunch of kids, but it's relevant to the topic.

How often do personal foul penalties result in ejection... 5% of the time?  I'd say even 1% is a high estimate.  So a personal foul looks like a pretty good tradeoff (defensively) for injuring an opponent and effectively "ejecting" him from the game.

Even if personal fouls had a much, much higher rate of ejection, if Bernard Pollard gets ejected from the game for taking Tom Brady out, any defense in the league will be happy to take that trade.  Hell, if GB offered DET a deal to where GB would sit Rodgers if DET sat Suh, you don't think DET would take that in a heartbeat?

What you seem to be missing is that part of the deterrent against illegal hits are the fines that follow.  However, if you have the team paying the players to injure opponents, fines then turn into a game of simply outpacing the fines with the bounties.

If offensive skill players treated their linemen to money then that would be just as much of a violation of the CBA as these bounties are.

not sure what fines and ejections have to do with anything here.

there are hits that are illegal in the game, because they are likely to cause injury, and they are penalized in game.

a coach can tell his guys "kill the quarterback". they can't put spikes on their helmets, put lead in their elbow pads, or use switchblades in their cleats, because it is against the rules. all they can do is what they already do, and that is make legal hits.

monetary performance incentives are another issue all together, and if that was removed as part of the new cba, then that is against the rules. but i think all this took place before the new cba. however, non-monetary incentives are still pretty cool. didn't reggie buy his linemen segways or something?

Let me see if I can tie this together for you:

This entire story is about the Saints instituting a policy that rewards their defenders for injuring opponents.  What are you missing here?

They are penalized in game by things like "personal foul" penalties, which almost never result in the defender being ejected from the game.  Therefore, if you can injure a key opponent and knock him out of the game (while you stay in the game), a personal foul penalty would be worth it.

Furthermore, the fines that come later would be offset by the bounty that you received.

Wrong.  They can also make ILLEGAL hits, as the Saints did against the Vikings in the NFCC.

Do you honestly believe that non-contract bonus pay was allowed under the previous CBA?

This entire scenario is wrong in about five different ways, and it's ridiculous for you to defend it.  Stop.

Now it turns out that the Saints are the target of a narcotics probe.  The fallout continues in the Big Easy. 

http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/football/orleans-saints-face-narcotics-probe-addition-bounty-scandal-article-1.1035953

This makes it so much easier to hate the Saints again. I hate that city, but liked the Saints, and was irritated by it because they were such a likable team.

Now, as for the bounties, I think Goodell should make an example out of them. With all these lawsuits the NFL has because former players are suing over concussions right now, this was the worst thing at the worst time. The Saints have given the former players one hell of a piece of evidence in their favor.