PDA

View Full Version : ELI: BOUNTIES ARE "NOT WHAT THIS GAME IS ABOUT"



RoanokeFan
03-05-2012, 09:41 PM
ELI: BOUNTIES ARE "NOT WHAT THIS GAME IS ABOUT" (http://www.nydailynews.com/blogs/giants/2012/03/eli-bounties-are-not-what-this-game-is-about)

"Eli Manning has taken his share of big hits in his eight NFL seasons. He
knows they’re part of the game, and he knows injuries are part of it,
too.


But what the New Orleans Saints allegedly did – paying players to
purposely injure opponents – crossed way over a line that the two-time Super
Bowl MVP said should never have been crossed.

“I know the importance of
a defense trying to get to the quarterback, get sacks, get hits on the
quarterback. That’s part of the game,” Manning said. “And I hear what Coach
Coughlin tells our defense about getting hits and I’m kind of sitting there and
I say ‘I know the opposing teams are saying the same thing about
me.’

“But when you start talking about injuring a guy and carting him
off and trying to end his season or career, that’s not what this game is about.
I think we should have more respect for the game than that. It can’t be a part
of football.”

With that, Manning became one of the first NFL players –
and the most prominent – to speak out strongly against the Saints’ actions in
the wake of the BountyGate scandal. He said he can’t remember any specific dirty
hit from the Saints from when the Giants lost 49-24 in New Orleans on Nov. 28,
so Manning doesn’t know if their former defensive coordinator, Gregg Williams,
ever put a bounty on him.

Just the idea of a bounty being placed on
another player, though, seemed to make him mad.

“Obviously it is a big
deal, what’s going on,” Manning said. “It’s not good for football and can’t be a
part of football. I know (NFL commissioner) Roger Goodell will do a good job
figuring all this out and making sure this doesn’t happen again.”

That
sentiment was echoed by some of Manning’s teammates, who joined him at a Times
Square theatre on Monday night to watch the premiere of the DVD of the Giants’
Super Bowl championship season. Safety Antrel Rolle, who insisted the Giants’
defense has no bounty system in place, said the Saints’ alleged actions are “not
good character.”

“You never want to go out there with the intention to
actually injure another opponent,” he said. “You do what you’ve got to do within
the fine lines of football.”

The Saints allegedly stepped over those
lines. In fact, they may have done it against the Giants when Saints safety Isa
Abdul-Quddus gave receiver Hakeem Nicks a vicious hit that left him with bruised
ribs. Nicks said “The way he was celebrating you would probably think that
(there was a bounty),” but he said he believes there probably
wasn’t.

“Some dudes thrive off big hits like that and it gets the
momentum going,” Nicks said. “They’re going to do it. I don’t think that’s going
to change in this game.”</p>

Flip Empty
03-05-2012, 09:51 PM
Wow, it's unusual to see him speak out like this. Good to see.

alau53
03-05-2012, 09:52 PM
bravo to eli and the gmen..you gave your opinions on bounty gate with class and dignity

GmenFan1980
03-05-2012, 09:53 PM
I was upset watching the Saints act so happy that they may of injured Nicks.

Especially when we showed great concern for Graham, and there O-linemen were pushing our guys away :/.

Screw the Saints

swimeasy
03-05-2012, 09:58 PM
Thanks Roanoke. I agree Flip. Very good to see and once again a leader to be proud of. And Rolle right there with him. Love it.

M0rbid
03-05-2012, 11:54 PM
We all knew Saints got away with murder against the Giants ever since 2009. NFL officials need to be held ACCOUNTABLE also.

Bluesmagoo
03-06-2012, 12:07 AM
Isn't there some sort of criminal charges applicable here? Collusion or conspiracy? Certainly the money involved would seem to make it fall into the ricco caregory. I would like to see Williams et al face criminal charges. Especially for the willful intent/act to commit bodily injury or assault for money. Surely there is an attorney out there eager to make a name for him/herself and let fly with the suboenas? Take depos/interogs etc from every player invloved in a questionable hit (the defence and the offensive player assaulted) from each team Williams coached. I would ask the DA in each county to act.

bELIeve_in_Giants
03-06-2012, 12:23 AM
Isn't there some sort of criminal charges applicable here? Collusion or conspiracy? Certainly the money involved would seem to make it fall into the ricco caregory. I would like to see Williams et al face criminal charges. Especially for the willful intent/act to commit bodily injury or assault for money. Surely there is an attorney out there eager to make a name for him/herself and let fly with the suboenas? Take depos/interogs etc from every player invloved in a questionable hit (the defence and the offensive player assaulted) from each team Williams coached. I would ask the DA in each county to act.</P>


Nah...</P>


I wouldn't get carried away. Goddell will come down hard enough.</P>

Bluesmagoo
03-06-2012, 12:41 AM
ya, rereading my post it does seem I gort a wee bit carried away. How long until pre-season? hahaha

Harooni
03-06-2012, 12:43 AM
Defensive guys all secretly or not so secretly have a plan to hit the opposing QB hard and possibly take him out.

in fact didnt we injure at least 5-6 qb's in a row last season? its part of football and the reason QB's are paid so much.

Bluesmagoo
03-06-2012, 12:47 AM
From Harooni

"in fact didnt we injure at least 5-6 qb's in a row last season?"

Don't mention that, it ruins my righteous indignation!
Now, where were we?

Flip Empty
03-06-2012, 12:48 AM
Defensive guys all secretly or not so secretly have a plan to hit the opposing QB hard and possibly take him out.

in fact didnt we injure at least 5-6 qb's in a row last season? its part of football and the reason QB's are paid so much.




You're saying that Eli is wrong? Clean hits are a part of football, cheap shots with cash rewards are not.

Harooni
03-06-2012, 12:51 AM
Defensive guys all secretly or not so secretly have a plan to hit the opposing QB hard and possibly take him out.

in fact didnt we injure at least 5-6 qb's in a row last season? its part of football and the reason QB's are paid so much.




You're saying that Eli is wrong? Clean hits are a part of football, cheap shots with cash rewards are not.

im saying it has always been a secret goal of all defenses. (not to severely injure) but to hit hard and knock a guy out.


"wild dogs"

Harooni
03-06-2012, 12:53 AM
From Harooni

"in fact didnt we injure at least 5-6 qb's in a row last season?"

Don't mention that, it ruins my righteous indignation!
Now, where were we?
hah
you got the saints on a continuing criminal enterprise charge. lmao

Bluesmagoo
03-06-2012, 01:02 AM
A guy can dream! Being a Giants fan in Texas however, I am trying to see how Jerry is involved in this... Or as Jerry would say "invoved" Jerry just hates the "mejya".

Bluesmagoo
03-06-2012, 01:12 AM
I don't think Williams will get a life imprisonment though. lol

FeaglesPuntsEaglesRunts
03-06-2012, 01:42 AM
Defensive guys all secretly or not so secretly have a plan to hit the opposing QB hard and possibly take him out.**

in fact didnt we injure at least 5-6 qb's in a row last season?* its part of football and the reason QB's are paid so much.





Jay Cutler was a concusion due to 9 sacks in a single half, and even more hits. That was not a result of cheap hits, the Bears clearly could not protect their quarterback. Todd Collins also came out of this game, the Bears couldn't protect him either.

Tony Romo is made of glass. He'll find any excuse to come out of a game, Favre had to basically telephone this guy and tell him not to be a wimp (for lack of a better term) about his thumb.

Shaun Hill hurt his arm, nothing really cheap about it. Got sandwiched between Tuck and Cofeild.

I can't find a video or anything of Moore. I don't remember it being anything particularly violent, he was waiting in the pocket way too long, throwing terrible passes (3 picks) and just seemed really scared in his first start.

greenca190
03-06-2012, 01:49 AM
Defensive guys all secretly or not so secretly have a plan to hit the opposing QB hard and possibly take him out.

in fact didnt we injure at least 5-6 qb's in a row last season? its part of football and the reason QB's are paid so much.




You're saying that Eli is wrong? Clean hits are a part of football, cheap shots with cash rewards are not.

Man, I just don't know. The "paid for cash" thing here, I feel like, is making every one view the Saints as being cheap hit artists, or whatever.

But we have been subjected to a ton of Saints prime time games, and they are always on during afternoon FOX games. I'm not in there market, as I imagine most of us are. But I have not seen many hits by them where I really questioned their motives. They have always seemed aggressive, but within the rules of the game.

When it comes down to it, it is the financial aspects of this that I am most concerned about. I really have not seen any hits over the year where I thought "They were trying to ruin that guys career".

redbeardxxv
03-06-2012, 05:13 AM
Isn't there some sort of criminal charges applicable here? Collusion or conspiracy? Certainly the money involved would seem to make it fall into the ricco caregory. I would like to see Williams et al face criminal charges. Especially for the willful intent/act to commit bodily injury or assault for money. Surely there is an attorney out there eager to make a name for him/herself and let fly with the suboenas? Take depos/interogs etc from every player invloved in a questionable hit (the defence and the offensive player assaulted) from each team Williams coached. I would ask the DA in each county to act.

Actually, Lawsuits by injured players and on behalf of the teams of those players HAVE been discussed. Nothing going on just yet, but this could balloon into a BIG mess.

GameTime
03-06-2012, 09:54 AM
Defensive guys all secretly or not so secretly have a plan to hit the opposing QB hard and possibly take him out.

in fact didnt we injure at least 5-6 qb's in a row last season? its part of football and the reason QB's are paid so much.



You're saying that Eli is wrong? Clean hits are a part of football, cheap shots with cash rewards are not.</P>


Clean hits that take players out shouldn't rewarded with extra cash either......this is all involved in this investigatuion. Its not onlyabout cheap hits and pursposely injuring players. Its about being paid "extra" if your "clean legal"hit causes a player to have to be removed from the game.</P>


</P>

Flip Empty
03-06-2012, 10:00 AM
Defensive guys all secretly or not so secretly have a plan to hit the opposing QB hard and possibly take him out.

in fact didnt we injure at least 5-6 qb's in a row last season? its part of football and the reason QB's are paid so much.



You're saying that Eli is wrong? Clean hits are a part of football, cheap shots with cash rewards are not.</P>


Clean hits that take players out shouldn't rewarded with extra cash either......this is all involved in this investigatuion. Its not only about cheap hits and pursposely injuring players. Its about being paid "extra" if your "clean legal" hit causes a player to have to be removed from the game.</P>


</P>
True that. The sport is nasty enough without offering players incentive to cause injury.

rebelfan1966
03-06-2012, 10:08 AM
These bounties have been around for a long time.... I don't agree with them, but until the NFL takes a serious approach at fixing them, they will remain. I think a serious approach begins with the termination of any coaches who knowingly participated, or allowed a bounty to take place and did not put a stop to it....

Additionally, the team owners should suffer more than just a coaching loss.... they should have to pay a fine and not be eligible to select any players in the upcoming draft.

I know it is brutal... but having watched my college team suffer the death penalty many years ago... at which time they loss all of their scholarships and were not bowl eligible.... I know the system gets the attention of all involved.

If R.G. lets this pass with a slap on the hand, it will continue.

By the way, Dungy said he felt the hit that started Peyton's neck problems was likely a bounty hit....

burier
03-06-2012, 10:50 AM
Isn't there some sort of criminal charges applicable here? Collusion or conspiracy? Certainly the money involved would seem to make it fall into the ricco caregory. I would like to see Williams et al face criminal charges. Especially for the willful intent/act to commit bodily injury or assault for money. Surely there is an attorney out there eager to make a name for him/herself and let fly with the suboenas? Take depos/interogs etc from every player invloved in a questionable hit (the defence and the offensive player assaulted) from each team Williams coached. I would ask the DA in each county to act.

Ricco dude? You need to relax.

The Giants used to have the same exact bounty program.

galaxy10
03-06-2012, 11:12 AM
Defensive guys all secretly or not so secretly have a plan to hit the opposing QB hard and possibly take him out.

in fact didnt we injure at least 5-6 qb's in a row last season? its part of football and the reason QB's are paid so much.



You're saying that Eli is wrong? Clean hits are a part of football, cheap shots with cash rewards are not.</p>


Clean hits that take players out shouldn't rewarded with extra cash either......this is all involved in this investigatuion. Its not onlyabout cheap hits and pursposely injuring players. Its about being paid "extra" if your "clean legal"hit causes a player to have to be removed from the game.</p>


</p>



Agreed. You hit it exactly right. The issue is not whether the hits
are legal or not. It is the fact that coaches and players are trying
to injure another player. I watched a bunch of defensive guys on ESPN
and all they talked about was whether the hits were legal or not. They
are totally missing the point. The Saints were trying to injure people,
whether they succeeded or not. It is that they were coached to injure
players. I think the involved coaches and players should be suspended.
That is the only thing that matters, fines will not do it.
</p>


</p>


</p>

Flip Empty
03-06-2012, 11:24 AM
I think I remember talk of the Ravens placing a bounty on Rashard Mendenhall at one point - I think it was his rookie year. He ended up on IR...
Where was the outrage then?

JesseJames
03-06-2012, 11:57 AM
I'm glad to see Eli speak out against this bounty garbage because players speaking out against this puts the ball squarely in Goodells court. Goodell seems to have no problem in fining or suspending players now lets see if he has the stones to handle dealing out justice to a team or a coach and do it appropriately..

Moss#83
03-06-2012, 12:03 PM
The Saints are easily the my most hated team. This only adds to it.

Hated the way they celebrated the hit on Nicks. There was definitely intent to injure him.

G-Man67
03-06-2012, 12:56 PM
sssshhhhh&lt;P&gt;</P>


let's have this story die quickly</P>

Relentless
03-06-2012, 12:56 PM
True, the Giants defense has put quite a few people out for the game and even the season, but remember, as anyone who has watched football for more than a few years can attest, the difference between a clean hit that causes an injury and a cheap-shot is like the difference between night and day.

Super Bowl XLII is a great example of this. I don't think anyone would argue that a big factor in the Giants win was the less-than-stellar performance of Tom Brady caused primarily by the relentless pressure of the Giants D. No cheap shots, in fact I think harassment is a better word to describe the tactic of the Giants D.

You can say what you want about the Giants, but they have always been known as a class organization with class fans, the type of team I can't see putting up with something like Bounty talk for very long. As for the fans, I'm still ashamed of the non-regular-season-ticket-holding-fans who embarrassed all Giants fans by throwing snow balls at players and refs years ago.

burier
03-06-2012, 01:51 PM
The Saints are easily the my most hated team. This only adds to it.

Hated the way they celebrated the hit on Nicks. There was definitely intent to injure him.

OOOoo someone never played football before.

Because if you ever played you'd know that when you hit a guy you don't intend to injure him.

You intend to kill him.

CTLadyBlue
03-06-2012, 02:14 PM
Defensive guys all secretly or not so secretly have a plan to hit the opposing QB hard and possibly take him out.

in fact didnt we injure at least 5-6 qb's in a row last season? its part of football and the reason QB's are paid so much.



You're saying that Eli is wrong? Clean hits are a part of football, cheap shots with cash rewards are not.</p>


Clean hits that take players out shouldn't rewarded with extra cash either......this is all involved in this investigatuion. Its not only*about cheap hits and pursposely injuring players. Its about being paid "extra" if your "clean legal"*hit causes a player to have to be removed from the game.</p>


*</p>



Agreed.* You hit it exactly right.* The issue is not whether the hits
are legal or not.* It is the fact that coaches and players are trying
to injure another player.* I watched a bunch of defensive guys on ESPN
and all they talked about was whether the hits were legal or not.* They
are totally missing the point.* The Saints were trying to injure people,
whether they succeeded or not.* It is that they were coached to injure
players.* I think the involved coaches and players should be suspended.*
That is the only thing that matters, fines will not do it.*
</p>


</p>


</p>


Seems like, 'the harder the hit, the bigger the payout'. I couldn't put my finger on why I despised the Saints - especially after their SB winning season with all their stupid '300' chants and 'who 'dats' and all. Now I'm justfied in it. This just makes me sick. Yeah, defenses are going to hit as hard as they can get away with, but when those hits are motivated by cash payouts - just....sick.

BTW, can someone tell me since I never saw the actual source - how did this all wind up coming out of the woodwork? Did someon overhear Williams or any of the players talking about it? How was it discovered??

Bluesmagoo
03-06-2012, 02:14 PM
My dear Burier,
As I stated in a previous post I may have overreacted. However, the element of scum Williams represents in not common to all teams. Do you have proof that the Giants operate in the manner to which you allude?
Hmm, shall we add you to the list?
Surely you are not defending or condoning these actions? You merely seem to be justiyiing them. For shame Burier. You force me to recant my claim of overreaction. I now demand a full scale investigation going back to the My Lai Massacre and the execution of Private Slovik in WWII. Might as well throw in Ethel and Julius Rosenberg. See what happens when you admonish someone to relax?

burier
03-06-2012, 03:12 PM
My dear Burier,
As I stated in a previous post I may have overreacted. However, the element of scum Williams represents in not common to all teams. Do you have proof that the Giants operate in the manner to which you allude?
Hmm, shall we add you to the list?
Surely you are not defending or condoning these actions? You merely seem to be justiyiing them. For shame Burier. You force me to recant my claim of overreaction. I now demand a full scale investigation going back to the My Lai Massacre and the execution of Private Slovik in WWII. Might as well throw in Ethel and Julius Rosenberg. See what happens when you admonish someone to relax?

My proof that the Giants operatED in that fashion (passed tense) is my ears hearing Lawrence Taylor say so years ago on 60 minutes. I bet its easy to find.

I understand Carl banks has said the same thing so...

My position is that you should come up with a better way to motivate your players for the simple fact that if anyone finds out about bounties it looks bad. Makes the game look dirtier than it is etc...

But if we're talking about Clean hits within the framework of the rules...Lets just be honest. Bounty system or not Guys are hitting eachother as hard as they possibly can anyway. Or at least that's what they're supposed to be doing.

Whats the difference?

Is it the money part? I mean Coughlin is always talking about "Winning the physical battle"

What do you think he means by that? Because I believe he means we need to whip the other teams *** if we want to win.

Whats happening here is we've got a trigger word "bounty" causing a stir.

The situation isn't ideal but...

I mean where do you stand on spygate?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y-2s_xby23g

Even did the legwork for ya

MikeIsaGiant
03-06-2012, 03:15 PM
Good for Eli

GameTime
03-06-2012, 03:57 PM
My dear Burier, As I stated in a previous post I may have overreacted. However, the element of scum Williams represents in not common to all teams. Do you have proof that the Giants operate in the manner to which you allude? Hmm, shall we add you to the list? Surely you are not defending or condoning these actions? You merely seem to be justiyiing them. For shame Burier. You force me to recant my claim of overreaction. I now demand a full scale investigation going back to the My Lai Massacre and the execution of Private Slovik in WWII. Might as well throw in Ethel and Julius Rosenberg. See what happens when you admonish someone to relax? My proof that the Giants operatED in that fashion (passed tense) is my ears hearing Lawrence Taylor say so years ago on 60 minutes. I bet its easy to find. I understand Carl banks has said the same thing so... My position is that you should come up with a better way to motivate your players for the simple fact that if anyone finds out about bounties it looks bad. Makes the game look dirtier than it is etc... <FONT color=#000080 size=4>But if we're talking about Clean hits within the framework of the rules...Lets just be honest. Bounty system or not Guys are hitting eachother as hard as they possibly can anyway. Or at least that's what they're supposed to be doing. Whats the difference? Is it the money part? I mean Coughlin is always talking about "Winning the physical battle" What do you think he means by that? Because I believe he means we need to whip the other teams *** if we want to win. </FONT>Whats happening here is we've got a trigger word "bounty" causing a stir. The situation isn't ideal but... I mean where do you stand on spygate? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y-2s_xby23g Even did the legwork for ya</P>


the big dif is that if you are going to get paid, IN CASH, above and beyond what your contract stipulates then it is a violation of the CBA. From the common sense stand point why pay a defender "extra" to do what he is supposed to do anyway?? If this is a clean hit issue and just because an opposing player gets injured or knoocked outof the game it make sit worthy of a payday??? That is bull****.</P>


Incentives for sacks, tackles, forced fumbles, extra is and should be ok in the context of being spelled out specifically in contracts. I understand it goes on and has been forever. But its out in the open now so whether or not its "part of pro football" it has and will be dealt with. </P>

Bluesmagoo
03-06-2012, 04:07 PM
Like Claude Raines in "Casablanca" ...
"I'm shocked! LT involved in something nefarious. nahhhh! All the more reason to investigate!
oh, BTW thx for being civil, Burier old bean. It is refreshing.

G-Man67
03-06-2012, 04:09 PM
the big dif is that if you are going to get paid, IN CASH, above and beyond what your contract stipulates then it is a violation of the CBA. From the common sense stand point why pay a defender "extra" to do what he is supposed to do anyway?? If this is a clean hit issue and just because an opposing player gets injured or knoocked outof the game it make sit worthy of a payday??? That is bull****.</P>


Incentives for sacks, tackles, forced fumbles, extra is and should be ok in the context of being spelled out specifically in contracts. I understand it goes on and has been forever. But its out in the open now so whether or not its "part of pro football" it has and will be dealt with. </P>


</P>


you know that is an interesting angle ... seems like most teams would have players throw some money in a pot and then it would be distributed during the post game film session</P>


how were the Saints doing it? ... did the owner throw $10K in a pot? ... it would have to have been the owner, IMO, for it to violate the CBA</P>

burier
03-06-2012, 04:13 PM
My dear Burier, As I stated in a previous post I may have overreacted. However, the element of scum Williams represents in not common to all teams. Do you have proof that the Giants operate in the manner to which you allude? Hmm, shall we add you to the list? Surely you are not defending or condoning these actions? You merely seem to be justiyiing them. For shame Burier. You force me to recant my claim of overreaction. I now demand a full scale investigation going back to the My Lai Massacre and the execution of Private Slovik in WWII. Might as well throw in Ethel and Julius Rosenberg. See what happens when you admonish someone to relax? My proof that the Giants operatED in that fashion (passed tense) is my ears hearing Lawrence Taylor say so years ago on 60 minutes. I bet its easy to find. I understand Carl banks has said the same thing so... My position is that you should come up with a better way to motivate your players for the simple fact that if anyone finds out about bounties it looks bad. Makes the game look dirtier than it is etc... <FONT color=#000080 size=4>But if we're talking about Clean hits within the framework of the rules...Lets just be honest. Bounty system or not Guys are hitting eachother as hard as they possibly can anyway. Or at least that's what they're supposed to be doing. Whats the difference? Is it the money part? I mean Coughlin is always talking about "Winning the physical battle" What do you think he means by that? Because I believe he means we need to whip the other teams *** if we want to win. </FONT>Whats happening here is we've got a trigger word "bounty" causing a stir. The situation isn't ideal but... I mean where do you stand on spygate? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y-2s_xby23g Even did the legwork for ya</P>


the big dif is that if you are going to get paid, IN CASH, *above and beyond what your contract stipulates then it is a violation of the CBA. From the common sense stand point why pay a defender "extra" to do what he is supposed to do anyway?? If this is a clean hit issue and just because an opposing player gets injured or knoocked out*of the game it make sit worthy of a payday??? That is bull****.</P>


Incentives for sacks, tackles, forced fumbles, extra is and should be ok in the context of being spelled out specifically in contracts. I understand it goes on and has been forever. But its out in the open now so whether or not its "part of pro football" it has and will be dealt with. </P>

Ok so first of all the players are pooling their own money so the CBA has nothing to do with it.

The team isn't cutting additonal checks.

And you mentioned other things like Sacks. If the bounty pool was for sacks I'm assuming you'd be just as upset.

Common sense isn't the point. By your logic contracts shouldn't have incentives because thats what the player is "supposed to do anyway" Right?

In the post you quoted I link to LT on 60 minutes stating that the Giants had a bounty program aswell.

Are we not outraged about that?

Bluesmagoo
03-06-2012, 04:16 PM
As for spygate , my comments here are well documented. I believe at most they should strip the Pats of their Superbowls and ban all involved ala Pete Rose. Why don't the consequences we, the ordinary citizen apply in sports, politices or entertainment? O, because we ourselves are weak, I forgot...

GameTime
03-06-2012, 04:23 PM
My dear Burier, As I stated in a previous post I may have overreacted. However, the element of scum Williams represents in not common to all teams. Do you have proof that the Giants operate in the manner to which you allude? Hmm, shall we add you to the list? Surely you are not defending or condoning these actions? You merely seem to be justiyiing them. For shame Burier. You force me to recant my claim of overreaction. I now demand a full scale investigation going back to the My Lai Massacre and the execution of Private Slovik in WWII. Might as well throw in Ethel and Julius Rosenberg. See what happens when you admonish someone to relax? My proof that the Giants operatED in that fashion (passed tense) is my ears hearing Lawrence Taylor say so years ago on 60 minutes. I bet its easy to find. I understand Carl banks has said the same thing so... My position is that you should come up with a better way to motivate your players for the simple fact that if anyone finds out about bounties it looks bad. Makes the game look dirtier than it is etc... <FONT color=#000080 size=4>But if we're talking about Clean hits within the framework of the rules...Lets just be honest. Bounty system or not Guys are hitting eachother as hard as they possibly can anyway. Or at least that's what they're supposed to be doing. Whats the difference? Is it the money part? I mean Coughlin is always talking about "Winning the physical battle" What do you think he means by that? Because I believe he means we need to whip the other teams *** if we want to win. </FONT>Whats happening here is we've got a trigger word "bounty" causing a stir. The situation isn't ideal but... I mean where do you stand on spygate? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y-2s_xby23g Even did the legwork for ya</P>


the big dif is that if you are going to get paid, IN CASH, above and beyond what your contract stipulates then it is a violation of the CBA. From the common sense stand point why pay a defender "extra" to do what he is supposed to do anyway?? If this is a clean hit issue and just because an opposing player gets injured or knoocked outof the game it make sit worthy of a payday??? That is bull****.</P>


Incentives for sacks, tackles, forced fumbles, extra is and should be ok in the context of being spelled out specifically in contracts. I understand it goes on and has been forever. But its out in the open now so whether or not its "part of pro football" it has and will be dealt with. </P>


Ok so first of all the players are pooling their own money so the CBA has nothing to do with it. The team isn't cutting additonal checks. And you mentioned other things like Sacks. If the bounty pool was for sacks I'm assuming you'd be just as upset. Common sense isn't the point. By your logic contracts shouldn't have incentives because thats what the player is "supposed to do anyway" Right? In the post you quoted I link to LT on 60 minutes stating that the Giants had a bounty program aswell. Are we not outraged about that?</P>


1....didnt read the link and dont care if its been going on in the NFL since day one. Its out now and has to be dealt with. </P>


2....the players cant recieve extra money, from what I hear, no matter where it comes from unless its within the rules of the CBA</P>


3...The bounty/pool is NOT for sacks its for taking another player OUT with a clean hit or not. </P>


4.....I am not arguing with you and saying you are wrong. Just stating my opinion. </P>

burier
03-06-2012, 04:44 PM
My dear Burier, As I stated in a previous post I may have overreacted. However, the element of scum Williams represents in not common to all teams. Do you have proof that the Giants operate in the manner to which you allude? Hmm, shall we add you to the list? Surely you are not defending or condoning these actions? You merely seem to be justiyiing them. For shame Burier. You force me to recant my claim of overreaction. I now demand a full scale investigation going back to the My Lai Massacre and the execution of Private Slovik in WWII. Might as well throw in Ethel and Julius Rosenberg. See what happens when you admonish someone to relax? My proof that the Giants operatED in that fashion (passed tense) is my ears hearing Lawrence Taylor say so years ago on 60 minutes. I bet its easy to find. I understand Carl banks has said the same thing so... My position is that you should come up with a better way to motivate your players for the simple fact that if anyone finds out about bounties it looks bad. Makes the game look dirtier than it is etc... <FONT color=#000080 size=4>But if we're talking about Clean hits within the framework of the rules...Lets just be honest. Bounty system or not Guys are hitting eachother as hard as they possibly can anyway. Or at least that's what they're supposed to be doing. Whats the difference? Is it the money part? I mean Coughlin is always talking about "Winning the physical battle" What do you think he means by that? Because I believe he means we need to whip the other teams *** if we want to win. </FONT>Whats happening here is we've got a trigger word "bounty" causing a stir. The situation isn't ideal but... I mean where do you stand on spygate? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y-2s_xby23g Even did the legwork for ya</P>


the big dif is that if you are going to get paid, IN CASH, *above and beyond what your contract stipulates then it is a violation of the CBA. From the common sense stand point why pay a defender "extra" to do what he is supposed to do anyway?? If this is a clean hit issue and just because an opposing player gets injured or knoocked out*of the game it make sit worthy of a payday??? That is bull****.</P>


Incentives for sacks, tackles, forced fumbles, extra is and should be ok in the context of being spelled out specifically in contracts. I understand it goes on and has been forever. But its out in the open now so whether or not its "part of pro football" it has and will be dealt with. </P>


Ok so first of all the players are pooling their own money so the CBA has nothing to do with it. The team isn't cutting additonal checks. And you mentioned other things like Sacks. If the bounty pool was for sacks I'm assuming you'd be just as upset. Common sense isn't the point. By your logic contracts shouldn't have incentives because thats what the player is "supposed to do anyway" Right? In the post you quoted I link to LT on 60 minutes stating that the Giants had a bounty program aswell. Are we not outraged about that?</P>


1....didnt read the link and dont care if its been going on in the NFL since day one. Its out now and has to be dealt with. </P>


2....the players cant recieve extra money, from what I hear, no matter where it comes from unless its within the rules of the CBA</P>


3...The bounty/pool is NOT for sacks its for taking another player OUT with a clean hit or not. </P>


4.....I am not arguing with you and saying you are wrong. Just stating my opinion. </P>

I guess that's the point. LT said the Giants were doing it years ago. Wasn't it out then? Shouldn't it have been dealt with then.

I don't think the CBA can gonvern what the players do with their own money. Though thats not really the point as there are clearly rules on the books against bounties.

The only thing I find interesting about this issue is where fans fall. It seems like everyone wanted to look the other way over spygate. (Pats/Giants fans) but when it comes to this everyone is getting fired up.

Now I'd contend that Pats fans downplay spygate because they're pats fans.

I'd contend that Giants fans downplay spygate because they're Pats fans (See what I did there)

Or more specifically...Belichick fans.

So if as fans we're outraged at the Saints are we not equally outraged at the Giants? Belichick was the D-coordinator while we had our bounties. I'm sure he knew about it if he didn't actively participate.

Or are people just that brazen about being total hypocrites.

burier
03-06-2012, 04:50 PM
Like Claude Raines in "Casablanca" ...
"I'm shocked! LT involved in something nefarious. nahhhh! All the more reason to investigate!
oh, BTW thx for being civil, Burier old bean. It is refreshing.

Well we totally agree on spygate and this bounty thing is "Not a good look" as they say.

I appreciate your consistency.

G-Man67
03-06-2012, 04:55 PM
I guess that's the point. LT said the Giants were doing it years ago. Wasn't it out then? Shouldn't it have been dealt with then. I don't think the CBA can gonvern what the players do with their own money. Though thats not really the point as there are clearly rules on the books against bounties. The only thing I find interesting about this issue is where fans fall. It seems like everyone wanted to look the other way over spygate. (Pats/Giants fans) but when it comes to this everyone is getting fired up. Now I'd contend that Pats fans downplay spygate because they're pats fans. I'd contend that Giants fans downplay spygate because they're Pats fans (See what I did there) Or more specifically...Belichick fans. So if as fans we're outraged at the Saints are we not equally outraged at the Giants? Belichick was the D-coordinator while we had our bounties. I'm sure he knew about it if he didn't actively participate. Or are people just that brazen about being total hypocrites.</P>


don't forget that people are NFL fans as well ... so, for myself, i don't like the league being tainted in any way ... i love that billions of non-football fans around the globe watch the Super Bowl every year ... i don't want them to go ... jees this is barbaric, they are paying each other to try to kill each other and they are cheating and stealing the plays</P>

burier
03-06-2012, 05:01 PM
I guess that's the point. LT said the Giants were doing it years ago. Wasn't it out then? Shouldn't it have been dealt with then. I don't think the CBA can gonvern what the players do with their own money. Though thats not really the point as there are clearly rules on the books against bounties. The only thing I find interesting about this issue is where fans fall. It seems like everyone wanted to look the other way over spygate. (Pats/Giants fans) but when it comes to this everyone is getting fired up. Now I'd contend that Pats fans downplay spygate because they're pats fans. I'd contend that Giants fans downplay spygate because they're Pats fans (See what I did there) Or more specifically...Belichick fans. So if as fans we're outraged at the Saints are we not equally outraged at the Giants? Belichick was the D-coordinator while we had our bounties. I'm sure he knew about it if he didn't actively participate. Or are people just that brazen about being total hypocrites.</P>


don't forget that people are NFL fans as well ... so, for myself, i don't like the league being tainted in any way ... i love that billions of non-football fans around the globe watch the Super Bowl every year ... i don't want them to go ... jees this is barbaric, they are paying each other to try to kill each other and they are cheating and stealing the plays</P>

Absolutely but the way you keep an isolated incident from altering the overall perception of the league is by laying the smack down when someone breaks the rules.

Then fans can say..."Hey thats not what the NFL is about. And they just proved it with a heavy penalty"

What you don't do is downplay and cover it up.

Goodell dealing with this in a transparent way is far better for the NFL's image than the alternative:

Breaking news on the Drudge Report.

galaxy10
03-06-2012, 05:24 PM
Defensive guys all secretly or not so secretly have a plan to hit the opposing QB hard and possibly take him out.

in fact didnt we injure at least 5-6 qb's in a row last season? its part of football and the reason QB's are paid so much.



You're saying that Eli is wrong? Clean hits are a part of football, cheap shots with cash rewards are not.</p>


Clean hits that take players out shouldn't rewarded with extra cash either......this is all involved in this investigatuion. Its not onlyabout cheap hits and pursposely injuring players. Its about being paid "extra" if your "clean legal"hit causes a player to have to be removed from the game.</p>


</p>



Agreed. You hit it exactly right. The issue is not whether the hits
are legal or not. It is the fact that coaches and players are trying
to injure another player. I watched a bunch of defensive guys on ESPN
and all they talked about was whether the hits were legal or not. They
are totally missing the point. The Saints were trying to injure people,
whether they succeeded or not. It is that they were coached to injure
players. I think the involved coaches and players should be suspended.
That is the only thing that matters, fines will not do it.
</p>


</p>


</p>


Seems like, 'the harder the hit, the bigger the payout'. I couldn't put my finger on why I despised the Saints - especially after their SB winning season with all their stupid '300' chants and 'who 'dats' and all. Now I'm justfied in it. This just makes me sick. Yeah, defenses are going to hit as hard as they can get away with, but when those hits are motivated by cash payouts - just....sick.

BTW, can someone tell me since I never saw the actual source - how did this all wind up coming out of the woodwork? Did someon overhear Williams or any of the players talking about it? How was it discovered??

Allegedly somebody tipped the league off about three months ago. The league began investigating and reviewed thousand of pages of material. Guess it was pretty damaging. Don't know the identity of the source and I would suspect that we never will.

buffyblue
03-06-2012, 05:27 PM
Ironic that folks are using LT for an example because whatever else the guy has done, he played clean. He smashed people but he was a clean player and did not take cheap shots.

Anyone that has ever played organized football over a period of time knows that when you hit someone you want to rattle them, you want to impose your will on them. However, you keep it clean. When you start with cheap shots and late hits, then there is a problem. When there is a DC that doesn’t even take the field offering bounties then it is borderline criminal.

It was tragic when the Buonoconti guy got paralysed but I can’t say that I feel bad for him because he got injured when he tried to illegally spear someone.

I agree that Roger Goddell is making the right call here in dealing with this in atransparent way. Hopefully he makes and example and throws Greg Williams out of NFL and fines the organizations he was associated with when he offerred these bounties.

I doubt he will do it but I would like to see Peyton Manning file a civil suit against Greg Williams if Indianapolis Colts do not exercise option and pay him 28 million he is due if they choose to keep him. It is obvious that his neck problems started on that cheap shot when his helmet was ripped off against Washington Redskins when Greg Williams was DC.

chasjay
03-06-2012, 05:34 PM
Am I totally in the minority in that I enjoy the athletic, graceful football plays that are made on each side of the ball more than I enjoy a savage de-cleating or knockout blow? Is part of the reason that the art of tackling has gone down is because defenders go for the flying kill shot instead of just wrapping the man up and dragging him down? Has the violence in the game increased because the fans demanded it, or have the coaches and players made the fans come to expect it? I'm in my 60's and the game has become more violent over my lifetime. Sure, there have always been some hard hitters and I realize that it is hard to find many athletically graceful moves being made on the LOS with a bunch of 350 lb men colliding with each other.

I know I'm rambling, but do most people really get more enjoyment from seeing the opposing running back hit the ground for a 4-yard loss while his legs turn to jelly, than they do from seeing the same man dragged down for the same 4-yard loss while retaining his senses?

I started out with a point - but I guess I lost it.

galaxy10
03-06-2012, 05:37 PM
Ironic that folks are using LT for an example because whatever else the guy has done, he played clean. He smashed people but he was a clean player and did not take cheap shots.

Anyone that has ever played organized football over a period of time knows that when you hit someone you want to rattle them, you want to impose your will on them. However, you keep it clean. When you start with cheap shots and late hits, then there is a problem. When there is a DC that doesn’t even take the field offering bounties then it is borderline criminal.

It was tragic when the Buonoconti guy got paralysed but I can’t say that I feel bad for him because he got injured when he tried to illegally spear someone.

I agree that Roger Goddell is making the right call here in dealing with this in atransparent way. Hopefully he makes and example and throws Greg Williams out of NFL and fines the organizations he was associated with when he offerred these bounties.

I doubt he will do it but I would like to see Peyton Manning file a civil suit against Greg Williams if Indianapolis Colts do not exercise option and pay him 28 million he is due if they choose to keep him. It is obvious that his neck problems started on that cheap shot when his helmet was ripped off against Washington Redskins when Greg Williams was DC.

I played high school and college football, granted I was a WR. Needless to say, I was tall and thin and my blocking was awful so I don't really know how a defensive mind works. I did not know about Buonoconti getting injured for a BS play. I did not know about Peyton Manning either. Did his injury come from the Redskins game? If it did, then I am even more pissed at Williams. I for one would like him to be suspended for the whole season. I doubt the league would throw him out, but I would not be against it. There is supposed to be a brotherhood, what happened? I thought there were just a few bad apples. The Saints were told to stop and they ignored the league, what happened to the chain of command. They should be hammered.

burier
03-06-2012, 05:41 PM
Am I totally in the minority in that I enjoy the athletic, graceful football plays that are made on each side of the ball more than I enjoy a savage de-cleating or knockout blow? Is part of the reason that the art of tackling has gone down is because defenders go for the flying kill shot instead of just wrapping the man up and dragging him down? Has the violence in the game increased because the fans demanded it, or have the coaches and players made the fans come to expect it? I'm in my 60's and the game has become more violent over my lifetime. Sure, there have always been some hard hitters and I realize that it is hard to find many athletically graceful moves being made on the LOS with a bunch of 350 lb men colliding with each other.

I know I'm rambling, but do most people really get more enjoyment from seeing the opposing running back hit the ground for a 4-yard loss while his legs turn to jelly, than they do from seeing the same man dragged down for the same 4-yard loss while retaining his senses?

I started out with a point - but I guess I lost it.


Yeah we'd rather the ball carrier get knocked sensless.

For better or worse thats what it is.

Go to your local video store (Do those still exisit)

Head over to the documentaries section or the sports section.

You'll see titles like

The NFLS GREATEST HITS!

The NFLnetwork has aired its list of TOP 10 MOST FEARED TACKLERS!

The game has changed drastically from the 30s when guys where slapping headlocks on eacother and riding eachother to the ground.

And that's just the way we like it.

chasjay
03-06-2012, 05:49 PM
Am I totally in the minority in that I enjoy the athletic, graceful football plays that are made on each side of the ball more than I enjoy a savage de-cleating or knockout blow? Is part of the reason that the art of tackling has gone down is because defenders go for the flying kill shot instead of just wrapping the man up and dragging him down? Has the violence in the game increased because the fans demanded it, or have the coaches and players made the fans come to expect it? I'm in my 60's and the game has become more violent over my lifetime. Sure, there have always been some hard hitters and I realize that it is hard to find many athletically graceful moves being made on the LOS with a bunch of 350 lb men colliding with each other.

I know I'm rambling, but do most people really get more enjoyment from seeing the opposing running back hit the ground for a 4-yard loss while his legs turn to jelly, than they do from seeing the same man dragged down for the same 4-yard loss while retaining his senses?

I started out with a point - but I guess I lost it.


Yeah we'd rather the ball carrier get knocked sensless.

For better or worse thats what it is.

Go to your local video store (Do those still exisit)

Head over to the documentaries section or the sports section.

You'll see titles like

The NFLS GREATEST HITS!

The NFLnetwork has aired its list of TOP 10 MOST FEARED TACKLERS!

The game has changed drastically from the 30s when guys where slapping headlocks on eacother and riding eachother to the ground.

And that's just the way we like it.

I don't want to watch grown men play patty-cake - I want to see clean, hard hits as well. I would like to think the Most Feared Tacklers would be those who are so skilled and practiced that you can't get by them - not the ones most likely to knock your d*** into your watch-pocket.

burier
03-06-2012, 05:55 PM
Am I totally in the minority in that I enjoy the athletic, graceful football plays that are made on each side of the ball more than I enjoy a savage de-cleating or knockout blow? Is part of the reason that the art of tackling has gone down is because defenders go for the flying kill shot instead of just wrapping the man up and dragging him down? Has the violence in the game increased because the fans demanded it, or have the coaches and players made the fans come to expect it? I'm in my 60's and the game has become more violent over my lifetime. Sure, there have always been some hard hitters and I realize that it is hard to find many athletically graceful moves being made on the LOS with a bunch of 350 lb men colliding with each other.

I know I'm rambling, but do most people really get more enjoyment from seeing the opposing running back hit the ground for a 4-yard loss while his legs turn to jelly, than they do from seeing the same man dragged down for the same 4-yard loss while retaining his senses?

I started out with a point - but I guess I lost it.


Yeah we'd rather the ball carrier get knocked sensless.

For better or worse thats what it is.

Go to your local video store (Do those still exisit)

Head over to the documentaries section or the sports section.

You'll see titles like

The NFLS GREATEST HITS!

The NFLnetwork has aired its list of TOP 10 MOST FEARED TACKLERS!

The game has changed drastically from the 30s when guys where slapping headlocks on eacother and riding eachother to the ground.

And that's just the way we like it.

I don't want to watch grown men play patty-cake - I want to see clean, hard hits as well. I would like to think the Most Feared Tacklers would be those who are so skilled and practiced that you can't get by them - not the ones most likely to knock your d*** into your watch-pocket.


The thing is the guy who is so skilled you can't get by and the guy most likely to knock your **** into your watch-pocket are most likely the same guy.