NFL: Great read from a Falcons Fan - The Fear Of 'New Orleans Vs. The World'

[ATLBound]

(03-24-2012 06:26 PM)AsylumGuido Wrote:  Sorry, but we as fans had no say in what went on. Oh, and believe me, the Saints fans have had a chip on their shoulders way, way before Katrina.

It's like a lost cause and you keep blaming it on homerism. But you're not being any less of a homer because you understand that your team did something very wrong, got caught, and got punished for it.

I don't understand how the Saints fans can say its them against the world. I'm not saying don't support your team. I would rally behind the Falcons and believe everything will be alright as well but I can understand when something is right or wrong.

My response: "Hey we did something wrong and against the rules, then was given a warning and at that point we kept doing it and covering it up. So we got what we deserve. But I believe my team will be able to move on and conquer this. Go Falcons"

It's still homeristic while being realistic about what happened. Don't really see the difficulty in this attitude that NONE of the Saints fans I have encountered has displayed.

[AsylumGuido]

(03-24-2012 08:31 PM)ATLBound Wrote:  It's like a lost cause and you keep blaming it on homerism. But you're not being any less of a homer because you understand that your team did something very wrong, got caught, and got punished for it.

I don't understand how the Saints fans can say its them against the world. I'm not saying don't support your team. I would rally behind the Falcons and believe everything will be alright as well but I can understand when something is right or wrong.

My response: "Hey we did something wrong and against the rules, then was given a warning and at that point we kept doing it and covering it up. So we got what we deserve. But I believe my team will be able to move on and conquer this. Go Falcons"

It's still homeristic while being realistic about what happened. Don't really see the difficulty in this attitude that NONE of the Saints fans I have encountered has displayed.

Okay ...

"Hey we did something wrong and against the rules, then was given a warning and at that point we kept doing it and covering it up. So we got what we deserve. But I believe my team will be able to move on and conquer this, even though what was going on has been overblown by both Goodell and the media. Geaux Saints!"

Okay, I did it.

[ATLBound]

(03-24-2012 08:41 PM)AsylumGuido Wrote:  Okay ...

"Hey we did something wrong and against the rules, then was given a warning and at that point we kept doing it and covering it up. So we got what we deserve. But I believe my team will be able to move on and conquer this, even though what was going on has been overblown by both Goodell and the media. Geaux Saints!"

Okay, I did it.

The only reason u think its overblown is because as a result of the bounty nobody got considerably hurt.

I truly believe that if any player during this timespan would have gotten seriously injured then mamy folks would be singing a different tune.

But because nobody did its easy for you to fall back on the "every team is doing it" , "one the least penalized team" , "nobody got seriously injured" tip. Which in turn gives the idea that since nothing different went on than from a different team, then that means the media is overblowing it or Goodell is as well.

The extent of punishment should not be based on the result of the crime. But the rest of your statwmemt was good...lol

[V Chip]

(03-24-2012 08:31 PM)ATLBound Wrote:  It's still homeristic while being realistic about what happened. Don't really see the difficulty in this attitude that NONE of the Saints fans I have encountered has displayed.

I've said pretty much the same sentiment on this very board (not directly but in my posts I have admitted the Saints deserve to get punished harshly). I'll say something similar again:

The Saints broke known rules. Not only that, the NFL says that the Saints knew and covered up all the way up the food chain to Loomis and if true, then they deserve every bit of the punishment they have received and depending on player punishments, probably all the player punishments as well.

Full stop.

Now having said that, if I disagree when someone says "The Saints admitted to trying to end players careers!!" it's because they admitted no such thing; if someone cannot see the nuance between intentional, malicious injury and unintentional legal-hard-hit injury or pain, then I will disagree with them on that, too. Just because I might not back the NFLs position on the issue 100%, or that I point out that some statements other people are making are untrue or illogical doesn't mean I am making excuses for the Saints or thinking they don't deserve the punishment. In fact if the same thing happened to the Falcons I would make the SAME EXACT POINTS. When Spygate happened I thought it was (and still think it is) weird that the NFL gathered all this evidence... and then destroyed it all, showing nothing else to anyone except that the Patriots got punished. When the NFL rules almost in every case that the officials calls on the field are correct when they review them, that makes me wonder -- yeah officials can be good but sometimes they will make mistakes, so we should expect more mea culpas, but there are very very few.

Anyways, just because someone disagrees with a point or a sentiment doesn't mean they are apologists or trying to spin or denying. For me at least, it means I just disagree with the point or the sentiment.

[Beef]

The problem with your "disagree with the point or the sentiment" is this...

When some slimeball emails Greg Williams and Sean Payton and says "Put me down for $5000 to take out Rodgers.", that guy isn't explicitely saying "but only take him out for this game" nor is he explicitely saying "I don't care if it's career ending".

But all you Saints fans are insisting that the context can only infer "but only for this game". You have no clue if that's the context or not, but you're still making definitive absolutes as if that must be it. And you're doing that because you want to lessen the severity of the offense and try to save any bit of face you can.

You don't get to make up your own context though and present it as fact. Sorry guys, but that's not how this works. So when you do, you must realize you look like blind homers even more.

[V Chip]

(03-25-2012 09:17 AM)Beef Wrote:  When some slimeball emails Greg Williams and Sean Payton and says "Put me down for $5000 to take out Rodgers.", that guy isn't explicitely saying "but only take him out for this game" nor is he explicitely saying "I don't care if it's career ending".

But all you Saints fans are insisting that the context can only infer "but only for this game". You have no clue if that's the context or not, but you're still making definitive absolutes as if that must be it. And you're doing that because you want to lessen the severity of the offense and try to save any bit of face you can.

You don't get to make up your own context though and present it as fact. Sorry guys, but that's not how this works. So when you do, you must realize you look like blind homers even more.

Well here again is another case where I'll disagree and you'll think I'm weaseling out... so be prepared.

First off, "all" us Saints fans are NOT insisting that the context can ONLY be "only for this game." Most are objecting to the opposite claim -- that the context can ONLY be "The Saints were trying to end careers!!!" I personally am stating there is a difference between a good, hard legal hit that causes pain and intentionally going at someone's knees, head, etc. as so many are claiming. Lots of defensive players around the league are saying the same thing I am -- even the Vikings player (John Sullivan) who wants Vilma banned said "If you want to offer money to knock somebody out of a game on a clean hit, fine." Other defensive players say that they want to hurt opposing players, but not injure them: James Harrison, Jared Allen, Terrell Suggs, etc.

Some slimeball never said "put me down for $5000 to take Rodgers out." What is reportedly said is that Ornstein said "PS Greg Williams put me down for $5000 on Rogers." When you misstate it the way you did you are doing what you just stated Saints fans do -- making up your OWN context and presenting it as fact. If everything is presented exactly as you interpreted it is horrible; if it happened and Payton knew about it and even tacitly approved of it then he deserves to be suspended for a year. But there are other possibilities -- not as likely, but still possibilities: Ornstein could have said it as a joke or even knowledge of a bounty system and not actually contributed money (if the NFL had records of him actually putting the money in, why wouldn't they say that instead of just using this email as an implication?).

But the main objection that I have had is the idea that Saints players deliberately tried to end careers or were dirty/cheap-shotters. Until this exploded the Saints were thought of as chippy, but not any more than the Falcons O-line was thought of as chippy either. I don't think no matter what allegations could come out against the Falcons O-Line that they would intentionally try to injure someone or end someone's career; I think Dunta Robinson (who alone has been fined more than all Saints players for the past couple years) is a dirty player but I don't think he is intentionally trying to injure someone or end their career.

So again, yes the Saints illegally ran a system that paid for plays that resulted in injuries, and they rightly got blasted for that -- well, more than that they got blasted for not admitting it and being so stupid to keep records and continue it when they had already been investigated for it.

[Radical]

Saints players were cheap shot players, and you'd have to be unbelievably dense if you don't think the players taking part in that program weren't intentionally trying to injure players, that's the entire damn point of a bounty to begin with.

[swanlee]

Saints fans are obviously in the bargaining stage of their grief

They are splitting hairs about injury taking out a player VS ending careers etc.

Look the entire Franchise was involved in tactics that are highly illegal/unethical in the NFL and completely went against the spirit of the league. Then tack on the added issues of lying about it trying to stonewall the investigations AND continuing the bounty program when they were warned you have now entered a whole new realm of issues.

At some point Saints fans will enter the acceptance stage of their grief and then they may be able to see the full scope of this issue. You guys are the white sox of the NFL and this scandal will taint and follow your team for the rest of time or until the Franchise is dismantled and set to L.A.

[ATLBound]

(03-24-2012 11:44 PM)V Chip Wrote:  I've said pretty much the same sentiment on this very board (not directly but in my posts I have admitted the Saints deserve to get punished harshly). I'll say something similar again:

The Saints broke known rules. Not only that, the NFL says that the Saints knew and covered up all the way up the food chain to Loomis and if true, then they deserve every bit of the punishment they have received and depending on player punishments, probably all the player punishments as well.

Full stop.

Now having said that, if I disagree when someone says "The Saints admitted to trying to end players careers!!" it's because they admitted no such thing; if someone cannot see the nuance between intentional, malicious injury and unintentional legal-hard-hit injury or pain, then I will disagree with them on that, too. Just because I might not back the NFLs position on the issue 100%, or that I point out that some statements other people are making are untrue or illogical doesn't mean I am making excuses for the Saints or thinking they don't deserve the punishment. In fact if the same thing happened to the Falcons I would make the SAME EXACT POINTS. When Spygate happened I thought it was (and still think it is) weird that the NFL gathered all this evidence... and then destroyed it all, showing nothing else to anyone except that the Patriots got punished. When the NFL rules almost in every case that the officials calls on the field are correct when they review them, that makes me wonder -- yeah officials can be good but sometimes they will make mistakes, so we should expect more mea culpas, but there are very very few.

Anyways, just because someone disagrees with a point or a sentiment doesn't mean they are apologists or trying to spin or denying. For me at least, it means I just disagree with the point or the sentiment.

Actually I wasn't really responding to anything u said but I agree the Saints were not as a whole trying to end someones career. BUT if you asked me "Is it possible that one of the players got headstrong and said Imma punish this dude so I can win that money?" then I would say yes that is possible.

Did someone do that I dont know so Im not gonna assume they BUT thats one of the problems with the bounty. All it takes is that one player to take it too damn far. Thank God it didnt happen but the possibility of getting paid SPECIFICALLY for an injury that could possibly end a career....that's pure fuckery

[phocis850]

Did Williams have a bounty on Payton?