NFL: Saints Bounty Thread

[AsylumGuido]

(08-31-2012 10:54 PM)ATLBound Wrote:  I've considered them. I thought I saw a flag flying and heard patriotic music playing in the background. Here is how I see it:

A. Saints got paid for big hits

B. Some of those big hits caused cart-offs and injuries

C. Saints got paid for big hits

D. If those big hits caused cart-offs and injuries, then....

Conclusion: Saints got paid for causing injuries, which in a technicality is true.

You are correct. That point is not being disputed. They all admit that like any other pay for performance program across the league there were awards for hard hits. The dispute is over the claim that warranted ALL of the suspensions in one way or another that the Saints targeted specific players with the express intent to injure in return for cash payments. In other words, bounties.

To date, there has been no evidence that this did indeed occur even though Goodell continues to vacillate between that hard line interpretation of a bounty and a fluffy version he mentioned in his recent email to fans stating that ...

"The bounty prohibition forbids offering or accepting any reward - cash or otherwise - for on-field misconduct, plays that incentivize or result in injury to opposing players, or for performance against an opposing player, group of players, or team."

In other words, a payment from a pool for recovering a fumble is now in his words a BOUNTY and justifies all totally unparalleled punishments.