NFL: Saints Bounty Thread

[JDaveG]

(10-19-2012 12:49 PM)AsylumGuido Wrote:  But, there isn't even a regulation against pay for performance. Here is what the NFLPA says in filing this info with the Louisiana court:

The NFLPA is making the same error you are. Repeating it through a proxy doesn't advance the discussion.

No, there isn't a regulation but that's not the point. The point is in both cases, the authority to deal with it was delegated (in the instance of gun regulation in airports) or granted (in the case of the CBA) to a party outside the lawmaking authority. Since the CBA at issue in the Saints case is a completely different CBA than was involved in 1996, and in fact had been modified twice since the Packers issue arose, and since the commissioner has the authority under the current CBA to set standards for player safety and enforce them, you are arguing apples and oranges when you try to compare the Packers in 1996 to the Saints of late.

Now, that's all assuming you're only referring to the player discipline issue, which is all the Packers situation dealt with. If you're trying to say Goodell lacks the authority to suspend the coaches or punish the Saints, then you're just off your rocker. The New Orleans Saints are members of the National Football League, and the coaches are contracted employees of their respective affiliate. Not only that, but Payton's suspension and the $500K fine and the loss of the 2nd round draft pick were followed by this statement from the Saints:

"To our fans, the NFL and the rest of our league, we offer our sincere apology and take full responsibility for these serious violations . . . There is no place for bounties in our league and we reiterate our pledge that this will never happen again."

So if that's your claim, you'll have to explain why the Saints accepted those punishments and issued an apology for "bounties" when, after all, Goodell lacked any basis for suspending Payton or taking those actions against the Saints.