If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(ESPN)   The bounty on Brett Farve during the 2009 NFC Championships was at least $35,000, and that's not even counting the money raised by Packers fans   (espn.go.com) divider line 179
    More: Interesting, Brett Favre, NFC Championship Game, Chris Kluwe, Jonathan Vilma, NFL, Joe Vitt, Seifert, Adam Schefter  
•       •       •

1368 clicks; posted to Sports » on 19 Jun 2012 at 1:53 PM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



179 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-06-19 05:23:42 PM

digistil: robsul82: justtray: Honestly, I have no interest in debating whether or not they got a competitive advantage. It's not something that can be proven either way...they cheated

I know, you already got tied in a knot trying to insist that they did, now you just want to be free to say that anyway.

LOL


Yeah, it WAS pretty funny watching him try to spin out of what a referee's job is.
 
2012-06-19 05:24:19 PM
Also, what's this about the Fudge Packers being found guilty of a bounty system in 2007 and receiving no where near as harsh a punishment? Is this true?
 
2012-06-19 05:24:45 PM

JohnBigBootay: At the end of the day these guys are all just football players. Some of them are jerks and some of them aren't but I really don't think any of them would intentionally and with malice aforethought attempt to end another player's career. I'm probably naive but I just don't.


Sorry to quote myself but I want to clarify - I think they intentionally knock the ever loving shiat out of one another. And sometime the hits are dirty - even intentionally dirty. Crazy emotional shiat happens on a football field. But to a man - Vilma, Harrison (james and rodney), Suh, go all the way back to Jack Tatum if you want - I think they'd all take it back if they could when one of their hits seriously injures someone. They ALL talk a big game and get hyped up and say all sorts of shiat in the locker room but every single time someone is motionless on the field they all come out and hold hands and shiat. they all know it could be them on the next play - every single one of them.
 
2012-06-19 05:24:46 PM

steamingpile: Sarcasm, I love it.

And you know bandwagon rob can't resist to show his idiocy.


Cowardly dogpiling from a moron behind an ignore list, what a shock.
 
2012-06-19 05:27:09 PM

robsul82: digistil: robsul82: justtray: Honestly, I have no interest in debating whether or not they got a competitive advantage. It's not something that can be proven either way...they cheated

I know, you already got tied in a knot trying to insist that they did, now you just want to be free to say that anyway.

LOL

Yeah, it WAS pretty funny watching him try to spin out of what a referee's job is.


Was loling w/ ya, not at ya.
 
2012-06-19 05:28:48 PM

JohnBigBootay: go all the way back to Jack Tatum if you want - I think they'd all take it back if they could when one of their hits seriously injures someone


Didn't Tatum say he didn't regret what happened to Stingley? Or did he privately feel bad and kept up the tough guy front publicly?

digistil: being found guilty of a bounty system in 2007 and receiving no where near as harsh a punishment? Is this true?


Yes, the Packers were busted for a pay-for-performance system in '07 and received no fines or suspensions. They stopped it as far as we know, but hey, they apparently don't have a Mike Cerullo.
 
2012-06-19 05:29:42 PM

digistil: Also, what's this about the Fudge Packers being found guilty of a bounty system in 2007 and receiving no where near as harsh a punishment? Is this true?


Pay-for-Performance, which is what the Packers admitted to, falls under the same "bounty" rule. They also stopped it when asked to stop it.
 
2012-06-19 05:30:53 PM

digistil: Was loling w/ ya, not at ya.


Ah.

robsul82: Yes, the Packers were busted for a pay-for-performance system in '07 and received no fines or suspensions. They stopped it as far as we know, but hey, they apparently don't have a Mike Cerullo.


Or they did stop it, to be perfectly fair, lol. Wouldn't want to assume anything.
 
2012-06-19 05:31:02 PM

robsul82: digistil: being found guilty of a bounty system in 2007 and receiving no where near as harsh a punishment? Is this true?

Yes, the Packers were busted for a pay-for-performance system in '07 and received no fines or suspensions. They stopped it as far as we know, but hey, they apparently don't have a Mike Cerullo.


That's honestly a bit of a farking disgrace. Was Gooddell the head farker then? (too lazy to figure it out)
 
2012-06-19 05:31:49 PM

Nabb1: justtray: Like I said though, I'd rather not argue uselessly over "competitive advantage" because it can't be proven and it's irrelevant to the topic.

If it has nothing to do with competitive advantage, how is it "cheating"? I suppose it violates the salary cap, if the team is condoning it (and the Saints front office conceded that they broke the rules in that respect, but has denied - uniformly with the players - intentionally setting out to injure people) but player-to-player incentives are fine (like QBs buying their linemen Rolex watches and so on).


The NFL dropped the damned hammer on the Saints. And yet, as harsh as the punishments were, they did NOT include forfeiture of any victories. So it would appear that, at least on some level, the NFL agrees with you on this.
 
2012-06-19 05:32:44 PM

Slow To Return: They also stopped it when asked to stop it.


;) ;) Nudge. Nudge.
 
2012-06-19 05:33:55 PM

digistil: robsul82: digistil: being found guilty of a bounty system in 2007 and receiving no where near as harsh a punishment? Is this true?

Yes, the Packers were busted for a pay-for-performance system in '07 and received no fines or suspensions. They stopped it as far as we know, but hey, they apparently don't have a Mike Cerullo.

That's honestly a bit of a farking disgrace. Was Gooddell the head farker then? (too lazy to figure it out)


There weren't looming lawsuits from former players building up steam, either. My feeling is Goodell took something the Saints were doing that was wrong, admittedly, and has conflated it into a "player safety" issue and nailed them to cover his and the League's ass when the depositions start. And, for their part, Payton and Loomis, for all the great things they've done, screwed up and put themselves in the position to be the example Goodell wanted to make out of someone.
 
2012-06-19 05:34:54 PM

digistil: That's honestly a bit of a farking disgrace. Was Gooddell the head farker then? (too lazy to figure it out)


Meh, not really. The Packers were never accused of paying bounties to harm players, just paying performance-based incentives, like $100 for holding AP under 100 yards rushing.

Of course, it does throw the whole "circumventing the salary cap" point out the window, but the people who like to bring that point up don't really care much about that.
 
2012-06-19 05:35:00 PM
SoundFX - Brian Cushing yukking it up with a teammate by saying "get sacks, get stacks" and making a money gesture (scroll to 1:25)

Yeah, if confronted, Cushing will say it's a contract incentive, not a P4P system. Just imagine how Roger would play that up if the investigation were located a little further west.

*spoooooooky music, floating heads of Goodell and Joffrey fly over your monitor HERE*
 
2012-06-19 05:38:11 PM

Slow To Return: Nabb1: justtray: Like I said though, I'd rather not argue uselessly over "competitive advantage" because it can't be proven and it's irrelevant to the topic.

If it has nothing to do with competitive advantage, how is it "cheating"? I suppose it violates the salary cap, if the team is condoning it (and the Saints front office conceded that they broke the rules in that respect, but has denied - uniformly with the players - intentionally setting out to injure people) but player-to-player incentives are fine (like QBs buying their linemen Rolex watches and so on).

The NFL dropped the damned hammer on the Saints. And yet, as harsh as the punishments were, they did NOT include forfeiture of any victories. So it would appear that, at least on some level, the NFL agrees with you on this.


They may or may not, but part of that is strategic. Goodell has limitless authority when it comes to discipline for "off the field" behavior. Discipline for "on the field" infractions, under the CBA, is different, and the grievance procedure for that allows for a third party to hear a player's appeal. If Goodell maintains this is of the "off the field" variety, he maintains control. Furthermore, the NFL is not obligated to release exculpatory evidence as in a criminal case. Goodell and his staff can hand select every piece of information turned over to the players and released to the public at this point, such as they did recently with a few hand-selected media people (NFL-friendly Peter King and ESPN, of course). Make no mistake: Goodell has carefully structured all this to control the media narrative. If Vilma's lawsuit has legs, then the League has to start turning stuff over to his lawyers through the discovery process, so don't be surprised if the League tries to argue Vilma is really trying to do an end-run around the CBA.
 
2012-06-19 05:39:49 PM

Nabb1: justtray: Like I said though, I'd rather not argue uselessly over "competitive advantage" because it can't be proven and it's irrelevant to the topic.

If it has nothing to do with competitive advantage, how is it "cheating"? I suppose it violates the salary cap, if the team is condoning it (and the Saints front office conceded that they broke the rules in that respect, but has denied - uniformly with the players - intentionally setting out to injure people) but player-to-player incentives are fine (like QBs buying their linemen Rolex watches and so on).


Thats the thing, if this was strictly player to player, it wouldn't be that big of an issue. Having the franchise itself involved is no bueno for the league. Couple that with the former player lawsuits and the concussion issue, and its pretty obvious why the league has to drop the hammer as hard as they are. In the end, follow the money. QBs generate alot, linebackers not so much. Plus they need to boost their defense for court 'see how we protect player safety your honor'
 
2012-06-19 05:41:07 PM

iron_city_ap: Plus they need to boost their defense for court 'see how we protect player safety your honor'


This is for the CHILDREN, how dare you.
 
2012-06-19 05:44:44 PM

Nabb1: There weren't looming lawsuits from former players building up steam, either. My feeling is Goodell took something the Saints were doing that was wrong, admittedly, and has conflated it into a "player safety" issue and nailed them to cover his and the League's ass when the depositions start.


That's the nail on the head.
 
2012-06-19 05:47:29 PM

robsul82: Didn't Tatum say he didn't regret what happened to Stingley?


I've read both that he did and he didn't. Dude wasn't a big talker. For what it's worth John Madden said it haunted him the rest of his life and he wouldn't discuss it.
 
2012-06-19 05:49:15 PM

robsul82: Brian Cushing yukking it up with a teammate by saying "get sacks, get stacks"


Or in Cushing's case, a bonus injection.
 
2012-06-19 05:50:49 PM

Nabb1: digistil: robsul82: digistil: being found guilty of a bounty system in 2007 and receiving no where near as harsh a punishment? Is this true?

Yes, the Packers were busted for a pay-for-performance system in '07 and received no fines or suspensions. They stopped it as far as we know, but hey, they apparently don't have a Mike Cerullo.

That's honestly a bit of a farking disgrace. Was Gooddell the head farker then? (too lazy to figure it out)

There weren't looming lawsuits from former players building up steam, either. My feeling is Goodell took something the Saints were doing that was wrong, admittedly, and has conflated it into a "player safety" issue and nailed them to cover his and the League's ass when the depositions start. And, for their part, Payton and Loomis, for all the great things they've done, screwed up and put themselves in the position to be the example Goodell wanted to make out of someone.


Yeah, probably right.
 
2012-06-19 05:52:07 PM

JohnBigBootay: robsul82: Didn't Tatum say he didn't regret what happened to Stingley?

I've read both that he did and he didn't. Dude wasn't a big talker. For what it's worth John Madden said it haunted him the rest of his life and he wouldn't discuss it.


Yeah, I googled it and saw two different PFT articles on it, one about the Pats QB who threw the pass on that play and said Tatum "wasn't a good person" and highlighted not apologizing or publicly showing regret, and the other about John Madden's account of Tatum being haunted by it forever. So yeah, who knows.
 
2012-06-19 05:53:33 PM

digistil: robsul82: Brian Cushing yukking it up with a teammate by saying "get sacks, get stacks"

Or in Cushing's case, a bonus injection.


Didn't want to say it, lol. Bergen Catholic High School's right up the road from where I am, he's still 1) fondly remembered there and 2) a wink-wink-nudge-nudge on that topic.
 
2012-06-19 05:57:40 PM

robsul82: Yeah, I googled it and saw two different PFT articles on it, one about the Pats QB who threw the pass on that play and said Tatum "wasn't a good person" and highlighted not apologizing or publicly showing regret, and the other about John Madden's account of Tatum being haunted by it forever. So yeah, who knows.


I would imagine Jack Tatum doesn't give two shiats about what people think of him but also privately resented being seen as a villain for what after all was a legal hit. I have no doubt it bothered him though - provided he was a human being and not raised by wolves.
 
2012-06-19 05:59:33 PM

JohnBigBootay: I would imagine Jack Tatum doesn't give two shiats about what people think of him but also privately resented being seen as a villain for what after all was a legal hit. I have no doubt it bothered him though - provided he was a human being and not raised by wolves.


I would imagine so, yes.
 
2012-06-19 06:06:10 PM

Jubeebee: The NFL figures a lot of people like Bert Faver still, so they keep pointing out that the evil Saints hurt Ol' Mr. Wrangler. It makes it easier for people to forget that EVERY team ran a bounty system, and the Saints are just in trouble because they thumbed their nose at Goodell and the NFL needs a fall guy so they can say they care about player safety.


You know, I keep reading similar crap, and nobody has yet to provide anything beyond a Cris Carter quote.

The Saints had a bounty out to injure Brett Favre. Not make it hard on him in the game, or to just lay big clean hits on him, but to injure him. He was old, and he's a prick, but they went out to injure him with numerous illegal hits. And they succeeded. The evidence exists unlike it exists for ANY other team in the sport.
 
2012-06-19 06:08:01 PM
Forgot to say, even though I agree that the NFL is trying to cover up the serious issues with concussions and other long-term injuries, it's idiotic for anyone to think this is going to take anything other than a tiny amount of temporary heat off of the league. I mean, they can't blame every f*cking concussion in the NFL on the Saints.
 
2012-06-19 06:08:40 PM

Nabb1: justtray: They cheated, they got caught. That's all I really care about.

You've made it more than apparent that you care more about that than apprising yourself of the actual facts. Did they do something stupid? Yes. Should they have stopped it when they were told? Absolutely. Did they have a "pay for performance" system? Yes, but it included all sorts of plays. It wasn't "cheating" in the sense of altering the outcome of play on the field, and the league has taken the position that this was an "off the field" infraction (i.e., it wasn't the hits - it was the money).


FYI, it is illegal to pay for performance and that is essentially what they were punished for, they just had the bad timing to do it near the time when injury lawsuits are happening so the punishment was more harsh. I still believe its to hang the NFLPA out to dry so the NFL lawyers can scream "we wanted to be safer but they fought us at every turn." Its a brilliant strategy if you stop to think about it for a minute, unless youre a saints fan. The other big mistake the owner made was not telling them if they don't stop heads will roll.

The players gave the commissioner this absolute power.
 
2012-06-19 06:15:45 PM

steamingpile: Nabb1: justtray: They cheated, they got caught. That's all I really care about.

You've made it more than apparent that you care more about that than apprising yourself of the actual facts. Did they do something stupid? Yes. Should they have stopped it when they were told? Absolutely. Did they have a "pay for performance" system? Yes, but it included all sorts of plays. It wasn't "cheating" in the sense of altering the outcome of play on the field, and the league has taken the position that this was an "off the field" infraction (i.e., it wasn't the hits - it was the money).

FYI, it is illegal to pay for performance and that is essentially what they were punished for, they just had the bad timing to do it near the time when injury lawsuits are happening so the punishment was more harsh. I still believe its to hang the NFLPA out to dry so the NFL lawyers can scream "we wanted to be safer but they fought us at every turn." Its a brilliant strategy if you stop to think about it for a minute, unless youre a saints fan. The other big mistake the owner made was not telling them if they don't stop heads will roll.

The players gave the commissioner this absolute power.


I basically covered that in a later post. But, yes, the Commissioner was out to sacrifice someone, and Payton and Loomis gave him the opportunity to make that someone the Saints.
 
2012-06-19 06:19:02 PM

steamingpile: The players gave the commissioner this absolute power.


If I've said it once I've said it a dozen times - the league should collectively bargain all issues related to player safety (fines, qb protection rules, etc.) back to the players. let the players police their own and decide the rules for if and when a player has to come out of the game or be cleared to play again. And they should decide their won fines. That they have not already done this is monumentally stupid. It's no different than having a damn safety committee made up of workers. It works in the real world and it would work in the NFL too.
 
2012-06-19 06:30:22 PM

Nabb1: I basically covered that in a later post. But, yes, the Commissioner was out to sacrifice someone, and Payton and Loomis gave him the opportunity to make that someone the Saints.


Yeah I saw that after I posted, I do find it interesting that the coaches arent really screaming too much, that speaks volumes to me. I think this may go on with a lot of teams but they are more discrete about it and certainly they dont tell the coaches or let them join in, that is also why they are getting hammered bad. The coaches being involved make it appear the NFL's management condones this behavior, so they have to squash that now.

JohnBigBootay: That they have not already done this is monumentally stupid. It's no different than having a damn safety committee made up of workers. It works in the real world and it would work in the NFL too.


I agree to a point, I personally think they need to have an independent 3rd party police this to get rid of any punishment just for speaking out. Im not naive enough to ignore personal feelings come into play when doling out punishments.
 
2012-06-19 06:40:03 PM

steamingpile: I do find it interesting that the coaches arent really screaming too much, that speaks volumes to me.


Because they have to get reinstated by the same guy who suspended them and rejected their appeals. Payton's more than happy to show how sorry he is playing drums at the House of Blues and getting tanked at Jazzfest.
 
2012-06-19 06:43:48 PM

steamingpile: I agree to a point, I personally think they need to have an independent 3rd party police this to get rid of any punishment just for speaking out. Im not naive enough to ignore personal feelings come into play when doling out punishments.


Fine. Make the safety committee be made up of recently retired players. But they are the ones who are being injured and they are the ones doing he injuring. It's their necks on the line and they should not only have a say, it should be completely in their control, not unilaterally ruled over by one man who is - obviously - an employee of the owners and the owners alone. The owners need to defuse the us vs them mentality that's been festering for years. They need to make the players their partners, not their enemies, and this is a perfect way to start bridging that divide.
 
2012-06-19 07:05:36 PM

JohnBigBootay: Fine. Make the safety committee be made up of recently retired players. But they are the ones who are being injured and they are the ones doing he injuring. It's their necks on the line and they should not only have a say, it should be completely in their control, not unilaterally ruled over by one man who is - obviously - an employee of the owners and the owners alone. The owners need to defuse the us vs them mentality that's been festering for years. They need to make the players their partners, not their enemies, and this is a perfect way to start bridging that divide.


Got no problem with this at all, makes sense to have injured or players suffering effects from injuries be the ones to hand out punishment.
 
2012-06-19 07:06:15 PM

Ken VeryBigLiar: PowerSlacker: / how the fark does Norv still have a job?

I'm convinced he has pictures of Spanos at a donkey show in TJ.


The players like him and the serious depth issues the past two years isn't his department. He's not perfect, but he shouldn't take all the blame.
 
2012-06-19 07:07:39 PM

robsul82: In other news, Hargrove has denied the voice on the video saying "gimme my money, Bobby" was his. Furthermore, with a bare modicum of thought, a defense would be "I was excited by Favre leaving the game, I thought our odds of winning were really good as a result, and I was referring to the bonus we'd get for making the Super Bowl."


That's the curse of being a Saint (or ex-Saint) now, I suppose. You can now never again refer to "money" without people assuming you're talking about "bounty money." Which is why Hargrove went with the "it wasn't me" defense over the "Bobby McCray and I had a $10 bet on who'd get more tackles" defense.

I'm still confused, though, on why Bobby McCray would be giving Hargrove any money? Wouldn't Hargrove had said, "gimme my money Vilma" instead?
 
2012-06-19 07:11:12 PM

Slow To Return: I'm still confused, though, on why Bobby McCray would be giving Hargrove any money? Wouldn't Hargrove had said, "gimme my money Vilma" instead?


That was my thought too. Vilma or Gregg, the guy who ran all of it.
 
2012-06-19 07:47:56 PM

steamingpile: JohnBigBootay: Fine. Make the safety committee be made up of recently retired players. But they are the ones who are being injured and they are the ones doing he injuring. It's their necks on the line and they should not only have a say, it should be completely in their control, not unilaterally ruled over by one man who is - obviously - an employee of the owners and the owners alone. The owners need to defuse the us vs them mentality that's been festering for years. They need to make the players their partners, not their enemies, and this is a perfect way to start bridging that divide.

Got no problem with this at all, makes sense to have injured or players suffering effects from injuries be the ones to hand out punishment.


Brendan Shanahan is a prime example of this being a great idea.
 
2012-06-19 07:54:34 PM

Slow To Return: I'm still confused, though, on why Bobby McCray would be giving Hargrove any money? Wouldn't Hargrove had said, "gimme my money Vilma" instead?


Well even if he meant the bonus for winning the game, it still wouldnt make sense for him to ask mccray.

The reason he asked mccray is because every report the NFL has cited as evidence credits him with the hit that put farvre out of the game.
 
2012-06-19 07:59:22 PM

steamingpile: The reason he asked mccray is because every report the NFL has cited as evidence credits him with the hit that put farvre out of the game.


So, McCray should have been saying, "Give me my money, Hargrove"? Is that what you're saying?
 
2012-06-19 08:01:05 PM

steamingpile: The reason he asked mccray is because every report the NFL has cited as evidence credits him with the hit that put farvre out of the game.


...Favre never left the game.
 
2012-06-19 08:03:19 PM

Slow To Return: So, McCray should have been saying, "Give me my money, Hargrove"? Is that what you're saying?


Not that that makes sense either.

/I know you know, I'm just putting it out there
 
2012-06-19 08:04:54 PM

Slow To Return: steamingpile: The reason he asked mccray is because every report the NFL has cited as evidence credits him with the hit that put farvre out of the game.

So, McCray should have been saying, "Give me my money, Hargrove"? Is that what you're saying?


Did you not read the links in this thread? From what was reported it was recorded not hearsay and he said "Give me some of that money"

Most of the evidence is pretty solid, I can understand saints fans not wanting to believe it or feeling picked up but its tough luck for this coming to a head when lawsuits are hitting, also the fact the NFL warned them first and they didnt quit.
 
2012-06-19 08:07:33 PM

steamingpile: Did you not read the links in this thread? From what was reported it was recorded not hearsay and he said "Give me some of that money"


Better question - did you watch the video? "Give me some of that money" suggests you didn't, for one.

steamingpile: Most of the evidence is pretty solid


Disagree obviously, but hey.
 
2012-06-19 08:27:51 PM

robsul82: "TAKE OUT HASSELBECK! I WANT HIM OUT OF THIS GAME! $10K BONUS TO WHOEVER GETS THIS GUY IN!"

[blog.seattlepi.com image 472x303]

Even Roger would understand that.


Don't mock clipboard Jesus. If it wasn't for him, the Saints would have travelled to StL to face an 8-8 Rams only to be clowned by Steven Jackson. The history would be much less amusing.
 
2012-06-19 08:29:06 PM

steamingpile: he said "Give me some of that money"


Ok, thanks.

Thanks for clearing it up for me.

Thanks.

/???????
 
2012-06-19 08:33:07 PM

Tickle Mittens: Don't mock clipboard Jesus. If it wasn't for him, the Saints would have travelled to StL to face an 8-8 Rams only to be clowned by Steven Jackson. The history would be much less amusing.


Why, do you think Jackson wouldn't have grabbed his dick?

Slow To Return: /???????


Yeah, it's very clear what he meant by saying that. Which it wasn't. If he did say "gimme my money," which is in question. Mmhmm.
 
2012-06-19 08:35:02 PM

Slow To Return: steamingpile: he said "Give me some of that money"

Ok, thanks.

Thanks for clearing it up for me.

Thanks.

/???????


Well a few plays earlier Hargrave was flagged for a hit on farvre, then just a little bit later was when he got knocked out, basically hes saying he deserved some of it but regardless the bounty was in place and vilma is making himself out to be an idiot.
 
2012-06-19 08:37:50 PM

steamingpile: Well a few plays earlier Hargrave was flagged for a hit on farvre, then just a little bit later was when he got knocked out, basically hes saying he deserved some of it but regardless the bounty was in place and vilma is making himself out to be an idiot.


"Basically, he saying he deserved" bounty money for a hit he in no way was responsible for because of an earlier hit? Thanks for the dispatch from Atlanta.

/stretccccccccccccccccch a little bit more, man, lol
//and again, Favre didn't get knocked out
 
2012-06-19 08:42:52 PM

steamingpile: then just a little bit later was when he got knocked out, basically hes saying he deserved some of it


Oh, ok, so you're reading into it. Gotcha.

steamingpile: but regardless the bounty was in place and vilma is making himself out to be an idiot.


Back on topic!!
 
Displayed 50 of 179 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report