Williams and Bounty System in Washington

[Boone]

You know what? The NFL better be careful. If you want the strictest possible laws applied to the game outside of league rules, the essence of NFL football, violence perpetrated on another human being, may well be 'illegal'. Two guys seen wailing on each other in the street can't offer the defense 'don't worry officer, this is a consensual fight'. The law has generally turned a blind eye to violence when it comes to sports except in the most extreme cases (think Tyson lunching on Evander Holyfield's ear). That doesn't mean it will always be that way. If the NFL doesn't manage this internally, they may find all kinds of changes to the game imposed by the courts, changes in the name of 'safety', that have the potential to ruin the game. You unleash political correctness and the judicial system on the game, it won't look anything like it does today.

 

[Goaldeje]

What are you saying the NFL should do about this, Boone?

 

[Ax]

If I may, they should use it as the moment to outlaw it's practice, with any future violations being severely punished, and move the **** on.

If they want to start reaching backward in time, then they can't use an arbitrary time limit. It has to punish everyone whoever participated in trying to intentionally hurt another player. Huff, Butkis, etc... should be removed from the HOF. All Super Bowl and World Championship titles will have to be voided. The history of the NFL would have to be erased. And a new league, wear players receive an amnesty clause from prosecution before playing, would have to be created.

This is a ****ing joke.

 

[Boone]

What are you saying the NFL should do about this, Boone?

I'm right there with Ax the more I think about all this.

I'm torn on what the NFL 'should do' because I think the whole idea that we should be 'shocked' by sanctioned violence is hypocritical and ridiculous. Not to mention, the idea that it's okay to take people out with violent hits as long as we're not offering a stipend to do it, is equally ridiculous, since it's damn near the basis of the game. I also find it curious that we believe offering million dollar athletes a couple thousand dollars for big hits really has that big an impact. To me, it's not much different than helmet decals in college.

That's not to say I don't get the difference between encouraging hard, tough plays and telling someone to 'hurt' or 'injure' another player (and I'm not convinced that's really what all this has been about).

I think a *reasonable* response to this would be to fine any coaches/front office staff who are currently in the league and who have engaged in breaking league rules, perhaps hand down some suspensions, and communicate a zero tolerance policy with killer penalties (lifetime ban?) from this point forward.

I totally agree with Ax that doing some kind of retroactive witchhunt is going to be a farce of epic proportion. I'll also say, I have no stomach for it as an NFL fan as, again, I think this treads very close to hypocrisy. And although I know we mock folks who say it, but if this becomes some big huge circus and media frenzy, or if my team get's draft picks taken away, I'm going to find better ways to spend my Sundays.

I have to think this is the biggest 'cover your ass' move the NFL has ever made. They must be terrified of class action suits by injured players over something like this, and that's likely the only reason they are making this such a public issue, replete with plenty of manufactured 'moral outrage'.

 

[Neophyte]

I rather agree with Boone and Ax at this point.

The one exception to this is if it can be proved that the Saints kept it up after being told to stop by the league. If that is true then Loomis, Payton and Williams have to be more than just wrist slapped. That is a complete and utter disregard for authority. You can't tell me they would let people under them get away with treating them that way so they league can't handle them with kid gloves. Whatever happens, has to hurt.

 

[Goaldeje]

Here's the major problem with all of this. In my opinion, there is an implicit trust both sides enter into when they agree to play football, especially professionally, but I think it also extends to other levels as well. That agreement is that whatever happens regarding injury happens during the regular play. If injury happens because you are going for the ball, and inadvertently roll over my ankle, so be it. But the moment one side is playing for injury instead of the ball or game or whatever, I think you have a problem. The problem is multi faceted, IMO.

Imagine you are a player targeted by one of these bounties, and bounty is successful and your playing career is cut short, resultingly. Is that grounds for suit? For taking your livlihood away? Who do you sue? The coach? Players? Owners? League? The NFL is gonna have to come down harshly on this either way. I think it will take our collective breaths away, regardless of whether or not the Saints disobeyed a direct order. If they did, it will be even worse, but I think it will be bad regardless. And it should, to some degree.

Offering incentives for hard hits is one thing. Anyone that has a problem with that needs to find another sport to root for. Incentives for causing injury is quite another thing all together.

 

[Boone]

Offering incentives for hard hits is one thing. Anyone that has a problem with that needs to find another sport to root for. Incentives for causing injury is quite another thing all together.

I think this is where things get awfully grey though. Does incentivizing team members to 'knock someone out of the game' equal 'injure someone'? I don't know. But I think one could argue that defenders are trying to knock the starting QB out of the game in every game, every time. We may not want to admit it, but fans know it, the NFL knows it, and the media knows it.

I think there is a line that is there between 'attack the opponent as physically as possible within the boundaries of the rules' and 'hurt someone'. I'm not assuming I know what was said, communicated, implied, etc..with these bounty systems. And I can't assume intent either.

I think that's what makes this so hard to manage in terms of fairly addressing it. But I think the NFL itself and the media has to own some of the responsibility for the culture that has existed and still exists. Let's face it, it's exactly the kind of hits these bounty systems promoted that ended up on the opening clips of Sportscenter and every other media outlet (including NFL highlights everywhere). So there's more than a little hypocrisy in all the 'outrage' here.

 

[Goaldeje]

My understanding is that there was an 11k page document or something that was the result of their investigation. With that much research they may very well have documented injury vs. knocking someone out of the game.

And I understand your point about hypocrisy, and agree to an extent. I would be livid if they exact penalties retroactively, but I do think the Saints need to be punished. It may be a fine line, but playing with intent to injure is borderline criminal. Injuring as a coaches sanctioned activity is indefensible, no matter how great a guy Gregg is.

 

[Burgundy Burner]

Article came out a while ago (referenced at PFT) that said Blache discontinued the program when he became DC. The evidence seems to back it up. This news should help the Redskins and keep the focus solely on Williams (and the Saints).

 

[Boone]

My understanding is that there was an 11k page document or something that was the result of their investigation. With that much research they may very well have documented injury vs. knocking someone out of the game.

And I understand your point about hypocrisy, and agree to an extent. I would be livid if they exact penalties retroactively, but I do think the Saints need to be punished. It may be a fine line, but playing with intent to injure is borderline criminal. Injuring as a coaches sanctioned activity is indefensible, no matter how great a guy Gregg is.

100% agree. But hey, sportsmanship has been under assault (from pee-wee leagues to the pros) for decades.

That was the most interesting thing about Matt Bowen's article - that he simultaneously acknowledged what Williams did and that he loved the guy and would have followed him anywhere. People make mistakes. This one may cost Williams his career.

 

[fansince62]

My understanding is that there was an 11k page document or something that was the result of their investigation. With that much research they may very well have documented injury vs. knocking someone out of the game.

And I understand your point about hypocrisy, and agree to an extent. I would be livid if they exact penalties retroactively, but I do think the Saints need to be punished. It may be a fine line, but playing with intent to injure is borderline criminal. Injuring as a coaches sanctioned activity is indefensible, no matter how great a guy Gregg is.

Goal...let's see how it plays out. Darren Sharper was interviewed yesterday and stated he was aware of and participated in a pool for INTs, sacks, etc., but was not aware of a bounty system for injuring opponents.

 

[servumtuum]

This is a memo from Roger Goddell to team owners posted by Adam Schefter-I'm putting it here for reference.

In the following memo from NFL commissioner Roger Goodell to the league's owners, obtained by ESPN NFL Insider Adam Schefter, Goodell advises the owners that league investigators found the Saints ran a 'bounty' program, in violation of league rules.

As you know, league rules have long prohibited payment of non-contract bonuses -- often referred to as "bounties." These payments are prohibited whether offered generally, or in the context of a particular game or a player's performance against a particular team. Such payments are contrary to rules relating to player contracts and the Collective Bargaining Agreement, and present a serious threat to the integrity of the game.

A particularly damaging form of bounty payment involves targeting an opposing player and offering payments for acts directed against that player.

Our office will shortly issue a press release based on the attached confidential report setting forth the key findings of a lengthy investigation into allegations that players on the New Orleans Saints violated the bounty rule during the 2009-11 seasons, and did so with the knowledge and assistance of certain members of the coaching staff.

These allegations first arose during the playoffs following the 2009 season. Despite a prompt response, NFL Security could not substantiate the allegations, in part because players declined to provide any information. During the latter part of the 2011 season, we received additional information that led us to reopen the investigation.

Over the past three months, our staff has reviewed some 18,000 documents and conducted multiple interviews. The findings in the accompanying documents are corroborated by multiple independent sources.

The investigation established that Saints defensive players regularly contributed cash into a pool, from which players received cash payments for certain achievements, including interceptions, fumble recoveries, etc. But players also received cash payments for "knock-outs" and "cart-offs" -- plays on which an opposing player was forced to leave the game. These cash awards were in the $1,000 to $1,500 range. Funds were also occasionally contributed by at least one assistant coach.

This conduct obviously has no place in our game and I intend to take all steps necessary to make sure that it stops immediately. Each owner should promptly review this matter with his coaching staff to make sure that this or any related impermissible activity is not taking place at his club.

Throughout this process, we have received the full cooperation of Saints owner Tom Benson. There is no information suggesting that club ownership knew of or approved these actions.

I will hold further proceedings before imposing discipline and will, of course, advise all clubs of any disciplinary action. We will discuss this matter at the upcoming Annual Meeting.

Any club with questions may contact Jeff Pash or me.

I think Goodell is likely in full on damage-control mode-he will apply whatever sanctions and punishments he deems appropriate and sufficient to maintain the NFL's public image. As far as what the sports media are saying, hinting about and speculating about, I'm putting that at the same level of credibility as I do their draft and FA prognostications. How far this may progress will, IMO, depend on how well Goodell thinks the image of the NFL has been salvaged in the public eye.

 

[Burgundy Burner]

The Bounty Hunter is on his way to NYC to meet with the league tomorrow morning - Maybe Goodell too.

PFT via the WaPo is saying that the suspensions, fines, and sanctions will be the strongest ever given by the league.

 

[fansince62]

This is a memo from Roger Goddell to team owners posted by Adam Schefter-I'm putting it here for reference.





I think Goodell is likely in full on damage-control mode-he will apply whatever sanctions and punishments he deems appropriate and sufficient to maintain the NFL's public image. As far as what the sports media are saying, hinting about and speculating about, I'm putting that at the same level of credibility as I do their draft and FA prognostications. How far this may progress will, IMO, depend on how well Goodell thinks the image of the NFL has been salvaged in the public eye.

eh...Goodell is a putz. You remember when ole number 51 was interviewed and talked about seeing someone's head rolling on the field? the paras above trade on legalisms. is Goodell going to retroactively demean those players for things they said and did...or is this exactly what you imply it is - all about the benjamins?

 

[the Omniscient]

Why is Goodell a putz? I do not get the hate this guy receives.

 

[fansince62]

Why is Goodell a putz? I do not get the hate this guy receives.

I don't hate him. I see him for what he is. I happen to think under his leadership the game will become increasingly mediocre....increasingly detached from its roots. to me he represents the worst in society - a smothering need to control others behaviors. How would Goodell have handled the Body Bag game of yore? he is gonna end up wussifying a great game. the only thing that concerns me about the bounty system is the tax evasion possibilities. in the main...it's a self-correcting problem: "take out our guy? payback will be a *itch!!!" Up until this moment...were any of us even talking about the Saints as a "dirty" team? no. we weren't.

 

[McD5]

he is gonna end up wussifying a great game. the only thing that concerns me about the bounty system is the tax evasion possibilities. in the main...it's a self-correcting problem: "take out our guy? payback will be a *itch!!!" Up until this moment...were any of us even talking about the Saints as a "dirty" team? no. we weren't.

I don't believe this is a Goodell issue, but rather, it's a money issue and an evolution issue. The money part is simple--athletes are bigger and faster these days, and you can't be the CEO of a product if all your stars go down. If you were a team owner, you would support him. That's not even to mention player lawsuits and injuries that can last a lifetime. It's a no-brainer. It has to be done.

The evolutionary issue is simply that we are becoming smarter. Advancements in science now tell us that the human brain is no longer the same after three concussions. We didn't know that in the past. And being smarter, these changes are now necessary.

This has been happening for twenty years now in many different sports, and will continue to happen in the future. It's why hockey players now have to wear helmets. It's why you can't knee a downed fighter to the head in the UFC. It has nothing to do with Gooddell.

 

[the Omniscient]

You do realize Goodell works for the owners right? It is not a dictatorship. As far as wussifying the game, well that is really on the competition comitees head, not Goodell. For the most part, Goodell is a talking head and is a single face for the 32 owners.

Of course, there is more to his job than this, but to the casual fan he is the reason the NFL is the No Fun League and he is the reason that the NFL is cracking down on rough play. But fact is, it is not all up to him.

I think it is extremely hard for anyone outside of the NFL to say whether or not Goodell is doing a good job. His bosses gave him a raise recently, that is the only evidence the fans have as to whether or not he is doing a good job.

If you want to blame anybody for making the game less violent, blame these guys:

Co-Chair: Rich McKay (Atlanta Falcons)
Co-Chair: Jeff Fisher (St. Louis Rams)
- Mark Murphy (Green Bay Packer)
- Ken Whisenhunt (Arizona Cardinals)
- Stephen Jones (Dallas Cowboys)
- Marvin Lewis (Cincinnati Bengals)
- John Mara (New York Giants)
- Ozzie Newsome (Baltimore Ravens)
- Rick Smith (Houston Texans)

- Those are all good points McD5

 

[servumtuum]

I don't hate him. I see him for what he is. I happen to think under his leadership the game will become increasingly mediocre....increasingly detached from its roots. to me he represents the worst in society - a smothering need to control others behaviors. How would Goodell have handled the Body Bag game of yore? he is gonna end up wussifying a great game. the only thing that concerns me about the bounty system is the tax evasion possibilities. in the main...it's a self-correcting problem: "take out our guy? payback will be a *itch!!!" Up until this moment...were any of us even talking about the Saints as a "dirty" team? no. we weren't.

What I am suggesting is that Goodell is acting-in his view-in a manner that would be seen as proactive in terms of the NFL being viewed as a viable self-policing organization in order to maintain a public image that has helped the league be as popular-and profitable-as it is. In other words I see it as a tactical move that any self-respecting industry spokesman, PR person or CEO would make when faced with a potentially embarrassing scenario-show yourself and the business you represent as being responsible and trustworthy. Granted he has, IMO, been somewhat inept and prone to occasional overreaction but I think he is very image conscious and reluctant to fail the "not on my watch" test of leadership even if he is sloppy about doing so.

He wants the muddy footprints taken off the carpets when his S600 Benz is detailed and shown to prospective buyers even though they don't affect how well the thing runs and drives.

The "payback's a *itch" idea is, I'm afraid, fraught with way too many perceptual downsides to be considered usable even though it may be emotionally compelling. That's an image Goodell and the league really don't want right now-too much of a professional wrestling/NBA sleaze factor-Goodell's looking for "squeaky clean" I think.

Bottom line-yeah, the Benjamins are calling the shots here.

 

[Ax]

I rather agree with Boone and Ax at this point.

The one exception to this is if it can be proved that the Saints kept it up after being told to stop by the league. If that is true then Loomis, Payton and Williams have to be more than just wrist slapped. That is a complete and utter disregard for authority. You can't tell me they would let people under them get away with treating them that way so they league can't handle them with kid gloves. Whatever happens, has to hurt.

Good point Neo. If after being specifically told to cease and desist, they kept on doing it, then they open themselves up for whatever punishment they get. And as Boone has said, it would be for the "stupidity of it", more than the act itself.