• SPORTS
    AND
    GAMING
  • Welcome Guest!
    Posting RulesBluelight Rules
  • Sports & Gaming Moderators: ghostfreak

official 2011 NFL thread vers. EAST COAST BIAS

winner of the 2l11 SB is??

  • NY Giants

    Votes: 4 36.4%

  • NE Pats

    Votes: 7 63.6%
  • Total voters
    11
  • Poll closed .
Status
Not open for further replies.
MikeOekiM said:
wow even before the news today i thought saints were going downhill with a great chance of them losing both carl nicks and marques colston. Now this:

ESPN's Adam Schefter reports that the Saints are in danger of NFL discipline after maintaining a "bounty program" to take opposing offensive players out of games under former defensive coordinator Gregg Williams.
Per Schefter, the NFL's investigation began in 2010, when Williams' defense began targeting Brett Favre and Kurt Warner. Between 22 and 27 Saints defenders were allegedly involved, as well as at least one defensive assistant. The league has reportedly reviewed 18,000 documents totaling more than 50,000 pages. New Orleans' discipline may lead to fines, suspensions, and draft-pick forfeiture. Williams is now defensive coordinator for the Rams.

The Saints' 2009-2011 "bounty" program under ex-defensive coordinator Gregg Williams is being characterized by the NFL as a "pay for performance" plan that awarded defenders $1,500 for "knockouts" and $1,000 for offensive players the opposing team was forced to cart off the field.
The Saints would often target a particular player, which reminds of Williams' comments to inflict "remember-me shots" on Brett Favre and Peyton Manning in 2009 and 2010. Players "regularly" put money into a cash pool and received payments when they successfully injured opponents. New Orleans is already without a 2012 first-round pick, so the NFL could begin taking away additional draft choices this year and a first-rounder in 2013. Expect discipline to be harsh. It will be discussed further at the league's meetings in March.

According to ESPN's Adam Schefter, the NFL has determined that MLB Jonathan Vilma was one of the primary culprits in the Saints' "pay for performance" bounty program that will result in NFL discipline.
"In the week of the NFC Championship Game," Schefter said on NFL Live Friday, "Saints linebacker Jonathan Vilma put $10,000 in cash on a table and said 'this goes to the guy that knocks out Brett Favre.'" Those weren't Vilma's exact words, but they were similar, according to Schefter, and he's sure to be atop the league's target list for impending discipline. It's worth nothing that Vilma is due $5.4 million in 2012 and has been discussed as a possible salary cap casualty. We wouldn't expect him back with the Saints.
Click to expand...

Jesus christ, 18,000 documents? That's yer problem right there. If you're going to do this type of shit, try not to leave a couple filing cabinets worth of paper trail. What the hell could require so much documentation, was Williams keeping score or acting like a bookie or something?

This really doesn't seem all that scandalous to me, it's just this story came at the wrong time and under the wrong commissioner IMO.
 
alasdairm said:
axl, i totally understand the whole macho football play-hard thing but you honestly think it's acceptable for a team to financially reward players for intentionally injuring opposing players?

alasdair
Click to expand...

Would it be better if they worded it differently and rewarded players for "big hits" instead of "intentionally injuring other players"? Because the two really are the same. As long as the hits are legal (not late, going for the knees or helmet to helmet against vulnerable players) then what is the difference?

Maybe its not PC for a team to straight up tell their players to injure the opposition, but if I was a D coordinator I would want to find a way to motivate my defense to put as much hurt on the other team as possible within the rules.
 
Care said:
Would it be better if they worded it differently and rewarded players for "big hits" instead of "intentionally injuring other players"? Because the two really are the same. As long as the hits are legal (not late, going for the knees or helmet to helmet against vulnerable players) then what is the difference?

Maybe its not PC for a team to straight up tell their players to injure the opposition, but if I was a D coordinator I would want to find a way to motivate my defense to put as much hurt on the other team as possible within the rules.
Click to expand...

the hits they are getting money for arent legal though. Gregg Williams would give out $5000 i think it was for knocking someone unconscious. To knock someone unconscious you have to do a helmet to helmet. which is illegal. Then he would offer $8000 for making someone leave on a cart. Plus you didnt see the video i put up where the player went straight at steve smiths ankles when the ball was no where near him?

I dont think you understand that the reason this is so bad is because Gregg Williams was paying the players to do illegal hits to injure players.
 
^ Show me a team that doesnt have any questionable hits over the last few years.

And sometimes helmet to helmet hits are legal. If a RB puts his head down to try to run over a defender the defender is allowed to meet him in kind. Its just a select few instances where you are not allowed to go helmet to helmet against what is considered a "defenseless" player. I am all for protecting players in that way, but there are plenty of legal hits that have the potential to cause devastating injury in football which I am totally ok with. If im playing defense, especially in a big game or on the playoffs, I want to knock that guy the fuck out because it gives a competitive advantage and is within the rules. That goes for every team, not just the saints (moreso for some other teams IMO).
 
Last edited:
Care said:
^ Show me a team that doesnt have any questionable hits over the last few years.

And sometimes helmet to helmet hits are legal. If a RB puts his head down to try to run over a defender the defender is allowed to meet him in kind. Its just a select few instances where you are not allowed to go helmet to helmet against what is considered a "defenseless" player. I am all for protecting players in that way, but there are plenty of legal hits that have the potential to cause devastating injury in football which I am totally ok with. If im playing defense, especially in a big game or on the playoffs, I want to knock that guy the fuck out because it gives a competitive advantage and is within the rules.
Click to expand...

and about that last part i guess we have two different opinions because knocking their best player out of the game doesnt mean you are the better team. I'd want to play to win the game not play to knock their best player out so i can win easier.
 
^ I think making the other teams offense fear your defense is a huge part of the game of football. And a win gained by your defense being as ruthless as possible within the rules is a legit way to win in my book.
 
alasdairm said:
axl, i totally understand the whole macho football play-hard thing but you honestly think it's acceptable for a team to financially reward players for intentionally injuring opposing players?

alasdair
Click to expand...

despite how I came off, I actually agree with you here. I respect football as a sport. I mean, I hate the Ravens, and when they permanentally injured Rashard by breaking his arm, due to a bounty, I was devastated. I think bounties have no place in the game on ANY level. a team can play tough defense, the best defense in the league, without resorting to such jackassery. I hate to bring this team up, because everyone knows I'm a big fan, but the Steelers play constant tough D and have we ever heard of them committing to such a bounty?
 
Surprise surprise, the blazed one badmouthing the fine upstanding sportsmen of B-town. :D

I doubt its the same as the Gregg Williams' bounty program. There's no proof that the Ravens were paid extra cash to go out and intentionally hurt Ward and the Osama loving Mendanhall. Why pay extra when you have a defense that will do it for nothing? Or in other words, do their job. Suggs made an error by talking about a bounty, but i dont believe he meant it the same way. I believe he meant that those guys need to be watched like hawks. It was unfortunate what happened. The hatred and passion is there in equal measure but i'd like to think the respect is also.

Gregg Williams, the self proclaimed Dr. Heat, doesnt look too clever now. What an idiot. He should be punished, its not acceptable, but Goodell is going to have his way with this revelation. In about 5 years time, players will be wrapped in cotton wool, littered with suspensions or every game will be like watching the Pro Bowl. Not good.

March is a slow month for the NFL, Combines over, Draft is next month so the sewer rats in the media and everywhere else have to stir up some trouble to keep themselves amused. This will run and run.
 
i think it's disgusting.

congrats on being dirty playing cheaters, Aints.

hopefully this will be your demise, so you can go back to wearing bags on your heads.

love,

the atlanta falcons
 
Care said:
Maybe its not PC for a team to straight up tell their players to injure the opposition...
Click to expand...
this has nothing to do with political correctness. what is sporting about deliberately trying to injure an opposing player?

this seems to be one of these issues where if it's your team doing it, it's macho and play-hard and how real men play football but if somebody does it to one of your players it's unacceptable?

:\

alasdair
 
it's not macho at all to try and deliberately hurt another player.
it's like the douchebag that kicks you in the balls and bites when you're fighting. essentially the opposite of macho.

it's macho to play hard, hit hard and try to win games within the rules that everyone else is playing under.
 
ChickenScratch said:
it's not macho at all to try and deliberately hurt another player.
it's like the douchebag that kicks you in the balls and bites when you're fighting. essentially the opposite of macho.

it's macho to play hard, hit hard and try to win games within the rules that everyone else is playing under.
Click to expand...

for once, I completely agree with ChickenScratch

hit hard, play mean - but stop when that whistle blows
 
i really don't give a fuck about any of this news, whatever,honestly, any bad news is good news to me

ultimately,i just want to be entertained to the max, so i say let the players wear brass knuckles and shit

i hope greg williams remains the rams defensive coordinator, and continues to secretly implement this bounty commission

fisher has always had a dirty defense in tennesee, now add in the biggest 'thug' of a DC and we'll have our self a killer D

realistically though, i do not see williams coaching next year
 
My point is that "purposely injuring players" and "making big hits" are really the same thing in my mind if both hits are legal by the rules. Offering bounties and making the biggest hit possible the same thing as far as what happens on the field is concerned. Coaches shouldn't run around preaching it that way, but at the end of the day I dont see a difference. I guess im just worried that the league will try to legislate "intent to injure" as a rule in response to this, which would be total bullshit. Wouldnt be the first time the made the rules less entertaining and more player safety oriented. In the end I just want to see some hard hitting football.

Im big into fantasy football, so believe me I hate when any offensive players get injured. My team might as well have died in a plane crash last season (in my local league).
 
Peyton manning is officially no longer a Colt. It will be weird to see the great one in a different uniform.

On one hand I would love to see the niners pick him up, but on the other hand Alsex Smith isnt that bad, and we have other needs. It really depends on what type of contract smith gets. If we end up offering him a huge deal and pass on trying to get manning I would be slightly irritated but in the end I trust the decisions the team is making considering the amazing turnaround they had last year. I would much rather keep our defense at an elite level then have a manning with iffy health at QB.

In the end I think he will go to a team with a strong O-line. Redskins and Dolphins seem like they would be decent fits.
 
I know the 49ers don't NEED Peyton as much as other teams do, but I would have to say San Fran would be a Super Bowl lock with that defense + Peyton Manning

I would like to see Peyton go to the Dolphins for purely entertainment reasons. seeing him go up against Tom Brady + the Pats twice a season would be a real treat
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top