[nofkayalk]

I am wondering, If I Pay someone to injure or maim my neighbor, isn't that a crime? And if that beating results in a death, Im never going to see the light of day.

So, If on the football field, its exempt from the laws in this country?

I realize Bit hits and Injuries happen. But the Injury side tends to be bad luck. To receive payment and place a bounty on someone just seems it would have to outside the law. Could there be bigger things coming from this depending on what proof there is?

Another thing you have to think about is how this impacts youth football. Kids see the pros do this, and they will want to do it as well.

In high school, we had an opposing team kicking and stomping several of our star players. Turns out later that one of their coaches and a few parents had put bounties on our players. The pros is one thing. While I may not agree with it, there is an argument.

There is no argument for this in high school or college.

[nakeseireo]

I don't really care if the players put up their own money for a pool. Whatever. Big hits are part of the game. You don't think, bounty or not, players aren't trying to hurt star players? I'm not talking broken necks or torn ACL's or something, but little dings that will knock them out for a game or two, or at the least, hamper their effectiveness.

Where it gets to be an issue to me is when people other than players put up money.

Coaches, and especially owners, begin to put up money, and they can now entice free agents to come with the promise of more money. Encentives that aren't in the contract, thus not counting against the cap.

I especially don't like it that someone from outside the organization was involved. As was mentioned earlier in the thread, there's a good chance he was betting on these games. If this is allowed to continue, we're only a few steps away from gamblers controlling the games again...

My only issue with your post is that most things that will knock a player out of a game aren't going to be little dings.

[nofkayalk]

My only issue with your post is that most things that will knock a player out of a game aren't going to be little dings.

Very true.

And it's obviously impossible for a player to say, "If I hit him this way, he'll completely shred his knee. So let's hit him this way, where he will only pull a muscle."

But players obviously try to ding each other up. Several linebackers and safeties have been quoted as saying something along the lines of, "Player A comes across the middle, I'm gonna make him regret it!" Analysts talk about that all the time, as well.

I'm sure I'm being naive, though, when I assume that most players aren't trying to seriously hurt each other. Outside the bounty, anyway.

[nakeseireo]

Very true.

And it's obviously impossible for a player to say, "If I hit him this way, he'll completely shred his knee. So let's hit him this way, where he will only pull a muscle."

But players obviously try to ding each other up. Several linebackers and safeties have been quoted as saying something along the lines of, "Player A comes across the middle, I'm gonna make him regret it!" Analysts talk about that all the time, as well.

I'm sure I'm being naive, though, when I assume that most players aren't trying to seriously hurt each other. Outside the bounty, anyway.

It's definitely a fine line between handing out big hits and encouraging hurting another player. I have no problem with brutal hits. But there's something uneasy about hearing that coaches/players were encouraging injury and paying each other extra money for injury.

it also never ceases to amaze me that people would leave a paper trail about this shit.

[CuittisIL]

The conversation was about Mike Freeman and waiting for a real reporter. Mike Freeman doesn't work for NFL.com.

The conversation is about the veracity of the report of a known felon putting out bounties. I have no idea who Mike Freeman is.

[CuittisIL]

Lets not get facts in the way of a good argument. It's not Rog's strong point.

YOUR facts.

All you have is conjecture until you hear from the arbitrator.

[CuittisIL]

Lets not get facts in the way of a good argument. It's not Rog's strong point.

A good argument doesn't paint a false equivalency between two very different situations.

On one hand, you have a private situation leaked by someone within MLB- a violation of established policy, then the same leaked result was thrown out by established appeal policy. The subject of the test was dragged through the court of public opinion before his hearing. He felt the need to clear his name. No final statement exists from the man who decided the case.

On the other hand, you have a 3 year investigation conducted in actual secrecy which involved several players lying and then going back on their stories, A general manager disobeying his team owner, a coach who failed to stop it, a defensive coach who admitted to the practice in a statement, and an official finding by the NFL. They WERE FOUND GUILTY! The only thing remains is the extent of the penalty.

Which facts did I get wrong?

[PriernPayorse]

YOU'RE facts.

All you have is conjecture until you here from the arbitrator.

no, the known facts of the case
http://sports.yahoo.com/mlb/news;_yl...sterone_022712

something you aren't interested in.

[PriernPayorse]

A good argument doesn't paint a false equivalency between two very different situations.

well, if they get off on a legal loop hole, I hope you come down hard on the report breaking out and defend the saints bitterly. I'm pointing out your hypocracy, not the case.

[CuittisIL]

well, if they get off on a legal loop hole, I hope you come down hard on the report breaking out and defend the saints bitterly. I'm pointing out your hypocracy, not the case.

You disputing an argument with conjecture?

[PriernPayorse]

You disputing an argument with conjecture?

carry on. I just enjoy pointing out hypocrites.

[CuittisIL]

no, the known facts of the case
http://sports.yahoo.com/mlb/news;_yl...sterone_022712

something you aren't interested in.

What does that have to do with the Saints situation?

False equivalency is the issue, not some reporter's opinion.

These situations are completely different.

[CuittisIL]

carry on. I just enjoy pointing out hypocrites.

What the fuck are you talking about?

[CuittisIL]

Two murder cases:

One is a where the only evidence that places the suspect at the scene of the crime is DNA that was kept in a lab technician's garage for two days after he collected the sample.

The other is a case involves several co-conspirators and 27 plus witness who frequently changed their stories and one defendant who pleads guilty and apologizes.

Same thing?

How am I a hypocrite for pointing out that they aren't the same?

[CuittisIL]

well, if they get off on a legal loop hole, I hope you come down hard on the report breaking out and defend the saints bitterly. I'm pointing out your hypocracy, not the case.

You realize that Gregg Williams has already confessed and apologized? There is no trial here. Just the NFL finding them guilty and deciding on a penalty.

[CuittisIL]

Two murder cases:

One is a where the only evidence that places the suspect at the scene of the crime is DNA that was kept in a lab technician's garage for two days after he collected the sample.

The other is a case involves several co-conspirators and 27 plus witness who frequently changed their stories and one defendant who pleads guilty and apologizes.

Same thing?

How am I a hypocrite for pointing out that they aren't the same?

I forgot to add that the first case involved the DA leaking the information and tainting the jury pool

[nakeseireo]

I was listening to the radio and they were talking about some former safety named Matt Bowen who said he played for Gregg Williams and this definitely was taking place. But he also said it was taking place everywhere else he played before and after playing for Gregg Williams. I've never heard of the guy, but not sure what his motivation to lie about it would be.

[CuittisIL]

I was listening to the radio and they were talking about some former safety named Matt Bowen who said he played for Gregg Williams and this definitely was taking place. But he also said it was taking place everywhere else he played before and after playing for Gregg Williams. I've never heard of the guy, but not sure what his motivation to lie about it would be.

Ex-Packer

Played for willlliammmsss in DC

[nakeseireo]

Ex-Packer

Played for willlliammmsss in DC

If this is so widespread, I have to wonder why only the Saints are being singled out in a 3-year investigation.

[PriernPayorse]

What the fuck are you talking about?

that you're a hypocrite.