Everything You Need to Know About BountyGate In One Paragraph

[pbmax]

From PFT, quoting Tagliabue's report:

Tagliabue used that specific occasion to give more passive-aggressive, big-picture advice to his successor: “It is essential to recognize that Vilma is being most severely disciplined for ‘talk’ or speech at a team meeting on the evening before the Saints-Vikings game. He is not being punished for his performance on the field and, indeed, none of the discipline of any player here relates to on-field conduct. No Saints’ player was suspended for on-field play by the League after the game in question. If the League wishes to suspend a player for pre-game talk including ‘offers’ to incentivize misconduct, it must start by imposing enhanced discipline for illegal hits that involve the kind of player misconduct that it desires to interdict. The relationship of the discipline for the off-field ‘talk’ and actual on-field conduct must be carefully calibrated and reasonably apportioned. This is a standard grounded in common sense and fairness. It rests also on the competence of NFL officiating and the obligation and ability of the League to closely observe playing field misconduct, record it and review for illegal hits or other related misconduct.”

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/category/rumor-mill/page/2/

[swede]

So much sense from Paul.
Thanks for the find PB.

[pbmax]

So much sense from Paul.
Thanks for the find PB.

Certainly welcome, swede. Tags really lays it on thick for Roger in some of the 22 pages. He quotes at length the method and procedure Rozelle used to implement steroid testing. The main thrust of which is that Rozelle announced the policy, implemented the policy and then had a discipline-free one year period so everyone understood what would be happening and any questions could be addressed.

You can also safely assume, probably, this helped the NFL avoid a few black eyes, but it also undoubtedly helped to gain club and player acceptance.

Bounties in general are a little dicier since there has been a policy and discipline plan in the past. But Roger obviously felt a different regime was required. I wonder if he felt at any time that he had on field proof of the program?

[swede]

Some have wondered or assumed outright that these events threaten the Goodell regime, but I recently saw it pointed out that Goodell serves at the pleasure of the owners and the owners are pleased by the MONEY, and my God how the money rolls in.

Paul seems to be saying to stop with the bizarre inquisitions over who knows what and when did they know it and if you lie to me I swear you won't play this game again for a year. Stop it. Make good rules for protecting players on the field of play and enforce those rules.

And how embarrassing for Goodell to have daddy come home and put you back in your place in front of the neighbors.

[mraynrand]

I wonder if he felt at any time that he had on field proof of the program?

This is where the rubber hits the road, and my biggest problem with all of this. If the program was so obvious, why weren't calls being made, by officials, on the field. Why weren't more roughing calls being made. In the specific case of the NFCC game with Favre, was it really that officials were afraid to affect the game's outcome by essentially protecting Favre. They probably could have dropped a couple flags but didn't. The lack of penalties, regardless of reason, took the legs out from under the bounty claim in my opinion, even if everything we believe Goodell believed, was true.

In retrospect, Goodell, having encoutered the bounty program, should have just stressed it going forward. Any hint of a bounty program would be deal with harshly; and with the new defenseless player rules and hands off the QB rules, there would be penalties to support any bounty charges.

Here's just one way this plays with the optics: The Stomp by Suh on EDS, the average tackle by James Harrison and Ray Lewis, looks far, far worse than the entire bounty program; without a bounty, even with ESPN trying to find every questionable late hit by the Saints and running them on a loop for the past year. It's really hard to see the harm in the bounty program in light of this.

[pbmax]

This is where the rubber hits the road, and my biggest problem with all of this. If the program was so obvious, why weren't calls being made, by officials, on the field. Why weren't more roughing calls being made. In the specific case of the NFCC game with Favre, was it really that officials were afraid to affect the game's outcome by essentially protecting Favre. They probably could have dropped a couple flags but didn't. The lack of penalties, regardless of reason, took the legs out from under the bounty claim in my opinion, even if everything we believe Goodell believed, was true.

In retrospect, Goodell, having encoutered the bounty program, should have just stressed it going forward. Any hint of a bounty program would be deal with harshly; and with the new defenseless player rules and hands off the QB rules, there would be penalties to support any bounty charges.

Here's just one way this plays with the optics: The Stomp by Suh on EDS, the average tackle by James Harrison and Ray Lewis, looks far, far worse than the entire bounty program; without a bounty, even with ESPN trying to find every questionable late hit by the Saints and running them on a loop for the past year. It's really hard to see the harm in the bounty program in light of this.

He is hamstrung by the silly nature of the bounty rules. Don't ever talk wildly about or offer incentives for typical league play. Tags just makes it abundantly clear that Goodell is mainly worked up about the language and imagery used. Almost by definition, the results on the field are par for the course. I think, for salary cap reasons, you have to have the rules against bounties, regardless of their effect of fending off lawsuits. But they should not, in and of themselves, rise to the level of year long suspensions.

Comparing Favre's fine for sexting his junk to Hargrove's suspension (both were found to have lied to investigators) was a fabulous read.

[LP]

Comparing Favre's fine for sexting his junk to Hargrove's suspension (both were found to have lied to investigators) was a fabulous read.

Yeah, but the photos proved Brent's was just a little lie.

[Fritz]

Yeah, but the photos proved Brent's was just a little lie.

A little white lie.

[Joemailman]

Super Bowl will be in New Orleans this season. I fully expect Goodell to show up wearing full body armor.

[Kiwon]

So coaches are held accountable but the players who agree with them and try to win the bounty pool aren't?

But, they just might could be if they try and are successful. However, if they try and fail then they are innocent.

What about players who maybe contribute to the bounty pool but don't try to win it. They have no responsibility either?

Interesting......we have Hate Speech laws where the intent of the words determine whether they are criminal or not.

Teens are arrested under "Columbine" laws for talking about wanting to do violent acts.

People are arrested under Terrorism laws for talking about wanting to do terroristic acts.

The Secret Service pays a visit to people who talk about wanting to harm government leaders.

But NFL players can get into trouble for talking about betting on NFL games even if they never actually do, right?

[Joemailman]

So coaches are held accountable but the players who agree with them and try to win the bounty pool aren't?

But, they just might could be if they try and are successful. However, if they try and fail then they are innocent.

What about players who maybe contribute to the bounty pool but don't try to win it. They have no responsibility either?

Interesting......we have Hate Speech laws where the intent of the words determine whether they are criminal or not.

Teens are arrested under "Columbine" laws for talking about wanting to do violent acts.

People are arrested under Terrorism laws for talking about wanting to do terroristic acts.

The Secret Service pays a visit to people who talk about wanting to harm government leaders.

But NFL players can get into trouble for talking about betting on NFL games even if they never actually do, right?

If the coaches were giving players orders to do certain things, then that is where the discipline should be the strongest. Players, especially lower echelon players like Hargrove, can put their careers in jeopardy by refusing a coaches order. In addition, a suspension against a player is a much more stiff penalty than a similar penalty against a coach because coaching careers can last much longer.

[Kiwon]

If the coaches were giving players orders to do certain things, then that is where the discipline should be the strongest.

Joe, as a past postal employee you are familiar with unstable behavior.

Next Tuesday at 4 pm, why don't you put on that blue jacket, stop by the closest liquor store and steal as many lottery tickets as you can.

Now, if you do that and get caught, who deserves greater punishment, me or you?

[pbmax]

Coaches need access to better due process safeguards.

I also think Tags is trying to get this off the Federal Judges docket, speaking in this case about the Vilma lawsuit. The last thing the League wants is for the Player Conduct policy to be overseen by the Courts like the CBA was since 1992.

[pbmax]

Joe, as a past postal employee you are familiar with unstable behavior.

Next Tuesday at 4 pm, why don't you put on that blue jacket, stop by the closest liquor store and steal as many lottery tickets as you can.

Now, if you do that and get caught, who deserves greater punishment, me or you?

Are you his supervisor? With the ability to hire and fire him?

[pbmax]

Apropos of nothing: