# Bounty



## pushpull7 (Apr 6, 2012)

What does everyone think about this bounty stuff?


----------



## HOKENSTYFE (Apr 7, 2012)

It's unfortunate that this came out this way, but how are you going to stop it? For the record, I'm for the bounty. If a teammates gives you a grand for sending an opposing player out the game, it's considered, almost a criminal matter. Though, if your paid millions a year, it's ok to send players out, every game. 

The intent, is to hit the opponent, so he doesn't want to carry the ball your way again. Period. That's why they have pads. A little money between teammates, give it a rest.

If a defensive back(example: Ed Reed - Baltimore Ravens), comes back from a hamstring injury against the New England Patriots. Brady will test that hamstring out...if Bill Belichick doesn't first. But it's not alright if someone is coming back from a concussion, to hit him high? Legally? Tackle him high, swing his upper body around, head slams into field. Some scenario. 

I hate advertising dollars, have ruined the visceral effects of a naturally, beautifully, violent game. I used to love playing defense. Linebacker, Cornerback & Defensive End. Don't get me wrong, I used to play Quarterback for my High School Varsity Football team.

Oh well.


----------



## technomancer (Apr 7, 2012)

We'll agree to disagree on this one. Sorry, paying someone to intentionally injure another player is NOT part of the game and is not acceptable in any way, shape, or form.


----------



## kung_fu (Apr 7, 2012)

Have you guys heard the audio?  He's talking about peoples lives/careers


----------



## kung_fu (Apr 7, 2012)

HOKENSTYFE said:


> The intent, is to hit the opponent, so he doesn't want to carry the ball your way again. Period. That's why they have pads. A little money between teammates, give it a rest.



To a certain extent, i'm with you (at least on the above point) Physical play is definitely a part of the game. Hits are meant to take guys out of plays and in a way taking them out of future plays by influencing their decisions ("I'll think twice before doing THAT again"). Actually removing guys from future plays by intentional injury, i feel, is not in the spirit of football or any other sport for that matter. Sporting events have always been about "Me vs You", "Team vs Team", "Player vs Player", etc. Match-ups. I think it should be about *outplaying* the opponent rather than stopping them.

In general, ofensive players are paid big bucks to score points and defensive players are being paid to stop points by physical play so they are _already_ being rewarded for their physical play. Performance bonuses are one thing, even for physical stuff (eg. more sacks = more money), but stuff like offering cash for headshots and acl damage are just sickening.


----------



## pushpull7 (Apr 7, 2012)

I have to agree with our supermoderator here. That is my take.

Now, as for a few other things, I do NOT believe this was a "rouge coach". I think that it's pretty clear the saints knew and didn't do enough but this isn't isolated.

Chances are, he did it in wash, buffalo, and jax too. His affectionate nickname?

Dr Heat.

So I'm not buying Vitt and his bullshit, the saints knew. I'd also wager a genuine wooden nickel that other teams have done similar things.


----------



## HOKENSTYFE (Apr 8, 2012)

...then how do you hold the past of this game in such high regard? The days of Deacon Jones, Dick Butkis, leather helmets. When men were men. No face guards. Those days were tough. Would you believe, more than RAM tough? I love the violence of the past days in sports. Whether for money or just the fact they were sick f*kkrs. Those were the days.

Personally speaking, I don't care if my teams opponents make the flight into that nights game. So if they become incapable of playing during the game...yayy team.

I like my meat red & my victims ded. Keep it shred.


----------



## pushpull7 (Apr 8, 2012)

I hear what you are saying, but I think there is a clear difference. Debatable forever. I like my meat red too.........but I have evolved to eat meat with a knife and fork  

I agree with the idea this is nothing new though. Arrogant smugness and an ability to think (or really in most cases actually BE ) above others is nothing new. But still, to know you are being investigated and then to continue in that way is excessively brash. 

As far as the game, I like a clean game best. I like the big hits, when they are hits.......not cheap shots. A guy getting free and drilling the QB, but when he gets up stomps on the guys face ( I hate sue) then that is unnecessary. I've always hated it, I will always hate it.


----------



## MFB (Apr 8, 2012)

The only bounty I know of in sports is this one


----------



## pushpull7 (Apr 8, 2012)

Goes kinda with what I'm saying. The "bounty" bowl, spygate, the raiders rule number one, all these guys care about is winning......they'll do it any way they can.


----------



## HOKENSTYFE (Apr 9, 2012)

Hey, "Win if you can, lose if you must but, cheat...cheat...cheat & never get caught". 

-Bobby Hennan circa 1985 ( World Wrestling Federation-Announcer, Manager, all around awesome)


----------



## pushpull7 (Apr 9, 2012)

Everything was upheld by his majesty.


----------



## pushpull7 (Apr 23, 2012)

uh oh, look at the can of worms that has been opened

Report: More trouble for Saints? - NFC South Blog - ESPN


----------



## pushpull7 (May 2, 2012)

just 4 players suspended hun? seems strange to me that vilma was so bad that he gets a year.


----------



## texshred777 (May 2, 2012)

I find it appalling. I like big hits. I am against rules like penalizing a defensive player for hitting a "helpless" receiver. If you jump to catch a pass, you better expect to get a hit laid on you. I remember a safety the Cowboys had(Washington) who was notorious for laying out receivers if they jumped to catch one. The NFL has gotten a little out of hand when it comes to penalizing players for good, clean(but hard) hits. I've seen too many guys penalized when they led with a shoulder to hit a back/receiver. 

With that said, putting a bounty on opposing players with the intention of injuring them is fucked up. It's the very thing that will lead to further scrutiny on defenders and more rules to make their jobs even harder. It also perpetuates the "thug" stigma of professional football players. I get it, hitting someone hard always has the potential of one(or both) of the players getting injured. But like criminal law, the INTENT is of consequence to the situation. Trying to lay someone out is different from trying to give them a concussion or a career ending knee/back injury.


----------



## pushpull7 (May 3, 2012)

You'd have to outlaw Ronnie Lott in todays league. 

However, guys like that girl named sue, they are completely different. Troy said it best, "there is no place for that in football".

Considering today's news, there is going to be extra concern over concussions, but then again there is no way to play w/o contact. I dunno, I like the gamesmanship more than seeing some guy go helmet to helmet. Sacking the QB is an art......doesn't have to be late/dirty.


----------



## The Reverend (May 3, 2012)

This is why I watch golf. 

Not a big fan of football, but it seems that there should be a difference between being injured in the course of a game and being injured intentionally. Intentionally injuring someone and being paid for it is literally like being a hired goon, only not illegal for some strange reason. 

If you want blood, watch MMA or Bum Fights or what-have-you.


----------



## pushpull7 (May 3, 2012)

I stay well clear of that. It's like I was saying on another forum when I see guys throwing punches it's like "ladies, ladies, please" Be better than the player you are playing against. Did you see guys like aldon smith this year? "I'm going around you, there is nothing you can do to stop me, enjoy the view from your back  "


----------

