Yep, no one says this though.
This shyt could have been done and done if they didn't fight it tooth and nail.
NO Saints Bounty Case: Snitch Exposed
- Thread starter protestor
- Start date
Yep, no one says this though.
This shyt could have been done and done if they didn't fight it tooth and nail.
I'd fight it too if I did nothing wrong.
If my teammates have a pool going for a legitimate hard hits that are legal which puts someone out of the game, I don't see what's wrong with that.
Yes but it's against the rules to pay for performance or to injure . So if you get v caught
your not supposed to circumvent The cap . Teams would just start paying players secret bonuses to save cap space .
I'd fight it too if I did nothing wrong.
If my teammates have a pool going for a legitimate hard hits that are legal which puts someone out of the game, I don't see what's wrong with that.
Seems like the more and more info comes out, these dudes should have known it was wrong to be putting 10g's on an injury incentive.
Spygate was blown under the rug because if it got bigger the NFL would've looked stupid. They already looked dumb when they brought in that guy who said the Pats taped practices only to find out that he lied and that the Boston Globe had to fall back when Kraft threatened a libel suit.
The Pats would've slapped around the league for fronting like it wasn't a prevalent practice and that it actually impacted games. He's just lucky Bellicheck isn't the snitch Mangini is. But of course all you non-fact checking cats keep mentioning spygate when all of the reasons are right there if you just google. Admit it, you hate the Pats, that's all there is to it.
As for this, Roger being Roger
The Pats would've slapped around the league for fronting like it wasn't a prevalent practice and that it actually impacted games. He's just lucky Bellicheck isn't the snitch Mangini is. But of course all you non-fact checking cats keep mentioning spygate when all of the reasons are right there if you just google. Admit it, you hate the Pats, that's all there is to it.
As for this, Roger being Roger
It might be "immoral", but it's not illegal and against the rules to hurt someone and put them out of the game if the hit was a legal hit.
Yes but it's against the rules to pay for performance or to injure . So if you get v caught
I understand that. But what if it was the players doing it on their own?
Because the coaches were involved, I understand that portion of it and why they were punished. Like you said, it's basically a secrete bonus. I get that.
But again, if it was done strictly between players (excluding the team and coaches adding to the "pot" ), I don't see how that is "wrong" if they are making legal hits.
Yeah, i`m not commenting on what is moral and immoral though.
I`m just stating why the NFL clearly is taking this case more seriously than Spygate, one is of a coach filming practices the other is tied to player safety in an era where Seau just merked himself and concussions is a hot button topic.
It's a lot of PR.
Yeah, I think if the coaches/management weren't involved, it would not have been as big of an issue. That's where the Saints fukked up. The hurting people legally isn't the issue with the NFL as much as they say it is, I'm thinking the fact of paid compensation by the team (indirectly in this case through coaches) is what fukked it up.