Jump to content
Slate Blackcurrant Watermelon Strawberry Orange Banana Apple Emerald Chocolate Marble
Slate Blackcurrant Watermelon Strawberry Orange Banana Apple Emerald Chocolate Marble
MSH Pro Shop closing from 8/26 til first week of September Read more... ×

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Fire Walker

Payton gone for a year.

Recommended Posts

hockeymass, do you mean you think the punishment is too harsh? I'm not surprised it that's long, particularly since there were allegations of lying by the Saints during the investigation. Beyond that, knowingly targeting players to knock them out the game is undoubtedly a huge competitive advantage if a team is successful, but, more importantly, how would anyone know whether knocking the guy out this week doesn't knock him out forever?

It's one thing to hit a guy hard, and if he gets knocked out, he gets knocked out. But when you pay players to try to knock out other players, it's obvious that lines could easily be crossed. In hockey, maybe it would be slashing near the cuff. If everyone's lucky, you only bruised the guy and he'll be able to play next Wednesday; but sometimes it breaks a bone, so the guy's out 6-8 weeks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

hockeymass, do you mean you think the punishment is too harsh? I'm not surprised it that's long, particularly since there were allegations of lying by the Saints during the investigation. Beyond that, knowingly targeting players to knock them out the game is undoubtedly a huge competitive advantage if a team is successful, but, more importantly, how would anyone know whether knocking the guy out this week doesn't knock him out forever?

It's one thing to hit a guy hard, and if he gets knocked out, he gets knocked out. But when you pay players to try to knock out other players, it's obvious that lines could easily be crossed. In hockey, maybe it would be slashing near the cuff. If everyone's lucky, you only bruised the guy and he'll be able to play next Wednesday; but sometimes it breaks a bone, so the guy's out 6-8 weeks.

Yes, I do. It's no secret that players often exploit or aim to cause injury. I don't really think any of this was groundbreaking stuff. Furthermore, now I'm going to have to listen to people bitch about Spygate for yet another season.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There's a huge difference between players aiming to cause injury versus the team asking the player to am to cause injury, then paying him when he is successful.

I never worry about Spygate. When I heard Jon Gruden and Jimmy Johnson say "We used to do that all the time," it made me think of it like stealing signals from second base. Teams do it all the team, while opposing teams need to protect themselves from being exploited.

But here's the clincher in each case: both teams knowingly disregarded Goodell and were punished more severely for that than the original infraction.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree -- there's a big difference between loose cannons and an institutionalized policy. And disregarding NFL mandates, and lying to the league, obviously played a big part in the severity of the sanctions.

Williams is out indefinitely, which also punishes his new team; he's got no guarantee he can ever come back.

I'm curious to see what the players' punishments are.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There's a huge difference between players aiming to cause injury versus the team asking the player to am to cause injury, then paying him when he is successful.

I never worry about Spygate. When I heard Jon Gruden and Jimmy Johnson say "We used to do that all the time," it made me think of it like stealing signals from second base. Teams do it all the team, while opposing teams need to protect themselves from being exploited.

But here's the clincher in each case: both teams knowingly disregarded Goodell and were punished more severely for that than the original infraction.

This is my problem. It's not really about this program, it's about the team making Goodell look bad. That's what the punishment is really for.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's not about Goodell personally looking bad. It's about a team not accepting the authority of the league, and lying to it. Further, in my opinion, they didn't make Goodell look bad. They made themselves look bad.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I feell that this suspension was fair but I also think players who participated need to be punished with fines or suspensions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

hockeymass, this isn't any different than when children lie to their parents. They'll do something that might not result in a big punishment, or maybe even no punishment, but then they'll lie to try to not get caught. From the parent's perspective, it has nothing to do with looking bad; lack of trust poisons a relationship, so the parents set the punishment much higher to try to prevent it from ever happening again.

There's no doubt that the Saints would have been punished severely for this. Just as there's no doubt that were punished much more severely for the lying.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Holy smokes does Goodell ever have big balls!

Would Bettman ever be able to do something like this in the NHL?

Never.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Holy smokes does Goodell ever have big balls!

Would Bettman ever be able to do something like this in the NHL?

Trying to take people out is "good hard, hockey" from what I hear. As for the suspension length, how long was Tocchet out?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The distinction needs to be made between "hitting to hurt" and "hitting to injure".

In football, and hockey...every hit should hurt your opponent. It should make them think twice about crossing over the middle...or cutting hard to the net or going into the corner.

It should never intentionlly be an attempt to injure. And, surely there should not be money paid out (or even offered) to injure another player.

Stiff penalties...but I think Goodell just wants everyone to know that he's running the show. As JA said...he's got a set on him for sure!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Fair punishment. You cannot play with players careers that way. If you incite players to injure other players by giving them money or for them to keep a spot on the roster, it's just not acceptable. You never know how bad your attempt to injure a player may turn out. What if you paralyze a guy and end his career? The Saints were stupider than stupid. Now serve the time!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The distinction needs to be made between "hitting to hurt" and "hitting to injure".

In football, and hockey...every hit should hurt your opponent. It should make them think twice about crossing over the middle...or cutting hard to the net or going into the corner.

It should never intentionlly be an attempt to injure. And, surely there should not be money paid out (or even offered) to injure another player.

It's semantics and a nice way of allowing guys to feel like they are doing something other than trying to injure people. The purpose of the game isn't to take people out, it is to score points for your team while limiting the points of the other team. Unfortunately too many people see no problem with intentionally causing injuries in an attempt to limit the points of the other team.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×