Topic: Official NFL Discussion: If You Only Count The Legal Points, KC Wins

[nickmitch]

That was a terrible decision. Those players were trying to take out (and injure) other players for money, and they deserve to be punished. The original punishments were justified, but the players union always supports the players no matter what (you could have a player brutally attack an innocent fan and the players union would still appeal a suspension or fine).

That was not a terrible decision. The players were punished for putting up money and other things that the commissioner did not have enough evidence to prove they were doing. You can't have him issuing punishments (and taking away men's livelihoods) without some sort of due process. And if they all deserved to be punished, what would you do? Suspend the whole defense? I mean, everyone would've had a chance to injure an opponent, right? That literally would kill a team's season and piss off fans and season ticket holders. The players weren't doing anything other teams don't do or at least think about. If you're playing against an elite quarterback with a bad ankle, your defensive co-ordinator isn't doing his job if he's not telling you to target that ankle. And nobody is asking anyone to do anything dirty, just clean, hard hits between the whistles.

[TJ Spyke]

Did you read the report? Tagliabue even said there WAS a bounty system in place. The players were in the wrong, but they are getting off. It's like when a murderer gets off scot-free because of a technicality. And who cares if the fans get pissed off? If anything, they should be pissed at the team for doing illegal things. And your excuse of "it's OK if others do it" is BS and does not justify what they did. If a player breaks the rules, they deserve to be punished. And a player who makes millions losing $50K is not gonna hurt them.

[nickmitch]

I didn't make my point clear. First, the players were getting punished not for taking bounties, but for putting up the cash and leading the program, which they denied and Tagliabue said wasn't enough evidence to warrant the suspensions. As far a taking a leadership role in the program, the players in question are innocent. Goodell didn't have the evidence to justify punishing them the way he did but did so anyway. He can't be allowed to have that kind of unchecked authority.

Second, punishing them for participating isn't fair. That would require the entire defense to be punished equally. Suspending an entire defense kills any team's chances at play offs or even a respectable record. And some people are losing up to a year's pay. And not having access to team facilities makes staying in that kind of shape much more difficult. Furthermore, not every guy on the team is a millionaire. Some are making less than $100K/year and you're talking about taking that away from them because of what the coaching staff has in place.

Third, I wasn't saying it's ok because others do it. Football is a rough game. Opponents getting injured only helps you. Ask any player, and they'll tell you it's just part of the game.

[TJ Spyke]

Kind of impossible for ANY player in the NFL to make less than $100,000 since the minimum salary is $375,000 for rookies, $450 for 1 year players, $525 for 2 years, $600K for 3 years, $685K for 4-6 years, $810K for 7-9 years, $910K for 10 years, and an extra $15 for every year after that. So no player is suffering even at the league minimum.

You were saying that its OK for these players to break the rules just because you say others do it or think about it.

We will have to disagree on this. But the players set up (and with the blessing of the staff) and executed an illegal bounty system, paying players to take out and injure opponents. It's despicable, and I find it appalling they are getting away with it.

[nickmitch]

But losing your pay (even if it's six figures) is still gonna hurt you significantly.

I'm not trying to argue for breaking the rules. I was trying to argue for the mentality of the players and coaches. They're not bad guys for wanting to hurt somebody.

And it wasn't the players' system. It was Greg Williams' system.

[TJ Spyke]

Don't cry for players losing money. If you break the rules, then be prepared for the consequences. If I go rob a bank, do I have a right to complain if I get fired? No.

Actually, they ARE bad guys for wanting to hurt somebody. That is NOT what football is about. It's never been about that, and players who try to hurt others should not be allowed to play. There is a reason that people like Ndamukong Suh (who the NFL players themselves called the dirtiest player in the league) are not respected.

Yes, Williams started it, but the players contributed to the fund with their own money.

[nickmitch]

I'm not crying for players losing money, I'm crying for players being unjustly punished. If you not be found guilty for robbing that bank and ended up in jail anyway, I'm sure you'd be pissed.

I guess everyone who plays defense in the NFL is a bad guy then. Suh plays dirty, sure. But everyone else wants to hit you clean and hard and for you to remember that you've been hit.

From Tagliabue: "Adding to the complexity, there is little evidence of the tone of any talk about a bounty before the Vikings game. Was any bounty pledged serious? Was it inspirational only? Was it typical 'trash talk' that occurs regularly before and during games? The parties presented no clear answers. No witness could confirm whether Vilma had any money in his hands as he spoke; no evidence was presented that $10,000 was available to him for purposes of paying a bounty or otherwise. There was no evidence that Vilma or anyone else paid any money to any player for any bounty-related hit on an opposing player in the Vikings game.

[noname2200]

That was a terrible decision. Those players were trying to take out (and injure) other players for money, and they deserve to be punished. The original punishments were justified, but the players union always supports the players no matter what (you could have a player brutally attack an innocent fan and the players union would still appeal a suspension or fine).

I agree. I'll add that the hypocrisy of them whining that the league doesn't care about player safety becomes especially laughable when they go and do something like this. I wonder, don't they realize that they also represent the people who are on the receiving end of said bounties?

[NWR_insanolord]

Todd McShay's first mock draft is already up, even though we don't yet know the real draft order. He has my Browns taking a guard, who he makes out to be one of the best guards he's ever seen. As a Notre Dame fan I'd have liked to see them take Manti Te'o, who he has going to the Bills in the next pick, but a great guard would make our offensive line pretty fantastic, adding to our very strong tackles and center.

[noname2200]

So in light of the probability that the Browns' pick is going to be outside the Top Ten, are you pleased or saddened insanolord?

[NWR_insanolord]

As of right now their pick would be just inside it, at number 10. I'm not really sure how I feel about it. It was fun to win three in a row, even though it was against pretty weak competition, but we don't have a second round pick this year since we used it to take WR Josh Gordon (who's been fantastic, and whose pick may have saved GM Tom Heckert's job) in the supplemental draft, so this first pick really needs to be a good one.

[TJ Spyke]

The NFL's website has the Browns at #12 right now. Based on who they play, it is very much possible that they will lose their last 3 games.

[NWR_insanolord]

Well ESPN has them at 10, I'm assuming using the tiebreakers used for the draft as opposed to the regular season. I don't expect them to win any of their remaining games, with it sounding like RG3's going to play this week, a surging Peyton Manning and the Broncos next week, and a Steeler team that probably won't turn the ball over eight times again in week 17.

[noname2200]

I'd say there's a chance the Broncos just lie down for that game, but they're probably going to try to get the #2 seed, so there's little chance of that.

[NWR_insanolord]

The Broncos play Baltimore this week, which is another game that has playoff implications. I don't see much of a chance that they won't still be playing for something next week, so I doubt they're going to be going easy.

[TJ Spyke]

Well, the Redskins say RGIII will not play tomorrow. Maybe the Browns might win? LOL

[Shaymin]

Given Cleveland's luck on these things, I'm putting a tenner down on Kirk Cousins breaking the single game passing yardage record.

Or I would, if gambling was legal.

[NWR_insanolord]

If RG3's not playing I think the Browns are likely to win. I believe Vegas already had them as favorites on the suspicion that he would at least be limited. Cousins has talent, and I feel bad for him that he's likely to remain a backup despite that, but our defense is pretty good and the offense has been clicking lately. Richardson's looking good and Weeden's been on a pretty good streak, making better decisions and throws and not throwing a pick in the last 2.5 games.

[noname2200]

I didn't get ("get" might be more appropriate) to watch last night's game, but is it true that the commentators were completely ripping the Jets post-game? It also sounded like the Sanchize was doing his damndest to screw everything up!

[nickmitch]

During, after, the next day. . .

[noname2200]

Staying on topic, can anyone name the last time the backup quarterback was never actually the backup quarterback? Also on point, why exactly did the Jets trade for Tebow?

[TJ Spyke]

There are now talks that the Jets will try and get rid of both Tebow and Sanchez after the season ends.

[noname2200]

I can believe that. Although in the case of Sanchez in particular I'm not sure they'll find any takers, at least not if they don't agree to eat most of the albatross they made for themselves. What's he guaranteed next season, eight million?

[TJ Spyke]

$8.5 million, which is what may be a big factor.

[ShyGuy]

Are the Jet's self destructive or something? Why are they so stupid?