Saints investigated for "Bounty Program"

[Demi]

A lot of information has already come out regarding BountyGate and the Saints. But we’re only just getting started.

One of the details that has emerged relates to the 2009 NFC Championship game where the Saints bruised and battered Brett Favre all night long.

Before the game, ESPN’s Adam Schefter reported on NFL Live that Jonathan Vilma threw $10,000 on a table and said it would go to the player that successfully knocked out Favre.

Dirty? Nothing dirty about that!

[purple guy]

Dirty? Nothing dirty about that!

The bounty is obviously against league rules, they way they played was just fine, IMO. Most Vikings fans just want to find an excuse for the loss. They definately shouldnt have had a bounty, but they didnt play dirty. Sour grapes tasting good I assume?? Losers always look for excuses outside of their controll.

Did he throw down the 10,000 and say take him out with a dirty play?????? Uh, nope. I know the bounty was in poor taste, the way they actually played was awesome defense, created turnovers, made our QB throw a pittiful pick, and they won the game.

[bigskyeric]

All I can say is.... I knew it. What a scumbag team. Extra money for cart offs.... Take their trophy away. WTF!!!!!

[vikeinmontana]

not surprising. good for the nfl in investigating what seemed to be pretty obvious to many football fans.

what some need to remember is that this issue doesn't have to be so black and white. i have not one single time said we lost that game BECAUSE of the dirty plays. i didn't blame anyone but our own team when we lost. so i have no "sour grapes" whatsoever. but that doesn't mean that they plays weren't there. they were, and fairly obvious. and only speaking for myself, i would have felt the exact same way had the vikings won the game. i'd be very happy with the win...and still angry and annoyed at the blatantly cheap crap.

after this new revelation....it just seems too obvious. what if it was the vikings? but instead of being dirty, we all suspected the vikings of quitting on plays and quitting on childress that game. there was no "proof" per se, but in several plays we saw people stop far before the whistle, give up blocks, and half-#### it all over. fast forward to today and pretend we learned that several coaches wanted chilli out so bad they were offering up cash for guys to quit. and even favre had come forward and said he offered his own money for guys to quit on plays.

if all of this came to light, would you feel like you knew it all along....and you were right in the idea that the team quit? or would you say hogwash....it doesn't prove anything. just because coaches asked players to quit...and even offered money to quit....and an investigation concluded they quit that game as well as other games....doesn't mean they actually quit on the team.

i know my answer.

[FailedtoOpen]

Its been so long that it doesn't really matter anymore to me. I'm no longer mad, or sad about it. What does piss me off was watching A Football Life with Kurt Warner and they had his wife on there. They replayed that specific event and had her say her but, and had him say his bit about it. It really drives home the whole idea that these are players who will have to live with the after effects for the rest of their lives. I actually like Kurt Warner a lot and he seems like a very, very respectable guy. It sucks that he is no longer in the league and who knows, he may have had another season in him if it wasn't for that game.

Again it's whatever. The whole organization is screwed up at the moment, whether it be calling Bree's a "good, but not great QB", or it be this whole BS.

If there was any one player I'd love to slap from that team it would be Sharper. He is such a bitter, ignorant #### that it pisses me off... gosh I dislike him now. I especially dislike when they have him on NFL Network.

[purple guy]

Favre said no big deal. Warner said no big deal. They didnt condone the bounty end of it, but neither had any problems with the way the Saints played. Like Favre said, its football. No reason for the bounty, but even the 2 guys who were supposedly targeted, arent crying about it and claiming they are "dirty" or "cheaters". Its football. 100% of the NFL defenses TRY to hit the QB hard every single snap. The Saints just happened to be successful cuz the Vikings couldnt block, doesnt make it cheap. Had the Vikings applied that pressure to Brees I guarantee no one on this board would have any issues with it.

[bigskyeric]

not surprising. good for the nfl in investigating what seemed to be pretty obvious to many football fans.

what some need to remember is that this issue doesn't have to be so black and white. i have not one single time said we lost that game BECAUSE of the dirty plays. i didn't blame anyone but our own team when we lost. so i have no "sour grapes" whatsoever. but that doesn't mean that they plays weren't there. they were, and fairly obvious. and only speaking for myself, i would have felt the exact same way had the vikings won the game. i'd be very happy with the win...and still angry and annoyed at the blatantly cheap crap.

after this new revelation....it just seems too obvious. what if it was the vikings? but instead of being dirty, we all suspected the vikings of quitting on plays and quitting on childress that game. there was no "proof" per se, but in several plays we saw people stop far before the whistle, give up blocks, and half-#### it all over. fast forward to today and pretend we learned that several coaches wanted chilli out so bad they were offering up cash for guys to quit. and even favre had come forward and said he offered his own money for guys to quit on plays.

if all of this came to light, would you feel like you knew it all along....and you were right in the idea that the team quit? or would you say hogwash....it doesn't prove anything. just because coaches asked players to quit...and even offered money to quit....and an investigation concluded they quit that game as well as other games....doesn't mean they actually quit on the team.

i know my answer.

The flaw in your analogy is that it was obvious the Saints were dirty. We were one factor away from the win. 12 men on the field, turnovers, and Missed penalties by the Refs. I wouldn't doubt it if in the end we find out the refs were paid off. How else do you explain the missed call on the high/low hit on Favre. A blind person in outer space would have seen that penalty. If you truly believe the Vikings didn't play there heart out in that game....... I don't even know how to respond. The biggest issue was the pressure the Vikings were under along with the noise. Remember, we outplayed them. Twice the yards, twice the 1st downs. No player in their right mind would ever quit that close to the Super Bowl. Especially a Minnesota Viking trying to break tradition of losing.

[vikeinmontana]

i can promise you that wasn't the ONLY thing wrong with my analogy! it was extreme and i know that. i'm just saying that these new developments are not surprising to me. they were getting paid to take guys out. it's much easier to take guys out after the whistle or after the qb hands the ball is than it is betwen the whistles.

oh well. it's long ago. i couldn't care less, and these developments won't get the vikes into the superbowl.

[purple guy]

Now the refs were probably paid off since the Vikings lost. Ridicolous. Doesnt matter if you outplay another team, the rules clearly state, to win, you have to outscore the other team, sorta what the whole scoreboard thingy is for.

[bigskyeric]

Now the refs were probably paid off since the Vikings lost. Ridicolous. Doesnt matter if you outplay another team, the rules clearly state, to win, you have to outscore the other team, sorta what the whole scoreboard thingy is for.

I said " I wouldn't doubt it " in other words, I wouldn't be surprised. Just seems Refs blow to many big calls that could decide games at pivotal points in games. Like the refs missing the blatant facemask on Rodgers that year when the Pack played the Cards. Seems it happens too much and sometimes I wonder if we are all watching something resembling professional wrestling. Had the Refs called the high/low, Favre wouldn't have thrown the INT because he would have been in Field Goal Range. I know... I know.... If chilly wasn't a twit and had 12 men on the field...etc. etc. Plenty of blame to go around. But the INT was the nail in the coffin. Refs with eyes that work would have prevented that nail.

[Rus]

Now the refs were probably paid off since the Vikings lost. Ridicolous. Doesnt matter if you outplay another team, the rules clearly state, to win, you have to outscore the other team, sorta what the whole scoreboard thingy is for.

They also state that you don't offer up bounties to your players. That's what the Bounty Rule is. And that's why what they did was wrong and why they should be punished for it, hard.

It's not whining, it's pointing out a fact. The Saints broke the rules, hard. And we all saw them do it back then and basically get away with it.

The game would suck if teams were allowed to place hits on the other team's star players. This isn't about the Vikings and it isn't about your feelings, it's about the quality of the game in general. No one wants to watch a game where all the stars have been taken out due to cheap hits. That brings down the quality of play in the league when you have your most talented players constantly sitting out due to concussions and broken bones.

You seem to forget that the NFL is an ENTERTAINMENT industry. It's about keeping the fans entertained and that is how the league and its franchises make its money. It's not entertaining when most of the teams in the league are playing scrubs all the time. That is why we have rules to protect players from take-out hits and bounties and all of that nonsense.

[purple guy]

They also state that you don't offer up bounties to your players. That's what the Bounty Rule is. And that's why what they did was wrong and why they should be punished for it, hard.

It's not whining, it's pointing out a fact. The Saints broke the rules, hard. And we all saw them do it back then and basically get away with it.

The game would suck if teams were allowed to place hits on the other team's star players. This isn't about the Vikings and it isn't about your feelings, it's about the quality of the game in general. No one wants to watch a game where all the stars have been taken out due to cheap hits. That brings down the quality of play in the league when you have your most talented players constantly sitting out due to concussions and broken bones.

You seem to forget that the NFL is an ENTERTAINMENT industry. It's about keeping the fans entertained and that is how the league and its franchises make its money. It's not entertaining when most of the teams in the league are playing scrubs all the time. That is why we have rules to protect players from take-out hits and bounties and all of that nonsense.

I know the bounty was wrong. But just because they had a bounty on Favre or any other player, doesnt make their play dirty or cheap. The fact they had a bounty was wrong, but doesnt make their play on the field dirty. I dont like the fact they had bountys on players, but it doesnt change my opinion that they played totally legally and were not dirty. The Saints have 19 unneccessary roughness penalities since the "bounty" scam started, tied for 8th in the NFL, so they are not even the "dirtiest" team over that span, by a long shot. Issuing a bounty is wrong, but I have zero problems with how they played. Aggressive and hard hitting D, nothing wrong with that IMO.

The Saints broke rules, but they didnt break any I "saw", only broke the ones reguarding the bountys themselves, not on the field. So are the other 7 teams with more unneccessary roughness penalities "dirty and cheap" too??? Or just the Saints cuz they beat up on the Vikings in the NFCC game??

And this caused "most of the teams" to play their scrubs "all the time"????? Alrighty then.

[bigskyeric]

They also state that you don't offer up bounties to your players. That's what the Bounty Rule is. And that's why what they did was wrong and why they should be punished for it, hard.

It's not whining, it's pointing out a fact. The Saints broke the rules, hard. And we all saw them do it back then and basically get away with it.

The game would suck if teams were allowed to place hits on the other team's star players. This isn't about the Vikings and it isn't about your feelings, it's about the quality of the game in general. No one wants to watch a game where all the stars have been taken out due to cheap hits. That brings down the quality of play in the league when you have your most talented players constantly sitting out due to concussions and broken bones.

You seem to forget that the NFL is an ENTERTAINMENT industry. It's about keeping the fans entertained and that is how the league and its franchises make its money. It's not entertaining when most of the teams in the league are playing scrubs all the time. That is why we have rules to protect players from take-out hits and bounties and all of that nonsense.

Well said Rus.

[bigskyeric]

I know the bounty was wrong. But just because they had a bounty on Favre or any other player, doesnt make their play dirty or cheap. The fact they had a bounty was wrong, but doesnt make their play on the field dirty. I dont like the fact they had bountys on players, but it doesnt change my opinion that they played totally legally and were not dirty. The Saints have 19 unneccessary roughness penalities since the "bounty" scam started, tied for 8th in the NFL, so they are not even the "dirtiest" team over that span, by a long shot. Issuing a bounty is wrong, but I have zero problems with how they played. Aggressive and hard hitting D, nothing wrong with that IMO.

The Saints broke rules, but they didnt break any I "saw", only broke the ones reguarding the bountys themselves, not on the field. So are the other 7 teams with more unneccessary roughness penalities "dirty and cheap" too??? Or just the Saints cuz they beat up on the Vikings in the NFCC game??

And this caused "most of the teams" to play their scrubs "all the time"????? Alrighty then.

You didn't see the High/Low? Or the Pile Drive on Favre? I did. And the League did when they fined the players for the hits. You honestly think that putting money on the line to 'injure a player so they are carted off the field' doesn't cause players to make cheap/dirty hits? Ummm.... ok.

[Demi]

The Saints broke rules, but they didnt break any I "saw", only broke the ones reguarding the bountys themselves, not on the field.

They were flagged during the game, they were fined after the game. So not only did they have the illegal bounties that they will be punished for, but they repeatedly broke a rule called "unnecessary roughness" during the game. Not sure why some people are refusing to accept it...