OffseasonChampions
New member
- Joined
- Mar 12, 2014
- Messages
- 148
- Reaction score
- 0
LOL, that one flew right over your head.-The Glove-":1hb0j3yy said:
Alleged Bounty Discussion
- Thread starter AsylumGuido
- Start date
Zebulon Dak
Banned
- Joined
- Mar 4, 2007
- Messages
- 24,551
- Reaction score
- 1,417
OffseasonChampions":2riy2uc5 said:
Flew over mine too. Why don't you dumb it down for us?
-The Glove-
New member
- Joined
- Jan 20, 2011
- Messages
- 7,689
- Reaction score
- 0
OffseasonChampions said:
OffseasonChampions
New member
- Joined
- Mar 12, 2014
- Messages
- 148
- Reaction score
- 0
Hint: There is a reason the Saints fan didn't reply to that one. Think Gregg Williams quotes.Zebulon Dak":az4gn1h0 said:
Sac
Active member
OffseasonChampions":2dcyg7gj said:
F-Season Chump-ions, I left a present for you in the shack.
The Radish
New member
I think many here have taken shots at comments from Guido and he has handled them way better than our own fans.
All we have here are opinions. Some see things one way, some see others. But everyone needs to keep a civil tongue in their mouths.
If this string can't be civil its going to be locked. For your further info several here have been issued board warnings for their useless comments.
:141847_bnono:
All we have here are opinions. Some see things one way, some see others. But everyone needs to keep a civil tongue in their mouths.
If this string can't be civil its going to be locked. For your further info several here have been issued board warnings for their useless comments.
:141847_bnono:
SouthSoundHawk
New member
- Joined
- Aug 20, 2012
- Messages
- 2,262
- Reaction score
- 0
The Radish":30m97ma0 said:
+1
He seems like an extremely classy individual.
I back my opinion that this topic is pretty pointless in the grand scheme of things. Fans just need something to complain about until the draft, and then they can direct their negativity towards the teams they root for, haha. NOLA got caught in a precarious situation, and paid the piper...time to move on.
OP
OP
AsylumGuido
Well-known member
The Radish":1mffgvsu said:
I really hope this thread can remain open. I openly welcome these questions. Many, including a very small number of the media, feel the Saints organization has been severely mischaracterized concerning this affair. This forum gives me the ability to address these mischaracterizations and hopefully set the record straight.
Oh, and I know exactly what our friend, Offseason, was referring to earlier and will address that when I get back from running a few errands.
OkieHawk
New member
Whatever happened, I'm not sure was actually a bounty thing. I'll give a friend of mine grief over it as he's a Saints fan, but I don't think there was enough evidence to prove actual bounties. Also, it's history now.
OP
OP
AsylumGuido
Well-known member
Okay, I'm back. Hawk Hat and I had to hit a couple of estate sales. Where were we? Oh, yes. I was going to shed a little light on Offseason's since removed post. He was clumsily referring to the famous tape from the night before the Saints/Niners playoff game from the 2011 season. As a matter of full-disclosure I will post the transcript of the tape and address the content as best I can.
Transcript of Gregg Williams' speech before 49ers game
The following is a transcript of the 4-minute sample of Sean Pamphilon's recording
Although the language is harsh, nothing in the "speech" could be said to clearly imply any sort of bounty.
Here is something I posted elsewhere addressing the Gore portion of the tape:
----------------------------------------------------
Once again, huge inaccuracies. First of all, the tape was not from halftime of any game. It was from the defense only meeting in the team hotel the night before the game. Secondly, it was not secretly taped. The videographer that made the recording was there filming a documentary on Steve Gleason, the former Saints player who was, and still is, battling ALS. Steve was invited to attend the meeting with his old defensive teammates. Thirdly, not only have I heard the tape, but I have read, in detail, the transcript. I have also read responses from several players that the verbiage used by Williams was his style of firing up the defense through the use of hyperbole. They claimed they never took his rantings literally and, in fact, sometimes it was so obscure that it didn't even make sense.
Next, the reference to Frank Gore had nothing whatsoever to do with a knee nor any pile. The reference was made as part of a lesson taught in defensive meeting rooms across the league. It has to do with the term "Kill the head and the body will die". The Kansas City Chiefs had it painted on as a huge sign outside the defensive meeting room at their facilities. It implies, that just as with a snake, if you kill the head the rest cannot function. Williams, in the manner of many defensive coaches, would identify the key player on the opposing team and stress the importance of limiting that player's affect on the game. In the case of Gore, he had been preaching all week long about needing to keep Gore from running north to south. He stressed stopping his up-field routes and turning him to the sidelines, making him run parallel to the line of scrimmage.
Keeping all of this in mind, here is the "actual" text from the tape concerning Gore:
[/b]
You can see the use of hyperbole, how he uses verbal imagery to get his point across. Jesus was well known for doing the same with his numerous parables, by no means directly comparing the two men, of course.
Note how he repeated the message twice in the beginning of the text. It was for emphasis. Note the references to turning over the coaches and the spectators. If it was in any way literal in meaning then he would be implying that the Saints were to take out coaches and go up into the stands and slaughter the masses. LOL. No, it is all hyperbole.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
The next bit seems to be referring to something about Alex Smith. It doesn't make much sense in that context. The "remember me" sounds like he was referencing from earlier and the repeated "I've got the first one" seems to be the key point from the earlier message. The rest is pretty clear and the goal of all defenses.
Williams then reiterates rhetorical "head" of the snake. Then after a bit of rah-rah, he moves on to some specific key players. The first was Kyle Williams who was coming off a concussion. Something every team does when preparing for an opponent is going over their injuries and determining if and how an advantage can be gained from that knowledge. How would Kyle Williams respond to a hard hit?
The next player mentioned is Michael Crabtree. This is also the reference that Offseason was hinting about. It is also what on the surface appears to be the most damning of all of the so-called evidence ... on the surface, at least. Remember that Williams had just referred to another player's injury and how it needed testing. Could he have been referring to a suspected injury that Crabtree may have been nursing? What did he mean by "outside ACL"? We may never know, but one thing is certain, if this was supposed to be an instruction to intentionally injure Crabtree the Saints must have really sucked at it, right? The only player injured in that game was the Saints RB Pierre Thomas after taking a hard helmet to helmet hit early in the game. In fact, he was the ninth RB injured playing against the Niners that season. Not only was there not a single Niner player injured that game, but the Saints did not even commit a penalty the entire game.
And following a reminder that Gore is the "head", the last player mentioned was Vernon Davis and it sounds to me like he wanted Davis knocked off his patterns and on his butt with his feet in the air.
Somehow this rhetoric, commonly used by Gregg Willliams, was supposed to prove to some that there were bounties on specific players. While alarming to some people, this bit of speech proves nothing and has to be interpreted well beyond the actual text to relay the pretense of bounties.
Transcript of Gregg Williams' speech before 49ers game
The following is a transcript of the 4-minute sample of Sean Pamphilon's recording
Although the language is harsh, nothing in the "speech" could be said to clearly imply any sort of bounty.
Here is something I posted elsewhere addressing the Gore portion of the tape:
----------------------------------------------------
Once again, huge inaccuracies. First of all, the tape was not from halftime of any game. It was from the defense only meeting in the team hotel the night before the game. Secondly, it was not secretly taped. The videographer that made the recording was there filming a documentary on Steve Gleason, the former Saints player who was, and still is, battling ALS. Steve was invited to attend the meeting with his old defensive teammates. Thirdly, not only have I heard the tape, but I have read, in detail, the transcript. I have also read responses from several players that the verbiage used by Williams was his style of firing up the defense through the use of hyperbole. They claimed they never took his rantings literally and, in fact, sometimes it was so obscure that it didn't even make sense.
Next, the reference to Frank Gore had nothing whatsoever to do with a knee nor any pile. The reference was made as part of a lesson taught in defensive meeting rooms across the league. It has to do with the term "Kill the head and the body will die". The Kansas City Chiefs had it painted on as a huge sign outside the defensive meeting room at their facilities. It implies, that just as with a snake, if you kill the head the rest cannot function. Williams, in the manner of many defensive coaches, would identify the key player on the opposing team and stress the importance of limiting that player's affect on the game. In the case of Gore, he had been preaching all week long about needing to keep Gore from running north to south. He stressed stopping his up-field routes and turning him to the sidelines, making him run parallel to the line of scrimmage.
Keeping all of this in mind, here is the "actual" text from the tape concerning Gore:
[/b]
You can see the use of hyperbole, how he uses verbal imagery to get his point across. Jesus was well known for doing the same with his numerous parables, by no means directly comparing the two men, of course.
Note how he repeated the message twice in the beginning of the text. It was for emphasis. Note the references to turning over the coaches and the spectators. If it was in any way literal in meaning then he would be implying that the Saints were to take out coaches and go up into the stands and slaughter the masses. LOL. No, it is all hyperbole.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
The next bit seems to be referring to something about Alex Smith. It doesn't make much sense in that context. The "remember me" sounds like he was referencing from earlier and the repeated "I've got the first one" seems to be the key point from the earlier message. The rest is pretty clear and the goal of all defenses.
Williams then reiterates rhetorical "head" of the snake. Then after a bit of rah-rah, he moves on to some specific key players. The first was Kyle Williams who was coming off a concussion. Something every team does when preparing for an opponent is going over their injuries and determining if and how an advantage can be gained from that knowledge. How would Kyle Williams respond to a hard hit?
The next player mentioned is Michael Crabtree. This is also the reference that Offseason was hinting about. It is also what on the surface appears to be the most damning of all of the so-called evidence ... on the surface, at least. Remember that Williams had just referred to another player's injury and how it needed testing. Could he have been referring to a suspected injury that Crabtree may have been nursing? What did he mean by "outside ACL"? We may never know, but one thing is certain, if this was supposed to be an instruction to intentionally injure Crabtree the Saints must have really sucked at it, right? The only player injured in that game was the Saints RB Pierre Thomas after taking a hard helmet to helmet hit early in the game. In fact, he was the ninth RB injured playing against the Niners that season. Not only was there not a single Niner player injured that game, but the Saints did not even commit a penalty the entire game.
And following a reminder that Gore is the "head", the last player mentioned was Vernon Davis and it sounds to me like he wanted Davis knocked off his patterns and on his butt with his feet in the air.
Somehow this rhetoric, commonly used by Gregg Willliams, was supposed to prove to some that there were bounties on specific players. While alarming to some people, this bit of speech proves nothing and has to be interpreted well beyond the actual text to relay the pretense of bounties.
kearly
New member
- Joined
- Mar 6, 2007
- Messages
- 15,975
- Reaction score
- 0
If I was a Saints fan, I would be pissed at Goodell, pissed at Gregg Williams, and pissed at life for being the unlucky fanbase who was made example of by a despotic Commish. Looking at the evidence presented in this thread from a neutral perspective, I think it's very clear players were being paid to injure other players, and punishment was justified. It's the amount of punishment that was totally ridiculous. In particular I never agreed with the Payton suspension. As far as I know there was never hard proof he had knowledge of the bounty system and even if he did a year is way too much. Meanwhile Mike Tomlin gets a slap on the wrist for blatant interference that prevented a TD.
The punishment was exaggerated to help the NFL's case in the inevitable concussion proceedings that were around the corner. Williams is guilty as sin, don't pick that battle guido. The Commish was a huge douche, pick that battle instead.
The punishment was exaggerated to help the NFL's case in the inevitable concussion proceedings that were around the corner. Williams is guilty as sin, don't pick that battle guido. The Commish was a huge douche, pick that battle instead.
FortWorthSeahawk
Well-known member
253hawk":2i19hyk4 said:All I take from this is that this is considered legal and that Kam Chancellor should be able to do it all day long without getting fined.
Even more frightening for all the wide receivers that have to play Seattle this year. This is assuming, of course, the NFL treats this type of hit as legal 100% of the time. Show of hands if you think that will happen.
RolandDeschain
Well-known member
O.J. was only alleged to have killed Nicole Brown, too. :thcoffee:
I love the word "alleged". You can use it to literally accuse anybody of anything.
I love the word "alleged". You can use it to literally accuse anybody of anything.
OP
OP
AsylumGuido
Well-known member
FortWorthSeahawk":2whpx3c6 said:253hawk":2whpx3c6 said:All I take from this is that this is considered legal and that Kam Chancellor should be able to do it all day long without getting fined.
Even more frightening for all the wide receivers that have to play Seattle this year. This is assuming, of course, the NFL treats this type of hit as legal 100% of the time. Show of hands if you think that will happen.
Oh, no. The hit was not legal under the rules. He definitely made contact with the head. I really think the fine was rescinded because it was unavoidable. I have always felt the flag was warranted according to the rule, but it is the rule that I might have an issue with.
At the point Bush pushes off to make the hit his shoulder is at Harvin's chest level. Harvin then bobbles the ball and drops down bringing his helmet down to Bush's shoulder level. At that point there was nothing that Bush could do to avoid it at that point. Watch the gif and you can see this.
OP
OP
AsylumGuido
Well-known member
kearly":39k3mste said:
Exactly what evidence makes it so clear that players were paid to injure other players? Seriously. I want to know. Nothing shows that unless you try to skip quite a few dots in trying to show how the dots are connected.
And I definitely agree on the Payton punishment. Never has a head coach been suspended for a single game, not to mention an entire season. The reason was obvious.
mikeak
Well-known member
" I really think the fine was rescinded because it was unavoidable."
Read this carefully because I think we agree
I don't disagree that unavoidable / avoidable should be a part of the discussions when looking at fines. I also think the fact that runners / receviers lowers their head SHOULD be considered.
Please give me ONE other time that this was done?????????
Look at the Ahmad Brook hit on Brees. I assume you are aware of it - he starts the hit in a legal area, the qb falls backwards and down - normal reaction something related to angle of the force and gravity..... the arm then moves up and connects with the throat and head area
I do believe that fine stood up........ so explain to me how that wasn't unavoidable?????
Read this carefully because I think we agree
I don't disagree that unavoidable / avoidable should be a part of the discussions when looking at fines. I also think the fact that runners / receviers lowers their head SHOULD be considered.
Please give me ONE other time that this was done?????????
Look at the Ahmad Brook hit on Brees. I assume you are aware of it
- he starts the hit in a legal area, the qb falls backwards and down - normal reaction something related to angle of the force and gravity..... the arm then moves up and connects with the throat and head areaI do believe that fine stood up........ so explain to me how that wasn't unavoidable?????
OP
OP
AsylumGuido
Well-known member
mikeak":2jc13joy said:" I really think the fine was rescinded because it was unavoidable."
Read this carefully because I think we agree
I don't disagree that unavoidable / avoidable should be a part of the discussions when looking at fines. I also think the fact that runners / receviers lowers their head SHOULD be considered.
Please give me ONE other time that this was done?????????
Look at the Ahmad Brook hit on Brees. I assume you are aware of it
I do believe that fine stood up........ so explain to me how that wasn't unavoidable?????
It wasn't. That should have been rescinded, as well.
We are on exactly the same page on this.
:th2thumbs:
Recon_Hawk
Well-known member
Thanks for the reply, AG. I've got nothing but respect for you, so I hope my comments don't come across as dickish.
I've changed my views a bit through this discussion. It's not as bad as i originally thought, but IMO the Saints still crossed a line and deserved some from of punishment for what happen. The poster "chrispy" summed up my feelings perfectly; its an argument on language. You call it "Pay-for-performance" which may or may not be as bad as a "Bounty", but its still a coach who is rewarding player for injuring players. And let's be clear on the term injury. We know that players are trying to "hurt" the opponent, but we also know that NFL players play "hurt". When they are leaving the field, it's because for that time period, they are "injured". And that's what Greg William's Pay-for-performance had them doing.
You say that money never was paid when a player was official injured, as to suggest Williams never promoted injuring opposing players, but I think that's very much sugarcoating it. When players are trying to knock the opponent out of the game to get paid, a negative result will be that sometimes that player gets permanently injured! And Just my opinion, but I bet when it came time Monday tape review that player got that coaches nod of approval for making the defenses job easier knocking that guy out of the game, and even if they don't get paid, that players style of play will be brought up come re-signing time.
I want to quote something one of those players from the Redskins said about William's system that wasn't from the first quote:
“I never took it for anything [but] just incentive to make good, hard plays,” said a current Redskins player, who requested anonymity. “But I’m pretty sure it did entice some guys to do more to a player than normal when it came to taking them out. I mean, that’s cash. Let’s just be honest about it." http://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/re ... story.html
Greg Williams isn't an idiot. He knew what the results would be offering money to "knockout" or "Cart-off" or "Killshot" an opposing player. Hence why he made a formal apology
“I want to express my sincere regret and apology to the NFL, [Saints owner Tom] Benson, and the New Orleans Saints fans for my participation in the ‘pay for performance’ program while I was with the Saints,” he said. “It was a terrible mistake, and we knew it was wrong while we were doing it. Instead of getting caught up in it, I should have stopped it. I take full responsibility for my role.”
So he didn't call it a "bounty", but you know how the saying goes; A rose by any other name..
Last thing - I hadn't read the Declaration statement by Anthony Hargrove before. After reading it, I'm confused on how anyone can read that and defend Williams in any sort of ways. It's obvious his use of strong arming tactics was meant to hide the truth of what was going on, whether Bounty or Pay-for-Performace.
I've got to run off again, but I'll keep an eye on this thread. PS. I hope your sons gig went well, my man!
I've changed my views a bit through this discussion. It's not as bad as i originally thought, but IMO the Saints still crossed a line and deserved some from of punishment for what happen. The poster "chrispy" summed up my feelings perfectly; its an argument on language. You call it "Pay-for-performance" which may or may not be as bad as a "Bounty", but its still a coach who is rewarding player for injuring players. And let's be clear on the term injury. We know that players are trying to "hurt" the opponent, but we also know that NFL players play "hurt". When they are leaving the field, it's because for that time period, they are "injured". And that's what Greg William's Pay-for-performance had them doing.
You say that money never was paid when a player was official injured, as to suggest Williams never promoted injuring opposing players, but I think that's very much sugarcoating it. When players are trying to knock the opponent out of the game to get paid, a negative result will be that sometimes that player gets permanently injured! And Just my opinion, but I bet when it came time Monday tape review that player got that coaches nod of approval for making the defenses job easier knocking that guy out of the game, and even if they don't get paid, that players style of play will be brought up come re-signing time.
I want to quote something one of those players from the Redskins said about William's system that wasn't from the first quote:
“I never took it for anything [but] just incentive to make good, hard plays,” said a current Redskins player, who requested anonymity. “But I’m pretty sure it did entice some guys to do more to a player than normal when it came to taking them out. I mean, that’s cash. Let’s just be honest about it." http://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/re ... story.html
Greg Williams isn't an idiot. He knew what the results would be offering money to "knockout" or "Cart-off" or "Killshot" an opposing player. Hence why he made a formal apology
“I want to express my sincere regret and apology to the NFL, [Saints owner Tom] Benson, and the New Orleans Saints fans for my participation in the ‘pay for performance’ program while I was with the Saints,” he said. “It was a terrible mistake, and we knew it was wrong while we were doing it. Instead of getting caught up in it, I should have stopped it. I take full responsibility for my role.”
So he didn't call it a "bounty", but you know how the saying goes; A rose by any other name..
Last thing - I hadn't read the Declaration statement by Anthony Hargrove before. After reading it, I'm confused on how anyone can read that and defend Williams in any sort of ways. It's obvious his use of strong arming tactics was meant to hide the truth of what was going on, whether Bounty or Pay-for-Performace.
I've got to run off again, but I'll keep an eye on this thread. PS. I hope your sons gig went well, my man!
OP
OP
AsylumGuido
Well-known member
Recon_Hawk":2utjqgur said:
Thanks for responding. I will do likewise later. The gig went great. We are now off to a wedding rehearsal dinner. Down here that means party your ass off.
:thirishdrinkers:
The Radish
New member
Following along this vein of thought,,,, How do you suppose locker room conversations would have gone with player number 45 in it?
hahahahaha
hahahahaha
