Bountygate draws more negative reaction than Spygate ..

BY ROGER HENSLEY STLtoday.com | Posted: Tuesday, March 6, 2012


QUESTION: Which do you think is the more egregious offense: Bountygate or Spygate?

JIM THOMAS

I guess it depends on what you think is worse. What has happened in Bountygate with the Saints is morally wrong. What happened with Spygate and the Patriots was cheating – cheating that may have affected the outcome of a couple of Super Bowls. What is interesting to me is that there seems to be much more of an outcry about Bountygate than Spygate. I wonder why?

BRYAN BURWELL

We still don’t know enough details of Bountygate yet. If the bounties were done to encourage illegally hurting a player, then we have a problem greater than Spygate.

But I have a big problem with the NFL casting the Saints and Gregg Williams as some sort of renegades perpetrating violence on a church-league game.

Football has always been a decidedly violent game played by exceptionally tough men who are always trying to inflict pain on the man in front of him. The game’s greatest stars played the game with mayhem in their hearts and knocking men out as their intentions.

And for the NFL to tell us how much they are concerned about player health and safety, but then tell us they want 18-game seasons and fight retirees tooth and nail over health benefits is a bit too hypocritical for my taste.

JEFF GORDON

Player safety is a much greater issue than tactical secrecy. When one team spies on another, the aggrieved team can simply adjust its game plan once it becomes apparent their opponent is sitting on its plays. Coaches incapable of going off-script shouldn’t be in the NFL anyway. But when a team loses players due to bounty-related injuries, the adjustment is not so simple. And those players suffering injuries on bounty-related hits are none too happy with the process. Targeting players for extra punishment is a time-honored practice in the NFL. But when this is done in a sanctioned and systematic way, myriad issues arise. For instance, can injured players sue over deliberate and premedicated attempts to injure? We may find out.

BERNIE MIKLASZ

In no way do I condone so-called bounty systems, but I’m also opposed to rushing to judgment, and I can’t stand hypocrisy. The NFL’s investigation into the New Orleans Saints’ bounty program – and the media/fan reaction to it – certainly raises questions.

Before the league starts going crazy in punishing Gregg Williams, New Orleans’ Saints executives and players, it would be helpful to examine this question: what qualifies as dirty play? What actions would qualify as over the line of decency? Are we really to believe that it’s evil for players to offer cash awards to each other for making successful football plays?

I think this cloud will be around for a while. I see New Orleans being made an example of and anyone associated with the goings on also hammered.

Be that right or not, they are the ones with their heads above the parapet whilst other clubs tremble behind them using them as cover.

In some ways, it's difficult to compare the two. It's true that in both cases, the teams were warned that what they were doing was against the rules and ignored the warnings. The difference, however, is that Williams appears to have used what some insiders are saying is a fairly common practice in the league but taken it too far. The Patriots, on the other hand, were going outside the lines of commonly accepted behavior to gain information about opponents that would put them on uneven playing field.

Of course, this gets back to the question as to whether Williams ever offered specific rewards for injuring players as opposed to just rewarding big plays. In the latter, it was just a motivational tool, whereas in the former, it's more sinister. Either way, it would only be adding an additional incentive to do what there are already lots of incentives for players to do anyway.

Not to go all Jesse Ventura on this question, but.....

Q: Why has Bountygate stirred more indignation than Spygate?

A: The Spygate perpetrator was the Patriots. The Bountygate perpetrator was a team not named Patriots.

Well the latest Peyton Manning news should help cool things off a bit as far as news on BOUNTYGATE goes.

I can believe it. If players were rewarded to take opposing players out the game for money. You can end careers and affect lives after football that way. I won't be surprised if more bounty systems start popping up.

Hmm, last time I checked, defensive players were paid to hurt players by a system no one thinks is illegal, that being their contracts. If you are a good defensive player, you get paid well. if you are a good defensive player who is a thumper and leaves guys dazed and confused, you get paid even more. We already pay players more when they are hard hitters, how much different is this exactly?

That being said, an actually bounty to specifically injure a player is another matter entirely. I'm not sure what to make of it, but before we hang people, let's remember that players are already paid to inflict pain, and the more pain they inflict (without sucking otherwise) they more they will probably get paid by their contract.

If the hits are not a penalty on the field what difference does it make what the motivation is? Illegal hits I can understand but if is legal under the current rules then I don't see the big deal.

Can I just say that Jeff Gordon puts out a crap argument for the pro-bountygate side of things. His example of how tame spygate is lameSpygate is worse, was worse and in the clear light of day as time moves on, will be considered the the more douche-bag event. Cheating in superbowls .... Nuff said.

That bountygate thing just makes think of the movie Slaphot.

Are you crazy? We could all end up in the clinker for this. You can't put a bounty on a man's head.


I just did.


Coach, I want that hundred dollars.


Ya gotta earn it, Killer.

Funny stuff, and having played that's what I really appreciate about sports like hockey, hurling, football and rugby. You get to hit people, knock them down and even fight sometimes. In a weird way, it's like a great a great equalizer and keeps the sport clean and respectful.

But seriously and Berg said it right, putting out a contract specifically to hurt someone totally goes against that. No place for that in football I don't think. Defensive players are payed to stop the other team from scoring. Making the quarterback eat dirt is just one of many tools to make that happen :)

This is the type of issue that can affect the popularity of the sport going forward imo, and its why the Saint will pay a heavy price.

You give years of your life way playing the sport, you don't make the most money in comparison to other sports and now the reputation of the sport is "thuggish".

The NFL will be smart to make this incident go away very quickly, but honestly violence is what football is a based around, but people don't perceive it as such, due to the "competition". Perception is reality, and in the case the NFL wants to keep that the actual reality hidden if they like see that green rolling in.

You know, guys.....there's a reason nobody pays professional flag football players millions.