So they didn't want "spygate" to end as well???Quote:
Originally Posted by PeoriaRam
Printable View
So they didn't want "spygate" to end as well???Quote:
Originally Posted by PeoriaRam
Never like Gregg Williams, i think he's extremely overrated. All he's gonna do for us is overload blitz and leave our avergae db's on one-on-one islands.
50,000 pages is shaky testimony.Quote:
Originally Posted by NJ Ramsfan1
Right.:o
The NFL has been handing out heavy fines for hits that only could be "heat of the moment" and unpremeditated for the last few years. The fact that bounties are given for cartoffs is sufficient proof that there was intent to injure on orders from Williams. You think the Steelers organization, for example, is going to sit back and watch Williams only get a fine?!
If the evidence from spygate was to be fully released, it would drastically undermine the legitimacy of a league championship. One that has billions of dollars blown on gambling and other things. It's more in the league's interests to sweep it under the rug. While the bounty system does call into question some aspects of the Saints 2009 run, you can't conclusively demonstrate it unfairly benefited the Saints, so the league can go weapons free and release all the evidence without that same fear of undermining things.Quote:
Originally Posted by ManofGod
Have they turned out the lights in the draft room? This is a damaging situation right now.
Everyone turn your head and cough.
I feel we should do nothing... At least for now. Let's let the NFL finish their investigation and let them lay down the law. If they suspend him for an extended period, we may need to let him go, however i don't think we should be issuing punishment for problems from another team.
No, its testimony and that's all we know, how extensive it is is immaterial.Quote:
Originally Posted by PeoriaRam
As far as I'm aware, it hasn't been released yet.
What we know is that there is an investigation into Williams as a participant in a 'Performance related pay/bounty' system that involves Peyton/Loomis and as yet unnamed Saints personnel. We have had additional testimony from players and ex-players outside of the investigation that corroborates the premise of that investigation as well as testimony that rebuts it and contextualises it.
We don't yet know what the investigation has found or what penalties it will recommend.
If Williams if found guilty of running/participating in a bounty scheme that encouraged his players to deliberately play outside of the rules of the game with intention to seriously harm opposing players then I would expect him to be suspended/banned and then fired and I would agree with it.
If the investigation surrounding Williams drags on and into the regular season I think it highly likely he'll be fired or will resign on the basis of distraction and I would agree with it.
What I will not do, prior to the release of the findings of the investigation, is call for or support calls for Williams firing or the idea that Fisher is guilty by association.
While I agree with most of what you're saying, I cannot agree with your final observation. Williams himself said that he knew what he was doing was wrong and against league rules, yet he continued to do it. I have a major problem with those that thumb their noses at rules and doing the right thing. Fire him now.Quote:
Originally Posted by Fat Pang
I understand that, really do and can see the case for immediate dismissal.Quote:
Originally Posted by RAMFANRAIDERHATER
However ( and in pointing this out I'm very conscious of appearing to be a pedant or overly academic about it ) I'm not sure what he's admitted to; whether he's admitted that he ran a PRP scheme that violates league rules and he's sorry about it or that he's admitted to running a bounty scheme that went after people with a view to putting them on a cart and is sorry about it.
Peoria I think, pointed out that encouraging the former may lead to the latter in any case and I can go along with to an extent but I do think that summary dismissal needs more information than we currently have.
Have any of you guys read the accounts of dozens of former players who REFUTE this stuff? Who say "yes, there was an incentive based system for big hits and big plays but NEVER a pay for injury system? Why are the initial allegations from thus far anonymous sources automatically believed and the subsequent statements to the contrary discounted? Talk about sloppy, one-sided judgments.
People like to dwell on the negative. Negativity sells. Negativity provides fodder for conversation. But this pre-occupation with presumed guilt and an an automatic belief that Gregg Williams is the Adolf Hitler of defensive coordinators has to stop. Let the league conduct its investigation and act accordingly.
There's a decent chance the former players are lying because telling the truth could expose them to criminal battery charges, possible lawsuits, and tax evasion cases while lying results in, well, there are no consequences for lying to reporters.Quote:
Originally Posted by NJ Ramsfan1
Does anyone think that Gregg Williams is only the beginning to this and more names will pop up?
It's hardly a novel thought that to increase one's chances of winning you try to inflict pain to an opposing player and limit his effectiveness if not get him out of the game altogether. Defensive coaches and players have employed this philosophy for years. The gray area is how you achieve this. If it is through good old fashioned football- that is, legally delivered, bone jarring hits, then I have absolutely no problem with it. It's football. If cheap shots or blows to vital areas of the body (head, neck, knees) are a pre-requisite, then obviously it's a much different story.
The question is "what is a coach obligated to do?" Does he really have to tell guys that are grown professionals that "it's not OK to try and end a guy's career? Does he really have to spell out that "aggressive defense doesn't mean dirty defense?" While many levels of football have incentive-based performance rewards for big plays, it is not allowed according to the NFL rules. Therefore Williams is guilty of that infraction and admitted as such. But you will NEVER hear him say he told his defenses to go out there and purposely try and injure people, and I simply have a hard time believing that.
Why jump ahead of the league on this? To show the league that we're not interested in having a hard-nosed Defense? Because they've known that for a decade now.
Sorry, all kidding aside.
I say wait until the League makes their decision. If the league suspends him for 4, 8, 12, 16 games (or however many), then McGinnis is already in place. He will implement the Williams/Fisher plan, and the team will do what they do. It's not like those 3 games aren't already on the same defensive page. From an on-field perspective, I don't think the team will miss a step.
The question then turns to the off-field perspective. I don't think firing Williams really gives us the PR boost that might be hoped for. Not to sound too cynical, but I highly doubt Williams is the only coach that had a performance-for-pay system. He's just the only one that got caught.
I don't think Williams specifically told players to go out and break someones leg, but he did institute a program that paid out the most money for hits that resulted in players being carted off the field on a stretcher. Can that be accomplished without causing an injury? It seems pretty clear to me causing an injury is implied, and many players have stated as much in describing how the bounty system works. In refuting the injury aspect of this issue, many players have said Williams never overtly instructed them to crack skulls, but they also never denied the existance of being paid for "knockout" or "cart off" hits. Again, I don't see how you get a "knockout" or "cart off" without inflicting injury.Quote:
Originally Posted by NJ Ramsfan1
Regardless of what anyone thinks, it's clear from memos and document releases that the NFL is working on the assumption that there was intent to cause injury in rewarding "knockout" and "cart off" hits.