What should the Rams do about Gregg Williams?

[PeoriaRam]

See now, Mike, that's an excellent point. And I don't want the negative effects of keeping Williams either, but I have to ask myself.....what would those negative effects be?

It's not like he's going to start a new bounty system here now? In fact, there will be such a spotlight on the Rams I would bet the Rams organization will be the cleanest in the league.

Mike Ornstein's involvement in the Saints scheme makes me question whether Williams would be that smart.

Or what, will the league/fans/media look down on us because our DC is the bounty posterboy? The league/fans/media already look down on us.

There's a difference between being looked down upon for incompetence and being looked down upon for being a bunch of bloodthirsty maniacs who would paralyze their own grandmothers for a C-note (hyperbole yet, but it conveys the point). It is possible that every hard hit draws a flag despite their relative legality, and if God forbid anyone got hurt facing our defense, I would dread that Sam Bradford ends the next series spread out all over the field in "retaliation".

Honestly, Williams isn't a hill worth dying on for the team. Let him go, replan free agency and the draft to focus more on the offense this offseason, and get another hardarse next year to run the D. There isn't something uniquely special and great about Williams that makes him the only DC we could possibly use.

[Fat Pang]

The league really wants to promote the idea that football is "safe" because otherwise, there might not be football a generation or 2 down the road.

To what extent is this possible and the essence of the game remain the same?

Can football ever be safe and remain the game that people watch today?

I'd argue and I'm happy to be convinced otherwise, that 'safe' football just isn't possible anymore than its possible to play in the front/second row in rugby and not get cauliflower ears and that in the event it ever made a serious effort to try to be, you wouldn't have football a generation or two down the road.

[adarian_too]

Specific to this situation, if Williams bounty system was to lay out the big hits (not injuries), then maybe the situation is not quite the boogeyman we currently see. And injuries are simply a by-product of the big hits.

I think a point that is being missed in this discussion is the presumption that one should have to motivate employees to "do their job" by throwing more coin at them than originally contracted for. In 2011, the base minimum salary for a rookie was $375,000. Frankly, I find it preposterous that I'll only get someone's best if some under-the-table wink and nod is contrived in addition to a salary most will never see.

It is a game of violence with clotheslines from the NightTrain to Deacon's headslaps. Nietszke (sp), Butkus, Lott and many more personified hard-hitting, sometimes questionable tactics. You can't legislate intent and trying to interrpret what a "defenseless" player is is getting close to preposterous.

If Williams or anyone else thinks that it is an acceptable motivational ploy to play down to thuggery, hooliganism, and gangsterism, then he can take his game and attitude to San Quentin, get a prison tat, and live the high life with the Arayan Crips.

[HUbison]

There's a difference between being looked down upon for incompetence and being looked down upon for being a bunch of bloodthirsty maniacs who would paralyze their own grandmothers for a C-note (hyperbole yet, but it conveys the point).

And what is that difference? And how does that difference affect the on-field product? It was reported yesterday that Fisher's Titans were the most penalized defense of the 2000's. Are they looked down upon by anyone?

It is possible that every hard hit draws a flag despite their relative legality,

And if so, Fisher should be camped outside Goodell's office declaring to the highest ivory tower about the prejudicial treatment the Rams are subjected to by officials for perceived injustices that were commited by Saints (not Rams) personnel.

and if God forbid anyone got hurt facing our defense, I would dread that Sam Bradford ends the next series spread out all over the field in "retaliation".

But that's impossible, is it not? Gregg Williams is the bad guy in Bountygate. If he's a Ram, then there's no way the other 31 teams would ever stoop to willfully injure. Right? Unless, of course, Williams is nothing more than a scape-goat for a practice that is common to most or all NFL teams.

[Goldenfleece]

And if so, Fisher should be camped outside Goodell's office declaring to the highest ivory tower about the prejudicial treatment the Rams are subjected to by officials for perceived injustices that were commited by Saints (not Rams) personnel.

That could be entertaining. Maybe he could bring Gregg along and have him explain how the brand of violence on his current team is completely different than the hooliganism he was coaching down in New Orleans.

But that's impossible, is it not? Gregg Williams is the bad guy in Bountygate. If he's a Ram, then there's no way the other 31 teams would ever stoop to willfully injure. Right? Unless, of course, Williams is nothing more than a scape-goat for a practice that is common to most or all NFL teams.

I think the concern there would be retaliation. Bounty or no bounty, if our defense starts hurting people, teams might start gunning for our quarterback.

[HUbison]

That could be entertaining. Maybe he could bring Gregg along and have him explain how the brand of violence on his current team is completely different than the hooliganism he was coaching down in New Orleans.

Indeed. I suppose that explanation would depend upon what he actually did in N'awlins. If he paid people to make illegal hits, then the difference is hard-nosed football vs. assault/battery. If he paid Saints to make big, bone-rockin', slobber-knockin', legal hits, then I hope there is no difference whatsoever.

I think the concern there would be retaliation. Bounty or no bounty, if our defense starts hurting people, teams might start gunning for our quarterback.

It's a huge assumption to imply they are not already gunning for our quarterback. In fact, is that not the very objective of all 32 NFL pass rush defenses?

[MauiRam]

Indeed. I suppose that explanation would depend upon what he actually did in N'awlins. If he paid people to make illegal hits, then the difference is hard-nosed football vs. assault/battery. If he paid Saints to make big, bone-rockin', slobber-knockin', legal hits, then I hope there is no difference whatsoever. It's a huge assumption to imply they are not already gunning for our quarterback. In fact, is that not the very objective of all 32 NFL pass rush defenses?

Bingo !! If an opposing defensive player is more concerned with injuring a particular player on offense rather than focusing on his respective responsibilities, then he's probably not going to be as effective. After all, the object of the game is to win. With or without "bounties," players are going to be injured - it's the nature of the game even without intent. Some of the most devastating injuries occur when players on the same team roll up on the leg of one of their teammates accidentally from behind.

If our players are well coached on both sides of the ball and therefore are totally focused on their respective assignments then I like our chances. There will always be players who for one reason or another take cheap shots when given the opportunity. Developing a disciplined team on both sides of the ball is where coaches' and players' energy is best expended. Execute, stay focused, avoid stupid penalties, play to win ...

[GroundChuck]

I say keep Williams. He is not the lone wolf regarding so called "Bounties". An incentive program goes on all the time in the pros as well as the college level. Why does anyone think you see so many stickers on college players helmets? For leading the pre-game calisthenics? I don't think so......