Saints investigated for "Bounty Program"

[jackal]

Willams should get a year suspension and i think it would be fair If the Saints
lost a couple draft picks and there head coach should get a couple game suspension as well.

All the players proven trying to hurt others should be suspended as well for
at least three games this year.

[PurpleHalo]

author's opinion, which I do not share. It is well known that Payton runs the offense and left Williams to run the defense with little supervision. Yes, Payton was technically his boss, but they were much closer to equals then your usual head coach/coordinator.

I have 0 inside knowledge of the Saints, don't know anyone who does, I'm a complete outsider, and I knew Williams had a bounty on Favre in our game. Granted, I didn't care to think about if this extended beyond that game, (selfish ignorance perhaps) yet did wonder about the Arizona game. How could Payton, being on the inside, not have any clue, especially since, supposedly, the owner made a decree to knock it off? Gregg Williams knew, the GM knew (according to the story) the owner knew, (also according to the story) but this completely blindsided Sean Payton, not buying it.

[Mothman]

First, Thank you JustMe. Second, Mothman, While you could be right, the odds of NOT messing it up and kicking the FG for a win were high. With all the things the Vikings did wrong in that game, they did a ton right. Like outplaying the Saints 2-1 in terms of Yardage and 1st downs. Again, I know why people think what they think. But, to deny the fact they would have been in very good FG range, the last 2 INT's never would have happened and the Vikings would have had a better then good chance to win the game, is silly.

I'm just saying that once you change one significant play in the game (the high-low hit on the first INT) the game diverges from there. The circumstances after that play would be different and consequently, everything that came next could have been different too. You can't just take that one play out and assume everything else would have gone the same or would have gone the Vikes way.

If this news about the Saints provides some fans with comfort, I can understand that. I'm looking at it more like VikeinMontana: I don't believe the Vikes lost that game because the Saints took a few cheap shots. The Vikes weren't robbed of a Super Bowl appearance by the Saints tactics, they were robbed by their own inability to execute. They killed their chances with penalties and turnovers. They didn't play like a Super Bowl team and consequently, they didn't get to be a Super Bowl team.

[bigskyeric]

they were robbed by their own inability to execute.

They were robbed by both factors.

[bpviking]

In other news I found this interesting from Siefert.

Also NFL Network was schedule to show the 2009 NFCC on an episode of NFL's Greatest Games yesterday and pulled it and replaced it with a different game.

Sharper is a punk and most definately his tweet "Well y'all seen Brett had surgery on ankle we got after in the championship game. Come Thurs. night 1st game. X marks the spot." Said it all.
"Round up all of those bad boys and hang them high in the street"!

[Mothman]

They were robbed by both factors.

We'll just have to disagree. I fail to see how a few uncalled penalties (and I don't believe it was more than that) robbed the Vikes of a victory in that game. Even a play like the high-low hit on Favre couldn't have been a factor if the Vikes had actually blocked well in the first place. The Saints couldn't have pounded on Favre if the Vikes hadn't repeatedly let them get in position to do it. As I said earlier, putting responsibility for the loss on anyone but the Vikes themselves is just passing the buck. It's a way to shift responsibility away from the team when the team had the opportunity to win that game and they didn't seize it. They simply didn't play well enough for 4+ quarters to get the win.

It's history now anyway so we might as well look forward and hope the Vikes get back in a conference championship soon.

Jim

[Cliff]

We'll just have to disagree. I fail to see how a few uncalled penalties (and I don't believe it was more than that) robbed the Vikes of a victory in that game. Even a play like the high-low hit on Favre couldn't have been a factor if the Vikes had actually blocked well in the first place. The Saints couldn't have pounded on Favre if the Vikes hadn't repeatedly let them get in position to do it.

I agree with you, Jim. However, it sounds like there were more than one time where Favre was getting hit when he shouldn't have. In other words, the line was doing their job and he was getting hit after he didn't have the ball anymore. Check out this quote by Favre;

Former QB Brett Favre on the alleged bounty system employed by the Saints in the 2009 NFC championship game: "In that game there were some plays that, I don't want to say were odd, but I'd throw the ball and whack, on every play," he told SI.com. "Hand it off, whack. Over and over. Some were so blatant. I hand the ball to Percy Harvin early and got drilled right in the chin. They flagged that one, at least."

I don't disagree that the Vikings played their own part in the loss. However, the Saints were going out of their way to hit Favre even after it was appropriate to do so. To me, those missed penalties were huge not only for field position and yards on the plays in question ... but because the abuse Favre took on late hits directly impacted his play on the field (which was the idea at the time I'm sure).

As I said earlier, putting responsibility for the loss on anyone but the Vikes themselves is just passing the buck. It's a way to shift responsibility away from the team when the team had the opportunity to win that game and they didn't seize it. They simply didn't play well enough for 4+ quarters to get the win.

It's history now anyway so we might as well look forward and hope the Vikes get back in a conference championship soon.

Jim

I'm not going to guess if the Vikings would have won or not ... like you say, it's history. However, this behavior should definitely not be tolerated by the league. Actually trying to injure another player is way over the line and teams should be discouraging that mentality and not rewarding it.

[bpviking]

This ^ x 10

[Mothman]

I don't disagree that the Vikings played their own part in the loss. However, the Saints were going out of their way to hit Favre even after it was appropriate to do so.

I think they were flagged most of the time when they crossed the line between what is legal and what isn't, although the officials missed a few calls. I don't think there were that many late hits.

I'm not going to guess if the Vikings would have won or not ... like you say, it's history. However, this behavior should definitely not be tolerated by the league. Actually trying to injure another player is way over the line and teams should be discouraging that mentality and not rewarding it

No argument here. I don't believe any player should be trying to injure another player but I have no problem with a defense hitting the opposing QB as often as possible within the rules in an effort to get him off his game. The Vikings themselves have used that strategy over and over throughout the decades. When a team crosses the line and hits a player illegally, they should be flagged for it and if it persists to an unreasonable degree, players should be warned and even ejected if necessary.

I'm definitely not in favor of cheap shots or bounties and I hope the league comes down on the Saints very hard for their transgressions. As you said, that behavior shouldn't be tolerated.

[dead_poet]

Here's something else I don't get. Why in the world would a player agree to the "bounty" when the cost of getting caught/penalized/fined far outweighs the potential reward of a few measly thousand dollars? Aside from Vilma's $10k bounty, it was reported to this point bounties were in amounts of $1,000 or $1,500, hardly worth it when a player's game check is thousands of dollars over that if fined or suspended. Right? Or am I missing something?

[glg]

Here's something else I don't get. Why in the world would a player agree to the "bounty" when the cost of getting caught/penalized/fined far outweighs the potential reward of a few measly thousand dollars? Aside from Vilma's $10k bounty, it was reported to this point bounties were in amounts of $1,000 or $1,500, hardly worth it when a player's game check is thousands of dollars over that if fined or suspended. Right? Or am I missing something?

Just because players make a lot of money doesn't mean they have a lot of walking-around money. Smart ones have big chunks of their checks automatically sent to investments. Dumber ones blow a lot of it. Really dumb ones have a bunch of child support payments coming out automatically.

That extra cash is probably often spent that night. Even for a player, $1k is a nice bonus to make a night a little extra fun.

[NextQuestion]

Hopefully this means we can cut Remi. He sucks!

[bigskyeric]

again... If the High/Low had been called. The same non penalty the League apologized for.... Had it been called that would have put the vikings very good FG position. The Last 2 Int's never would have happened.... To think that wouldn't have changed the game is...well..... you know how I feel.

[Demi]

again... If the High/Low had been called. The same non penalty the League apologized for.... Had it been called that would have put the vikings very good FG position. The Last 2 Int's never would have happened.... To think that wouldn't have changed the game is...well..... you know how I feel.

Yeah, and I agree. If they didn't outright cheat in an attempt to injure our starting quarterback, we win that game.

[bigskyeric]

Yeah, and I agree. If they didn't outright cheat in an attempt to injure our starting quarterback, we win that game.

The Fact we were in that game till the end gives me that much more respect for Favre. That man played his absolute heart out for the Minnesota Vikings. The abuse he took from that squad of scum bags, and continued to lead to what should have been a victory was amazing. I can not wait to see an asterisk next to the Saints Super Bowl..cough cough..win. The asterisk will read *The 2009 Saints were accused and convicted of setting a bounty on opposing players in an attempt to injure. The Minnesota Vikings, opponent of the Saints in the 09 NFCC lost in overtime by a field goal. Due to this absurd loss, the NFL changed the rules of overtime in playoff games. Please note the New Orleans Saints are considered cheaters and do not deserve the Lombardi Trophy they broke the rules to achieve in 2009*

Does anyone else find it odd that the media has focused on Favre and the Vikings first and foremost, and Kurt Warner secondly? And have not even mentioned Manning and the Colts.....the team they beat in the Super Bowl???

I hope ESPN does another 'Missing Rings' documentary. This would be a great one. As the Vikings already have 2 made about them for the 69 and 98 teams.