Online Now 1696

BOL Round Table

The No. 1 'Bama fan community on the Internet

On this Board 1123
Record: 6133 (1/15/2013)

Online now 1600
Record: 9097 (3/2/2012)

Boards ▾

BOL Round Table

The No. 1 'Bama fan community on the Internet

The Water Cooler

BOL message board for off-topic posts

Ticket Exchange

Buy, sell or swap tickets

Reply

Report: Harper could face severe penalties

  • crimsonbleeder said...

    The people who try and defend the bounty system and attack Goodell are the same people who were mad at Fat Phil Fulmer when WE WERE doing wrong in the Albert Means' recruitment---just doesn't make sense. It's OK to dislike Fat Phil and Goodell for other reasons, but for being a disciplinarian in the league at the height of its popularity, trying to protect its players and keep the lawyers from taking away everything the NFL has worked for is not one of them.

    Don't like or agree with your analogy at all though am obviously on your side with regards to Goodell. I know far more than I should about the Albert Mean's situation but I don't really have the energy to revisit that know but the idea that Fulmer and Kramer were cleaning up the game is absurd bullshit. Whatever though, I am not turning this thread into an Albert Means discussion.

    manbearpig7

  • CamelSpider said...

    No, it isn't. Protecting players is one thing. Making the sport unwatchable while really not helping matters a bit is what we're discussing. Keep up or go away.

    The problem with that analysis is that you say the rule changes aren't helping, when there is evidence that they are. I've attached a recent article on the new kickoff rules resulting in a significant number of consussions. If you fine, suspend, etc. the offending parties, behaviors will be changed, and they certainly have. Keep up or go away. On second thought, just go away.

    This post was edited by crimsonlawyer on 4/17/2012 at 4:11 PM

    Rich McKay says NFL's kickoff tweak reduced concussions - ESPN

    Moving kickoffs up 5 yards last season did exactly what the NFL sought, reducing concussions.

    espn.go.com

    crimsonlawyer

  • crimsonlawyer said...

    The problem with that analysis is that you say the rule changes aren't helping, when there is evidence that they are. I've attached a recent article on the new kickoff rules resulting in a significant number of consussions. If you fine, suspend, etc. the offending parties, behaviors will be changed, and they certainly have. Keep up or go away. On second thought, just go away.

    There are at least as many studies proving the kickoff rules did nothing. Also, fining DBs for what they've now defined as aggressive hits is stupid. You can't play football and also be concerned with what part of someone's body your helmet hits, not when both players are moving as fast as they are. He needs to die of a heart attack.

    CamelSpider

  • CamelSpider said...

    There are at least as many studies proving the kickoff rules did nothing. Also, fining DBs for what they've now defined as aggressive hits is stupid. You can't play football and also be concerned with what part of someone's body your helmet hits, not when both players are moving as fast as they are. He needs to die of a heart attack.

    Why don't you supply us some of those studies. I'm sure the NCAA decided to make the same change, despite the fact that it had no effect, just to feed Goodell's ego.

    crimsonlawyer

  • crimsonlawyer is making really good points in this thread

    faceman237

  • The problem is that nothing ever happened. You can't say there was this bounty system where players were paid to "take out" opposing teams' best players but then offer no proof to support it. Whatever was said or done in the locker room never matriculated onto the field. This suggests that the players didn't take it seriously. No opposing teams players were ever actually "taken out". It was basically a motivational tool (not a very smart one obviously). The bounty system was meant to get players to play harder/better but not meant to be taken literally as in actually trying to injure someone on purpose. There is no proof that the bounty system ever made it out of the locker room. That is what Drew Brees is asking for. Proof that the Saints did something wrong (On The Field) that would justify such harsh penalties. Too bad the NFL media are such p***** that they won't ask Goodell any tough questions for fear of getting blacklisted by the league.

    This post was edited by greygoose2098 on 4/17/2012 at 4:43 PM

    signature image signature image signature image

    greygoose2098

  • faceman237 said...

    crimsonlawyer is making really good points in this thread

    No he's not. He's just proving to not really enjoy football. He should follow figure skating.

    CamelSpider

  • greygoose2098 said...

    The problem is that nothing ever happened. You can't say there was this bounty system where players were paid to "take out" opposing teams' best players but then offer no proof to support it. Whatever was said or done in the locker room never matriculated onto the field. This suggests that the players didn't take it seriously. No opposing teams players were ever actually "taken out". It was basically a motivational tool (not a very smart one obviously). The bounty system was meant to get players to play harder/better but not meant to be taken literally as in actually trying to injure someone on purpose. There is no proof that the bounty system ever made it out of the locker room. That is what Drew Brees is asking for. Proof that the Saints did something wrong (On The Field) that would justify such harsh penalties. Too bad the NFL media are such p***** that they want ask Goodell any tough questions for fear of getting blacklisted by the league.

    But, but, but it SOUNDS bad so we HAVE to punish it. Who cares if it is really harmful? Goodell is all about appearance. Screw him.

    CamelSpider

  • CamelSpider said...

    No he's not. He's just proving to not really enjoy football.

    didn't you say you weren't going to watch the NFL this year?

    faceman237

  • This post is for members of BamaOnLine or All Access VIP members only. Start Free Trial

    Raging Bull

  • This post is for members of BamaOnLine or All Access VIP members only. Start Free Trial

    CamelSpider

  • greygoose2098 said...

    The problem is that nothing ever happened. You can't say there was this bounty system where players were paid to "take out" opposing teams' best players but then offer no proof to support it. Whatever was said or done in the locker room never matriculated onto the field. This suggests that the players didn't take it seriously. No opposing teams players were ever actually "taken out". It was basically a motivational tool (not a very smart one obviously). The bounty system was meant to get players to play harder/better but not meant to be taken literally as in actually trying to injure someone on purpose. There is no proof that the bounty system ever made it out of the locker room. That is what Drew Brees is asking for. Proof that the Saints did something wrong (On The Field) that would justify such harsh penalties. Too bad the NFL media are such p***** that they want ask Goodell any tough questions for fear of getting blacklisted by the league.

    Look at Roman Harper's hit on Steve Smith last year after a touchdown. Smith was hit 5 yards deep in the end zone. He obviously was not injured on the play, but an argument could be made that Roman was trying to take him out. Another instance was two years ago when a Saints DL took out Kurt Warner on an interception. Again, there's probably no way to know for certain but it sure looked like he was trying to get his bounty money by taking out an opposing QB.

    signature image

    .

    Luvnthemouth

  • crimsonlawyer said...

    That's exactly what's being discussed. You think Goodell is doing a bad job because you don't enjoy football with the new rules as much as you did with the old rules, regardless of what the consequences may be to the players.

    I'm not sure I've ever seen a poster make himself look like more ignorant than the vaunted camelspider. It's common sense really...the league is getting sued left and right by former players. He has no choice in the matter.

    signature image

    Thehit86

  • Thehit86 said...

    I'm not sure I've ever seen a poster make himself look like more ignorant than the vaunted camelspider. It's common sense really...the league is getting sued left and right by former players. He has no choice in the matter.

    Oh, the irony.

    CamelSpider

  • This post is for members of BamaOnLine or All Access VIP members only. Start Free Trial

    ROLL TIDE!

    rollingtide2004

  • Luvnthemouth said...

    Look at Roman Harper's hit on Steve Smith last year after a touchdown. Smith was hit 5 yards deep in the end zone. He obviously was not injured on the play, but an argument could be made that Roman was trying to take him out.

    A really really stupid argument could be made sure but you can say that about anything.

    He obviously wasn't trying to injure Smith.

    manbearpig7

  • greygoose2098 said...

    The problem is that nothing ever happened. You can't say there was this bounty system where players were paid to "take out" opposing teams' best players but then offer no proof to support it. Whatever was said or done in the locker room never matriculated onto the field. This suggests that the players didn't take it seriously. No opposing teams players were ever actually "taken out". It was basically a motivational tool (not a very smart one obviously). The bounty system was meant to get players to play harder/better but not meant to be taken literally as in actually trying to injure someone on purpose. There is no proof that the bounty system ever made it out of the locker room. That is what Drew Brees is asking for. Proof that the Saints did something wrong (On The Field) that would justify such harsh penalties. Too bad the NFL media are such p***** that they won't ask Goodell any tough questions for fear of getting blacklisted by the league.

    How do we know that nothing happened? When Earl Bennett was injured by Roman Harper, did Harper get a check/cash? If so and they can prove it as more likely than not, then I don't see how he is not punished. In most cases, it's impossible to prove that the injury was intentional, but they can certainly have some third party testimony as to whether or not he got paid.

    This post was edited by manbearpig7 on 4/17/2012 at 5:51 PM

    manbearpig7

  • manbearpig7 said...

    A really really stupid argument could be made sure but you can say that about anything.

    He obviously wasn't trying to injure Smith.

    really really stupid? It makes sense to me, may be wrong but it's definitely not "really really stupid".

    How is it obvious he wasn't trying to injure him?

    faceman237

  • faceman237 said...

    really really stupid? It makes sense to me, may be wrong but it's definitely not "really really stupid".

    How is it obvious he wasn't trying to injure him?

    He pushed him in the back with his arms and it was an obvious personal foul. They guy had just scored a TD and every single person in the stadium was watching. Zero chance of injury, he was just venting as Smith was likely talking trash. It was retarded sure, but he wasn't trying to end his career while the guy is deep in the endzone celebrating.

    That's like saying George Teague was trying to hurt TO when he hit him on the Dallas star. If you are looking for an intent to injure, find me a play where he lowers his helmet on a receiver going across the middle, or something shady away from the ball. Not a blatant personal foul that would have never injured anybody.

    This post has been edited 3 times, most recently by manbearpig7 on 4/18/2012 at 8:14 AM

    manbearpig7

  • This post is for members of BamaOnLine or All Access VIP members only. Start Free Trial

    BamaNtn92

  • This post is for members of BamaOnLine or All Access VIP members only. Start Free Trial
    signature image signature image signature image

    Edward S

  • This post is for members of BamaOnLine or All Access VIP members only. Start Free Trial

    Raging Bull

  • This post is for members of BamaOnLine or All Access VIP members only. Start Free Trial
    signature image signature image signature image

    greygoose2098

  • This post is for members of BamaOnLine or All Access VIP members only. Start Free Trial

    manbearpig7

  • This post is for members of BamaOnLine or All Access VIP members only. Start Free Trial
    signature image signature image signature image

    Edward S

Alabama
247Sports
Features
Resources
Connect

247Sports In partnership with CBS Sports