Here's the difference: Someone joining a 5 dollar office pool for the NCAA tournament doesn't affect the outcome of the NCAA tournament.
So just to make sure I'm understanding you correctly... You honestly believe that filming opposing teams' defensive signals is a more offensive act than setting up a system that paid players to injure other players and potentially jeopardize their careers? Just for the record, your former coach, who is responsible for Spygate ever happening, now regrets what he did, and would disagree with you 100%. http://www.boston.com/sports/football/patriots/extra_points/2012/05/mangini_regrets.html Mangini regrets turning in Patriots, Spygate By Zuri Berry, Boston.com Staff Former Patriots assistant coach and former New York Jets head coach Eric Mangini expressed dismay today over the ever cloudy shadow that is "spygate." Mangini, who alerted the NFL in 2007 that the the Patriots were taping opponents while head coach of the Jets, took to ESPN's NFL Live program to convey his disappointment in how the scandal has continued to plague the franchise, particularly after Baltimore Ravens coach John Harbaugh called the Patriots' three Super Bowls tainted. "It's regret, it's disappointment, it's all of those things," Mangini said. "Because I know what it took to win those Super Bowls and I have so much respect for the people that were involved there. I'm disappointed that this is what it's translated into. "Never in a million years did I expect it to play out like this," Mangini continued. "This is one of those situations where I didn't want them to do the things they were doing. I didn't think it was any kind of significant advantage, but I wasn't going to give them the convenience of doing it in our stadium, and I wanted to shut it down. But there was no intent to get the league involved. There was no intent to have the landslide that it has become." Harbaugh later backtracked on his comments, but that didn't stop ESPN personality and former Patriots linebacker Tedy Bruschi from defending the franchise. Mangini, who appeared with Bruschi on NFL Live, was upset that Bruschi had been put in a position to defend the Patriots as well. "To have guys like Tedy have to defend the championships that we earned in New England, and to have anything taken away from the Kraft family, from coach Belichick, and the players and coaches that have meant so much to me, never in a million years did I think it was going to translate into what it was going to translate into," Mangini said. "And it doesn't tarnish what we achieved there. It doesn’t tarnish what they achieved after the fact. I think when you look at the history of success that they had after that incident, it's pretty obvious that it didn't play any type of significant role in the victories we had or the success that we had."
They burned the evidence on SpyGate because if it was ever fully proven that the Pats cheated their way to 3 titles in 4 years the NFL wouldn't be worth catspit. Cheating scandals level sports entities for years after they occur.
http://www.boston.com/sports/football/patriots/extra_points/2012/05/mangini_regrets.html Yeah I'm pretty sure that it's your current coach who is responsible for Spygate. Crimes are usually attributed to the guy that did it, not the guy who caught it. That being said, the bounty thing is worse than Spygate, hence the punishment, and Mangini is a fag.
Actually, if you are in the Coca Cola factory legally and you get caught filming, then it isn't a criminal matter at all, so you wouldn't be thrown in jail. What they could do is tell you to stop filming, kick you off the premises, and then go after you in a civil trial.
I saw a stat that the superbowl patriot teams were 10-3 in games decided by 3 points or less. Since then they're 10-8 in such games.
The clock is ticking until a giant NFL alumni class action lawsuit pops up for head (and possibly other) injuries with significant long term effects, and the more the NFL can do to show a lack of negligence and player safety being a top priority, the better they will fare in court.
My first reaction was shock as well. The more I read about it, the more sense the year made. We've all heard the fiery coach speech. Go light those guys up, play hard, hit hard, ect, but never did I have a coach say something to the effect of "take this guy out and I'll pay you". When I tried to think of this happening at a high schools level it was disturbing. So that said, the nfl had to make the example out of these players, because this type of behavior will filter down if not dealt with harshly. I doubt we hear a story about another bounty system for a long time.
Not a lick of sympathy from me here. Wish the suspensions were longer in fact. We "pay" these guys to go on field and entertain us with a sport that we love. NOT try to injure each other purposely, do you realize how much that undermines the integrity of the game? Are you serious? Your point of this being "peanut payments" to each other is INSANE, the suspensions would be justified had they been offering a million or ten million dollars for the SAME thing? It's the point that there was PURPOSE and INTENT to injure with this bounty program. I am all for big hits and people getting their shit rocked on the field, it's what makes the game what it is. But when a player is out there trying to get teammates to purposely injure opponents....... how the hell could you be against these suspensions? Insane
For both cases, it relies on the evidence. If there's evidence Vilma orchestrated (or co-orchestrated) putting bounties on multiple players, and then paying people after they hurt someone, then yes, he deserves a big suspension. Everyone knows that the NFL is trying (maybe not wholeheartedly, but they are trying) to cut out player safety. To issue money to intentionally hurt players in this day and age is just not going to fly. I can't judge just how I feel about the suspension until the evidence comes out. I think the coaches should be punished more, but Vilma was the leader of that defense, and apparently the leader of the bounty system. Goodell apparently warned the Saints a number of times to stop. If Vilma was informed of those warnings and still ignored them, then I'm much more inclined to agree with the suspension. If the evidence shows he's paying out for sacks or he's not actually paying out money, then he shouldn't be suspended at all. But I doubt that's the case. I really hope we get some facts out in the public in this case, so we can make a more informed judgment. I don't want to like a season-long suspension, but if the evidence is right, I could definitely see it. I've expected Vilma to be gone for the year for a while, so this isn't really shocking. Is it worse than Spygate? It's completely different. Spygate taints the integrity of the game. The Saints bounty scandal has to do with player safety and lawsuits. It's still coaches coaching and players playing without any unfair advantages. Injuries are part of the game, you can try harder to hurt people, but most of the time, if an injury is going to happen, it's going to happen, barring some awful cheap shot. All depends on the evidence. If they taped the Rams walkthroughs and from those tapes, they were able to find out what plays the Rams were running, then to not suspend Belichick is a joke. If they did the same thing for all their Super Bowls and kept doing it, then he should have been suspended indefinitely. But it works a lot better for the NFL if everyone brushes it under the rug. If the tapes were made public, and it was really bad, it would be one of the biggest sports scandals in recent memory considering how popular the NFL is. On the other hand, there might not have been a lot there (though apparently enough to dock a 1st round pick and issue big fines). But something stinks about that whole situation.
Like many others I find the bounty program disgusting but more about the money needed to get guys to play hard when their paychecks are definitely enough. The suspensions are over the top when compared to what everyone saw Albert Haynesworth do and then receive a five game suspension. The suspensions levied against the Saints players would be more appropriate if Haynesworth had been suspended for a year or for life. I don't believe Goodell's concern for player safety is anything more than lip service. The rule change of a receiver knocked out of bounds did nothing to improve player safety. Everything is done to keep the public perception positive, it's not about the health of the players it's about keeping the money rolling into the coffers. Sadly retired players aren't all on the same sheet of music when it comes to long term health problems as a result of playing the game. Take Troy Aikman for example, with all the concussions he suffered, he still sides with the money. Is it any wonder why quarterbacks have the most rules in their favor? It's because they draw the most fans which results in the greatest amount of revenue for the NFL on a per player basis. In order for the NFL to truly be responsible for player health, it will take someone in government with the balls of Teddy Roosevelt to make it happen. That person currently does not exist in any political party.
I disagree about haynesworth. His act was stupid and violent, but it was a far cry from a pre meditated system that paid for injuring another player. What the saints were involved in is much more disturbing than a player lashing out after a play.
If you tackled the CEO of Coca Cola, and put him in a coma for a while, you can be assured to spend some time picking up the soap. As for this case, I don't care what happens to Saints n Vilma. They did the wrong thing during the time when player safety was THE biggest concern in the NFL. Also, Saints screwed us over with the secret handshake deal with Vilma in FA few years ago.
