spacegolfer Posted March 17, 2012 Share Posted March 17, 2012 Good hits are great and a part of the game. I am all for it. It is great to have the opportunity to knock someone hard enough to dislodge the ball or make him think twice for catching it. It is wrong to see the opportunity to get a cheap shot or hit with intent of hurting bad enough to have them removed from the game. It is also wrong to place bounties and try to collect bounties for taking someone out of game. I see nothing wrong with bounties on getting good hits without intent to injure. No cheap shots. The game is very quick and sometimes reflexes will not allow one to pull off in time when it looks like a disaster is going to take place. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DaveTV1 Posted March 18, 2012 Share Posted March 18, 2012 That is your problem you back up saying good hits but then you say bounty hit to put people in the carts are ok. whatever I'm not the one that labeled them bounty hits, that was the media. Let's take a look at some of the footage : . It looks very tame to this : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2oHAtIl4-2g I'm trying to compare bounties vs. good hits. I don't think the Saints hit hard enough to collect any money. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coach Rab Posted March 18, 2012 Share Posted March 18, 2012 I'm not the one that labeled them bounty hits, that was the media. Let's take a look at some of the footage : . It looks very tame to this : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2oHAtIl4-2g I'm trying to compare bounties vs. good hits. I don't think the Saints hit hard enough to collect any money. I love this footage. I see 1 dirty hit on the reverse and 1 other questionable hit. The rest looked like Favre had Romo's protection in the pocket. Some people seem to think every hit on Favre was dirty and that's why the saints advanced and won the SB.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buckeyefan1984 Posted March 18, 2012 Share Posted March 18, 2012 Uh oh buckeye... Even more holes in your assumptions and false media reports.<---LOL. False media reports? Funny, I haven't seen any threats from Drew on making the media stop with the "false" reports. Have you? no? I didn't think so. Drew Brees on the SVP show said he has not spoken to the media through any means about the franchise tag and that he is looking forward to working out a deal where he can he a Saint the rest of his career. That sir, is not a report. That is from the man himself. Good day, take a lap. http://www.nola.com/saints/index.ssf/2012/03/drew_brees_contract_has_new_or.html Brees' resistance to the franchise tag dates to 2005, when he was tagged by the San Diego Chargers. At the time, a more naïve Brees embraced the designation, largely because it more than quadrupled his salary. Nine months later he regretted it after shredding his right shoulder in the final game of the season against Denver. "I've played under the franchise tag before, back in 2005, and that ended with 13 anchors in my right shoulder and a 25 percent chance of playing football again," Brees said on ESPN radio last week. "That didn't work out too well for me." Brees said he wants a long-term deal done by April 16, the start of the club's offseason conditioning program. There's presumably a reason for this. He wants to be with his teammates for the de facto start of the 2012 season. He also wants to avoid a potential PR problem. If Brees doesn't sign the franchise tender and report to the offseason program, his image as the team-first leader of the club could take a hit. A surprising number of fans have already turned on him. The crowd will grow if he stays home while his teammates toil through offseason workouts in Metairie. The real deadline to get a deal done is July 16. Under NFL rules, franchise players who do not reach an extension by that date can play only under a one-year deal in 2012. Brees' leverage increased dramatically this week when Calvin Johnson and Mario Williams signed mega-deals with the Lions and Bills. Johnson's eight-year, $132 million deal reportedly includes $60 million in guaranteed money. Williams' six-year, $100 million deal includes a reported $50 million guaranteed. Such lucrative deals for non-quarterbacks can only help the Brees camp's case. _______________________________________________________________ LOL. Me back peddal? not hardly. Again, you seem to forget that I live here in Louisiana so I know what's going on. But go ahead and keep living in that fantasy land of what Drew may or may not be saying on television and what HE IS SAYING through the press. LOL. Back peddaling, good one. False, but a good one. Anything else? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spacegolfer Posted March 18, 2012 Share Posted March 18, 2012 http://www.nola.com/...has_new_or.html Brees' resistance to the franchise tag dates to 2005, when he was tagged by the San Diego Chargers. At the time, a more naïve Brees embraced the designation, largely because it more than quadrupled his salary. Nine months later he regretted it after shredding his right shoulder in the final game of the season against Denver. "I've played under the franchise tag before, back in 2005, and that ended with 13 anchors in my right shoulder and a 25 percent chance of playing football again," Brees said on ESPN radio last week. "That didn't work out too well for me." Brees said he wants a long-term deal done by April 16, the start of the club's offseason conditioning program. There's presumably a reason for this. He wants to be with his teammates for the de facto start of the 2012 season. He also wants to avoid a potential PR problem. If Brees doesn't sign the franchise tender and report to the offseason program, his image as the team-first leader of the club could take a hit. A surprising number of fans have already turned on him. The crowd will grow if he stays home while his teammates toil through offseason workouts in Metairie. The real deadline to get a deal done is July 16. Under NFL rules, franchise players who do not reach an extension by that date can play only under a one-year deal in 2012. Brees' leverage increased dramatically this week when Calvin Johnson and Mario Williams signed mega-deals with the Lions and Bills. Johnson's eight-year, $132 million deal reportedly includes $60 million in guaranteed money. Williams' six-year, $100 million deal includes a reported $50 million guaranteed. Such lucrative deals for non-quarterbacks can only help the Brees camp's case. _______________________________________________________________ LOL. Me back peddal? not hardly. Again, you seem to forget that I live here in Louisiana so I know what's going on. But go ahead and keep living in that fantasy land of what Drew may or may not be saying on television and what HE IS SAYING through the press. LOL. Back peddaling, good one. False, but a good one. Anything else? Maybe he can go to the Gnats and be a back-up to Elite Manning! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DaveTV1 Posted March 19, 2012 Share Posted March 19, 2012 I love this footage. I see 1 dirty hit on the reverse and 1 other questionable hit. The rest looked like Favre had Romo's protection in the pocket. Some people seem to think every hit on Favre was dirty and that's why the saints advanced and won the SB.... I don't see a dirty hit on the reverse, because Favre was trying to fake to the New Orleans secondary and linebackers that he still had the ball to open up the reverse. As I've stated all along, I saw the games in question, and I only saw aggressive play by New Orleans. This video was supposed to "highlight" the cheap shots that New Orleans did against Minnesota, and I'm not convinced that any of them were "cheap shots" or "bounty hits". The only one's that are complaining are the ones that want to end all defensive hits and make it all offense, get rid of the NFL completely, or hate the Saints. What's to hate about the Saints ? They've won one Super Bowl. The Steelers of the 70's and the Raiders of the 70's and 80's were far dirtier than the Saints, and they have huge fan bases. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rattler88 Posted March 19, 2012 Share Posted March 19, 2012 I don't see a dirty hit on the reverse, because Favre was trying to fake to the New Orleans secondary and linebackers that he still had the ball to open up the reverse. As I've stated all along, I saw the games in question, and I only saw aggressive play by New Orleans. This video was supposed to "highlight" the cheap shots that New Orleans did against Minnesota, and I'm not convinced that any of them were "cheap shots" or "bounty hits". The only one's that are complaining are the ones that want to end all defensive hits and make it all offense, get rid of the NFL completely, or hate the Saints. What's to hate about the Saints ? They've won one Super Bowl. The Steelers of the 70's and the Raiders of the 70's and 80's were far dirtier than the Saints, and they have huge fan bases. We are not complaining about great hits and knocking the #### out of someone- that has been said over and over and over- you want to make it out that trying to put people in carts is the same as a great hit. You are the one lost. If someone gets hurt because of a great hit, so be it, but to try to.............never mind been there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coach Rab Posted March 19, 2012 Share Posted March 19, 2012 http://www.nola.com/...has_new_or.html Brees' resistance to the franchise tag dates to 2005, when he was tagged by the San Diego Chargers. At the time, a more naïve Brees embraced the designation, largely because it more than quadrupled his salary. Nine months later he regretted it after shredding his right shoulder in the final game of the season against Denver. "I've played under the franchise tag before, back in 2005, and that ended with 13 anchors in my right shoulder and a 25 percent chance of playing football again," Brees said on ESPN radio last week. "That didn't work out too well for me." Brees said he wants a long-term deal done by April 16, the start of the club's offseason conditioning program. There's presumably a reason for this. He wants to be with his teammates for the de facto start of the 2012 season. He also wants to avoid a potential PR problem. If Brees doesn't sign the franchise tender and report to the offseason program, his image as the team-first leader of the club could take a hit. A surprising number of fans have already turned on him. The crowd will grow if he stays home while his teammates toil through offseason workouts in Metairie. The real deadline to get a deal done is July 16. Under NFL rules, franchise players who do not reach an extension by that date can play only under a one-year deal in 2012. Brees' leverage increased dramatically this week when Calvin Johnson and Mario Williams signed mega-deals with the Lions and Bills. Johnson's eight-year, $132 million deal reportedly includes $60 million in guaranteed money. Williams' six-year, $100 million deal includes a reported $50 million guaranteed. Such lucrative deals for non-quarterbacks can only help the Brees camp's case. _______________________________________________________________ LOL. Me back peddal? not hardly. Again, you seem to forget that I live here in Louisiana so I know what's going on. But go ahead and keep living in that fantasy land of what Drew may or may not be saying on television and what HE IS SAYING through the press. LOL. Back peddaling, good one. False, but a good one. Anything else? Drew Brees doesn't have to threaten the media... he made his own statement which is completely opposite of what you previously said. Your story is still based on "what he did in San Diego." Nice try. Game over, you lose. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buckeyefan1984 Posted March 20, 2012 Share Posted March 20, 2012 Drew Brees doesn't have to threaten the media... he made his own statement which is completely opposite of what you previously said. Your story is still based on "what he did in San Diego." Nice try. Game over, you lose. Oh really? I must have missed it where Drew signed the franchise tag. Please post the link of that happening? Oh, you mean he hasn't signed it yet? I didn't think so. Nice try tho. But really, and I ask this in all fairness. Who are you trying to convince? me or yourself? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coach Rab Posted March 20, 2012 Share Posted March 20, 2012 Oh really? I must have missed it where Drew signed the franchise tag. Please post the link of that happening? Oh, you mean he hasn't signed it yet? I didn't think so. Nice try tho. But really, and I ask this in all fairness. Who are you trying to convince? me or yourself? In his interview, he says he is ok with it, but he is confident a deal can be worked out before that has to happen. And what if he doesn't sign it? Do you really think he will sit out an entire year without being able to play football? No. He wants to be a Saint and will be a Saint when it is all said and done. What exactly are you trying to convince me of? You say Brees is unhappy through "sources." Brees says himself "I am not unhappy." "I want to be a Saint." "We will get a deal done." Get a life. How about you re-sign Romo to 15 more losing seasons. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rattler88 Posted March 22, 2012 Share Posted March 22, 2012 I'm not offended by it, and to me it's not an issue. I know that every time a linebacker, defensive lineman, or corner/safety hits a quarterback they want them out of the game. As long as the hit is legal, I don't have any qualms with it being said on the practice field, in the locker room, on the sideline, or in a huddle. I know L.T. was visibly upset after his sack on Theismann, but it was a legal hit. I have a problem with late hits, cutback blocks, blocks in the back, clipping, etc. . I didn't see many on here complaining about the Falcons being labeled as dirty, but Uncle John wasn't around. (Some R rated language in this article : http://www.slate.com...op_blocks_.html ) But since the Saints had a slush fund to award defensive players, people are up in arms. I would bet that these "bonuses" wouldn't have covered the fines, if the NFL had seen anything on tape that would have been considered a cheap hit. LaVar Arrington took out Aikman, and it was a solid legal hit : . If he got a $5000 bonus after that game for a hit like that, I have no problem with it. It's been shown on highlight films years after he retired. Amazingly enough, he was injured against the Cowboys after signing with the Giants. I don't jump on a bandwagon, and start calling for suspensions, fines, removal from the league, unless I see intent to harm that is illegal. Show me proof that the Saints did this on a continual basis. I know the Saints have a few heavy hitters, but none that I would say are a force in the NFL. Players safety is the overall issue. get use to it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goldandwhite Posted March 22, 2012 Share Posted March 22, 2012 By the time Goodell is finished with the player safety issue the games will start looking like that last Pro Bowl. http://aol.sportingnews.com/nfl/story/2010-02-07/goodell-says-player-salaries-will-keep-growing Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
unclejohn Posted March 22, 2012 Share Posted March 22, 2012 It appears that Jeremy Shockey was the "snitch". I use that word since that what Warren Sapp called him that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Valhalla Posted March 22, 2012 Share Posted March 22, 2012 It appears that Jeremy Shockey was the "snitch". I use that word since that what Warren Sapp called him that. Snitches get stitches.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rattler88 Posted March 22, 2012 Share Posted March 22, 2012 Snitches get stitches.... that sounds like a bounty...........:lol: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DLine06 Posted March 23, 2012 Share Posted March 23, 2012 If people are going to jump on the Defensive players having side bonuses that are in house, then they should have jumped on Emmitt Smith for buying his offensive line expensive gifts for blocking for him back in the 90's. That was an incentive as well. This is an issue of unethical play. The o-lineman were blocking to protect Emmitt. Now if they were chop blocking, or going overboard after the play that's different. The reason Kurt Warner retired was in response to the late concussion hit he received from this bounty. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buckeyefan1984 Posted March 23, 2012 Share Posted March 23, 2012 In his interview, he says he is ok with it,<---But that isn't what he has said to the press. He was burned by San Diego and told the Saints not to franchise him. but he is confident a deal can be worked out before that has to happen.<---I'm sure he is. I'm also pretty sure he thought the same thing while in San Diego as well...but we all know how THAT turned out now don't we? And what if he doesn't sign it? Do you really think he will sit out an entire year without being able to play football?<---Yep, I sure do. All he has to do is simply go back to his recent history in San Diego. No. He wants to be a Saint and will be a Saint when it is all said and done.<---And before that, he wanted to be a Charger. But again, we all know how THAT ended up. What exactly are you trying to convince me of?<---I'm not trying to convince you of anything. I'm just merely suggesting that you take off the rose colored glasses. You say Brees is unhappy through "sources."<---And you're telling me that he isn't? Hey, whatever you want to tell yourself. Brees says himself "I am not unhappy." "I want to be a Saint." "We will get a deal done."<---I bet he doesn't sign the Franchise tag. Get a life. How about you re-sign Romo to 15 more losing seasons.<---You get a life. You brought me in to this and even when I gave you a way out, you still wanted to continue because someone "dared" to give you Saints fans a taste of your own medicine. We don't need to resign Romo, we have OUR quarterback locked in. How about yours? We know who our starting QB is going to be. how about you? We know who our Head Coach is going to be, how about yours? There's alot more where that came from there Mavgrad99. You might want to find another topic to "delve" in and let this one go. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coach Rab Posted March 23, 2012 Share Posted March 23, 2012 buckeye, the only reason I entertain you and mention is because you believe stuff even when it doesn't appear the way you see it. Your blind love for the Cowboys made you say a couple of times that "The Cowboys were a great team." Jason Garrett's boneheaded game plans "He is a great coach." Romo loses a game by himself... "It's not Romo's fault." "Romo is better than Brees." "Romo is better than Montana." (ok, you didn't say the last one, but it would not surprise me if you believe that). So here is where we will call it... you enjoy your speculation, as you seem to enjoy speculating more than just about anyone I have ever seen in my life. I will stick to reality and believing what I see and reacting to what happens. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buckeyefan1984 Posted March 24, 2012 Share Posted March 24, 2012 buckeye, the only reason I entertain you and mention is because you believe stuff even when it doesn't appear the way you see it.<---Wait? what? Dude, look no further than your own post that I'm about to pick apart to see how this very sentence covers you to a tee. Your blind love for the Cowboys made you say a couple of times that "The Cowboys were a great team."<---My blind love? show in any post over the past two seasons where I've called "this" Cowboys team "great". Jason Garrett's boneheaded game plans "He is a great coach." Romo loses a game by himself... "It's not Romo's fault." "Romo is better than Brees."<---Show one post where I've stated that Romo is better than Brees. "Romo is better than Montana." (ok, you didn't say the last one, but it would not surprise me if you believe that). So here is where we will call it... you enjoy your speculation,<---and you enjoy yours. as you seem to enjoy speculating more than just about anyone I have ever seen in my life.<---Other than yourself. I will stick to reality<---Whose reality? yours? Good one. and believing what I see<---In that reality? Good luck. and reacting to what happens.<---Best idea that you've had to date. Yes, go with that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rattler88 Posted April 5, 2012 Share Posted April 5, 2012 http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/7778005/gregg-williams-told-new-orleans-saints-hurt-san-francisco-49ers-speech WOW Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goldandwhite Posted April 5, 2012 Share Posted April 5, 2012 After that comment about injuring Crabtree's ACL this guy may never coach in the NFL again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
unclejohn Posted April 6, 2012 Share Posted April 6, 2012 After that comment about injuring Crabtree's ACL this guy may never coach in the NFL again. +1 and I wouldn't doubt if Sean ever coaches the Saints again either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crawford Posted April 6, 2012 Share Posted April 6, 2012 After that comment about injuring Crabtree's ACL this guy may never coach in the NFL again. As he shouldn't. Especially after hearing that recording. Bad thing about all this the Saints got caught, wonder how many other teams are doing the very same thing. More then we probably think. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
footballfan11 Posted April 6, 2012 Share Posted April 6, 2012 As a coach saying tear his head off is just the boys to get pumped up but to tell to take out a acl is the same thing trying to give him a concussion. Unclejohn u know that is Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DaveTV1 Posted April 7, 2012 Share Posted April 7, 2012 As he shouldn't. Especially after hearing that recording. Bad thing about all this the Saints got caught, wonder how many other teams are doing the very same thing. More then we probably think. See the Naughty 49ers thread, it's the same stuff. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now