Ndamukong wrote:
Yes it does hurt divisional rivals. The Saints would stop been competitive. Even if they could keep some talent, which they wouldn't, they would literally have nothing to play for. Why play to win when you can't do anything with those wins? Might as well throw the season completely and pick early. Plus divisional games against the Saints wouldn't mean anything. Who cares if they have the head to head over you? They can't do anything with it.
They already have players under contract. I'd imagine the better players will have contracts exceeding the length of any ban. Unless they are requesting a trade/release they will be staying. If they drop the level of play/competitivness significantly then they won't be in a position to be succesful again after the ban is over. Similar to Melbourne when they were banned from collecting competition points. They wouldn't be picking early either because they'd have the first round picks taken away (they don't even have one this year anyway).
Ndamukong wrote:
Points 2 and 3. Like I said. They used the bounty system to enhance performance in the regular season as well. You can't just decide to implement this post season ban if you feel it's as serious as you are making out. It should be applied to all aspects of the game surely? Otherwise you are saying it's ok so long as you don't do it in important games. Really don't understand what the basis is for this line of punishment, it seems pretty nonsensical to me.
It's pretty simple and i've explained it clearly already. If the allegations are true then they either:
A) wanted to injure players deliberately for money (which IMO is worse)
or
B) wanted to injure players to gain a competative advantage. Injuring players deliberately gives them a better chance of winning games. Winning games gives them a better chance of making the play-offs. Making the play-offs gives them a better chance of winning the superbowl.
Now A) is extremely unlikely given the little amount of money when you consider the context. B) is likely. They tried to injure players in order to win the SB. Take away what they tried to gain (either the ability to win the SB or the actual SB(not likely)). In the same way as the Melbourne Storm cheated the books in order to win, the NRL took away their ability to gain competition points for that season.
The fact it was in the post season or the regular season is irrelevant.
Ndamukong wrote:
Point 4. I think you are being incredibly naive to think those organisations had no knowledge of the bounties. Especially the Bills given that Williams was the HC. You really think a bunch of 53 players staff would keep all that under wraps? Like I say, incredibly naive.
Again, i'm not being naive. You've stated that the average length of any career is 3 years. What i'm saying is it would be extremely difficult to justify a post season ban for the Redskins/Bills given that many/most of the players/coaches on the roster now will not have been on the roster when Williams or the system were in place. Of course, as i've said, if it can be proven that the owner of either of those were aware of it then the franchise should be fined and docked draft picks. If it can be proven that players/coaches on those teams were aware/participated in the bounty system then they should be fined and suspended. Now if it is still in place on any teams then i would advocate the same ban.
Ndamukong wrote:
Point 5. You can stand around saying if this and that happened then the world would be a completely different place. Favre would've been hit regardless. Who wouldn't go after a 40 year old QB with little to no mobility? Plus is a $10k bonus really a big deal to guys earning millions? I'd imagine a Superbowl bonus dwarfs $10k.
Of course they would have still hit him....but would they have hit him as late? would Favre have committed as many turnovers if he hadn't been deliberately injured? There is a massive difference between targetting Favre because he is imobile and targetting him to knock him out of the game. There is a difference with targetting his ankle to force turnovers and put pressure on him and targetting his ankle to get him carted off.
I'd also imagine that any benefit gained by cheating to a SB win dwarfs any paltry fine or draft picks they get docked?
Ndamukong wrote:
The precedent has been set with the Patriots. They cheated their way to Superbowls and none were taken off them. If the NFL do anything more than fines, suspensions and draft picks then the Saints will have been incredibly hard done to in my opinion. I do however think that Williams should be suspended for numerous seasons.
This is a million times worse than the Patriots though. The Saints deliberately endangered other players lives in order to win, they potentially committed salary cap infringements (did the payments count on it?), they potentially have tax implications (IRS are allegedly interested).
