Saints grievance hearings coming on M...

Saints grievance hearings coming on May 16, 30

There are 17 comments on the MSNBC story from May 12, 2012, titled Saints grievance hearings coming on May 16, 30. In it, MSNBC reports that:

If you weren't watching PFT Live on Friday, you missed lawyer Peter Ginsberg talking extensively and in-depth regarding the issues arising from the NFL's suspension of four players as a result of the bounty investigation:A Saints linebacker Jonathan Vilma , Saints defensive end Will Smith , Packers defensive end Anthony Hargrove , and Browns ... (more)

Join the discussion below, or Read more at MSNBC.

GBPfan

Colorado Springs, CO

#1 May 13, 2012
I'm not sure how to feel about the grievance hearings. It might be best for the Packers if Hargrove loses his grievance and appeal. Let the new guys get some playing time while the veteran is forced to sit out the first half of the season.

Since: Jun 10

Location hidden

#2 May 21, 2012
I cant believe these Saints players.They got caught redhanded.They better hope it never comes out the refs were paid off.I love a hard hitting game but not when almost all the players are trying to take one player out.Everybody except the refs could see what they did to Curt Warner and Favre.Oh the poor Saints cheaters.
GBPfan

Colorado Springs, CO

#3 May 22, 2012
Bleeds Purple wrote:
I cant believe these Saints players.They got caught redhanded.They better hope it never comes out the refs were paid off.I love a hard hitting game but not when almost all the players are trying to take one player out.Everybody except the refs could see what they did to Curt Warner and Favre.Oh the poor Saints cheaters.
Was it the Saints that were responsible for beating the Vikings or was it the refs? You should make up your mind before posting a comment. BTW I watched Favre for sixteen straight years of regular season and playoff games. I never saw one of those games where the other team wasn't trying to take him out. I never thought the other teams were cheating, and I bet when the Vikings were trying to take Favre out you didn't consider that cheating either. I guess hard hitting turned to cheating the second time ran out in that game, huh?

Since: Jun 10

Location hidden

#4 May 22, 2012
GBPfan wrote:
<quoted text>
Was it the Saints that were responsible for beating the Vikings or was it the refs? You should make up your mind before posting a comment. BTW I watched Favre for sixteen straight years of regular season and playoff games. I never saw one of those games where the other team wasn't trying to take him out. I never thought the other teams were cheating, and I bet when the Vikings were trying to take Favre out you didn't consider that cheating either. I guess hard hitting turned to cheating the second time ran out in that game, huh?
I guess youre denying a bounty program then.Their were several questionable penalties in both those games.I guess you didnt see when they sandwiched Favre with no penalty but called the Vikes for every petty thing.You have to be fair about it.If it was the Packers youd be singing a different tune.Sure you try to take him out but not with late hits and honing in on one player.I think most teams try to dominate the other but not necessarily try to temporarily or permantely injure someone to do it.
GBPfan

Colorado Springs, CO

#5 May 22, 2012
Bleeds Purple wrote:
<quoted text>I guess youre denying a bounty program then.Their were several questionable penalties in both those games.I guess you didnt see when they sandwiched Favre with no penalty but called the Vikes for every petty thing.You have to be fair about it.If it was the Packers youd be singing a different tune.Sure you try to take him out but not with late hits and honing in on one player.I think most teams try to dominate the other but not necessarily try to temporarily or permantely injure someone to do it.
I believe several coaches, players and employees from the Saints have admitted to a bounty program. However, questionable penalties are a refereee issue, not a bounty issue. And I saw Favre get hit hard in the NFC Championship game, just as I saw him get hit hard hundreds of times over his career. AS I SAID, I NEVER CONSIDERED HARD HITTING TO BE CHEATING. I'm sure you didn't either when it was Viking players hitting Favre hard. Whine all you want, but hard hitting is within the rules in football. Favre knows that. That is why we've never heard Brett Favre whine about it.

Since: Jun 10

Location hidden

#6 May 22, 2012
GBPfan wrote:
<quoted text>
I believe several coaches, players and employees from the Saints have admitted to a bounty program. However, questionable penalties are a refereee issue, not a bounty issue. And I saw Favre get hit hard in the NFC Championship game, just as I saw him get hit hard hundreds of times over his career. AS I SAID, I NEVER CONSIDERED HARD HITTING TO BE CHEATING. I'm sure you didn't either when it was Viking players hitting Favre hard. Whine all you want, but hard hitting is within the rules in football. Favre knows that. That is why we've never heard Brett Favre whine about it.
Youre right I love a hard hitting game and wish they went back to the 60s with hardly any rules.I think you understand the difference from what happened here though otherwise they wouldnt be in trouble.In Favres case it was take his legs out.For Frank Gore it was repeatedly hit him in the head.It wasnt the defensive line meeting at the quarterback.And it was cheating because it was illegal.You encouraged people to do things they wouldnt normally do for money.It would be the same as not trying to tackle Aaron Rodgers but instead go for his head cause hes had a concussion.
GBPfan

Colorado Springs, CO

#7 May 22, 2012
Bleeds Purple wrote:
<quoted text>Youre right I love a hard hitting game and wish they went back to the 60s with hardly any rules.I think you understand the difference from what happened here though otherwise they wouldnt be in trouble.In Favres case it was take his legs out.For Frank Gore it was repeatedly hit him in the head.It wasnt the defensive line meeting at the quarterback.And it was cheating because it was illegal.You encouraged people to do things they wouldnt normally do for money.It would be the same as not trying to tackle Aaron Rodgers but instead go for his head cause hes had a concussion.
Of course the Saints would normally hit players. That is why they won the Super Bowl. You are stupid if you think the only reason they hit other players was the piddly little amounts that were paid as bounties. I used to hit everybody as fricking hard as I could and I was never paid a dime. No football player worth a crap plays the game any other way.

Since: Jun 10

Location hidden

#8 May 23, 2012
GBPfan wrote:
<quoted text>
Of course the Saints would normally hit players. That is why they won the Super Bowl. You are stupid if you think the only reason they hit other players was the piddly little amounts that were paid as bounties. I used to hit everybody as fricking hard as I could and I was never paid a dime. No football player worth a crap plays the game any other way.
I didnt say they wouldnt hit them.It was a coordinated and organized event to hit the player in the same spot over and over to cause injury.It was going after specific body parts..not just a good hit.Didnt you hear the recording from the 49ers game where williams instructed the team to hit Frank Gore in the head repeatedly.He said when the head dies the body dies.
GBPfan

Colorado Springs, CO

#9 May 24, 2012
Bleeds Purple wrote:
<quoted text>I didnt say they wouldnt hit them.It was a coordinated and organized event to hit the player in the same spot over and over to cause injury.It was going after specific body parts..not just a good hit.Didnt you hear the recording from the 49ers game where williams instructed the team to hit Frank Gore in the head repeatedly.He said when the head dies the body dies.
Coaches say all kinds of things. You would know that if you ever played the game. Did the players hit Gore repeatedly in the head? NO! BTW who won that game? I guess a team needs a better game plan than "hit Gore in the head." Especially since it is against the rules to hit a player in the head. No wonder the Saint's players ignored their coach.

BTW the game of football is a coordinated and organized event to hit the player in the same spot (legally between the knees and head when tackling and blocking) over and over to cause harm. EVERY team sometimes hits outside of the zone where legal hits are to be made. The injuries that occur EVERY play in the NFL vary from temporary pain to permanent disability. No bounty causes that and when every bounty is eliminated from the game, those injuries will continue just as always. Whine about the Saints all you want, but what they did that was against the rules was "run a bounty program." Nothing more. Every team in the league has had bounty programs of one sort or another. I agree that no game performance bonuses are necessary and they should have been eliminated long ago, but for many reasons other than player safety, because the players won't be any safer or get injured any less by eliminating bounties.
GBPfan

Colorado Springs, CO

#10 May 24, 2012
I noticed that you have never denied that YOU had no problem with the Viking players trying to take Farve out of games while he played for the Packers. Hmmmmmm. I wonder why that is? Could it be you are simply a whiny hypocrite?

Since: Jun 10

Location hidden

#11 May 27, 2012
GBPfan wrote:
I noticed that you have never denied that YOU had no problem with the Viking players trying to take Farve out of games while he played for the Packers. Hmmmmmm. I wonder why that is? Could it be you are simply a whiny hypocrite?
No I never had a problem with the Vikings pounding Favre or Rodgers, however we didnt have a bounty system or intentionally try to injure anyone.We only rattled them so they didnt have time to pass.We never gave Favre the beating the Saints did.
GBPfan

Colorado Springs, CO

#12 May 29, 2012
Bleeds Purple wrote:
<quoted text>No I never had a problem with the Vikings pounding Favre or Rodgers, however we didnt have a bounty system or intentionally try to injure anyone.We only rattled them so they didnt have time to pass.We never gave Favre the beating the Saints did.
Thank you. You have proved my point. Every team tries to pound the opposing team's QB. It is simply ridiculous for you ar anybody else to think that is not an attempt to intenionally injure. I guarantee that if Jared Allen pounds on you, you will KNOW it was intentional and you will be injured. The only question is: How much will you be injured? A little or a lot?

There are 2 reasons that the Vikings never gave Favre the same beating the Saints did. First, the Vikings didn't have as hard hitting a defense as the Saints. That is a credit to the Saints. Second, the Saints played against a 40 year old Favre who was slowed down by age and playing behind that crappy Viking O-line for a season. The Vikings defense always played against a younger, healthier, more athletic Favre.

I do agree that there appears to be quite a bit of eveidence of a bounty system run by the Saints. They got caught. YOU are speculating when you say the Vikings never had a bounty system during the years rthat Favre was regularly kicking Viking ass. If Chris Carter is to be believed, the Vikings did have bounties.

You are unjustifiably whining about a bounty system. Because the only evidence any of us have are admissions by players and coaches. That is the exact same proof we have against the Vikings having a bounty system, thanks to Chris Carter. You can insist that bounty systems create injuries, but I KNOW better. The Viking bounty system went 16 years without causing any serious injury to Brett Favre.
GBPfan

Colorado Springs, CO

#13 May 29, 2012
BTW I do understand how you feel. The Vikings certainly weren't hitting Brees like the Saints were hitting Favre. Did the Vikings hit Brees at all? I'd be upset also if I was a Viking fan. There is no doubt about which team wanted that game more.

Since: Jun 10

Location hidden

#14 May 29, 2012
GBPfan wrote:
<quoted text>
Thank you. You have proved my point. Every team tries to pound the opposing team's QB. It is simply ridiculous for you ar anybody else to think that is not an attempt to intenionally injure. I guarantee that if Jared Allen pounds on you, you will KNOW it was intentional and you will be injured. The only question is: How much will you be injured? A little or a lot?
There are 2 reasons that the Vikings never gave Favre the same beating the Saints did. First, the Vikings didn't have as hard hitting a defense as the Saints. That is a credit to the Saints. Second, the Saints played against a 40 year old Favre who was slowed down by age and playing behind that crappy Viking O-line for a season. The Vikings defense always played against a younger, healthier, more athletic Favre.
I do agree that there appears to be quite a bit of eveidence of a bounty system run by the Saints. They got caught. YOU are speculating when you say the Vikings never had a bounty system during the years rthat Favre was regularly kicking Viking ass. If Chris Carter is to be believed, the Vikings did have bounties.
You are unjustifiably whining about a bounty system. Because the only evidence any of us have are admissions by players and coaches. That is the exact same proof we have against the Vikings having a bounty system, thanks to Chris Carter. You can insist that bounty systems create injuries, but I KNOW better. The Viking bounty system went 16 years without causing any serious injury to Brett Favre.
I dont know that you can say we had a crappy o line and defense.We dominated the game in every statistic.Ya there was alot of things the Vikes should have done where they could have won the game.For one they should have sat on it when we were in field goal range.For another we shouldnt have had 12 men in the huddle.Everybody has there own opinion and mine is that the Saints got away with anything without getting penalties while we got penalized for everything.I remember watching the Saints Cardinals game also and Im not a Cardinals fan but I kept wondering how come they arent getting any penalties and they were trashing Curt Warner.Back to the original article about the grievance they were caught on tape as well as testimony,thats why the coach is suspended and the players.They deserve more.,not less.They won a superbowl while running a bounty program and then tried to cover it up.Who knows if it would have been a different outcome,we never will.Im with you Id rather not have all these rules but if youre going to do that you have to allow all the teams the same privilege.I dont want flag football.The Saints are acting like their the victims here.They got away with plenty.Id rather go back to the sixties and the black and blue division,but right now you have the commissioner stressing safety,over 200 players suing the nfl for concussions and other injuries and the Saints running a bounty program.
GBPfan

Colorado Springs, CO

#15 May 30, 2012
Bleeds Purple wrote:
<quoted text>I dont know that you can say we had a crappy o line and defense.We dominated the game in every statistic.Ya there was alot of things the Vikes should have done where they could have won the game.For one they should have sat on it when we were in field goal range.For another we shouldnt have had 12 men in the huddle.Everybody has there own opinion and mine is that the Saints got away with anything without getting penalties while we got penalized for everything.I remember watching the Saints Cardinals game also and Im not a Cardinals fan but I kept wondering how come they arent getting any penalties and they were trashing Curt Warner.Back to the original article about the grievance they were caught on tape as well as testimony,thats why the coach is suspended and the players.They deserve more.,not less.They won a superbowl while running a bounty program and then tried to cover it up.Who knows if it would have been a different outcome,we never will.Im with you Id rather not have all these rules but if youre going to do that you have to allow all the teams the same privilege.I dont want flag football.The Saints are acting like their the victims here.They got away with plenty.Id rather go back to the sixties and the black and blue division,but right now you have the commissioner stressing safety,over 200 players suing the nfl for concussions and other injuries and the Saints running a bounty program.
Make up your mind. Did the Vikings have many opportunties to win which they messed up or did the referees screw up or did the Saints cheat? I can't even figure out what the hell you are complaining about. Te truth is that the Vikings were beaten on the scoreboard which is all that counts. I remember the Seahawks totally outplaying the Steelers in the Super Bowl. Do you remember who won that game? That kind of thing happens in football sometimes. The team that scores the most wins regardless of statistics. Being the more aggressive and hard hitting team can make up for other shortcomings. The Saints weren't the only team to ever prove that.

Since: Jun 10

Location hidden

#16 Jun 3, 2012
GBPfan wrote:
<quoted text>
Make up your mind. Did the Vikings have many opportunties to win which they messed up or did the referees screw up or did the Saints cheat? I can't even figure out what the hell you are complaining about. Te truth is that the Vikings were beaten on the scoreboard which is all that counts. I remember the Seahawks totally outplaying the Steelers in the Super Bowl. Do you remember who won that game? That kind of thing happens in football sometimes. The team that scores the most wins regardless of statistics. Being the more aggressive and hard hitting team can make up for other shortcomings. The Saints weren't the only team to ever prove that.
There were plenty of questional calls and plays in that game but I dont want anything for that.I want our vengeance on the football field the way its always been.The problem is the Saints are acting like their the victims.They were a dirty team and they got caught.Unless you can prove to me that all 32 teams had a bounty system they had an unfair advantage.They had a bounty on Rodgers too.Just because they werent successful doesnt make it right.What if they had broke Rodgers neck and ended his career and then you found out later they had a bounty and some players got paid for doing it,wouldnt you cry foul?
GBPfan

Colorado Springs, CO

#17 Jun 3, 2012
k
Bleeds Purple wrote:
<quoted text>There were plenty of questional calls and plays in that game but I dont want anything for that.I want our vengeance on the football field the way its always been.The problem is the Saints are acting like their the victims.They were a dirty team and they got caught.Unless you can prove to me that all 32 teams had a bounty system they had an unfair advantage.They had a bounty on Rodgers too.Just because they werent successful doesnt make it right.What if they had broke Rodgers neck and ended his career and then you found out later they had a bounty and some players got paid for doing it,wouldnt you cry foul?
The Saints were NOT a dirty team. The stats prove that. They had no more illegal hits than most teams and fewer than many. Whiny Viking fans can't change the truth no matter how much they would like to.

The Saints DID apparenty run a bounty program. They certainly deserve punishment. The question is how much punishment do they deserve for something that has been done by many teams, including the Vikings. Personally, I believe Goodell was justified in giving severe penalties, primarily because the Saints had previously been told to stop the program, but blatantly defied that order.

The NFL can totally do away with bounties and I hope they do. Bounties are completely unnecessary. However, I harbor no illusions. The game of football will remain just as hard hitting. Injuries will occur just the same without bounties as with bounties. Dirty play and illegal hits will continue to happen the same after bounties are successfully banned. Aaron Rodgers will continue to be targeted by EVERY team that plays the Packers. The Vikings will continue to target Aaron and they will try to put him out of games. I KNOW these things will go unchanged. Aaron KNOWS these things will go unchanged. We both know he could get his neck broken on any given play. That is a risk in a contact sport played by very big, fast, powerful people. The Saints never put Aaron at any more risk than any other team. You can shiver in your boots about the big bad Saints. I know they are just another football team.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Scott Fujita Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Barkevious Mingo's lean frame remains a weighty... (May '13) May '13 James Rhodes 1
News Plenty of questions, not many answers: Clevelan... (Sep '12) Sep '12 dan 1
News NFL: No legal ground for court to halt lockout (Mar '11) Mar '11 yernogoood- 1
News Will NFL players be able to budget during lockout? (Mar '11) Mar '11 LOL 1
News Will Players Be Able To Budget During Lockout? (Mar '11) Mar '11 Mocha Motive 6
News Will players be able to budget during lockout? (Mar '11) Mar '11 Erin 1
News NFL players eye financial reality of lockout (1... (Mar '11) Mar '11 Morte 5
More from around the web