runningfishy
Banned
- 2,874
- 19
- Joined
- Sep 25, 2005
I can't believe how RG3 will get a ring this year and it's only his first season
LOL Bradford got front groped. Look carefully.
S.Jackson be like, that's happened to me before.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: this_feature_currently_requires_accessing_site_using_safari
I can't believe how RG3 will get a ring this year and it's only his first season
The NFL Was Completely Fine With "Smash-For-Cash" Bounty Programs 16 Years Ago
Deadspin.com
The four players implicated in the Saints bounty scandal are in a kind of limbo, as their suspension appeals make their way through through federal court, as well as the league's CBA-mandated appeals process. The latest movement comes in a Louisiana District Court, where yesterday the NFLPA filed papers suggesting that the NFL not only knew about previous cash-for-hits programs, but publicly said they were A-OK. The only difference between then and now? The league wasn't in the middle of the PR nightmare of concussions and head trauma.
The filing is below, with the good stuff on Page 8. In January of 1996, ESPN aired a segment on a Packers bounty program administered by Reggie White. "Smash-for-Cash" paid out $500 for big hits, and was originally funded by the entire team, but had paid out so much by the playoffs that White and DE Sean Jones contributed to keep it going.
The ESPN report also cited similar programs around the league, including one in Philadelphia that Troy Vincent was more than happy to discuss on camera. The most damning thing in the segment was the response, from an unnamed NFL spokesman:
"The ‘Smash-for-Cash' program is within the rules as long as players use their own monies, the amounts are not exorbitant, and the payments are not for illegal hits."
There's more. The NFLPA's court filing also cites a 1996 AP article that fleshes out some of the details of White's program.
"I gave them money for big hits,'' White said, explaining how he spent his entire $13,000 game check to reward players $500 apiece for big hits in Green Bay's playoff win over San Francisco. "I don't know if the money is any more motivation, but I know I paid out a lot."
The article adds that the Packers had been giving out cash bonuses for big plays and big hits since 1994. And once again, the NFL gave a statement explicitly condoning the program.
Greg Aiello, an NFL spokesman, said there was nothing wrong with what White did, likening it to a quarterback buying gifts for his offensive linemen.
I think Jim Harball beats his wife and abused his brother. LOL He's definitely psychotic!
I can't seem to embrace the 49ers the same way post rice/young days. It's just not the same, probably because Jim harball is a jerk.
Let's get this out of the way first: 49ers coach Jim Harbaugh was absolutely right to decline a penalty resulting in a safety toward the end of his team's win over the Seahawks. With a flag for a chop block, San Francisco could have accepted it, taken two points to push its lead to nine, and received the free kick. Instead, Harbaugh chose the result of the play on the field: a fourth-down pass to Ben Obomanu than came up just short of the first-down marker. Turnover on downs, Niners kneeldown.
This was more than just patented Jim Harbaugh trolling. Though the conventional wisdom says "take the points, make it a two-possession game, there was really nothing for San Francisco to gain." It's not even so much that there was any realistic chance of Seattle recovering their onside kick (yes, you can kick onside after a safety), scoring, recovering another onside kick, and scoring again, all within 43 seconds. Why expose your "hands team" to an onside kick, risking an injury to a skill position? If you have the option to end a game without running any more plays, and Joe Pisarcik isn't in the building, take it. Points be damned.
(Net points is the seventh tiebreaker for divisional standings. The season coming down to those two points is less likely than the Seahawks coming back to win last night.)
Now, about those two points: They were the difference between the 49ers winning by seven, or by nine. That matters to a not-insignificant subset of viewers—those who had money on the game. Depending on where you wager, Seattle was getting 7, 7.5, or 8.
R.J. Bell of Pregame.com breaks down who got hosed, and for how much:
49ers -7 had money refunded (but would have won with the safety)
49ers -7.5 or -8 lost (but would have won with the safety)
Seahawks +7 had money refunded (but would have lost with the safety)
Seahawks +7.5 or +8 won (but would have lost with the safety)
Overall, it's safe to say that coach Harbaugh's unconventional decision resulted in a $75 million dollar swing worldwide with the bettors overall losing that amount (due to 65% of the action being on the 49ers) and the bookies overall winning that amount.
I'm going to try to make anyone who lost money feel a little better (though it's not going to work). The chop block penalty on Paul McQuistan? A terrible call that shouldn't have been flagged in the first place.
"I gave them money for big hits,'' White said, explaining how he spent his entire $13,000 game check to reward players $500 apiece for big hits in Green Bay's playoff win over San Francisco. "I don't know if the money is any more motivation, but I know I paid out a lot."
Good, one less ***** to worry about.I can't seem to embrace the 49ers the same way post rice/young days.
Harbaugh gets the job done, that's all that matters.
He's a good coach.
But in all honesty he doesn't get the job done.
The only coach who gets the job done is the one who leads the team to the championship.
Remember what ricky bobby says
If you aint first
And uphold the decision.Goddell recused himself from the case.....the god Paul Tagliabue will step in
some of these responses about Jim are hilarious...
I laugh throughout games at the way he acts... there's not one play that goes by where he doesnt look like hes about to **** his pants.
Based on the way this "Smash For Cash" story is coming across on tv, it doesn't seem like that would help Vilma/Saints' case that much, compared to them basically saying "We need you to injure Favre/Rodgers/Cam on this play and get him out the game" or whatever. Hell, it's been in the newspapers that the Texans DBs do this solely for INTs. No one made any money last week. Obviously.