NFL investigating Saints for placing bounties on players(merged X2)

AndyJohnson said:

It was legal to film defensive signals. The only violation was the spot it was done from. It is ILLOGICAL to assume filming the same thing from a different spot, has any impact on a game.

Click to expand...

Ask Reiss > Patriots Mailbag > Spygate Q&A says:

Q: I've heard that it's not against the NFL rules to tape opponents signals but it was the point on the field from where the Patriots taped the signals that was the problem. Is that correct, and if so do you know where in the rule book that is stated?
Jack, Texas

A: Jack, taping signals of opposing coaches, regardless of location, is against the rules. The NFL clarified that in the September of 2006 memo from Ray Anderson, although from a technical standpoint, the league should probably now be writing that into the Constitution & Bylaws.

Click to expand...

And the Final Ruling says:

Bill Belichick has been fined $500,000 by the NFL. That is the maximum amount under the NFL Constitution and By-Laws for violating league policy last Sunday on the use of equipment to videotape an opposing team's offensive or defensive signals.

Click to expand...

No mention of it being about location, just about taping signals, period.

In a full interview, Belichick said:

"Even though I felt there was a gray area in the rule and I misinterpreted the rule, that was my mistake and we've been penalized for it. I apologize to everybody that is involved - the league, the other teams, the fans, our team, for the amount of conversation and dialogue that it's caused.

"I misinterpreted the rule. The commissioner made his ruling and we've been penalized for it and tried to move on."

Click to expand...

Again, no mention of it being about location.

It's not LOGICAL for Bill to not offer up this defense if he thought it was significant.

Bottom line: the Pats were caught out, they owned up to it, they paid the penalties, life moved on.

The Saints should be doing the same, and an apology from Williams is not enough. We should have heard from the owner by now.

The Saints rules violations clearly did impact the game in which they occurred and of course rewarded the injury of players, so they should be more heavily punished.

sly24 said:

I agree and I seriously cannot believe this. The punishment came down quick on us for spygate and was done by the commissionner ONLY. Now for something far worse, he's going to consult the owners about it?? This can't be serious. Obviously the punishment will be softened with the owner's meeting.

Click to expand...

I agree. Why does the commish feel he can/should wait, when he didn't feel he could/should wait when Belichick and the Pats are involved?

Naugy Nugget said:

Ask Reiss > Patriots Mailbag > Spygate Q&A says:



And the Final Ruling says:



No mention of it being about location, just about taping signals, period.

In a full interview, Belichick said:



Again, no mention of it being about location.

It's not LOGICAL for Bill to not offer up this defense if he thought it was significant.

Bottom line: the Pats were caught out, they owned up to it, they paid the penalties, life moved on.

The Saints should be doing the same, and an apology from Williams is not enough. We should have heard from the owner by now.

The Saints rules violations clearly did impact the game in which they occurred and of course rewarded the injury of players, so they should be more heavily punished.



I agree. Why does the commish feel he can/should wait, when he didn't feel he could/should wait when Belichick and the Pats are involved?

Click to expand...

the 2006 memo clarified the rule but reading the actual rule you could easily interpret it the way Belichick did and frankly I would say they could make a strong case that a memo doesn't change a rule.

It was clearly wrong to do it but the fact that it even required a memo to clarify exonerates the team from 2000-2005 which clears the superbowls,in my humble, biased, opinion.

I think that there is a very good chance that BB will use all the "SpyGate" rehash to rile this team up for another run..

Salva135 said:

LOL, come on man, is that response really necessary? There's nothing outrageous about what I said. I'm not saying I agree that SpyGate is worse, just that I believe that a lot of non-Patriot fans will view it as worse. I've been to plenty of other message boards already and read sentiment that what the Saints did is more a part of the "culture" of football than what the Patriots did, and that Spygate affected the integrity of the sport to a greater degree. Hell, that's coming from some sportswriters as well.

Click to expand...

I can see this. After all, we all know that cameras can steal your soul while what these Saints clowns were doing was trying to maim which might lead to as harmless a thing as taking a career or a life. Yeah, all in all, spygate was obviously much worse.

pherein said:

I can't even believe what I am hearing. Your damn right we tried to hit Farve, Warner and the rest. Our defense was suppose to put them on their ass and not care about what injuries the QB or players got because of it. Their is not a defense in the NFL that does not do the same, we are no different than NE.
If the Patriots defense could have clocked Manning, they would have more than happy to do so, and the fans would have supported it. This is not a very good depiction of what happened.

Click to expand...

Pherein, you've always seemed like a good guy, so let me put this gently:

Your team allegedly had a pot of money that was used, in part, to reward players who took opponents out of the game. There is an allegation that there was $10k for taking out Favre in the playoffs. If the allegations are true, your team took the "hard hits/good plays" pot, went way too far with it and may have led to injuries (possibly including the Favre injury in the playoffs), and then proceeded to lie about it, and that the problem actually reached all the way to the owner who was lied to by members of his organization.

Your team's former DC has already apologized for his 'mistake'.

And, sadly, you've got some sick fans among your group:

It took me a day to conclude that I Don't Care - SaintsReport Community Forums

jcdavey said:

Loomis could pay price for lying to league, owner | ProFootballTalk



don't really see how loomis escapes this ........


yeah but it's all in the media's head, saints fans.......

Click to expand...

...or, maybe benson is lying about telling loomis to stop the program.

MoLewisrocks said:

This may also cost him at the negotiation table as he will need a clean face of the franchise as much as he ever did now. Although I'm sure that face was also well aware of what was going on and I wouldn't be surprised if his agent wasn't involved in pushing the league to reopen the investigation for leverage purposes...

Click to expand...

Problem with that: said agent is going to have egg on his face at a minimum, as he potentially committed a salary cap violation himself. . . .

Naugy Nugget said:

Ask Reiss > Patriots Mailbag > Spygate Q&A says:



And the Final Ruling says:



No mention of it being about location, just about taping signals, period.

In a full interview, Belichick said:



Again, no mention of it being about location.

It's not LOGICAL for Bill to not offer up this defense if he thought it was significant.

Bottom line: the Pats were caught out, they owned up to it, they paid the penalties, life moved on.

The Saints should be doing the same, and an apology from Williams is not enough. We should have heard from the owner by now.

The Saints rules violations clearly did impact the game in which they occurred and of course rewarded the injury of players, so they should be more heavily punished.



I agree. Why does the commish feel he can/should wait, when he didn't feel he could/should wait when Belichick and the Pats are involved?

Click to expand...

If the cameraman was in the designated area, there would be nothing wrong with what was done. That has been discussed as nauseum here and elsewhere.

Something I learned this morning that I had not heard before is that the NFL learned of this in November but waited to break it until now to avoid the distraction during the season...

Umm, when Spy Gate broke, it was week 1. When the bogus story by the fat toad at the Herald came the morning of arguably the biggest game in the history of this franchise.

I'm sorry but this is absolute BS. Suddenly the NFL cares about when a story breaks?! Come on.

Edit: This was from Howard David on NFL Radio this morning, I have yet to see it in print.

DaBruinz said:

I think that there is a very good chance that BB will use all the "SpyGate" rehash to rile this team up for another run..

Click to expand...

I seriously doubt BB will have his 2012 team living in the past trying to get them motivated about a punishment he received 5 years ago when all but a couple of them werent Patriots.
If his idea of motivating the 2012 team is to cry about how he was wronged 5 years ago, he should retire. Luckily, I think its safe to say, unlike many fans, BB has moved on and isn't obsessed about this.

sly24 said:

I agree and I seriously cannot believe this. The punishment came down quick on us for spygate and was done by the commissionner ONLY. Now for something far worse, he's going to consult the owners about it?? This can't be serious. Obviously the punishment will be softened with the owner's meeting.

Click to expand...

I understand what you are saying but I am not so sure, for example, Minnesota's owner or some other owners whose teams are in the same division will want to go soft on them. Also, I can see Kraft saying, the punishment has to be worse than the one on the Pats.

BradfordPatsFan said:

Something I learned this morning that I had not heard before is that the NFL learned of this in November but waited to break it until now to avoid the distraction during the season...

Umm, when Spy Gate broke, it was week 1. When the bogus story by the fat toad at the Herald came the morning of arguably the biggest game in the history of this franchise.

I'm sorry but this is absolute BS. Suddenly the NFL cares about when a story breaks?! Come on.

Edit: This was from Howard David on NFL Radio this morning, I have yet to see it in print.

Click to expand...

My dislike of Goodell has been pretty clearly demonstrated on this site. That being said, I'm willing to give Goodell the benefit of the doubt and to say that he may have learned from the Spygate fiasco.

BradfordPatsFan said:

When the bogus story by the fat toad at the Herald came the morning of arguably the biggest game in the history of this franchise.

Click to expand...

Let's not compare apples and biscuits here: the fat toad's story was not a revelation by the league.

sly24 said:

I agree and I seriously cannot believe this. The punishment came down quick on us for spygate and was done by the commissionner ONLY. Now for something far worse, he's going to consult the owners about it?? This can't be serious. Obviously the punishment will be softened with the owner's meeting.

Click to expand...

I know a lot of people are complaining about Goodell putting off a decision until the owners meeting, but I can actually understand this.

The ramifications are huge. This doesn't affect just the Saints. It also affects the Rams and Redskins. It affects the Rams because they just hired Williams and it affects the Redskins because of potential salary cap ramifications if Williams put money in the pot there.

Anyone from the Saints defense over the last 3 years is affected. And they have had players move on. So, we're not just talking about 22-27 players. We're talking about more than 30 players and players on other teams.

Let's say, hypothetically, that every player with the exception of Vilma gets a 4 game suspension. The league is likely to allow the Saints to spread them out over the course of the year. Former Saints players on other teams won't be as lucky. Vilma and any other player who threw in large funds for the express intent of targeting a single player should get a 1 year suspension.

Then there is what to do with the money. In this case, they should put the money from the fines into the injured players fund.

Then there is what to do with Williams, Payton, and Loomis. Williams ran this for at least 4 years (one with Washington and 3 with New Orleans). Does he get a 1 year suspension or is he gone for life?

What sort of fines do you hit Payton and Loomis with? Clearly they knew it was going on. Loomis will probably be fired by Benson since Benson gave him a direct order to make sure it was stopped. But I still expect him to be fined. And Payton was clearly complicit in it, but let it continue despite league memos reminding people that Bounties and bounty systems are against the CBA and have been for at least the past 2 CBAs.

If you decapitate the Saints management right before the draft by firing Payton and Loomis, then you put them at a distinct disadvantage. Even if the scouting staff is the same, the coach isn't and he's the one who has to deal with the players.

So, I can fully understand why Goodell is waiting until the owners meeting. People may not like it, but it's actually the right thing to do since this is 1000X bigger than the incident with the Patriots.

Deus Irae said:

My dislike of Goodell has been pretty clearly demonstrated on this site. That being said, I'm willing to give Goodell the benefit of the doubt and to say that he may have learned from the Spygate fiasco.

Click to expand...

I was thinking this too but didn't feel like giving him the benefit of the doubt.

AndyJohnson said:

I seriously doubt BB will have his 2012 team living in the past trying to get them motivated about a punishment he received 5 years ago when all but a couple of them werent Patriots.
If his idea of motivating the 2012 team is to cry about how he was wronged 5 years ago, he should retire. Luckily, I think its safe to say, unlike many fans, BB has moved on and isn't obsessed about this.

Click to expand...

Andy - it would really help you if you actually READ what was said. No where did I say anything about "living in the past". I said about the REHASH. Also, if you think BB doesn't get riled up over people harping on something that is old news, you clearly haven't ever watched a press conference of his.

Do everyone else and me a favor and put me on your ignore list so no one has to listen to your BS replies to me.. Thanks.

DaBruinz said:

I know a lot of people are complaining about Goodell putting off a decision until the owners meeting, but I can actually understand this.

The ramifications are huge. This doesn't affect just the Saints. It also affects the Rams and Redskins. It affects the Rams because they just hired Williams and it affects the Redskins because of potential salary cap ramifications if Williams put money in the pot there.

Anyone from the Saints defense over the last 3 years is affected. And they have had players move on. So, we're not just talking about 22-27 players. We're talking about more than 30 players and players on other teams.

Let's say, hypothetically, that every player with the exception of Vilma gets a 4 game suspension. The league is likely to allow the Saints to spread them out over the course of the year. Former Saints players on other teams won't be as lucky. Vilma and any other player who threw in large funds for the express intent of targeting a single player should get a 1 year suspension.

Click to expand...

I think you make a really good point. My concern, however, is this. Let's say that player X was involved with this while on the Saints. He gets signed by another team (say, the Falcons), and that new team has *NO* idea what took place in New Orleans. So now it's several years later, and all of a sudden player X, who is a key cog in the Falcons' defense, gets suspended for 4 games in 2012 - and one of those games is a divisional game against the Saints. Yes, that hurts the player, but it also hurts the Falcons, who are an archrival of the Saints, in a game where they play the Saints.

It seems unfair to penalize a new team for something that happened several years ago with a player on a different team. Same player, I know, and something has to happen by way of penalty. But in reality, you may have a situation where a team that had players targeted for bounty by the Saints now getting punished for unknowingly adding a player involved in that on their team.

Doesn't seem like that makes a lot of sense.

DaBruinz said:

Andy - it would really help you if you actually READ what was said. No where did I say anything about "living in the past". I said about the REHASH. Also, if you think BB doesn't get riled up over people harping on something that is old news, you clearly haven't ever watched a press conference of his.

Click to expand...

I read your comments, and yes it would result in living in the past if BB made 2012 about revenge for Spygate.
BB 'getitng riled up' about things that are old news, is exactly the proof that he is not going to focus on old news.

Do everyone else and me a favor and put me on your ignore list so no one has to listen to your BS replies to me.. Thanks.

Click to expand...

Nah. You can either post more well thought out posts, or just not reply to me if you wish. But I won't let you off the hook by putting you on ignore.

BradfordPatsFan said:

I was thinking this too but didn't feel like giving him the benefit of the doubt.

Click to expand...

Never give that NY p*ckerhead the benefit of the doubt.

Since Sean Payton is a BB disciple, it's obvious that it's all going to somehow come back to the Pats.

Seacoast Fan said:

...or, maybe benson is lying about telling loomis to stop the program.

Click to expand...

Loomis is as good a scapegoat as any. He's screwed but everyone else will get off easy.

Goodell will want this bad press gone before the draft. He'll sweep it under the rug like he did with Vick being involved with a professional interstate gambling
syndicate, which was much more damaging to the NFL than the dogfighting.