I've finally gotten around to reading up on the Saints (especially Gregg Williams) long-standing paying of bounties for injuring opponents. This is WAY beyond appalling; it is, literally, criminal. Surely it is a major felony in every jurisdiction in the country to pay a person to injure a third person. Williams will (according to SI speculation) probably receive an 8-game suspension. May I suggest that he (and perhaps others) should be banned for life AND receive prison time.
I'm generally leery of legal authorities getting involved in sports (I make exceptions, of course, if MY guy gets assaulted! ;D), but this is a whole different animal. For a coach to pay for injuring opponents makes him no better than a mafia don. Where are the prosecutors?
Pretty sad for a coach of an NFL team to stoop so low.
When there is more than a little at stake, many people in this world will lie, cheat and steal if they believe that they can avoid detection.
Ain't that the truth!
I need legal help with "Bounties for Injuries" issue.
Why does this not constitute the legal definition of assault with malice aforethought?
What would prevent a district attorney or federal prosecutor from calling a grand jury to investigate this for criminal intent and prosecution?
Thank you.
Quote from: Ralph Turner on March 10, 2012, 11:02:50 PM
I need legal help with "Bounties for Injuries" issue.
Why does this not constitute the legal definition of assault with malice aforethought?
What would prevent a district attorney or federal prosecutor from calling a grand jury to investigate this for criminal intent and prosecution?
Thank you.
This can get complicated. What about "enforcers" in hockey?
Quote from: Gray Fox on March 10, 2012, 11:27:04 PM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on March 10, 2012, 11:02:50 PM
I need legal help with "Bounties for Injuries" issue.
Why does this not constitute the legal definition of assault with malice aforethought?
What would prevent a district attorney or federal prosecutor from calling a grand jury to investigate this for criminal intent and prosecution?
Thank you.
This can get complicated. What about "enforcers" in hockey?
just as guilty!
Fox News had a segment on this topic this morning. Maybe this issue will be addressed before the start of the 2012 season.
Is a cash bounty for taking a player out of an NFL game any different than a helmet sticker for a HS or College player for doing the same thing? How about the fact this has been happening as long as they have been playing football? Buddy Ryan and the Eagles got caught doing this and it was supposed to be addressed and stopped back in the 90's but hasn't been. The NFL will hang Greg Williams out to dry and a couple of others and this will continue to happen.
I think there is a difference for a great hit and purposely trying to take someone out with a hit.
Quote from: newcardfan on March 11, 2012, 11:59:24 AM
I think there is a difference for a great hit and purposely trying to take someone out with a hit.
I know of a few HS and college coaches who have told players that special helmet stickers would be given for a hit that takes a player out of a game. We had a skull and crossbones sticker in HS that was given for a hit that took a star player out on another team, there is no difference.
Quote from: Knightstalker on March 11, 2012, 02:56:34 PM
Quote from: newcardfan on March 11, 2012, 11:59:24 AM
I think there is a difference for a great hit and purposely trying to take someone out with a hit.
I know of a few HS and college coaches who have told players that special helmet stickers would be given for a hit that takes a player out of a game. We had a skull and crossbones sticker in HS that was given for a hit that took a star player out on another team, there is no difference.
Actually, there is. According to media reports, Williams had a set fee for varying levels of injury. In probably every jurisdiction in the country,
paying a person to injure a third person is a felony. Why prosecutors are not getting involved is beyond me (or perhaps they are, but it has not yet come to light).
It is called prosecutorial discretion.
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on March 11, 2012, 03:24:30 PM
Quote from: Knightstalker on March 11, 2012, 02:56:34 PM
Quote from: newcardfan on March 11, 2012, 11:59:24 AM
I think there is a difference for a great hit and purposely trying to take someone out with a hit.
I know of a few HS and college coaches who have told players that special helmet stickers would be given for a hit that takes a player out of a game. We had a skull and crossbones sticker in HS that was given for a hit that took a star player out on another team, there is no difference.
IMHO,That is part of what's wrong in athletics today. No player should be targeting another player with the intent to take him out. Athletic competition is about developing sportsmanship. I just don't see how "targeting" another player, with the intent of injuring him is sportsmanlike.
Quote from: newcardfan on March 11, 2012, 07:34:41 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on March 11, 2012, 03:24:30 PM
Quote from: Knightstalker on March 11, 2012, 02:56:34 PM
Quote from: newcardfan on March 11, 2012, 11:59:24 AM
I think there is a difference for a great hit and purposely trying to take someone out with a hit.
I know of a few HS and college coaches who have told players that special helmet stickers would be given for a hit that takes a player out of a game. We had a skull and crossbones sticker in HS that was given for a hit that took a star player out on another team, there is no difference.
IMHO,That is part of what's wrong in athletics today. No player should be targeting another player with the intent to take him out. Athletic competition is about developing sportsmanship. I just don't see how "targeting" another player, with the intent of injuring him is sportsmanlike.
This is not just an issue with athletics today, this was happening in the 70's at my high school and others in the conference we played in.
Quote from: Knightstalker on March 11, 2012, 09:04:38 PM
Quote from: newcardfan on March 11, 2012, 07:34:41 PM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on March 11, 2012, 03:24:30 PM
Quote from: Knightstalker on March 11, 2012, 02:56:34 PM
Quote from: newcardfan on March 11, 2012, 11:59:24 AM
I think there is a difference for a great hit and purposely trying to take someone out with a hit.
I know of a few HS and college coaches who have told players that special helmet stickers would be given for a hit that takes a player out of a game. We had a skull and crossbones sticker in HS that was given for a hit that took a star player out on another team, there is no difference.
IMHO,That is part of what's wrong in athletics today. No player should be targeting another player with the intent to take him out. Athletic competition is about developing sportsmanship. I just don't see how "targeting" another player, with the intent of injuring him is sportsmanlike.
This is not just an issue with athletics today, this was happening in the 70's at my high school and others in the conference we played in.
That still doesn't make it right. Any time in any sport an athlete deliberately plans to injure an opponent-just doesn't seem right.IMO I can't justify that type of action. Football is all about the hard hits-not intentionally trying to hurt someone. We can go round and round on this issue and never come to a resolution-but at least we can state our opinions.
I agree that ethically there is little difference between helmet stickers (or other team incentives) for injuring an opponent and a coach specifically paying for it. Rightly or wrongly, legally there is a major difference: paying a person to injure a third party is a felony. Williams apparently did so. If that is correct, Williams is not just a scumbag, he is a felon.
Frank, there are two meaning of prosecutorial discretion. In technical terms, it refers to the ability (and duty) of prosecutors to decide which cases to pursue. In everyday terminology it also could mean discretion in the sense of not speaking until one needs to speak. I suspect you meant the former, but wonder if anyone has a sense of whether they have decided not to prosecute, or have simply chosen not to reveal their cards before getting in the game?
I would suspect the latter.
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on March 11, 2012, 09:51:39 PM
I agree that ethically there is little difference between helmet stickers (or other team incentives) for injuring an opponent and a coach specifically paying for it. Rightly or wrongly, legally there is a major difference: paying a person to injure a third party is a felony. Williams apparently did so. If that is correct, Williams is not just a scumbag, he is a felon.
+1. Well stated.
I've been talking with friends about this; since day one, I've said that Williams should get a lifetime ban from coaching in the NFL, no questions asked. So what if he's the "fall guy" and other people have been doing it for years? To me, this is a chance for the NFL to make a strong statement about player safety, especially with the recent concerns about safety.
Unfortunately I think that Williams is going to be protected a bit by the "other people are doing it and we don't really want to open this can of worms" logic...which means he'll get maybe an 8-game suspension, IMHO.
Quote from: ExTartanPlayer on March 20, 2012, 10:45:54 AM
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on March 11, 2012, 09:51:39 PM
I agree that ethically there is little difference between helmet stickers (or other team incentives) for injuring an opponent and a coach specifically paying for it. Rightly or wrongly, legally there is a major difference: paying a person to injure a third party is a felony. Williams apparently did so. If that is correct, Williams is not just a scumbag, he is a felon.
+1. Well stated.
I've been talking with friends about this; since day one, I've said that Williams should get a lifetime ban from coaching in the NFL, no questions asked. So what if he's the "fall guy" and other people have been doing it for years? To me, this is a chance for the NFL to make a strong statement about player safety, especially with the recent concerns about safety.
Unfortunately I think that Williams is going to be protected a bit by the "other people are doing it and we don't really want to open this can of worms" logic...which means he'll get maybe an 8-game suspension, IMHO.
If that. This wil be handled as quietly as possible-unfortunately.
Not so quietly, after all:
http://nfl.si.com/2012/03/21/nfl-hammers-saints-gregg-williams-for-bounty-scandal/?sct=hp_t11_a0&eref=sihp
HC Payton suspended for entire season, 2 other coaches for 8 and 6 games, team fined $500,000 and forfeits two #2 draft picks. Williams is suspended 'indefinitely', and will not even be reviewed until after next season, so AT LEAST one full year.
My kudos to the NFL. But at least for Williams, it is also a felony - will prosecutors get involved?
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on March 21, 2012, 03:08:35 PM
Not so quietly, after all:
http://nfl.si.com/2012/03/21/nfl-hammers-saints-gregg-williams-for-bounty-scandal/?sct=hp_t11_a0&eref=sihp
HC Payton suspended for entire season, 2 other coaches for 8 and 6 games, team fined $500,000 and forfeits two #2 draft picks. Williams is suspended 'indefinitely', and will not even be reviewed until after next season, so AT LEAST one full year.
;D But at least for Williams, it is also a felony - will prosecutors get involved?
Agreed!! I am surprised they did not try to sweep it under the rug and look the other way. It looks like NFL made the right call. Wonder if now any prosecutos will get involved?
A correction to my earlier post: the 8 game suspension was not another coach, but the GM.
No word yet on any punishment of players, but I would anticipate a heavy fine/suspension of Vilma, who reportedly put a $10,000 bounty (of his own money) on anyone knocking out Bret Favre in a 2010 playoff game - again, not just a violation of NFL rules, but a felony.
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on March 21, 2012, 04:15:52 PM
A correction to my earlier post: the 8 game suspension was not another coach, but the GM.
No word yet on any punishment of players, but I would anticipate a heavy fine/suspension of Vilma, who reportedly put a $10,000 bounty (of his own money) on anyone knocking out Bret Favre in a 2010 playoff game - again, not just a violation of NFL rules, but a felony.
Everything will eventually come out now that they got the ball rolling.
After listening to the news, sound like the NFL will look for more-could be very interesting.
Agreed with Ypsi and newcardfan, I was impressed by the punishment. Glad the NFL took the stance. Just because something has been done since the beginning of football's inception, that coaches place "stars" on helmets for it, or that everyone does it, does not make it appropriate or right.
Quote from: pg04 on March 22, 2012, 07:37:52 PM
Agreed with Ypsi and newcardfan, I was impressed by the punishment. Glad the NFL took the stance. Just because something has been done since the beginning of football's inception, that coaches place "stars" on helmets for it, or that everyone does it, does not make it appropriate or right.
At this point, the NFL had to make a stance. Now they have to follow through with their investigation.
Remember why President Teddy Roosevelt "nudged" the NCAA into creation?
Quote from: Ralph Turner on March 24, 2012, 11:25:37 PM
Remember why President Teddy Roosevelt "nudged" the NCAA into creation?
The offense at the time was the flying wedge and players were dying because of it.
The second shoe drops - hard!
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2012/football/nfl/05/02/saints.suspensions.ap/index.html?eref=sihp&sct=hp_t11_a0
One remedy (among others) toward setting an appropriate tone would be the NFL's imposition on the Saints of a forfeiture by the Saints of all games played by them during the term of the "bounty" conspiracy. Fat chance - for obvious commercial reasons!
Quote from: hickory_cornhusker on March 25, 2012, 12:01:53 PM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on March 24, 2012, 11:25:37 PM
Remember why President Teddy Roosevelt "nudged" the NCAA into creation?
The offense at the time was the flying wedge and players were dying because of it.
I believe it also had something to do with Yale's dominance at the time. They had a much more physical style and had been dominating Harvard at the time. Some have gone on record questioning the altruism of Teddy's motives given he was a Crimson grad and the rule changes definitely worked in favor of his alma. But this is politics, surely something so underhanded would never take place :o
Quote from: hazzben on May 06, 2012, 08:01:45 AM
Quote from: hickory_cornhusker on March 25, 2012, 12:01:53 PM
Quote from: Ralph Turner on March 24, 2012, 11:25:37 PM
Remember why President Teddy Roosevelt "nudged" the NCAA into creation?
The offense at the time was the flying wedge and players were dying because of it.
I believe it also had something to do with Yale's dominance at the time. They had a much more physical style and had been dominating Harvard at the time. Some have gone on record questioning the altruism of Teddy's motives given he was a Crimson grad and the rule changes definitely worked in favor of his alma. But this is politics, surely something so underhanded would never take place :o
WOW,
For a second there, I thought I was reading the politics board. :o