Chargers Header
Forum Home News Media Vault Schedule Team Charger Girls Tickets Fan Zone Community En Espaņol Fantasy Football Pro Shop

Go Back   The Official San Diego Chargers Forum > Chargers Talk > Around the NFL
Register FAQ Members List Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old 05-02-2012, 03:00 PM
RathMan1990's Avatar
RathMan1990 RathMan1990 is offline
Hall of Famer
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: San Diego
Posts: 1,907
Default

I was expecting a few games suspended to these players, but Vilma got the axe.

These suspensions are harsh but it is right.
__________________
RATHMAN: "...a voice came over me... it said too look up, get up, and don't ever give up..."
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 05-02-2012, 05:28 PM
abernardojr's Avatar
abernardojr abernardojr is offline
Yes indeed
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: .
Posts: 4,182
Default

It's pretty sad the way NO seems to be responding to this. It's one thing to say that you'll overcome the suspensions but the way they make it out like they're the victims? I don't understand why they feel so entitled as if they weren't deserving of the penalties they got. It seems like it just adds to the claims people were making about the way the organization carries itself.
__________________

The Right Side of the Rivalry

Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 05-02-2012, 11:06 PM
interpolfan11's Avatar
interpolfan11 interpolfan11 is offline
Hall of Famer
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: San Clemente
Posts: 1,465
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by abernardojr View Post
It's pretty sad the way NO seems to be responding to this. It's one thing to say that you'll overcome the suspensions but the way they make it out like they're the victims? I don't understand why they feel so entitled as if they weren't deserving of the penalties they got. It seems like it just adds to the claims people were making about the way the organization carries itself.
I agree.

Darren Sharper was on NFL Live today and he was adamantly against any players being suspended for their involvement in the bounty program. He was arguing that all 32 teams had performance-based incentive programs for players, which is true, but he didn't seem to understand that not all of them were BOUNTY programs.

I mean, why shouldn't players' careers get cut short as a result of attempting to cut the careers short of opposing players?
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 05-02-2012, 11:13 PM
SDC-SBV-1D's Avatar
SDC-SBV-1D SDC-SBV-1D is offline
Hall of Famer
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: san diego
Posts: 2,756
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by abernardojr View Post
It's pretty sad the way NO seems to be responding to this. It's one thing to say that you'll overcome the suspensions but the way they make it out like they're the victims? I don't understand why they feel so entitled as if they weren't deserving of the penalties they got. It seems like it just adds to the claims people were making about the way the organization carries itself.
Imo the most alarming aspect of this whole matter.
Especially disappointed in drew for his comments defending sean paytons and demanding to hear and explanation for paytons suspension. I understand he is obligated to defend him but it can. be done in a much classier way that doesn't make you sound as big of a do uche as bruschi one belicheat.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 05-03-2012, 11:31 AM
thumper300zx's Avatar
thumper300zx thumper300zx is online now
Boo first. Think later.
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Lehi
Posts: 24,489
Default

Steven A. Smith had what I think was a great debate on ESPN with Skip Bayless. Usually I'm not a huge Steven A. Smith guy -- but he laid down the gauntlet on Skip. Of course, I don't necessarily think these guys are arguing their opinion -- I think they are often forced to cover the opposite side [devil's Advocoate] to make it fun.

At any rate -- Steven's argument was that Vilma had plenty of opportunity to plead his innocence to Goodell, and ONLY DID SO after the punishment, which (though he didn't say it directly, and was careful not to) makes Vilma a liar, and makes him look culpable.

One other thing I got out of it -- the NFL is once again a HORRIBLE example. If what many ex-players and pundits are saying is true, players feel pressure to follow their superiors, in so far as to break rules. And then there is a pact/honor -- you don't throw them under the bus; you lose the locker room if you do. Is this middle school? You are allowed to be BULLIED within your profession with no way to 'rat' people out for breaking the rules?

I think the truth lies somewhere between -- I think Vilma was a somewhat voluntary participant. I think the NFL knows a lot more than we do. I think the NFL let the audio leak because they knew it would put most of us on their side -- they probably have a lot more information they could share. They have billions of dollars to investigate this stuff. This is not any different than steroids in baseball.

Anyone could've talked -- but no one did. Part was pressure, but part was to 'play the game', to make their money, and be great. It's really pretty sad. Grown men unable to keep their integrity. Grown men unwilling to 'narc' someone because of the social repercussions. THERE IS NOTHING WRONG WITH REPORTING illegal/bad behavior after you have addressed it in a personal matter first. You talk to the offender, and if they are unwilling to change, reporting it is ok.

Shame on you players and coaches and owners. Possibly shame on the NFL for not doing something before this...but finally they did. So better than nothing.
__________________
"Sorry." -Philip Rivers (to ref)



"I like to turn the offense into a defense. I want them to worry about what we're gonna do. I want them to try to defend us." -Junior Seau
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 05-03-2012, 04:52 PM
JoeMcRugby's Avatar
JoeMcRugby JoeMcRugby is online now
Pollyana-ish Homer Mod
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Rossmoor
Posts: 44,662
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by thumper300zx View Post
Steven A. Smith had what I think was a great debate on ESPN with Skip Bayless. Usually I'm not a huge Steven A. Smith guy -- but he laid down the gauntlet on Skip. Of course, I don't necessarily think these guys are arguing their opinion -- I think they are often forced to cover the opposite side [devil's Advocoate] to make it fun.

At any rate -- Steven's argument was that Vilma had plenty of opportunity to plead his innocence to Goodell, and ONLY DID SO after the punishment, which (though he didn't say it directly, and was careful not to) makes Vilma a liar, and makes him look culpable.

One other thing I got out of it -- the NFL is once again a HORRIBLE example. If what many ex-players and pundits are saying is true, players feel pressure to follow their superiors, in so far as to break rules. And then there is a pact/honor -- you don't throw them under the bus; you lose the locker room if you do. Is this middle school? You are allowed to be BULLIED within your profession with no way to 'rat' people out for breaking the rules?

I think the truth lies somewhere between -- I think Vilma was a somewhat voluntary participant. I think the NFL knows a lot more than we do. I think the NFL let the audio leak because they knew it would put most of us on their side -- they probably have a lot more information they could share. They have billions of dollars to investigate this stuff. This is not any different than steroids in baseball.

Anyone could've talked -- but no one did. Part was pressure, but part was to 'play the game', to make their money, and be great. It's really pretty sad. Grown men unable to keep their integrity. Grown men unwilling to 'narc' someone because of the social repercussions. THERE IS NOTHING WRONG WITH REPORTING illegal/bad behavior after you have addressed it in a personal matter first. You talk to the offender, and if they are unwilling to change, reporting it is ok.

Shame on you players and coaches and owners. Possibly shame on the NFL for not doing something before this...but finally they did. So better than nothing.
I believe that Vilma was more than a "somewhat" willing participant if the report is true that he slapped $10K in cash on a table during a defensive team meeting and offered it to anybody who knocked Kurt Warner out of the divisional round playoff game - and repeated the $10K offer the next week for knocking out Favre.

The NFL needed to come down hard after the years of lies and thumbing its noses at NFL headquarters, especially in light with the potential financial liability that the NFL is facing with long-term head injury litigation.
__________________


You want analysis? Don't ask me: I'm just a Pollyanna lying idiotic know-nothing ball-watching stat boy.
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 05-03-2012, 11:14 PM
thumper300zx's Avatar
thumper300zx thumper300zx is online now
Boo first. Think later.
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Lehi
Posts: 24,489
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JoeMcRugby View Post
I believe that Vilma was more than a "somewhat" willing participant if the report is true that he slapped $10K in cash on a table during a defensive team meeting and offered it to anybody who knocked Kurt Warner out of the divisional round playoff game - and repeated the $10K offer the next week for knocking out Favre.

The NFL needed to come down hard after the years of lies and thumbing its noses at NFL headquarters, especially in light with the potential financial liability that the NFL is facing with long-term head injury litigation.
What I mean by somewhat voluntary -- I can understand the players are put in tough position. It's really still no valid excuse for following through with a plan like they apparently had, but I can see where you would lose favor with an organization, coach, owner if you weren't willing to do what they asked you to do. And if the NFL players and teams have these unspoken rules of honor/loyalty, it's more pressure.

Instead, organizations should be telling their players NOT to participate in things like this -- same with steroids in baseball, but instead it was either vocally or silently encouraged, all with a don't NARC/rat anybody out about it mentality.

Vilma was dumb -- he should've known it was safe to talk about the whole situation before his penalty was handed down. To all the sudden claim his innocence after was beyond stupid. But I do agree to some extend that the organization facilitated this, and in this case, Vilma probably should've gotten 8 games with the emphasis going toward telling organization they need to create an atmosphere that allows players to safely decline requests from coaches, etc. to carry out unfair demands.

Of course we don't have all the facts, it could've been much worse than we can imagine. Overall, I'd rather see a harsh punishment to all involved than something too light. I'm certainly not upset about Vilma getting 16. But again, I think maybe 8 games for those who had the pressure of following directions from their superiors.
__________________
"Sorry." -Philip Rivers (to ref)



"I like to turn the offense into a defense. I want them to worry about what we're gonna do. I want them to try to defend us." -Junior Seau
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 05-04-2012, 01:39 AM
JoeMcRugby's Avatar
JoeMcRugby JoeMcRugby is online now
Pollyana-ish Homer Mod
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Rossmoor
Posts: 44,662
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by thumper300zx View Post
What I mean by somewhat voluntary -- I can understand the players are put in tough position. It's really still no valid excuse for following through with a plan like they apparently had, but I can see where you would lose favor with an organization, coach, owner if you weren't willing to do what they asked you to do. And if the NFL players and teams have these unspoken rules of honor/loyalty, it's more pressure.

Instead, organizations should be telling their players NOT to participate in things like this -- same with steroids in baseball, but instead it was either vocally or silently encouraged, all with a don't NARC/rat anybody out about it mentality.

Vilma was dumb -- he should've known it was safe to talk about the whole situation before his penalty was handed down. To all the sudden claim his innocence after was beyond stupid. But I do agree to some extend that the organization facilitated this, and in this case, Vilma probably should've gotten 8 games with the emphasis going toward telling organization they need to create an atmosphere that allows players to safely decline requests from coaches, etc. to carry out unfair demands.

Of course we don't have all the facts, it could've been much worse than we can imagine. Overall, I'd rather see a harsh punishment to all involved than something too light. I'm certainly not upset about Vilma getting 16. But again, I think maybe 8 games for those who had the pressure of following directions from their superiors.
And I'm willing to bet that Vilma would have received that penalty had he come clean. Silence doesn't help an individual in the NFL anymore than denial when the individual gets nailed in a criminal investigation with evidence that affirms the accusations.

The punishment on top of what Vilma would have received had he 'fessed up' at the start is similar to the goals of the criminal system: doing your utmost to assure that "it" doesn't happen again, and when I refer to "it" I mean either confessing or presenting your case when you are offered the opportunity.

Vilma chose to stiff-arm the inquiry of the 2009 bounty program that didn't exist - and yet continued into existence through 2011. I'm guessing that the next NFL player won't stiff-arm future inquiries - and that is the major purpose of the recently-administered penalties.

As it turns out, Vilma gets $1 milllion that he wouldn't have otherwise received for 2012 due to the restructuring of his contract that paid him an option bonus rather than being salary only.
__________________


You want analysis? Don't ask me: I'm just a Pollyanna lying idiotic know-nothing ball-watching stat boy.

Last edited by JoeMcRugby; 05-04-2012 at 11:18 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 05-04-2012, 07:51 AM
thumper300zx's Avatar
thumper300zx thumper300zx is online now
Boo first. Think later.
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Lehi
Posts: 24,489
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JoeMcRugby View Post
And I'm willing to bet that Vilma would have received that penalty had he come clean. Silence doesn't help an individual in the NFL anymore than denial when the individual gets nailed in a criminal investigation with evidence that affirms the accusations.

The punishment on top of what Vilma would have received had he 'fessed up' at the start is similar to the goals of the criminal system: doing your utmost to assure that "it" doesn't happen again, and when I refer to "it" I mean either confessing or presenting your case when you are offered the opportunity.

Vilma chose to stiff-arm the inquiry of the 2009 bounty program that didn't exist - and yet continued into existence through 2011. I'm guessing that the next NFL player won't stiff-arm future inquiries - and that is the major purpose of the recently-administered penalties.

As it turns out, he gets $1 milllion that he wouldn't have otherwise received for 2012 due to the restructuring of his cont
Agreed on the stiff-arming.

I hope the NFL publicizes that players can 'narc' and be protected. They need to be given an environment that allows integrity, instead of one that discourages it. I hope Goodell's NFL is helping to create that.
__________________
"Sorry." -Philip Rivers (to ref)



"I like to turn the offense into a defense. I want them to worry about what we're gonna do. I want them to try to defend us." -Junior Seau
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 05-04-2012, 08:20 AM
WootMonkey's Avatar
WootMonkey WootMonkey is online now
Support our troops
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: North Park
Posts: 11,341
Default

Sympathy level: 0

Quote:
According to the report, Vilma was the recipient of multiple impermissible benefits during his successful run with the Hurricanes from 2000 to 2003. In addition to meals, drinks, entertainment, cash gifts and more, Vilma reportedly received $2,250 in bounty payout from imprisoned former Miami booster Nevin Shapiro.

Shapiro reinstituted Luther Campbell's infamous bounty program in Miami, setting players' sights on rivals Florida and Florida State.

The booster put out bounties on Tim Tebow and had a three-year standing bounty on Seminoles quarterback Chris Rix from 2002 to 2004. A hit that knocked Rix from the game paid $5,000.

“We pounded the (expletive) out of that kid,” Shapiro said of Rix. “Watch the tape of those games. You’ll see so many big hits on him. Guys were all going after that $5,000 in cash. Vilma tried to kill him -- just crushed him -- a couple of times trying to get that $5,000. And he almost got it, too.”
http://www.nfl.com/news/story/09000d...nties-at-miami
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 12:03 AM.


© 2014 San Diego Chargers. All Rights Reserved.