What did they think the bounty program was? For that matter, what do you think the bounty program was? Because to me, asking players to actively hurt other players is EXACTLY what the program was about.
Well, it was clearly silly for a variety if reasons, but the program (of which money was the currency) likely helped them bond, etc. The money was of no intrinsic importance IMO though, so I suppose you could argue the staff overpaid because I sincerely doubt it got players to try harder or to break the rule out of sheer pursuit of the money.
They took the money because more money is better, generally. Just as they would have taken any token of esteem whether it was a sticker, hug, game ball, money, etc. Please listen to what actual players are saying. For the most part, we don’t need to speculate on their motives or thoughts on the matter, they have told us.
Can I ask why you think it doesn’t matter? It would seem the social norms of actual NFL players is particularly relevant in this situation. Why are their opinions any less valid than yours or mine? Especially since when they are in a far better position to judge the specifics, and far more likely to be affected by the decisions being made.
And who is in a better position to judge such a thing? Why would retired players lie about it? I could see if this were Vilma, or someone else directly implicated in the current scandal, but many of these guys have nothing to gain defending Williams or lying about the nature of the program.
Even if you think the nature of the program made it clear to players that they were to actively hurt other players, apparently, the players didn’t get that impression. Doesn’t that make you question your assumptions? Why do you think someone that is so clear to you as an outside observer is so unclear to the direct participants?
No. But seriously. I’m asking you that if the bounty program wasn’t a bounty on hurting other players, what do you think the program was about? Who could take the most defensive linemen out for ice cream in a single post game party?
I’m genuinely confused as to what you’re trying to argue here.
In addition to hard tackles, weren’t the bounties higher for knocking opposing players out of the game? How can you argue the intention wasn’t to hurt them when the goal was to make them unable to play?
I don’t recall any bounties for hard hits, only for knockouts and cartoffs.
(There were also payments for sacks, interceptions and fumbles. Even extra-contractual payment schemes for those is illegal, but is much more defensible.)
Let’s not forget much of the harshness of the punishments was for lying about it and continuing it after being told to stop. I don’t think those two aspects will apply to the players.
Of course the bounty was for hurting players (among other things). The players were rewarded for injuring someone else. Those facts are not in dispute. They were rewarded because such a play, was seen as good or advantageous for the team. That perspective is true irrespective of any token financial reward going to the player for the hit. That is the crux of the issue. As long as hurting/injuring people is seen as an objective good, and is sought as a goal, we will still have safety issues.
What is in dispute is whether the bounties themselves were an inducement to, or an incentive for actively seeking to injure people through dirty play or illegal hits. I am saying that the bounty program, which rewarded several different types of things btw, was not an inducement to break the rules or to deliberately injure players above and beyond what might happen in normal play. Which is why people like Brett Favre, who was targeted, have said the bounty didn’t really make a difference.
What the bounty scandal really highlights is the culture of football in its naked form; something that most fans are not comfortable with. A few years back, I remember LT analogized playing football to being in car wreck every week. Those guys hit him with the type of force every week because that is what they are paid to do. They wanted to hurt him every week. They want him to be unable to play. That is their goal, every down, every set, every game, bounty or not.
The main difference between a game plan, and a bounty, is money. If the money was not a motivator, as many seem to acknowledge now, what are we all worked up about? Do you really think DCs around the league don’t tell their players when the opposing star is nursing an injury, or whip them into a frenzy in order to make them hit harder, or tell them to take the other guy out?
I see your point. I would argue that this revelation really puts a lie to the lip service defensive players would give to causing injuries. Fans like the big hits yet assume injuries (beyond lumps and bruises) are incidental. Both the explicit intent to injure and the monetary aspect makes us fans think, “This isn’t what I asked you to do.”
I hope to never again hear a defensive player complain about dirty chop blocks. Turnabout is fair play, assholes.