I'm with the packers on this one

**Henry Burris** · 04-07-2012, 09:28 AM

Mike of Eau Claire, Wis., notes that the Packers acknowledged last year that receivers creating a "reverse bounty" for dropped passes last season and writes: Not exactly a bounty as it was not done by the Packers or coaches, but not too far removed. I see a distinction but I wonder if this might be too close to the line now being drawn.

Kevin Seifert: Yes, as ESPNMilwaukee.com's Jason Wilde reported last season, Packers receivers organized a system where a $100 Best Buy card was contributed for every dropped pass. That's a little different than a bounty system, and certainly much less harmful. But if the players eventually disbursed the cards to each other, it would technically count as what Goodell referred last month as "non-contract bonus payments."

These payments, even if they're a fraction of a player's base salary, circumvent the salary cap and could open the door to larger stakes in the future. Moving forward, Goodell has required each team to certify that no players receive non-contract bonus payments. Regardless, given the heightened tension of this issue, Packers players should find a non-financial way to hold each other accountable moving forward.

Also, doesn't it seem that the rule refers to the team as giving the non-contract bonus payments, or at least strongly implying so?e

**little bear** · 04-07-2012, 10:54 AM

Please use the right rival team logo when posting a new thread. It's not that complicated, you know. Thx

**short faced bear** · 04-07-2012, 04:20 PM

**Ski-Whiz** · 04-07-2012, 04:23 PM

Originally Posted by little bear

Please use the right rival team logo when posting a new thread. It's not that complicated, you know. Thx

Fixed it...

**Ski-Whiz** · 04-07-2012, 04:26 PM

Honestly, I'm not really sure a bounty is a bad thing.

If they do something outside of the rules during the game (illegal hit etc), let them face that music.

Otherwise, why CAN'T they have incentives for playing aggressive??

People are way too darn sensitive.

When players play dirty or play after the whistle, the league handles them accordingly. Just like Mr. Stomper from Detroit.

So really a bounty isn't saying bring a gun, and shoot the dude.

It's basically an incentive based on play.

**Jimmors** · 04-07-2012, 06:07 PM

Because the bounty system was for illegal play (injuring players, hits), so by having a bounty on that type of gameplay, the coaches are both legitimizing that type of play, as well as encouraging it. So that is the problem with it.

Incentives on the other hand encourage positive play...yards, TDs, etc. Theres nothing wrong with rewarding positive plays and encouraging that.

**Wolfman** · 04-09-2012, 08:05 AM

Originally Posted by Ski-Whiz

Honestly, I'm not really sure a bounty is a bad thing.

If they do something outside of the rules during the game (illegal hit etc), let them face that music.

Otherwise, why CAN'T they have incentives for playing aggressive??

People are way too darn sensitive.

When players play dirty or play after the whistle, the league handles them accordingly. Just like Mr. Stomper from Detroit.

So really a bounty isn't saying bring a gun, and shoot the dude.

It's basically an incentive based on play.

Yeah, nothing wrong with bounties...

Thread: I'm with the packers on this one

LinkBack

Thread Tools

I'm with the packers on this one

Posting Permissions