Thoughts on Bountygate

First of all, I hate that this scandal is being perpetually linked to Spygate. Just when everybody started forgetting about it, Bountygate comes around. Every article seems to make a connection between the two, and I think that the comparison is simply an inflammatory device used to generate interest. Fortunately, everybody seems to be in agreement that Bountygate is more egregious than Spygate. At least we don't have to deal with a back and forth debate over that issue.

I think that bounty hunting and video taping are two radically different issues. First of all, nearly all of the evidence from Spygate was based upon witness testimony, and none of the alleged videos were recovered in the investigation. However, in the case of the Saints' scandal, there is abundant documented evidence to prove that "bounty hunting" was regimented and institutionalized from the GM to the coaches to the players.

Spygate was, in my opinion, blown out of proportion by the media. The alleged "Rams Walkthru Tape" is really what drove the scandal, but no such tape was recovered. The existence of such a tape came from the testimony of one man, and the media ate it up as fact. The Boston Herald ran that story the day before Superbowl XLII against the Giants. The report was never verified, but the Herald ran the story anyway.  For some reason, the Boston media loves to hate and slander its own teams.

Many coaches, including Bill Cower have dismissed the scandal as overblown because the game is played between the lines. He said, "Knowing what they're going to run is one thing, and having to stop it is another thing. A lot of times the best team that can execute - even when the other team knows what they're doing - those are the teams that win championships, and we weren't good enough that day." 

The competitive advantage gained by videotaping signals is small in comparison to the advantage gained by intentionally injuring the opponents players.  The Saints are not the first or the last team to create incentives for injuring opponents because it decreases the talent and depth of the opposition. Jonathan Vilma allegedly offered up a bounty of $10,000 for Brett Favre, and Favre's injury was a monumental moment in that AFCCG. The Saints went on the win the Superbowl. 

I don't want to create an asterisk on their trophy, I really don't.  The Saints executed at a championship level, and they deserved to win.  I do however, have a problem with players being paid bonuses that are not counted in the salary cap. A coach paying players out of his own pocket is a good way to keep a little extra cap space, and that creates a competitive advantage in and of itself. The real issue at hand is not that any specific hits were illegal or "cheap," but rather that it morally objectionable to pay players to injure opponents.  This is not just a matter of winning and losing, there are individual victims here, there have been careers ended over a few thousand dollars.

Overall, Bountygate is absolutely worse than Spygate, and I hope that the punishment is accordingly harsh.  A clear message must be sent to every organization in the league.  The Saints must lose more than a first round draft pick, it should be multiple picks. The penalty needs to be so stiff that no organization will dare to try such a policy.  This was institutionalized assault, and it was knowingly supported by executives in the Saints organization.  The hammer must come down hard, and Goodell must do more than hand out heavy fines.  The NFL needs to essentially cripple the Saints franchise so that no other franchise would be stupid enough to risk a similar sentence. I think that at the very least, the Saints should be stripped of 2 first round picks.  The crime is worse than Spygate, and the punishment must equal the crime.