Jump to content





Photo
- - - - -

Good reading on "Bountygate"


This topic has been archived. This means that you cannot reply to this topic.
33 replies to this topic

#25 breezing2anotherSB

breezing2anotherSB

    Senior Member

  • Joined: 29-December 11
  • PipPipPipPip
  • posts: 206
  • Reputation: -50
HUDDLER

Posted 12 March 2012 - 10:12 PM

It's the funniest thing,but nothing ever came of that report. And given how long it's been, nothing ever will.

The Saints, however, are about to get punished big time :lol:

Maybe it's because the coaches weren't involved. Or then again,maybe the league just likes the Panthers better (which is understandable).


Of course nothing came out of it because the Panthers lost and really have not been a threat to win the Super Bowl since. When you are a real winning organization that actually has won a Super Bowl without using illegal drugs or trying to gain an unfair advantage you get put under a microscope. The fact that any Panther fan would judge anything the Saints allegedly have done after having a team go to a Super Bowl only because of their rampant steroid usage is not only laughable but it is pathetic as well.

#26 Wyank

Wyank

    SENIOR HUDDLER

  • Joined: 14-December 10
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 2,021
  • Reputation: 612
HUDDLER

Posted 12 March 2012 - 10:15 PM

lol

#27 Panthercougar68

Panthercougar68

    The Nice

  • Joined: 07-December 10
  • posts: 2,736
  • Reputation: 270
SUPPORTER

Posted 12 March 2012 - 10:16 PM

Of course nothing came out of it because the Panthers lost and really have not been a threat to win the Super Bowl since. When you are a real winning organization that actually has won a Super Bowl without using illegal drugs or trying to gain an unfair advantage you get put under a microscope. The fact that any Panther fan would judge anything the Saints allegedly have done after having a team go to a Super Bowl only because of their rampant steroid usage is not only laughable but it is pathetic as well.


Well uh your "winning" franchise has about 87 more games to win to reach .500 all time.

And 2005 says hi.

#28 Bogart

Bogart

    Muthafuka

  • Joined: 26-November 08
  • posts: 911
  • Reputation: 304
SUPPORTER

Posted 12 March 2012 - 10:20 PM

It's the funniest thing,but nothing ever came of that report. And given how long it's been, nothing ever will.

The Saints, however, are about to get punished big time :lol:

Maybe it's because the coaches weren't involved. Or then again,maybe the league just likes the Panthers better (which is understandable).


Of course nothing came out of it because the Panthers lost and really have not been a threat to win the Super Bowl since. When you are a real winning organization that actually has won a Super Bowl without using illegal drugs or trying to gain an unfair advantage you get put under a microscope. The fact that any Panther fan would judge anything the Saints allegedly have done after having a team go to a Super Bowl only because of their rampant steroid usage is not only laughable but it is pathetic as well.


5 players were accused of juicing here verses 22 to 27 players plus coaches, GM and owner accused of payouts to injure apposing players to gain an advantage there. Hmmm...doesn't seem quit on the same level does it?

#29 Mr. Scot

Mr. Scot

    Football Historian

  • Joined: 25-November 08
  • posts: 48,232
  • Reputation: 15,722
SUPPORTER

Posted 12 March 2012 - 10:20 PM

Of course nothing came out of it because the Panthers lost and really have not been a threat to win the Super Bowl since. When you are a real winning organization that actually has won a Super Bowl without using illegal drugs or trying to gain an unfair advantage you get put under a microscope. The fact that any Panther fan would judge anything the Saints allegedly have done after having a team go to a Super Bowl only because of their rampant steroid usage is not only laughable but it is pathetic as well.

Ah but the Saints did cheat to gain an unfair advantage, and their leadership has admitted it.

Add in that Payton and Benson are so scared of what's going to happen that they're in New York begging for mercy (but probably won't get it).

But hey, maybe if you post that same article you quoted without attribution - which makes you a plagiarist by the way (look it up) - a dozen more times or so, maybe Roger Goodell will read it and take pity on the Saints.

That, or maybe all of us will just continue to sit here and laugh at you while you sit there all butthurt and pissed off trying to get back at us with all the effectiveness of a five-year-old throwing a tantrum.

I'd say option two is more likely :D

#30 rico6

rico6

    Shit.

  • Joined: 03-August 09
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 6,773
  • Reputation: 230
HUDDLER

Posted 12 March 2012 - 10:29 PM

According to an investigative report posted on the Charlotte Observer's Web site on Sunday, a number of Carolina Panthers used a vast quantity and tremendous variety of performance-enhancing drugs during the team's 2004 Super Bowl season.

The newspaper looked at medical records and court documents released in conjunction with the federal steroids case against Dr. James Shortt, who last month was sentenced to one year and one day in prison for distributing steroids and human growth hormone.

"Several of [the players] were using disturbing, particularly alarmingly high amounts with high dosages for long durations -- some in combinations," said Dr. Gary Wadler, who prepared a report for the U.S. Attorney's Office that was used to prosecute Shortt. "This wasn't just a passing flirtation with these prohibited substances. When I see [prescriptions] 'renewed five times,' I say, 'What are you trying to accomplish?' "

Players' names were blacked out on Wadler's report, but the Observer reported that six Panthers -- and three of the five starting offensive linemen from the Super Bowl team -- were taking performance enhancers. And many reported adverse reactions.


Why are you spamming that like an idiot?

#31 breezing2anotherSB

breezing2anotherSB

    Senior Member

  • Joined: 29-December 11
  • PipPipPipPip
  • posts: 206
  • Reputation: -50
HUDDLER

Posted 12 March 2012 - 10:34 PM

Ah but the Saints did cheat to gain an unfair advantage, and their leadership has admitted it.

Add in that Payton and Benson are so scared of what's going to happen that they're in New York begging for mercy (but probably won't get it).

But hey, maybe if you post that same article you quoted without attribution - which makes you a plagiarist by the way (look it up) - a dozen more times or so, maybe Roger Goodell will read it and take pity on the Saints.

That, or maybe all of us will just continue to sit here and laugh at you while you sit there all butthurt and pissed off trying to get back at us with all the effectiveness of a five-year-old throwing a tantrum.

I'd say option two is more likely :D


Yep an according to your logic you would say that me pasting an article is as bad as taking illegal banned substances.

#32 Mr. Scot

Mr. Scot

    Football Historian

  • Joined: 25-November 08
  • posts: 48,232
  • Reputation: 15,722
SUPPORTER

Posted 12 March 2012 - 10:39 PM

Yep an according to your logic you would say that me pasting an article is as bad as taking illegal banned substances.

Well, technically there's no law against not being very bright, being bad at forum trolling and getting laughed at by the people you're trying to upset, so I guess you've got nothing to worry about :thumbsup:

#33 Frizzy350

Frizzy350

    Senior Member

  • Joined: 25-January 09
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 2,518
  • Reputation: 641
HUDDLER

Posted 12 March 2012 - 10:39 PM

Yep an according to your logic you would say that me pasting an article is as bad as taking illegal banned substances.


nobody here is defending the players that were on our team who were taking banned substances.

mr scot has not been taking banned substances.
you have been plagiarizing material.

one of u is committing a crime.

#34 Mr. Scot

Mr. Scot

    Football Historian

  • Joined: 25-November 08
  • posts: 48,232
  • Reputation: 15,722
SUPPORTER

Posted 12 March 2012 - 10:41 PM

nobody here is defending the players that were on our team who were taking banned substances.

mr scot has not been taking banned substances.
you have been plagiarizing material.

one of u is committing a crime.

Metamucil is still on the approved list, right?

As long as that's true... :Angel_anim: