A.) Indeed, I am not related to either of the posters you mentioned. I'm here on my own free will and only here since there isn't a better Panther board (or an officially sanctioned one). If so, I'd be there.
B.) I'm "repeating myself like a scratched vinyl" for one of two reasons: 1.) more than likely the person I'm replying to in any instance didn't read any of the previous posts I made in the subject (telling on yourself here, bud) and bringing up the very points I've previously debunked in earlier replies before they joined in, or 2.) I'm bringing them up again because I want their interpretation of what I'm seeing as to how it relates to the topic at hand.
C.) Despite the construed belief shared by a few posters here, I'm not troll, nor do I have any interest in trolling. Trolling is fun for a short while, then becomes mundane and tasteless because there's only so much that can be trolled upon until personal attacks and insults begin and freely slung about; what's the fun in insulting someone I have no idea what they look like, I've never met, nor likely will ever meet?
D.) Do you honestly think I'd be typing these big ass, well-thought out replies in fully typed out sentences (with impeccable grammar and sentence structure, might I add) if I my sole purpose here was to troll y'all? If that's the norm of trolls here, then I demand to know where y'all getting y'all trolls from because they sound defective. If I wanted to troll, I'd be posting solely in memes, GIF's, and short responses while single-quoting posters I was looking to engage in multiple consecutive posts to take up as much space as I could in each thread. I wouldn't be multi-quoting to reply to the specific posters I am debating. I simply post on numerous NFL boards of various different teams to gain insight to those teams. I expect the ribbing and won't cry over it.
E.) I'm not the one playing "knock knock", if you read the beginning of this debate, you'd know I wasn't even the one that brought up "Bountygate". I replied to another poster that did, yes, but the debate that ensued was continued by countless other posters that willingly joined and contributed which is certainly welcomed. You painting me as going into random threads and bringing up "Bountygate" is wildly inaccurate and frankly just flat out wrong. Again, someone quoted me bringing up "Bountygate" ("raleigh-panther" if I'm remembering right). If someone quotes and replies to me, I'm more than likely going to respond if I feel my argument is valid.
F.) No, you're not being a dick to me, you're just speaking your mind about what you feel a new poster is doing on your home board (despite me preceding you by ~5 months and change). But even if you would be acting like "a dick", it's all good. I have my big boy pants on and can handle it, my e-feelings won't get hurt. As I said before, an internet forum isn't "serious bidness" to me. I can laugh and joke around with y'all as I have in other threads here.
G.) I appreciate you saying I'm an intelligent person.
A pool with intent to injure certainly is on a different scale of wrong, we're certainly in agreement.
What I'm saying is throughout the entire "Bountygate" saga, all the League and every media outlet known to man spewed 24/7 was along the lines of, "between 2009 and 2011, under Gregg Williams' leadership the Saints defense placed bets and deliberately sought to cause serious injury to Favre, Warner, ect. through the course of the game(s) to collect those bounties". Never addressing a "pay-for-performance" pool, only a "pay-to-injure" pool.
Sidenote: yes, a "pay-for-performance" pool is not acceptable by the League's standards either, but considering their prevalence across the League across the entire lifespan of the League, we both know that wasn't the cause of the sanctions. Hell, I'd guarantee there are still similar pools in the NFL to this day. It's just far more hush-hush and simply something that will never be eradicated entirely.
However, if there was truly a "pay-to-injure" scheme orchestrated 2009-2011 under Gregg Williams, he would not be coaching in the NFL right now. End of story. Plea deal or not, if he condoned and encouraged the injury of players, not only could the League simply not allow him to remain coaching at the professional level, but what college or high school athletic director in their right mind would hire him after the allegations "being proven"? That's the equivalent to a teacher molesting students and then after serving their prison sentence, the school district openly allowing them back to continue teaching like nothing ever happened.
But as for your last phrase, what evidence have you seen that unequivocally proves there was a "pay-to-injure" system in place? Empirical evidence, not just "oh the NFL said this, this, and this about the investigation". That's not evidence.
Hell, barely a month after "Bountygate" broke, the NFL also said Loomis was wiretapping opposing teams' signals in 2002-2004. They ran with that story as fact like we were unbeatable during that span, despite only having a 12-12 win-loss record at the Superdome and finishing dead last in yards allowed defensively in 2004 and 27th in that same category in 2002. Then all of a sudden they stopped talking about the story like it never happened. Still waiting on that apology. LOOOL.