ESPN NFL

Drew Brees and Darren Sharper aren’t teammates anymore, but the former New Orleans safety went to bat for the Saints quarterback in this interview with WWL Radio’s Bobby Hebert.

“It still baffles me every day I wake up and I don’t see, on the bottom line, a new contract for Drew Brees,'' Sharper said. "I’m just confused as to why the guy that has led this organization has not been given a contract extension so he can be on board for years to come. ... You just have never seen this happen to a franchise quarterback and Drew is a franchise quarterback in every sense of the word. Have you ever heard of Tom Brady going through a contract, stalled talks that have taken this long. Peyton Manning? Aaron Rodgers? Philip Rivers? ... None of these guys have ever had to deal with a franchise tag and had to play out the last year of their contract and then go into the offseason.”

Sharper has a point. Brees has done a lot for the Saints and for the New Orleans area. You may see a guy like Manning or Brett Favre getting pushed out near the end of their careers. But Manning ended up with a great deal in Denver after parting ways with the Colts. Favre went on to have productive time with the Jets and Vikings after he and the Packers parted ways. But Brees isn’t at the end of his career. He has at least five more good years left in him and it's not like the Saints are eager to hand his job to Chase Daniel.

At the moment, Brees is in any conversation about the league’s best quarterback. He’s right there with Rodgers and Brady (and Manning, if you want to include him for lifetime achievements) and Brees is a notch or two above Rivers.

Sharper may be right when he says we’ve never seen a quarterback of Brees’ magnitude let his contract run out and have to go through lengthy negotiations in an effort to get a new deal.

An attorney from the private sector who advised the NFL during the Saints bounty investigation disputed linebacker Jonathan Vilma's claim that he did not intend to pay bounties for knocking Kurt Warner and Brett Favre out of playoff games in the 2009 season and the he never set out to intentionally hurt another player.

“The evidence overwhelmingly supported the charges,’’ Mary Jo White, a former U.S. attorney, said in a conference call with the media Thursday. “I haven’t seen the statement that Mr. Vilma may have issued. He plainly, as were the other players, was invited to participate with counsel in an interview to provide his side of the story if there was a different side of the story. He declined to do that.

“If you look at the press release issued yesterday, plainly the conduct there is quite specific as to bounties being pledged by Mr. Vilma. On two occasions, you know the identities of whom the bounties were placed on, the amount of the bounties and when they were placed. There is very, very strong evidence from multiple independent sources reporting those charges.’’

White also said that defensive lineman Anthony Hargrove (now with the Green Bay Packers) said he was told to lie about the bounty program when asked about it in 2010. Hargrove since has signed a declaration admitting the bounty program existed and he took part in it. White was asked if Hargrove disclosed who initially told him to lie to investigators.

“He did, but I don’t think it is appropriate to reveal that,’’ White said.

White went on to repeatedly emphasize how strong the NFL's evidence was. You can read more of what she had to say here.

There have been so many subplots to the New Orleans Saints’ bounty program that some significant ones have gotten lost in the shuffle.

Thanks to Jeff Schultz for bringing attention to one of them. In this column, Schultz writes about the role and stance the NFL Players Association has taken and suggests the union change its name to “the Union of People We Feel Like Representing."

He’s got an excellent point. In its statement after the suspensions of Jonathan Vilma, Will Smith, Scott Fujita and Anthony Hargrove were announced, the union said it had “not received any detailed or specific evidence from the league of these specific players’ involvement in an alleged pay-to-injure program."

That’s a pretty standard line from the NFLPA. Think back to last year’s lockout. How many times did we hear the union say that the NFL would not share information how much each team was making, even though the league repeatedly said the union had been supplied with as much information as possible.

It’s a similar story this time. Former New Orleans defensive coordinator Gregg Williams has admitted the bounty program took place and there is that damning audiotape of Williams talking to his players the night before last season’s playoff game at San Francisco. The NFL also has said that multiple sources said Vilma offered $10,000 of his own money for bounties on Brett Favre and Kurt Warner. The NFL said Smith assisted Williams in establishing and funding the bounty program. The league also said Hargrove submitted a “signed declaration to the league that established not only the existence of the program at the Saints, but also that he knew about and participated in it’’. The league also said Fujita pledged a significant amount of money to the bounty program.

What more evidence does the union want?

Obviously, the union is prepared to stand by Vilma, Smith, Hargrove and Fujita, who just happens to be a member of the NFLPA’s executive committee, as they make their expected appeals. Any union should stand by its members because they pay dues that should bring them support from their union.

But this is where things head to an area that looks to be painted in multiple shades of gray. The NFLPA will try to protect the four suspended members.

That screams out one huge question -- what about the union’s hundreds of other members? They pay dues too and, presumably, that buys them protection as well. Shouldn’t the union be standing by Favre and Warner, who paid dues for years? And shouldn’t the union be protecting Carolina quarterback Cam Newton and Green Bay quarterback Aaron Rodgers, who the league said were also targets of the bounty program?

By standing so firmly with the suspended players, the union seems to be giving the appearance it doesn’t care about its other members or their safety and welfare. I’m sure the union would dispute that and say it cares about all its members and there’s probably truth in that.

But perception is everything. And the way the union has handled this thing so far sure make it look like it has a serious conflict of interest on its hands.

Maybe the union should step aside on this one. I don't see how you fully can stand up for the rights of your players when one group is trying to hurt another group. The union can pick a side, if it wants. But maybe choosing to not pick a side and staying out of this one is the only way the union can avoid the perception of a conflict of interest.

New Orleans Saints linebacker Jonathan Vilma, who was suspended by the NFL earlier Wednesday, issued a statement through his attorney a few minutes ago. Here it is in its entirety:

Vilma

“I am shocked and extremely disappointed by the NFL’s decision to suspend me for the 2012 season. Commissioner Roger Goodell has refused to share any of the supposed evidence he claims supports this unprecedented punishment. The reason is clear: I never paid, or intended to pay, $10,000, or any amount of money, to any player for knocking Kurt Warner, Brett Favre or any other player out of the 2009 Divisional playoff game, 2010 NFC Championship Game or any other game.

“I never set out to intentionally hurt any player and never enticed any teammate to intentionally hurt another player. I also never put any money into a bounty pool or helped to create a bounty pool intended to pay out money for injuring other players. I have always conducted myself in a professional and proud manner.

“I intend to fight this injustice, to defend my reputation, to stand up for my team and my profession, and to send a clear signal to the commissioner that the process has failed, to the detriment of me, my teammates, the New Orleans Saints and the game.’’

Vilma doesn’t quite say it, but it sure sounds to me like he’s planning to appeal the suspension.

Say this much about NFL commissioner Roger Goodell -- he’s consistent.

Goodell was harsh when he issued punishment for the New Orleans Saints organization, coaching staff and front office for roles in a three-year bounty program. Saints coach Sean Payton was suspended for the entire 2012 season, former defensive coordinator Gregg Williams was suspended indefinitely, assistant head coach Joe Vitt will be suspended for the first six games of the season and general manager Mickey Loomis was suspended for the first eight games of the season. The Saints also were fined $500,000 and had to forfeit a second-round draft pick in 2012 and 2013.

When the NFL announced player discipline Wednesday, Goodell was just as harsh. He suspended New Orleans linebacker Jonathan Vilma for the entire season and Vilma no longer can take part in offseason workouts. New Orleans defensive end Will Smith will be suspended for the first four games. Former New Orleans defensive lineman Anthony Hargrove, now with Green Bay, will be suspended for the first eight games and former New Orleans linebacker Scott Fujita, now with Cleveland, will be suspended for the first three games.

Smith, Fujita and Hargrove can continue taking part in offseason programs and will start their suspensions just before the regular season.

As it did with the announcement of discipline for the coaches, Loomis and the Saints, the NFL sent out a detailed release about why the players were suspended.

Here is the explanation from the league on what each of the four players did to earn the punishment:

Vilma: “The investigation concluded that while a captain of the defensive unit Vilma assisted Coach Williams in establishing and funding the program. Multiple independent sources also confirmed that Vilma offered a specific bounty -- $10,000 in cash – to any player who knocked Arizona quarterback Kurt Warner out of the 2009 Divisional playoff game and later pledged the same amount to anyone who knocked Minnesota quarterback Brett Favre out of the 2009 NFC Championship Game the following week (played on Jan. 24, 2010). Vilma is eligible to be reinstated after the Super Bowl in 2013.’’

Smith: “Smith, a defensive end, assisted Saints defensive coordinator Gregg Williams in establishing and funding the program during a period in which he was a captain and leader of the defensive unit. Multiple independent sources also confirmed that Smith pledged significant sums to the program pool for 'cart-offs' and 'knockouts' of opposing players.”

Hargrove: “Actively participated in the program while a member of the Saints. Hargrove submitted a signed declaration to the league that established not only the existence of the program at the Saints, but also that he knew about and participated in it. The evidence showed that Hargrove told at least one player on another team that Vikings quarterback Brett Favre was a target of a large bounty during the NFC Championship Game in January of 2010. Hargrove also actively obstructed the league’s 2010 investigation into the program by being untruthful to investigators.’’

Fujita: “The record established that Fujita, a linebacker, pledged a significant amount of money to the prohibited pay-for-performance/bounty pool during the 2009 NFL playoffs when he played for the Saints. The pool to which he pledged paid large cash rewards for 'cart-offs' and 'knockouts,' plays during which an opposing player was injured.’’

The league went on to say that all the players are suspended without pay for “detrimental conduct."

“In assessing player discipline,” Goodell said, “I focused on players who were in leadership positions at the Saints; contributed a particularly large sum of money toward the program; specifically contributed to a bounty on an opposing player; demonstrated a clear intent to participate in a program that potentially injured opposing players; sought rewards for doing so; and/or obstructed the 2010 investigation.”

The players can appeal the suspensions, but Goodell already is indicating that a defense saying they were just following the orders of coaches will not fly.

“No bounty program can exist without active player participation,” Goodell said. “The evidence clearly showed that the players being held accountable today willingly and enthusiastically embraced the bounty program. Players put the vast majority of the money into this program and they share responsibility for playing by the rules and protecting each other within those rules.”

PALM BEACH, Fla. -- Although his franchise quarterback, Cam Newton, was one of four players named as specific targets in the Saints’ bounty program, Carolina coach Ron Rivera doesn’t anticipate further problems with the Panthers and Saints.

“I'd be surprised if there's any retribution, I really would,’’ Rivera said during a breakfast for NFC coaches Wednesday morning at the owners meetings.

The NFL report announcing the Saints’ punishment, listed Newton and Green Bay’s Aaron Rodgers as well as retired quarterbacks Brett Favre and Kurt Warner as players that specifically were targeted for injury. As NFC South opponents, the Saints and Panthers play each other twice a season.

“When we play them it's not going to be about that,’’ Rivera said. “It's going to be us playing them trying to win our division. And that's what it should be. It should be about the game, and not what happened.’’

That’s a good message, and I’m sure Rivera will share it with his team before playing the Saints next season. Rivera’s a coach that is respected by his players and his words could keep things from getting out of hand on the field. But NFL players are intense competitors and I’m sure at least some of the Panthers will have added motivation against the Saints because they know that team was trying to injure their quarterback.

Rivera also weighed in on another issue related to the Saints’ bounty program. Former New Orleans tight end Jeremy Shockey was accused by former NFL defensive lineman and current television analyst Warren Sapp of being “the snitch’’ that started the investigation into the bounty program. Shockey, who played for Carolina last season and currently is a free agent, has issued strong denials.

“If you know Jeremy Shockey, you know that's not Jeremy Shockey,’’ Rivera said. “I know there was an insinuation that he had been the guy. But that's not Jeremy's makeup. That's not who Jeremy Shockey is. Jeremy Shockey's a guy that, if there was something going on, that's their business. I would be surprised, I really would. It wouldn't hurt him in my eyes either way because first of all I think Jeremy Shockey's a tremendous person. I think he's also a very good football person -- a football personality who understands this game.’’

Minnesota punter Chris Kluwe isn’t the only member of the Vikings to say that New Orleans linebacker Jonathan Vilma should be permanently banned by the NFL for his role in the Saints’ bounty program.

NFC North colleague Kevin Seifert reports Minnesota center John Sullivan agreed with Kluwe on Vilma and also said former Saints Darren Sharper and defensive end Bobby McCray also should receiver harsh penalties. Sullivan was a first-year starter in the 2009 season, when the Vikings played the Saints in the NFC Championship Game. In its report announcing the Saints’ punishment, the league said Minnesota quarterback Brett Favre was a specific target of New Orleans defenders in that game.

"If you want to offer money to knock somebody out of a game on a clean hit, fine," Sullivan said. "But the guys that went after it in the wrong way, that's the exact opposite of sportsmanship. It's just disgusting. To think that you're going to take money to hit someone illegally and hurt them out of the game, I can't even fathom that somebody would do that."

Sullivan talked about McCray’s hit on Favre after a second-quarter handoff and implied that at least one of Sharper’s hits on Favre was illegal.

"I really think if you go back and look at that game, anybody who took a shot at Brett illegally and you can see with the intention of trying to injury him [should be banned]," Sullivan said. "And the big two that come to mind are Sharper and Bobby McCray. They've got to do something to those guys too, whether it's no Hall of Fame [or] you're not allowed to be associated with the NFL anymore. I have a hard time talking about it. It just disgusts me that you would go out there and try to hurt somebody and take away their livelihood. It' s just gross."

Sullivan also questioned the suspension of New Orleans general manager Mickey Loomis for the first eight games of the season. Loomis will be allowed to continue in his job throughout the offseason, including training camp and most of the preseason. Loomis’ suspension will start when NFL rosters are cut down to 53 players just before the start of the regular season.

"Seems like it would be more effective as a punishment during the draft," Sullivan said.

Forget the feud between Warren Sapp and Jeremy Shockey. That’s old news.

It’s time for a new chapter in the sad saga that is the fallout from the New Orleans Saints bounty program. Now, it’s Minnesota punter Chris Kluwe telling a Minnesota radio station he believes New Orleans middle linebacker Jonathan Vilma should be banned from the NFL.

"My position has always been that I think Vilma and [former New Orleans defensive coordinator] Gregg Williams should be banned for life and then [coach Sean] Payton should get a year, their GM [Mickey Loomis] should get a year and anyone who knowingly took money after a hit that injured someone should get a year as well,’’ Kluwe said.

Vilma was specifically named in the NFL’s report for putting up $10,000 of his own money to anyone who injured Minnesota quarterback Brett Favre in a Jan. 24, 2010 playoff game in New Orleans. Kluwe recalled it was obvious something out of the ordinary was going on.

"Me and [kicker] Ryan [Longwell] were kind of looking at each other on the bench going, 'Are they really going after Brett?'" Kluwe said. "Like, 'Is this really what they're doing?' But you don't want to believe that something like that is happening because you think better of the other players.

"You don't want to think that they're doing something like that. I think that was part of the thing that the league was looking at [in its investigation] was like, 'OK, we've really got to make sure that this is true because otherwise it's going to make the sport look really bad.'"

Payton has been suspended for a year and Williams has been suspended indefinitely. There has been no disciplinary action taken against Vilma yet. NFL commissioner Roger Goodell is expected to first meet with representatives from the NFL Players Association before issuing any punishment for players involved.

NFL commissioner Roger Goodell announced heavy penalties (suspensions, a heavy fine and the forfeiture of draft picks) against the New Orleans Saints on Wednesday. But this story is far from over.

Let’s take a look at what else might happen.

What’s left to come?

Pat Yasinskas: Disciplinary action against the players. The NFL has said anywhere from 22 to 27 players were actively involved in a three-year bounty program in which Saints’ defenders were offered financial incentives to intentionally injure opponents. The players also were involved in funding the programs. Goodell has said there will be disciplinary action against the players, but he didn’t announce it when he revealed the suspensions for coach Sean Payton, former defensive coordinator Gregg Williams, assistant head coach Joe Vitt, general manager Mickey Loomis, a $500,000 fine for the team, and the loss of second-round draft picks in 2012 and 2013.

That’s because Goodell has agreed to allow the NFL Players Association some time to complete an independent investigation into the situation. Goodell is expected to meet soon with union leader DeMaurice Smith and will listen to recommendations on penalties. The ultimate decision on that rests with Goodell, and given the severity of the punishment he already has handed out, look for the penalties against players to also be harsh.

Expect multiple suspensions and heavy fines. Goodell is intent on making sure nothing like this ever happens again. He already got the message out to coaches and administrators. But he also has to make it clear to players.

When will those penalties come?

PY: Unless Goodell and Smith meet very quickly, there probably will be a little lag time on this. The annual NFL spring meeting begins Monday in Palm Beach, Fla., and Goodell will have to travel there sometime over the weekend. Once the meeting gets started, he’ll be tied up with other matters.

The likely scenario is that an announcement will come late next week or early the following week.

Which players have the most to lose?

PY: It’s hard to say, because the NFL’s report didn’t go into a lot of specific details on players. But the one player that was singled out in the report was New Orleans middle linebacker Jonathan Vilma. The NFL said he was responsible for placing a $10,000 bounty of former Minnesota quarterback Brett Favre. That’s not going to look good when a decision on his punishment is made. It’s likely Vilma will face a multiple-game suspension, and he probably will be the player with the most severe punishment.

But it’s not likely to end with Vilma. The NFL obviously turned up a lot of details in its investigation, but held back details on specific players. Those details likely will come out when discipline for players is announced. Expect more suspensions and plenty of fines.

Will the NFL stagger the suspensions, or will they all come at the same time in the 2012 season?

PY: Keep in mind, the punishment on this one isn’t likely to be limited to just the Saints. There are former New Orleans defenders scattered about the league, and some are out of the NFL. They’re still subject to discipline. But it’s likely the Saints will have multiple defenders facing penalties. If a lot of them are facing multiple-game suspensions, the NFL might have to stagger the suspensions. You could argue the penalties already have put the Saints at a competitive disadvantage. But forcing them to play multiple games without, let’s just say for example, half their defense, would make the Saints completely non-competitive. If there are a lot of players suspended, the NFL might have to spread things out.

How will the Saints replace the suspended players?

PY: Again, much will depend on the number of players suspended. But the fact that Loomis will be allowed to work through the offseason, and begin his suspension just before the regular season opens, will give him time to put a plan in place. He’s likely to go heavy on defensive players in the draft, although the Saints won’t have a pick in the first two rounds (the first-round pick was lost last year when the Saints traded up to get Mark Ingram. The second-round choice was forfeited as part of the punishment). So the Saints might have to play some of their middle-round draft picks very early in the season.

The Saints already have added free-agent defensive tackle Brodrick Bunkley, and have had multiple free-agent linebackers in for visits. The Saints have been active in free agency throughout the Loomis/Payton era. But there’s an additional challenge this year, because the Saints are very tight against the salary cap. Part of the issue is that quarterback Drew Brees is currently carrying the franchise tag while he and the team try to work out a long-term contract. A new deal isn’t likely to free up much cap room. In fact, unless there’s some unusual structure to it, Brees’ cap figure will probably be in the $19 million range. But the Saints need to get him signed just to create some stability.

Then, there are other ways Loomis can work with the cap. There are several players who could be released to free up cap room, and several other contracts that easily could be restructured. There’s little doubt the Saints will remain players in free agency. They also could catch a bit of an in-season cap break. Once players begin suspensions, they don’t count against the cap. They’ll again count against the cap once they are reinstated, but their prorated salary for the games they miss won’t continue to count against the cap, because they won’t be paid for the games they miss due to suspension.

The New Orleans Saints’ bounty program has prompted a pretty interesting Twitter war.

On his verified account, former NFL defensive tackle Warren Sapp said that former New Orleans tight end Jeremy Shockey was “the snitch." On his verified Twitter account, Shockey denies that. But let me caution you that some of the language from Shockey is a little rough.

I’m not saying I think Sapp or Shockey are right or wrong. But I will say I think there’s a misconception about the whole “snitch’’ thing. The league started looking into the bounty program after the Saints beat up Brett Favre and Kurt Warner on their way to winning the Super Bowl after the 2009 season. At the time, it was obvious that something like a bounty program might be going on. Shockey was playing for the Saints at the time.

The league investigated and couldn’t get enough evidence to prove it. The NFL later told the Saints to put a stop to the bounty program.

The league kept on investigating and it’s obvious that some players eventually talked. But I don’t think the whole thing was started by a “snitch."

The announcement of the NFL’s penalties for the New Orleans Saints bounty program contained one item that involves another NFC South team.

The league specifically mentions four players who were targeted with bounties. They were Brett Favre, Kurt Warner, Aaron Rodgers and Cam Newton. Favre and Warner are retired, and Rodgers plays in the NFC North.

But Newton plays for the Carolina Panthers. Apparently, the bounty on Newton came in last season’s regular-season finale, when Newton left the game and backup Derek Anderson made one of his two appearances last season.

I’m pretty sure that mention of Newton in the NFL’s report caught some eyes in Carolina. Keep in mind, the Panthers used the No. 1 overall pick in last year’s draft on Newton. He won the offensive rookie of the year award and is viewed as the franchise quarterback.

The fact he was being targeted for injury by an opponent isn’t going to sit too well with Carolina’s players. They’re not going to forget that.

This is going to add some intensity to the rivalry between the Panthers and Saints.

I just finished reading through the very lengthy and detailed release the NFL sent out to announce the penalties imposed on the New Orleans Saints for their bounty program.

My initial reaction?

The penalties are extremely severe and pretty much unprecedented in the NFL. Head coach Sean Payton has been suspended for a year. General manager Mickey Loomis is suspended for the first eight games of the 2012 season, and assistant head coach Joe Vitt will be suspended for the first six games. The Saints also lost second-round draft picks for this year and next year.

But I can’t say I’m surprised or that the penalties are unfair.

This is Roger Goodell’s NFL, and that’s the bottom line in what will go down as one of the biggest scandals in NFL history. In his tenure as commissioner, Goodell has made lots of noise about the importance of player safety. He made his loudest noise ever Wednesday when he handed down the discipline for the Saints (as well as suspending former New Orleans defensive coordinator Gregg Williams indefinitely). Maybe a bounty program 20 or 30 years ago wouldn’t have been a big deal. But this isn’t the NFL of 20 or 30 years ago.

It’s obvious that the league wanted to make a statement on this one. The NFL has a very smart and seasoned public relations department. If the commissioner and his top assistants wanted this one to get lost in the shuffle, they had their chance. They could have announced it late last week when the NCAA tournament was cranking up. Or they could have done it Monday or Tuesday when Peyton Manning was dominating the headlines.

But Goodell and the NFL waited until Wednesday, and that puts the Saints firmly on center stage. Goodell’s comments in the release were about as strong as you’ll see from a league that usually goes out of its way to portray everything as rosy.

“Beyond the clear and continuing violations of league rules, and lying to investigators, the bounty program is squarely contrary to the league’s most important initiatives -- enhancing player health and safety and protecting the integrity of the game,” Goodell said. “Let me be clear. There is no place in the NFL for deliberately seeking to injure another player, let alone offering a reward for doing so. Any form of bounty is incompatible with our commitment to create a culture of sportsmanship, fairness and safety. Programs of this kind have no place in our game, and we are determined that bounties will no longer be a part of the NFL.”

Goodell also was sending a strong message to the other 31 teams. But he made an example out of the Saints. That’s mainly because the Saints set themselves up to become an example.

According to the league, Payton and Loomis were aware that a bounty program existed and rewarded defensive players for injuring opponents. The report even details some specific targets of bounties -- Brett Favre, Cam Newton, Aaron Rodgers, and Kurt Warner. The league says Payton and Loomis did nothing to stop the bounties that went on for three seasons and the coach lied to league investigators and instructed his assistants to do the same.

There’s one particular item in the announcement that gives some in-depth insight into how the Saints were operating.

“Coach Vitt said one of his primary roles was to monitor the activity of Coach Williams,’’ the report says. “This was based on the direction of Coach Payton, who apparently had less than full confidence in Coach Williams. Despite Coach Vitt’s knowledge of the bounty program, his understanding of the terms 'knock-out' and 'cart-off,' his witnessing Coach Williams handing out envelopes that he believed to contain cash, and his acknowledgement that the defensive meeting preceding the 2010 NFC Championship Game may have 'got out of hand' with respect to Brett Favre."

Wow, the league is even peeling off the cover of what wasn’t exactly a well-kept secret around the NFL. Payton hired Williams in 2009 because he needed to make his defense better. It was pretty well known that Payton made the move despite the fact he and Williams weren’t the best of friends. But they coexisted for three seasons and won a Super Bowl in their first year together.

Does the Super Bowl make all this worthwhile?

I’m not so sure. The Saints have a real mess on their hands. You could say Payton should have stayed true to himself and never hired Williams, who the league says was the mastermind of the whole bounty program. But it’s kind of useless to waste time on hindsight.

The Saints have to move forward, and that’s not going to be easy. In addition to the actions already announced, the Saints likely will have multiple defensive players suspended for part of the 2012 season.

Goodell has put the Saints in their place for messing with the integrity of the game. He also has sent a message to them (and to other teams) that he really is the boss.

But the Saints are suddenly left without the guys who’ve been running the show since 2006. Payton’s suspension begins April 1, and Loomis isn’t going to be allowed to be involved with the team until midway through next season. Owner Tom Benson was not implicated for doing anything wrong by the league.

Benson suddenly faces a huge challenge. He’s got to decide if he’s going to fill Payton’s spot with one of the assistants currently on staff or look outside for a head coach. (Where do you find a head coach at this time of year?) Benson also has to decide who’s going to make personnel decisions in Loomis’ absence.

Benson’s reputation in New Orleans has improved quite a bit in recent years. Agreeing to keep the team in New Orleans for the long term and winning a Super Bowl will do that for you. The Saints are more popular and beloved than they’ve ever been.

It’s up to Benson to find a way to keep them there. He can start by making sure quarterback Drew Brees, who saved a city and a franchise once, gets signed to a long-term contract very soon. Brees may have to do it all over again. But it's up to Benson to finish the job by putting good people in the places of Payton and Loomis.

Most importantly, it's up to Benson to make sure his entire organization plays by Goodell’s rules.

We’ve got a new development in the story about the New Orleans Saints’ bounty program.

Former New Orleans defensive lineman Anthony Hargrove, who spent last season with Seattle, has issued a lengthy statement, courtesy of NFC North colleague Kevin Seifert. Hargrove was a central figure in early reports on this story. A Sports Illustrated story even said Hargrove was vocally celebrating after Minnesota quarterback Brett Favre was injured in the NFC Championship Game between the Saints and Vikings in the 2009 season.

We’ll run Hargrove’s written statement in its entirety and editorialize on it a bit at the bottom. Here’s what Hargrove had to say:

First of all, the purpose of this statement is simply to address the comments that have been made about me in the media. I will not address anything to do with anyone else but myself.

In regards to the hit I made on Brett Favre that has been talked about: it was one of about five times I got to him and the only one that was late. I agree it was a late hit, but in the heat of the moment I was simply trying to make a play. I can assure you that when I got up, I was thinking two things, one, that I cost my team, and two, that I might have just cost myself some money if the NFL fined me.

To put things in perspective, I received a game ball for my play that day and yet got fined while receiving nothing and expecting to receive nothing for the play some keep referencing. Kudos to Brett, he even asked me if that was all I had! Gotta love him.

And in regards to my comments that have been talked about where I say that Favre is done, I readily agree that it sounds bad in retrospect. A lot of things look bad when we look back and realize how they sound. Trust me, I've said much, much worse. Heck, I probably say worse every day.

But did I personally want Favre INJURED? Absolutely and categorically NO! Did I feel like we, the Saints, had a better chance of being in the Super Bowl with Favre on the sideline? Of course. Would the Patriots and their fans have probably been excited to see Eli [Manning] on the bench with his foot up whispering that he was done [in Super Bowl XLVI]? Would players on the sideline have made comments to that effect? Right or wrong, I'm guessing yes.

Probably every Saints fan, player and coach got an adrenaline rush when thinking Minnesota might be in trouble. I said what many people were probably thinking, though maybe I said it in a way that sounded a bit too excited. Those who know me best know that I lean toward the animated side a bit. Okay, a lot! It's who God made me. I do regret saying it, though.

I have made many mistakes in my life and have paid dearly for some of them, and the late hit and the comments were both mistakes, in my opinion. But players all over the league do the same thing every Sunday, make late hits and say stupid things. But I can say with absolute certainty that neither the late hit nor the comment have anything whatsoever to do with the issue being so hotly discussed in the media.

All right, that was pretty interesting. First off, I’ll agree with Hargrove that he is an animated sort. I’ve interviewed him several times and he’s always been very talkative and emotional. If he says his comments were made in the heat of the moment, I believe him.

But the thing that really stands out here is that there is never a mention of the bounty program. Hargrove talks about getting fined by the NFL for his hit on Favre. But he never makes any mention of financial reward.

Does that mean Hargrove was saying there was no bounty program? We don’t know. Hargrove didn't deny its existence. He simply addressed the two plays connected to him and said there was no bounty involved in those plays.

All indications are the Tampa Bay Buccaneers aren’t ready to end their search for a head coach. Monday will mark the three-week anniversary of Raheem Morris’ firing.

Since then, the Bucs seemingly have been talking to anyone (almost everyone), but don’t appear close to making a hire. They could be waiting to talk to more coaches that are still involved in the postseason. Or they soon could be narrowing their lengthy list and bringing a few candidates back for second interviews.

What we do know is that by the end of this week the Bucs will have interviewed at least eight candidates. We don’t know exactly how those candidates stack up in the team’s eyes.

But I’m going to give you my rankings of the candidates that are known to have interviewed or are expected to interview by the end of the week. I'm factoring in some insight on what it appears the Bucs are looking for in an ideal candidate. I’ve also talked to coaches and front-office types who have worked with some of the candidates as well as media members who have covered them.

So let’s take a look at my list:

1. Mike Sherman. Even before Morris was fired, Sherman’s name was tied to this job. Part of it was due to the fact Sherman uses the same agent as general manager Mark Dominik, who undoubtedly is going to have a big say in this hire. The Bucs want a cohesive relationship between their front office and the coaching staff and all indications are Sherman and Dominik would work well together.

But there are more reasons why Sherman remains No. 1 on my list. The first is that he’s almost exactly the opposite of Morris in just about every way and that appears to be what the Bucs want. Sherman is 57 with lots of experience. Although his most recent job was a lackluster tenure at Texas A&M, he has been an NFL head coach before. A lot of people tend to forget Sherman’s time in Green Bay was pretty productive.

He produced a winning record in five of his six seasons. He comes from an offensive background and I think that scores points with the Bucs. Tampa Bay needs quarterback Josh Freeman, who it wants to be the foundation of the franchise, back on track after a disappointing 2011 season.

Also, there’s the fact that Sherman is a strong disciplinarian, another thing Morris was not.

2. Mike Zimmer. Like Sherman, Zimmer is mature and would clean up the lack of discipline and accountability that plagued the Bucs under Morris. Zimmer hasn’t been a head coach, but he’s got a long résumé as a defensive coordinator -- he's currently working in Cincinnati with stints in Atlanta and Dallas before that. Zimmer is universally respected in league circles and the only potential knock against him for this job might be that he doesn’t come with an offensive background.

But Zimmer could end up with this job if he can convince the Bucs he can bring in a strong offensive coordinator and quarterbacks coach.

3. Tom Clements. He’s 58 and has never been an NFL head coach and only did a two-year stint as a coordinator in Buffalo, but he still has pretty strong credentials. He’s been the quarterbacks coach of the Green Bay Packers for six seasons and you could say that coaching Brett Favre and Aaron Rodgers is a lot like being the Maytag repairman. But those who know him well say Clements is a big part of the reason the Packers made such a strong transition from Favre to Rodgers.

Prior to joining Green Bay, Clements was quarterbacks coach in Pittsburgh, Kansas City and New Orleans. He also played quarterback at Notre Dame (back when the Notre Dame quarterback pedigree meant a lot) and was a Hall of Fame player in the Canadian Football League.

Clements, who also is an attorney, is known for his no-nonsense approach.

4. Marty Schottenheimer. If you based it only on experience, which obviously is a big factor, Schottenheimer would be the hands-down choice. He spent 26 years as an NFL head coach, with stints with the Browns, Chiefs, Redskins and Chargers. Schottenheimer’s career record is 327-200, which almost makes it easy to overlook his 5-13 postseason record. Freeman potentially could be better than any quarterback Schottenheimer ever worked with (and that includes Drew Brees only as he was in San Diego, not after he got to New Orleans).

But Schottenheimer is the one candidate who age could work against. He’s 68 and hasn’t coached in the NFL since 2006. He’s been a successful builder before, but can he do it again at this age?

5. Rob Chudzinski. At 43, he’s the youngest of the known candidates. He had a two-year stint as offensive coordinator in Cleveland and helped Derek Anderson (yes, that Derek Anderson) get to a Pro Bowl. But Chudzinsk’s a hot name right now almost entirely because of his work in his first season in Carolina.

Without an offseason program, he installed an entirely new offense and rookie quarterback Cam Newton had a record-setting season. If Chudzinski did that for Newton, the Bucs have to be imagining what he could do with Freeman. But Chudzinski also would have to convince the Bucs he could bring them a proven defensive coordinator.

6. Jerry Gray. He currently is the defensive coordinator in Tennessee and had a pretty successful run as coordinator in Buffalo when Gregg Williams was the head coach. Williams also has a strong background as a secondary coach.

Gray also had a good NFL career as a defensive back and finished his playing career with the Bucs in 1993. The fact that he’s a former player helps his candidacy because he can relate to players. But the fact that he is 49, means that unlike Morris, he would not be a contemporary to the players.

7. Joe Philbin. The offensive coordinator for the Green Bay Packers, Philbin already has had a second interview for the job as Miami’s head coach. Philbin has led a very good Green Bay offense since becoming coordinator in 2007. But head coach Mike McCarthy has handled play-calling duties. Although Philbin had 19 years of experience in the college ranks, the Packers are the only NFL team he has worked for. His rise has been pretty rapid. Philbin joined the Packers (then coached by Sherman) in 2003 as an assistant offensive line coach and became tight ends coach the next year. He later became offensive line coach for one season before becoming coordinator.

8. Brad Childress. Yes, Childress had some success as head coach of the Minnesota Vikings. He had a winning record in two of his five seasons, but his tenure was marked by inconsistency and turbulence, including the fiasco in which Randy Moss returned to the Vikings. Some who have covered Childress say stability isn’t necessarily his biggest strength. In Minnesota, he seemed prone to go with the quick fix, bringing in Favre and begging him to stay for a second season. That’s the kind of approach that could remind the Bucs, who are going to remain committed to building through the draft, a little too much of the Jon Gruden era, in which there never seemed to be a long-term plan.

Before joining the Vikings, Childress was offensive coordinator in Philadelphia. But head coach Andy Reid called the plays. I do think there’s a chance Childress could be hired by Tampa Bay, but as the offensive coordinator for one of the other candidates.

Tim Tebow aside, the biggest quarterback story in the league this year might be one that’s really about next year.

What should the Indianapolis Colts do?

They almost certainly will have the first pick in the 2012 draft, and Stanford’s Andrew Luck, perhaps the best quarterback prospect to come along in the past decade, will be sitting there. At the same time, Peyton Manning, perhaps the best quarterback ever, is expected back from a neck injury that has sidelined him all season.

The draft is more than four months away and Manning’s 36th birthday will come in a little more than three months. Already, there is a ton of speculation about what the Colts should do.

The three choices being thrown about: Manning? Luck? Or both?

All those are on the table, but I think the Colts would be making a big mistake if they go with both. Sure, it sounds great to pair the greatest quarterback of this generation with the guy who might be the best quarterback of the next.

But that’s in theory. Reality is a different story. If Manning comes back to stay and Luck is the draft pick, the Colts are asking for trouble.

The thing we, as a society, tend to forget is that you don’t get to be an NFL quarterback without being extremely competitive and at least a little selfish. Manning wasn’t put on this earth to be a glorified quarterbacks coach. If he comes back to the Colts, he’s coming back as the starter, not a mentor.

This whole scenario reminds me of a story I did soon after joining ESPN.com. In March 2008, Brett Favre announced his retirement (for the first time). I called heir apparent Aaron Rodgers, who had been drafted in the first round in 2005, for reaction and was a little stunned by what I got.

"Obviously, when a team drafts a quarterback in the first round, that's a pretty big statement," Rodgers said. "At that time, Brett felt like he still had plenty left in his tank and those are some pretty difficult terms to come in under. That first year, we were just teammates."

For perhaps the first time ever, Rodgers admitted that Favre didn’t welcome him with open arms and there was trouble in paradise (or at least the land of the Cheeseheads). That’s not an uncommon phenomenon.

Kurt Warner wasn’t ready to hand the ball to Matt Leinart when the Cardinals drafted him in 2006. Drew Brees wasn’t overjoyed when the Chargers brought in Philip Rivers in 2004. Heck, you can go even further back. It’s common knowledge that Joe Montana and veteran Steve Bono didn’t treat Steve Young like a close friend (and I’m being very generous with the wording here) when they were together in San Francisco in the 1990s.

That’s because guys like Montana, Favre, Warner and Brees are so competitive. All of them fought for their jobs and, at least initially, kept it. The eventual passing of the torch from Favre to Rodgers worked out fine for the Packers, but it definitely caused a rift in the short term.

You could argue the Chargers and Cardinals made mistakes by bringing in replacements for Brees and Warner before they were ready to even think about being replaced.

That’s why, no matter what Archie Manning says on any given day about his son and Luck coexisting, any thought of that coupling is a formula for problems.

The Colts really can’t afford to have both Manning and Luck -- and we’re not talking about the salary cap. We’re talking about a situation that would be unhealthy for the players and the team.

The Colts can bring Manning back for the quick fix and trade the pick. (Bill Polian did that in 1995, when he was with the expansion Carolina Panthers.) Or the Colts can trade Manning to clear the way for Luck to start with a clean slate.

It’s one or the other. You can’t have both.

TRENDING UP

TRENDING DOWN