ESPN NFL

» AFC Scenarios: East | West | North | South » NFC: East | West | North | South

Yes, the start of training camps is two months away, but it’s never too early to consider the coming season. A look at the best-case and worst-case scenarios for the Cardinals in 2012:

Dream scenario (11-5): A full offseason of healing and playbook study lets Kevin Kolb prove the Cardinals knew what they were doing when they acquired him from Philadelphia last offseason. There's plenty of credit to go around. The team's decision to reassign assistant coach John McNulty from receivers to quarterbacks becomes a popular storyline. There's no doubt Kolb's mechanics have improved, but talent and good health are what win football games.

Michael Floyd's addition through the draft makes the Cardinals' passing game nearly impossible to defend, particularly with second-year back Ryan Williams emerging as the game-breaking runner Arizona was convinced it had drafted. Adding young linemen for Russ Grimm to develop also pays off, particularly as the season progresses. Bobby Massie looks like a keeper at right tackle. On the other side, Levi Brown picks up where he left off last season, proving Arizona was right in re-signing him to a five-year contract.

The transformation on defense surprises even the Cardinals. Yes, Arizona made strides on that side of the ball while winning seven of its final nine games in 2011. But there was no way anyone could have expected Sam Acho to challenge Simeon Rice's season franchise record for sacks since 1982 (Rice had 16.5 in 1999). With a healthy Dan Williams at nose tackle and Acho pumping up an already underrated pass rush, cornerback Patrick Peterson takes the next logical step in his development: picking off passes and returning them for touchdowns.

Winning at San Francisco in Week 17 delivers an 11-5 record and the NFC West title to Arizona, the team's third division crown in five years.

Nightmare scenario (5-11): No one can blame Gregg Williams or Jonathan Vilma for the concussion Kolb suffers in the Hall of Fame Game against New Orleans to open the exhibition season. Some in the Cardinals' organization welcome the switch to John Skelton, but with Ryan Williams and Beanie Wells predictably battling knee problems, the offense becomes one-dimensional. That's tough for a team with Brown and a rookie starting at tackle. Kolb's return after a few weeks means as much as it did last season -- nothing.

By October, it's clear the Cardinals didn't do enough at tackle or outside linebacker to take the next step. Those offseason stories about a full offseason helping Kolb seemed justified at the time, but we should have known better. McNulty's coaching helps, but players revert to form under pressure and Kolb is no exception. He wasn't going to develop instincts all of a sudden, was he? Aldon Smith's three-sack game against Arizona on Monday night in Week 8 doesn't seem so bad when Clay Matthews collects four of them the following week.

For the second time in three seasons, the Cards finish 5-11 after getting blown out at San Francisco in Week 17. The quarterback questions persisting upon Kurt Warner's retirement continue to linger. Watching Peyton Manning in the playoffs doesn't help.

Last week, former NFL quarterback Kurt Warner did some radio interviews in which he said that, given the dangers that are becoming more and more evident all the time now, he'd prefer that his sons not play football. And former NFL wide receiver Amani Toomer, who was a teammate of Warner's with the Giants in 2004, went nuts on Warner, ripping him for being "disingenuous" and "trashing" the game of football. You can read a summary of that foolishness here.

Now, in case you hadn't heard, Giants defensive end Osi Umenyiora is now on Twitter -- a development about which everyone in the football world with the possible exception of Jerry Reese and the Reese family is and should be thrilled. Umenyiora decided this morning to weigh in on the whole Warner-Toomer deal. You can read his tweets here on his Twitter page, but this is what he said, tweet by tweet:

"By the Way, Kurt Warner is Right to think how he is thinking about his kids and football."

"Its an awesome game and has done a lot for me, but i know when im 45 there is a strong chance il be in a wheelchair."

"If i can avoid that for my son, i will. But if he wants to play i wont stop him"

"Love Toomer thats my Guy, but he is dead wrong for attacking Kurt like that"

First off, that last one. Umenyiora is 100 percent correct about Toomer, whose reaction to what Warner said was way beyond wrong. Toomer acted as though Warner had been touring the country making anti-football speeches and publishing op-ed articles in major newspapers decrying the game. In fact, all Warner did was answer a question on a radio show and give his honest opinion about his own family. Toomer was so far out of line in his reaction that what he said was a hundred times more troubling than what Warner said.

See, as smart players such as Umenyiora apparently understand, we're in a time and a place in which we need to be having a frank conversation about football and the long-term and short-term safety issues inherent in it. "I would rather my kids not play" is a perfectly rational opinion to have and to express, and no one -- whether they played in the NFL or not -- should feel bullied into keeping such thoughts to themselves. Too often when we talk about football in this country, there is a chorus of tough-guy former players shouting down anyone who dares express something other than the conventional wisdom.

But as Umenyiora suggests, not only is Warner's opinion justified, it's an important one to bring to the forefront of this and all future discussions about the sport. Umenyiora expresses love for the game and doesn't seem to regret his conscious decision to have made it his life's work, but he seems to believe there's a "strong chance" it will land him in a wheelchair at a still-early point in his life. Those are very serious conflicting emotions, and the best way to allow those charged with reconciling them to do so is to encourage an open, honest and frank discussion of the attendant issues. I have no idea whether he's being overly dramatic with his wheelchair comment, but it's obviously something he's thought seriously about, and it's certainly worth considering in light of the current and growing emphasis by the NFL on player safety and the burgeoning awareness of the issues NFL players face in the years that follow the ends of their careers.

It's good to see a player as good and as prominent as Umenyiora -- one who was a teammate of Toomer's -- talking sense instead of talking tough. Because the important thing in all of this isn't whether you want your kids to play football or not. The important thing is that all sides and opinions need to be heard as football potentially confronts and existential crisis. This is about finding solutions, and figuring out the right and sensible way to move forward -- not about whether it's wrong to criticize the game just because you made money playing it. Here's hoping that what we hear from folks like Umenyiora helps folks like Toomer understand what this discussion is really about, and what the proper way is of conducting it.

Under criticism from ESPN's Merril Hoge and others, Kurt Warner has clarified his stance on concussions with a reasoned response that advances the conversation with civility.

Should we have expected anything less from the former St. Louis Rams and Arizona Cardinals quarterback?

Warner disagrees with Hoge's contention that treatment for head trauma is the problem, more than the trauma itself. He personalizes the issue by noting that his own child has suffered effects from brain injury. He agrees with Hoge on the need for better treatment. He diffuses Hoge's contention that Warner should "get involved" with his kids' football programs to better ensure safety, pointing out how his 12-year-old son's Pop Warner league conducts baseline neurological testing.

Warner directly counters Hoge's contention that Warner was "uneducated" and "uninformed" on the subject matter. Drawing from his own experience as a player, Warner describes the pressure players feel to get back on the field. He points to the situation in Cleveland with Colt McCoy last season as evidence the NFL is still finding its way on the concussion issue.

Warner also differentiated between his approach as a player and his feelings as a parent.

"As a football player and a fan of the game, I want my kids to play the game that I am so passionate about," he wrote. "They currently play football, and there are few things that bring me more joy than watching them play and getting excited about the game I love. But, at the same time I am constantly concerned about my kids and the violence of the game of football. I worry about them suffering head trauma and developing any long-term issues as a result of that injury."

This was a nearly perfect followup to the less measured comments Warner made last week.

The surest way to avoid a football-related concussion is to stop playing football.

It's a path retired quarterback Kurt Warner has considered promoting, and one retired running back Merril Hoge strongly rejected during a provocative Friday. Both suffered multiple concussions as players.

Concussions forced Hoge, now an ESPN analyst, to retire. They severely affected his quality of life. The fear of additional concussions played at least some role in Warner's decision to retire following the 2009 season.

"I understand how great the game of football was for me, and what it did for my family, but when I'm sitting back and watching my kids play, my boys play right now -- they love it, their dream is to play in the NFL -- I worry about it," Warner told Colin Cowherd.

Warner was speaking from the heart only days after Junior Seau's suicide amplified concerns over what role, if any, head trauma might have played in the retired linebacker's demise.

"I worry about the long-term effects for me personally," Warner continued. "I worry about what can happen after football, as we've seen with a number of guys. I worry about what could happen at a younger age. ... With the way things are going right now and the way guys are getting bigger and stronger and faster, I would encourage my kids to probably stay away from it, if I could."

Hoge, meanwhile, has thought through this issue to a degree most others have not. He used the words "uneducated" and "uninformed" to describe Warner's take on the situation.

"When you think about what the problem is, it is not head trauma," Hoge said. "It is how head trauma is cared for. That is the issue. You are going to have concussions in every sport known to man. You're going to have them riding a bike. My son is 16, played football for eight years. He has had one concussion and that came from falling off a bike, hitting his head on a curb, splitting his helmet open. That doesn't mean I don't let him ride the bike."

Warner's response was understandable. In listening to his conversation with Cowherd, it was clear to me that Warner was still formulating his thinking on the matter. Hoge has a much stronger opinion.

"In Kurt Warner's situation, there was a chance to inform and educate those that are uninformed and uneducated," Hoge said. "Instead of scaring them away from the game, make them embrace the game by doing this: get involved, Kurt Warner. Get involved with your kids and their programs, make sure they are following the right guidelines. If your son is concussed, if your daughter is concussed in soccer or whatever, what are you doing for that player? Are you removing him from the game? Do you have the proper procedures in place? That is what is critical."

Warner could already be doing the things Hoge encouraged him to do, for all we know. The bottom line, in my view, is that the discussion is moving forward.

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.

The gap between the New Orleans Saints' savagely stated intentions and their on-field actions provides an opening to question the punishment handed down by commissioner Roger Goodell.

Jonathan Vilma's season-long suspension for helping to establish and fund the program carries particular interest in the NFC West.

"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," the NFL announced in meting out the punishment.

Saints defensive end Bobby McCray did knock Warner from the game for a time with a crushing hit following an interception, but Warner himself feels as though the Saints did not cross a line with their actions that day.

Warner's comments to Burns & Gambo on Arizona Sports 620 made clear his feelings:

"I could have been seriously hurt every time I stepped on that football field. There is no question that players went out to hurt me and knock me out of games many times throughout my career, whether or not there was a $10,000 bounty on me. Again, I look at it and say, 'Did somebody hit me harder in that situation because the bounty was there?' I don't know. I don't believe so. I believe that was a situation [on the McCray hit] that was set up perfectly for any defensive player, and any defensive player would have taken it. And it was a clean hit and it was a bigger man hitting a smaller man who wasn't prepared for it. And i got crushed.

"I would be mad if someone took a shot at me that was outside the rules of engagement to try to hurt me. If i got hurt because of that, then I would be extremely angry and to me that would cross way over that line.

"I believe that there have been defensive linemen in the locker room many a times say, 'Hey, the first one to knock Kurt out of the game, I'm buying dinner or I'm doing this after the game or whatever. I believe that stuff has gone on for years and years and years. And it wasn't the intention of taking a cheap shot. It was the intention of giving their team a benefit from knocking out a good player on the other team. No doubt in my mind, that that has gone on for years.

"There have been games where I felt like, 'They're really just trying to take me out of this game. They're going a little above and beyond.' I didn't feel that in that playoff game against the Saints. I felt it was a good, hard, competitive football game where the hits on me were clean."

While Goodell is punishing the Saints specifically, he's attacking the bounty mind-set in general. Punishing Vilma and the Saints so harshly may or may not be fair to them. The NFL culture is the broader target.

Vilma and the Saints aren't being punished this week for the hits they put on Warner. League officials already reviewed those hits after the game as a matter of course. The punishment attacks the intentions and makes it easier for the NFL to counter in court allegations it hasn't taken player safety seriously enough.

Note: The video above features discussion on the punishment for Vilma and other players. Warner did not participate in that discussion.

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.

In March, two Minnesota Vikings players -- punter Chris Kluwe and center John Sullivan -- called for the NFL to suspend New Orleans Saints linebacker Jonathan Vilma for his role in the Saints' bounty program prior to the 2009 NFC Championship Game. At the time, we noted a developing and awkward dynamic: NFL Players Association (NFLPA) members advocating against their union brethren.

Sullivan, in fact, went so far as to say: "As a union member, I'll be very upset if we come to the defense of these acts. They're indefensible. You can't defend them. It's despicable, has no place in the sport."

Vilma, whom the NFL said offered a $10,000 reward for any player who knocked then-Vikings quarterback Brett Favre out of the 2009 NFC Championship Game, received a one-year suspension. We haven't yet heard from Sullivan, but Kluwe said via Twitter that the suspension is "just."

Kluwe also provided an extended and nuanced analysis of the what he called a "tough spot" for the NFLPA, which has already pledged to "vigorously protect" Vilma and the three other suspended players and "pursue all options on their behalf."

Here's what Kluwe tweeted:

"Vilma and the others deserve the right to an appeal; while I agree with the commissioner's decision others may not, and that's fine, this is America. However, the union has to simultaneously balance defending four guys against the judgment, of [Roger] Goodell (which needs oversight, make no mistake) while at the same time recognizing those four guys were attempting to harm other union members, who also deserve that same protection. The union cannot be just about appeals when someone does something wrong. It also has to be a shield for those men who are a part of it that you never hear about, but pay the same dues and play the same game. I can only hope that the leadership of the NFLPA realizes this, and acts in *all* of its members' interests, however that takes place."

I find this a fascinating, if subtle, subplot of this story. The NFLPA argues the NFL hasn't provided evidence of its accusations, but obviously there are at least some players -- and union members -- who are convinced otherwise. By definition, players engaging in a bounty system are trying to harm other players. Why isn't the union jumping to the defense of the targeted players, which according to the league includes Favre, Green Bay Packers quarterback Aaron Rodgers, Arizona Cardinals quarterback Kurt Warner and Carolina Panthers quarterback Cam Newton?

I realize this is a tough day in the NFL for a lot of reasons. I just think this issue merits some discussion along with everything else. The story has thus far centered around the aggressors. What about the victims?

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 the 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.”

At a time when the New Orleans Saints seem to be getting attacked from all angles, they have at least one prominent person defending them.

Retired NFL quarterback Kurt Warner, who was one of four players listed in the NFL report as having a bounty placed upon them for injury, said he didn’t see the Saints do anything wrong in a playoff game with the Arizona Cardinals in the 2009 season. Warner was just interviewed on NFL Network and admitted the game was physical.

“I don’t recall anything in that game over the top or out of the ordinary,’’ Warner said.

Warner said he did have a sense that he might have been a target in some other games during his career, but said that game against the Saints wasn’t one of them.

But Warner did admit he’s been disturbed as more details emerge about the Saints’ bounty program. Warner said the intent to injure opponents is what takes the Saints’ situation beyond a sport that is physical by its nature.

“I think that’s where the whole thing crosses the line,’’ Warner said.

Warner said he understands why NFL commissioner Roger Goodell issued such harsh penalties against the Saints. He said Goodell was drawing a clear line for all 32 teams.

“Don’t go beyond that because I think this is where our game, to some degree, has gotten out of hand,’’ Warner said.

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.’’

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 that 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 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 Payton made the move despite the fact he and Williams weren’t the best of friends. But they co-existed 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.

Alex Smith and the San Francisco 49ers face no looming deadline for a contract agreement.

That could help explain why negotiations seem to lack urgency.

The NFL's labor agreement prevents players from entering into football preparations with coaches until April 16. The quarterback market has shaken out elsewhere around the league. Neither side has better alternatives at present.

News that free-agent quarterback Josh Johnson might pay a free-agent visit to the 49ers looks like an attempt by the team to pressure Smith (separately, team CEO Jed York told reporters Tim Tebow was not an option).

Teams routinely show interest in one player to pressure another. Players routinely show interest in one team to pressure another.

Earlier Tuesday, the Detroit Lions put Seattle Seahawks linebacker David Hawthorne on a plane to visit their headquarters. Hawthorne was reportedly still in the air when linebacker Stephen Tulloch, perhaps sensing additional urgency with a free-agent prospect on the way, re-signed with Detroit.

Kurt Warner's experience with the Arizona Cardinals following the 2008 season resembles what is happening to Smith this offseason. Warner had led the Cardinals to a Super Bowl appearance. He had earned a new contract, but the Cardinals realized Warner had more value to them than he had to other teams. Warner was about to turn 38, was known to prefer staying in Arizona and appeared unlikely to start fresh elsewhere.

Smith is younger than Warner, but also less accomplished and less critical to his team's overall success. The 49ers know his value to them is greater than it would be to other teams. They could probably afford to reduce their offer without worrying about another team exceeding it. That wouldn't necessarily be the best tactic, of course, but neither is there any reason for San Francisco to bid against itself.

Would the 49ers sign Johnson to replace Smith on the roster?

Johnson, 25, has five touchdowns, 10 interceptions and a 57.7 NFL passer rating in 26 appearances (five starts) over four NFL seasons. He played for 49ers coach Jim Harbaugh at the University of San Diego. There would be no assurances Johnson would fit well with the 49ers or even beat out 2011 second-round draft choice Colin Kaepernick for the starting job.

The biggest danger for Smith is waiting around long enough for the 49ers to shift their thinking toward the longer-term future. That happened to Matt Hasselbeck in Seattle last offseason. Coach Pete Carroll wanted to bring back Hasselbeck after the quarterback led a surprise playoff run, but Hasselbeck asked for more money than the Seahawks were comfortable offering. As the lockout dragged on, the organization decided to make a clean break.

The Seahawks were in rebuilding mode at the time. The situation in San Francisco is different. The 49ers have a stronger foundation to contend this season with Smith returning. Both sides have to realize a Smith re-signing stands as the best scenario.