Jay Feely OWNS Bayless on bountygate

The key word in all of this, for me at least, has been INTENT. I agree that our team should be penalized and fined for what happened (although I take great issue with the severity of it but that is for another thread) but this willingness to label our organization with the description that we were INTENDING to injure players is something that I still take issue with. It is a huge stretch.

The Pistons employed something called "the Jordan Rules" when playing Michael Jordan. Chuck Daly describes what the Jordan Rules were. The bolded part is interesting: "If Michael was at the point, we forced him left and doubled him. If he was on the left wing, we went immediately to a double team from the top. If he was on the right wing, we went to a slow double team. He could hurt you equally from either wing—hell, he could hurt you from the hot-dog stand—but we just wanted to vary the look. And if he was on the box, we doubled with a big guy. The other rule was, any time he went by you, you had to nail him. If he was coming off a screen, nail him. We didn't want to be dirty—I know some people thought we were—but we had to make contact and be very physical."

Now, if that is the language that Daly uses in a Sports Illustrated interview simply describing the methods, I can only imagine what was possibly said in team meetings and huddles. I don't think it was the Pistons intent (that word again) to injure MJ but if it happened within their play and based on their philosophy I don't think they were going to apologize for that. Let's say they put money on it. $500 for putting him on the floor. 1K if he leaves the court. 2K if he leaves the game. Again, I don't think the incentivization (while wrong) changes their intent. Their intent was to play him physically, "nail him", and make hard contact. How they described doing that in meetings or bonuses (no insinuating they did, simply using it as a comparison) given out for results of that their play, imho, doesn't change intent. Intent is a hard thing to try and characterize and I take issue with those who so easily try to do so. I could be very wrong but the truth is those who are openly speculating one way or another simply don't know.