What is the vendetta against Jeff Duncan? (3 Viewers)

He makes the attempt to be objective and occasionally plays the role of contrarian and most Saints fans can't handle anyone who doesn't pump sunshine all day...
I'm going to say this as respectfully as I can: this is a garbage take.

There was absolutely nothing "objective" about how Duncan behaved during that fiasco. It was personal, it was emotional, and it was against all the facts. If you want objective journalism, how about the Wall Street Journal analysis that showed the Saints caused the second fewest number of injuries during the time of the "bounty" program?
 
Thanks for posting the articles, but reading them just makes me mad again. I feel like I’m man enough to get P'Oed off at my team if they had put up $ to actually injure opposing players. However, if it was so obvious, why hasn’t the evidence been published to the public? As a fan I want to see it, so that I can process the information, get mad and hopefully move on. We all know that the league was facing a substantial concussion lawsuit and it scared the heck out of them!

If we were guilty, I’m man enough to handle it. But please show us the evidence!
I think there was a dirty hand scrawled note on a cocktail napkin from Mike Cerullo, that made accusations.

That and some of Gregg Williams' admittedly over the top pep talks about inflicting pain on the opponent, plus the fact that they did run the "big play kitty".

The NFL now employs Mike Cerullo.

There was nothing else that suggested bounties were being placed on players in a targeted manner. NADA. Which is why the player suspensions were vacated. In fact there was an analysis done that showed that the opponents who faced the Saints that season suffered injuries at a far lower rate than average. That is to say, the Saints inflicted among the fewest injuries on opponents of any team that season.

So, you had accusations with no proof from a disgruntled employee and madman "come on let's go kill them" speeches from and old school frothing at the mouth coach.

That's it. Talk and accusations with a rule violation on the "big play pool".

It was a railroading.
 
Last edited:
Yeah, if I remember correctly, the Saints were called for the 3rd least PF penalties that year.
 
I don't see what is so special about his writing, regardless of his opportunism during the bounty scandal and carrying water for the NFL at every turn.
I've never read a piece of his and come away with the impression that he was a good writer. Underhill's short presence in the New Orleans media exposed how little effort we've gotten from a lot of these guys who are supposed beat writers. Duncan has never once, in all of his years covering the Saints, provided anything like what Underhill did.
I doubt he could compete for a job in many other markets.
 
Granted we made some really bad personnel moves and coaching hires along the way, but it is interesting that we are the main team (in my opinion) that has always been a threat to what the Patriots have created.

Part of me thinks if Fabri-Gate doesn't happen, we go on to win 2 more before now.

Both teams would be tied at 3 with Brees/Brady, Sean/Bellicheck being in the discussion for G.O.A.T.
 
I don't see what is so special about his writing, regardless of his opportunism during the bounty scandal and carrying water for the NFL at every turn.
I've never read a piece of his and come away with the impression that he was a good writer. Underhill's short presence in the New Orleans media exposed how little effort we've gotten from a lot of these guys who are supposed beat writers. Duncan has never once, in all of his years covering the Saints, provided anything like what Underhill did.
I doubt he could compete for a job in many other markets.
I bought his book about Super Bowl 44 and found it to be a good third perspective (the other two being Payton and Brees' books). I enjoyed his book. I've met him at as SR.com get together and he was a nice guy to talk to. That's what makes his Bounty Gate antics so disappointing. I don't mind, and actually welcome, contrary points of views about the Saints if they're valid. They weren't valid in this case and very insulting. He took the approach that he looked completely unbiased and objective about the team he was covering and that would win him some points with the national circuits. Sadly, he wasn't objective and was biased to the script the NFL was feeding everyone.
 
Don't forget the fabricated ledger of pay-outs that didn't match our actual opponents and game logs and was thereby proved to be manufactured "evidence"... something Mike Florio, of all people, actually debunked when he could see that this was the NFL's WMD Sadaam Sadaam Kansas City Shuffle red hearing nazi propaganda to focus the public's attention on how the knight in shining armor on a white horse never tell a lie Roger was giving the heavy hand of righteous justice to the straw boogeyman they created because they cared about safety and concussions, yet in the same breath instituted weekly Thursday night games because he really cared about money and was trying to look proactive because a ton of players were about to file a class action lawsuit over concussions and the NFL's negligence in informing players what leading doctors had been trying to tell the NFL for over a decade.

At least one journalist (or lawyer turned journalist) decided to check the veracity of the claims after his moral high ground knee jerk reaction subsided.
 
And then there were his articles comparing Saints fans and citizens of New Orleans to conspiracy theorists because we didn't agree with his take on Bounty Gate. In this article, and others, he denigrated the people of New Orleans. He has even refered to fans opposed to the antics of Goodell as "meatnecks".

Those were little more than a slap in our face and a sign of serious disrespect to our community. An example:


Well, a lot of people were going off the rails. I don't recall the meat necks part, so 'll stay out of that bit.

And it's well beyond our little corner of the web.

When people think it was an NFL conspiracy, or that Goodell has it out for us, or it's all scripted, etc. C'mon.

did the NFL over react to something Gregg Williams was doing, because player safety was a big legal issue at the time? yes. did they make it up our of thin air? No. Was it exaggerated? Yes.
 
Exhibit 1A




Duncan bought that bull**** hook, line, and sinker because he thought it’d land him a cushy job at ESPN (this was when ESPN announced they were going to be hiring a beat writers for all 32 franchises) and instead it blew up in his face and they hired an actual journalist, Mike Triplett.

I agree with the first bit, don't agree for the reasons. You can't prove that, it's just your opinion. But clearly, he didn't think the league was lying. I'm not sure how much the league was lying, vs running with flimsy evidence.

But, this is the core takeaway, that I think frames the reaction he gave.

"The scandal has irreparably damaged the Saints' reputation and embarrassed Benson in league circles. It's created the biggest public relations nightmare since the club's shameful post-Katrina dalliances with San Antonio. "

We were the ultimate feel good story from 2006-2009, and it kept on going until until early 2012. Now what do we hear from other fans? Bounty this, bounty that. Just like, what do Pats fans hear? SpyGate, Deflategate, and what do you call Kraft's thing? Hand Gate? Spa Gate? it follows a team forever. Even if it's not the full story.

In either case, he's been paid for quite a while to be a sports opinion writer. Not a beat writer or reporter. He's not always going to have a popular opinion. I remember DeShazier would write some pretty harsh stuff (until he started working for the team), but people didn't give him crap, because he had earned his cred and was "allowed" to be mean.

I dunno, I don't get bothered by that kind of stuff, unless someone is always an arse. If Sean Payton can have a 2 hour sit down with the guy and be cordial, then I don't see why we have to stay mad at him. But, to each their own.
 
I agree with the first bit, don't agree for the reasons. You can't prove that, it's just your opinion. But clearly, he didn't think the league was lying. I'm not sure how much the league was lying, vs running with flimsy evidence.

But, this is the core takeaway, that I think frames the reaction he gave.

"The scandal has irreparably damaged the Saints' reputation and embarrassed Benson in league circles. It's created the biggest public relations nightmare since the club's shameful post-Katrina dalliances with San Antonio. "

We were the ultimate feel good story from 2006-2009, and it kept on going until until early 2012. Now what do we hear from other fans? Bounty this, bounty that. Just like, what do Pats fans hear? SpyGate, Deflategate, and what do you call Kraft's thing? Hand Gate? Spa Gate? it follows a team forever. Even if it's not the full story.

In either case, he's been paid for quite a while to be a sports opinion writer. Not a beat writer or reporter. He's not always going to have a popular opinion. I remember DeShazier would write some pretty harsh stuff (until he started working for the team), but people didn't give him crap, because he had earned his cred and was "allowed" to be mean.

I dunno, I don't get bothered by that kind of stuff, unless someone is always an arse. If Sean Payton can have a 2 hour sit down with the guy and be cordial, then I don't see why we have to stay mad at him. But, to each their own.

I kind of feel the same way, I think he is a decent to good writer but he went way overboard with the Saints bounty stuff, which led most Saints fans to believe he had ulterior motives (which I think is very likely)...
 
Also, to your point, SP also seemed to have made up with Peter King...that doesn't mean we all have to like it....
 
Also, to your point, SP also seemed to have made up with Peter King...that doesn't mean we all have to like it....

Well, he took quite a few more years to make up with PK.

Use that accordingly.
 
Well, he took quite a few more years to make up with PK.

Use that accordingly.

Not sure of the timelines but...yeah, it makes sense. PK had a much bigger audience and spewed as much or more unfounded BS as Duncan did...
 

Create an account or login to comment

You must be a member in order to leave a comment

Create account

Create an account on our community. It's easy!

Log in

Already have an account? Log in here.

Users who are viewing this thread

    Back
    Top Bottom