Skip to content

Kareem McKenzie’s “cart-off” vs. Saints appeared innocuous

kareemmckenzie AP

After we passed along the report that the Saints kept a bounty ledger that included a $1,000 payment for a “cart-off” against the Giants in 2009, we heard from readers who mentioned that Giants offensive tackle Kareem McKenzie was carted off the field in the 2009 game at New Orleans.

However, McKenzie did not appear to be hurt on any type of dirty play from any Saints player.

McKenzie left the Saints game with a groin injury that he suffered on a play when Eli Manning was sacked and fumbled, and although several contemporaneous accounts mention how hard Manning was hit on the play, none of the accounts we’ve found indicated that there was anything untoward about the way McKenzie was hurt.

A New York Times report said that “McKenzie remained on the field, and then was helped off on a motorized cart by the medical staff.” A New York Post report said that “McKenzie was injured in the scrum to recover Eli Manning’s fumble.” An Associated Press report said, “He was hurt on a play in which Eli Manning was sacked.” No mention anywhere of any indication that anyone on the Saints did anything to cause McKenzie’s injury.

If the $1,000 notation in the bounty ledger was for McKenzie getting carted off, it’s not clear which Saints player would have received the bounty payment. But it doesn’t appear that the Saints took a cheap shot at McKenzie.

Permalink 17 Comments Feed for comments Latest Stories in: Home, New Orleans Saints, New York Giants, Rumor Mill
17 Responses to “Kareem McKenzie’s “cart-off” vs. Saints appeared innocuous”
  1. philwauke says: Jun 1, 2012 8:15 PM

    so you had to go back to 2009 to find to find a slug o-lineman that had a groin pull? Boy what a bounty system they were running!

  2. truthfactory says: Jun 1, 2012 8:29 PM

    People will confuse their inability to knock people out with innocence. The intent of a bounty is illegal… Doesnt matter how successful you were at accomplishing your goal.

  3. zaggs says: Jun 1, 2012 8:31 PM

    “However, McKenzie did not appear to be hurt on any type of dirty play from any Saints player.”

    “McKenzie was injured in the scrum to recover Eli Manning’s fumble.”

    Lots of things happen during those scrums. All it takes is one shot.

  4. ehatem says: Jun 1, 2012 8:53 PM

    If the NFL had this ledger and could show that the player was removed from a game via a Saints hit, legal or otherwise, then we all wouldn’t be where we are right now. If the league had that, they’d show it to the players and tell them to start singing sweetly or they’d release it to the press, which would then cause any player who got paid 1000 bucks to lose a heck of a lot more then that via civil lawsuits. The league knows something was up, but they don’t have the evidence to prove it. And while that’s enough to nail an organization to the wall (I mean if they can nail the Redskins and Cowboys for essentially following the rules then the bar is set incredibly low for that), I doubt its enough to get the players. And so this thing will just go on and on.

  5. themonster49 says: Jun 1, 2012 8:59 PM

    Us regular folks are allowed to be lazy and not go back and watch the film to see what happened.

    This story is a sham, you didn’t go look at the tape, taking people talking about the game as it didn’t happen, considering most possible-intentional hits aren’t mentioned most of the time for decades.

    I don’t know what caused that guy to get injured, maybe nobody was around him and he pulled or tweaked something, but since this is a bounty story, maybe the other end is possible and someone intentionally did it like grabbed him and unnecessarily rolled into it or maybe someone did it to him in the pile scrambling for the fumble.

    How about You go look, come back, and tell us what you saw, unbiased, and then decide based off the pieces of facts if it affects the bounty claim or not.

  6. 49erstim says: Jun 1, 2012 9:01 PM

    The “intent” of a defense is to hold opponents under 50 points. They were unsuccessful. By the logic of the Saints kool-aid drinkers that means their entire defense doesn’t exist!…. The infamous “Michael Knight” defense! Keep it real kiddies! Lol.

  7. goodellgate says: Jun 1, 2012 9:02 PM

    Kill the groin and the body will die.

  8. booker1974 says: Jun 1, 2012 9:09 PM

    So let me get this straight. The allegations are that the defensive players were being payed to injure opposing offensive players. The ledger appears to back this up, stating that players were injured in the games against the Bills and Giants and that payments were made. Yet, the players injured were defensive players or o-linemen that left with groin pulls? So how do defensive players get rewarded for an opposing defensive player getting hurt, when they’re not even on the field at the same time? And how does an opposing player pulling a muscle constitute a rewardable play by the defender? Something’s fishy.

  9. hipstercagematch says: Jun 1, 2012 9:12 PM

    MDS you seem to not get it. See even if there wasn’t a cheap shot on McKenzie doesn’t make the fact that someone on the Saints D was given an extra 1000 for it any less illegal than it is.

    I know PFT is trying to protect it’s rapport with players but c’mon man. They got caught lying after getting caught with their pants down and were justly punished no matter what NO homers try to say.

  10. musicman495 says: Jun 1, 2012 9:41 PM

    “But it doesn’t appear that the Saints took a cheap shot at McKenzie.”

    Gregg Williams’s pep talk BS notwithstanding, you can say that about 99% of the Saints’ defensive snaps over the three years in question. So why are Saints players and coaches being sent to gulags? For violating the salary cap?

  11. booker1974 says: Jun 1, 2012 9:55 PM

    McKenzie stepped on a lose ball and pulled a groin. Kind of hard to pin that on the Saints.

  12. khuxford says: Jun 1, 2012 10:10 PM

    zaggs says:
    Jun 1, 2012 8:31 PM
    “However, McKenzie did not appear to be hurt on any type of dirty play from any Saints player.”

    “McKenzie was injured in the scrum to recover Eli Manning’s fumble.”

    Lots of things happen during those scrums. All it takes is one shot.
    ——————–
    truthfactory says:
    Jun 1, 2012 8:29 PM
    People will confuse their inability to knock people out with innocence. The intent of a bounty is illegal… Doesnt matter how successful you were at accomplishing your goal.
    ________________

    It was a pulled groin. How do you manage to intentionally create a pulled groin in a scrum?

    And inability to knock people out equated with innocence? No. An inability to match that ledger up with actual successes would be what creates a lack of proof of guilt, though. The story we’re getting indicates a player was paid $1000 for knocking out McKenzie…with a pulled groin. Seriously?

    Why am I even posting here? PFT just steals my material.

  13. saintij says: Jun 1, 2012 10:25 PM

    The longer this goes on the more questions I have of the league

    they took hard decisive action in the suspensions of coaches with HEAVY penalties. Hit the head lines daily, with a “BITCH SLAP” comment about the Saints, had the image of the evidence being so damning EVERY ONE and I mean EVERYONE sucked it up and just started the tsumni of haters ……
    now this “ledger?” shows up …..and now it seems the evidence isnt really evidence but it is but not really sure mores coming ………HUH!?!?!?!?!?!?!?

    LUCY…YOU GOT SOME SPLAINING TA DO!

  14. truthfactory says: Jun 1, 2012 11:19 PM

    khuxford says:
    It was a pulled groin. How do you manage to intentionally create a pulled groin in a scrum?

    And inability to knock people out equated with innocence? No. An inability to match that ledger up with actual successes would be what creates a lack of proof of guilt, though. The story we’re getting indicates a player was paid $1000 for knocking out McKenzie…with a pulled groin. Seriously?

    Why am I even posting here? PFT just steals my material.
    ———————

    The ledger not matching up doesn’t equal a “lack of proof of guilt”. The ledger is real. They didn’t just “make it up”… if they did, I’m sure they would have matched it up to a game where an opposing player was actually injured by the defense.

    What is more likely is that the smaller “$100-$1,000″ payments were unrelated to the groin injuries , but rather were paid for big hits or other plays…. The previous evidence suggests that payments of up to $10,000 were offered for true knock out hits and these smaller payments could have (and probably were) made for any number of “big hits” that may not have resulted in the cart-offs that you and others are trying to match them up with.

  15. awl1998 says: Jun 2, 2012 12:50 AM

    beg your pardon? the story says there was $1000 paid for a cart off in that game. Only one player was carted off. It says nothing about “smaller” payments in that game.The other thing is, all have admitted to payments for big plays (and a number of other teams have as well). The $10,000 “evidence” is the NFL’s claim as to Vilma, which he denies, and re: which no evidence at all has been shown.

  16. crabboil says: Jun 2, 2012 11:29 AM

    Manufactured evidence.

    Someone needs to beat the s*** out of Goodell.

  17. cidman2001 says: Jun 2, 2012 12:24 PM

    Everyone assumes that a bounty payment or a cart off is something that only exists for a cheap shot or illegal hit. Both could result from a perfectly legal play.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Not a member? Register now!