commentary...

for true football purists,the problems with the "bounty" scandal,has to do with the collective bargaining agreement,with the NFLPA looking at,and banking on that the union is starting to focus on Article 43,"non-injury grievances",and the NFL is banking on,and looking at Article 45,"Commissioner Discipline",which has two words in it that mean a great lot to the NFL,"conduct detrimental"... article 43 says a four member panel sets discipline,for players,for anything non-injurious,to the players,and article 45,gives the Commissioner,under the term,"conduct detrimental",the power to discipline...
the NFLPA wants to strip the Commissioner,of that "conduct detrimental" power to discipline players,and yet both the NFLPA,and the NFL are in a quandry,on how to proceed with this stuff,because the NFL has evidence that the conduct detrimental clause has been tripped,and the NFLPA thinks that is a non-injury grievance procedure,in accordance to the players... that is the differences in discipline...
now for my opinion:i see both arguments,but honestly believe that the players involved have tripped the "conduct detrimental",and that the NFLPA simply wants to protect the players,from any discipline,at all,and yet,the executives,coaches,and players(remember it was 22 to 27 players,originally implicated),so the NFL took the executives,coaches,and players mostly to blame for the scandal,and disciplined them very hard,and the players,and NFLPA do not want to accept their alloted discipline,claiming they did nothing wrong,and after,"the soap opera that will not end",is over,it will be an episode that has soiled the image of the NFL...
to the players involved,accept your discipline,like men,and shut up,and just play football...