NFL: Saints Bounty Thread

[papachaz]

whew, well, now the heats off so I can go back to being the nice guy I usually am

[NZFalcon]

awesome thread guys got the 1000 and 100

[phocis850]

Don't make me sticky this thread. LOL

[AsylumGuido]

(08-29-2012 04:45 PM)Peyton Wrote:  I'll tell you the mistake I think Goodell made. Placing way too much credibility on Mike Cerullo, a disgruntled Saints employee.

I don't think Goodell really wants to have Cerullo cross examined.

Exactly! Who do you think supplied the hand-written "ledger"? Months ago when I first read about Cerullo being the initial source the person that exposed him also made mention of falsified documents. Even Goodell admitted that Vitt was mistakenly implicated by that document.

I have maintained that I feel Goodell honestly thought he had something to go on, but as he shared that "evidence" it began to, and continues to, fall apart at the seams. Goodell stated he had multiple sources and later implied that those sources were Cerullo, Anthony Hargrove, Gregg Williams and Joe Vitt. Hargrove, Williams and Vitt all openly admitted to having a pay for performance program going on, as have other players, but all have vehemently denied any bounties. That leaves Cerullo.

[AsylumGuido]

(08-29-2012 05:56 PM)ATLBound Wrote:  How does acting out on the Saints make these lawsuits go away?

Yea its showing some concern about safety, but how does it make billions of dollars in liability go away?

I'm asking because I don't understand, not to be a smart ass

It doesn't make them go away. It is but one piece of "evidence" that the league can present that shows their concern, albeit well after the fact.

[mdrake34]

CHICAGO – The nation's most influential pediatricians group says the health benefits of circumcision in newborn boys outweigh any risks and insurance companies should pay for it.

In its latest policy statement on circumcision, a procedure that has been declining nationwide, the American Academy of Pediatrics moves closer to an endorsement but says the decision should be up to parents.

"It's not a verdict from on high," said policy co-author Dr. Andrew Freedman. "There's not a one-size-fits-all-answer." But from a medical standpoint, circumcision's benefits in reducing risk of disease outweigh its small risks, said Freedman, a pediatric urologist in Los Angeles.

Recent research bolstering evidence that circumcision reduces chances of infection with HIV and other sexually spread diseases, urinary tract infections and penis cancer influenced the academy to update their 13-year-old policy.

Their old stance said potential medical benefits were not sufficient to warrant recommending routinely circumcising newborn boys. The new one says, "The benefits of newborn male circumcision justify access to this procedure for those families who choose it." The academy also says pain relief stronger than a sugar-coated pacifier is essential, usually an injection to numb the area.

The federal Centers for Disease Control and Convention has estimated circumcision costs range from about $200 to $600 nationwide. Coverage varies among insurers and several states have stopped Medicaid funding for circumcisions.

The new policy was published online Monday in Pediatrics. It comes amid ongoing debate over whether circumcision is medically necessary or a cosmetic procedure that critics say amounts to genital mutilation. Activists favoring a circumcision ban made headway in putting it to a vote last year in San Francisco but a judge later knocked the measure off the city ballot, ruling that regulating medical procedures is up to the state, not city officials.

In Germany, Jewish and Muslim leaders have protested a regional court ruling in June that said circumcision amounts to bodily harm.

Meantime, a recent study projected that declining U.S. circumcision rates could add more than $4 billion in health care costs in coming years because of increased illness and infections.

Circumcision involves removing foreskin at the tip of the penis. The procedure can reduce germs that can grow underneath the foreskin, and complications, including bleeding and infection, are rare, the academy says.

Despite the U.S. decline, about half of baby boys nationwide still undergo circumcision, or roughly 1 million each year. The country's overall rate is much higher than in other developed nations, but U.S. rates vary by region and are higher in areas where it is a cultural or religious tradition, including among Jews and Muslims.

Psychologist Ronald Goldman, director of an anti-circumcision group, the Circumcision Resource Center, said studies show circumcision causes loss of sexual satisfaction -- a claim the academy said is not supported by the research it reviewed -- and can be psychologically harming. Goldman contends medical studies showing benefits are flawed and that the academy's new position is "out of step" with medical groups in other developed countries.

The American Congress of Obstetricians and Gynecologists took part in the research review that led to the new policy and has endorsed it. Circumcisions in hospitals are typically performed by obstetricians or pediatricians.

The CDC also participated in the review, and will consider the academy's updated policy in preparing its own recommendations, a CDC spokesman said. The agency has a fact sheet summarizing circumcision's potential health benefits and risks but no formal guidelines.

The American Medical Association and American Academy of Family Physicians have neutral policies similar to the pediatrics academy's previous position.

Philadelphia social worker Shannon Coyne examined medical research on circumcision before her son was born last September and had a tough time making a decision. She learned that a relative's boy needed reconstructive surgery after a botched circumcision, and that another's son who wasn't circumcised developed urinary infections.

Coyne said she and her husband ultimately decided against circumcision, because she didn't want her baby to have what she considers cosmetic surgery without being able to consent.

Her advice to other parents is "just make an informed decision. Do your research, be open-minded."

Some 18 states have eliminated Medicaid coverage for circumcision, a trend that could contribute to rising health care costs to treat infections if circumcision rates continue to decline, according to a study published Aug. 20 in Archives of Pediatrics & Adolescent Medicine.

Dr. Aaron Tobian, a Johns Hopkins University assistant professor who co-authored the study, said the academy's updated policy "is a very good step."

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/health/2012/08/27...z252MnyRDZ

[AsylumGuido]

(08-29-2012 06:00 PM)papachaz Wrote:  and don't forget he obviously had enough to take down the head coach for a year, the former DC as it stands for now for life, the assistant for several weeks.....

I just can't see him being able to do all that if he didn't have enough butt behind his case to do so. if he had that, then he has what he needs for the players too. I'd even bet Williams will support him as much as possible in hopes to get the ban lifted. of course to me that also makes any testimony from williams suspect now....

we made it to 100! 8 more posts to make the thousand, come on y'all you can do it

Don't forget that the coaches have no union to stand behind them. Both Williams and Payton swore there were no bounties, but Goodell is all powerful in this situation. When Payton left his meeting with Goodell it was the angriest I have ever seen him. He knew he had just got screwed and there was nothing he could do about it. Several players said they learned that the coaches were given a gag order which could keep them from being reinstated.

Goodell didn't need anything to do that to the coaches. The owners gave him that absolute power over their coaches. Goodell claims Payton lied to him about the existence of bounties and that why he was punished so severely. But, how can you lie about the existence of something that you know didn't exist? Payton told the truth.

[RockHoward]

(08-30-2012 10:02 AM)AsylumGuido Wrote:  When Payton left his meeting with Goodell it was the angriest I have ever seen him. He knew he had just got screwed and there was nothing he could do about it.

As long as Payton's attitude remains "don't get caught' then he is bound to live an unhappy and angry life.

[AsylumGuido]

(08-30-2012 11:49 AM)RockHoward Wrote:  As long as Payton's attitude remains "don't get caught' then he is bound to live an unhappy and angry life.

And why would you assume his attitude ever was "don't get caught"? And everyone I know that has met him, including my son, has always said how friendly and upbeat he is.

[RockHoward]

(08-30-2012 12:08 PM)AsylumGuido Wrote:  And why would you assume his attitude ever was "don't get caught"? And everyone I know that has met him, including my son, has always said how friendly and upbeat he is.

Because the anger and unhappiness only comes out when you get caught.