Threaded Mode | Linear Mode

AsylumGuido · 09-03-2012, 12:42 PM

(09-03-2012 12:35 PM)JDaveG Wrote: I didn't start reading this thread just for the last 4 pages. I'm not going to go through 108 pages of thread to find every instance of you taking a Saints player, coach or administrator's word over everyone else's, because everyone else here has read the thread too, and they know that the above is 100%, grade A, Mark 1 Mod 0 horse squeeze.

Yes, I would tend to believe them over what was being said. I came to believe them more as I heard and read more of the shallow "evidence". I came to believe them completely when they began swearing in court what they had been saying all along. So, yes, until I hear sworn testimony from Goodell and his supposed mystery source (Cerullo), I will keep believing them.

**Radical** · 09-03-2012, 03:45 PM

(09-03-2012 12:42 PM)AsylumGuido Wrote: I came to believe them more as I heard and read more of the shallow "evidence".

You went from "no big deal; will blow over in a week" to, "full blown NFL conspiracy" somewhere in the vicinity of instantly.

AsylumGuido · 09-03-2012, 04:34 PM

(09-03-2012 03:45 PM)Radical Wrote: You went from "no big deal; will blow over in a week" to, "full blown NFL conspiracy" somewhere in the vicinity of instantly.

No, it should still be no big deal. The Saints were doing nothing that pretty much every team in the NFL does. It should have blown over. But Goodell had an agenda to prove the league was all on board for player safety. And they had what they thought was a goldmine in Mike Cerullo. What they didn't know was that he would do anything to try to bring down Loomis and Payton. He has made it known over the past couple of years that he felt Loomis and Payton had black-balled him from the league.

But, no, it isn't an NFL conspiracy at all. It is a very huge error in judgment by Goodell which he he has done his best to try to mitigate by changing accusations in mid-stream. This was never orchestrated. It has been shoddy to have ever been planned. The investigation has been deemed as "unfair" and "haphazard".

ATLBound · 09-03-2012, 05:41 PM

(09-03-2012 11:03 AM)AsylumGuido Wrote: I am not sure about the meaning of the Crabtree reference, but I seriously doubt it meant go tear up his knee because if it did they had ample opportunity and never did. Don't forget that the Saints had ZERO penalties called on them that game. They played about as clean a game as you could play.

Ample opportunity???? I think he had one catch. What ample opportunity? Penalties is not the thing hear. You don't have to have to penalties to have a bounty. Stop with the penalties thing, it has no bearing.

ATLBound · 09-03-2012, 05:48 PM

(09-03-2012 11:11 AM)AsylumGuido Wrote: Oh, and for those of you that believe the league is incapable of telling a lie:

Referees union claims league is spreading 'misinformation'

(AP) -- The NFL referees union says the league is "engaged in a misinformation campaign" following unsuccessful negotiations earlier in the weekend.

The two sides failed to reach an agreement Saturday when they met for the third day in a row, and the league said it's proceeding with replacement officials.

The NFL locked out the referees in early June, and hired replacements, whose work in exhibition games has been heavily criticized.

On Sunday, it sent teams a memo saying it upped its offer to the union and thought it was close to a deal, but the union says "there was no agreement ... to do anything other than to meet on Saturday. Any claim that numbers were agreed to before Saturday is absolutely false."

The NFL's memo says it offered more money in order to reach a deal before the regular season started, and thought the union was planning to reach one on Saturday.

In a memo obtained by The Associated Press, the NFL said that on Saturday "the officials immediately did an about-face and made clear that they had no intention of settling within the agreed-upon parameters."

The union says that "after locking out the NFL Officials on June 3 and refusing to negotiate with the NFLRA, the NFL is now engaged in a misinformation campaign."

The statement goes on to say "there was no agreement on Thursday or Friday to do anything other than to meet on Saturday. Any claim that any numbers were agreed to before Saturday is absolutely false."

The NFL has seen and heard the problems the replacements have had this summer, something that tests the integrity of the sport. The speed of the game and the amount of time starters are on the field increase exponentially for real games, making the replacements' task more challenging.

In 2001, the NFL used replacements for the first week of the regular season before a contract was finalized.

___________________________________________________________

Yup! Standard operating procedure. Tell the press was you want the public to believe and don't let the truth stand in the way. The gullible public will believe anything.

They didn't lie about anything. Did you read the article that you posted????

Here's the statement from the memo they sent:

On Sunday, it sent teams a memo saying it upped its offer to the union and thought it was close to a deal, but the union says "there was no agreement ... to do anything other than to meet on Saturday. Any claim that numbers were agreed to before Saturday is absolutely false."

The NFL's memo says it offered more money in order to reach a deal before the regular season started, and thought the union was planning to reach one on Saturday.

They may have THOUGHT that the officials were going to like the offer. They never said it was a done deal. This article showed nothing about misinformation. The only possible misinformation would be if they lied about upping the offer, but the officials never denied that. This is a failed article and faield attempt by the refs to show the NFL in a negative light, unless they get gullible people to not read. Now personally, I side with the refs in the whole matter, but this article is reaching.

**Radical** · 09-03-2012, 06:43 PM

(09-03-2012 04:34 PM)AsylumGuido Wrote: No, it should still be no big deal. The Saints were doing nothing that pretty much every team in the NFL does. It should have blown over. But Goodell had an agenda to prove the league was all on board for player safety. And they had what they thought was a goldmine in Mike Cerullo. What they didn't know was that he would do anything to try to bring down Loomis and Payton. He has made it known over the past couple of years that he felt Loomis and Payton had black-balled him from the league.

But, no, it isn't an NFL conspiracy at all. It is a very huge error in judgment by Goodell which he he has done his best to try to mitigate by changing accusations in mid-stream. This was never orchestrated. It has been shoddy to have ever been planned. The investigation has been deemed as "unfair" and "haphazard".

You've found a way to consider payments for knocking people out of the game to be different from payments for injury. Call me a Falcons "homer," but the cognitive dissonance you've been putting on display since the get-go has been amazing. You've been routinely incorrect about how this was going to play out. You started off saying it was no big thing and that it would just blow over, to it was all on Gregg Williams, to saying that Payton wouldn't be suspended any more than a few games, etc.

I've more or less avoided this whole event because it doesn't interest me, and I can't speak for others on here, but I'm thinking that this whole debate is more of you trying really hard to paint the best picture for the Saints rather than me being a Falcons fan wishing for and taking pleasure in anything bad happening to your team. Way too many times I've seen you evoke emotional arguments and responses, place double standards on who is to be trusted, and throw in bits of information or articles that serve to smear Roger or anyone not on the side of the Saints.

ATLBound · 09-03-2012, 08:44 PM

(09-03-2012 06:43 PM)Radical Wrote: You've found a way to consider payments for knocking people out of the game to be different from payments for injury.

This response is for Guido, but this statement is qupted because it is simple and true.

This can't be said enough. Through all the multiple responses this gets lost in the fold. Don't care about the Gregg Williams audio, the ledger, the mike cerullo, the ornstein email, etc. I already broke it down for anybody with reading comprehension. Goodell is using deductive reasoning. This is why he is saying that Vitt and others admitted to it:

1. Saints players got paid for big hits, whacks, etc.

2. Some of those hits or whacks caused injuries and cart-offs

3. Therefore, Saints got paid for big hits that caused injuries and cart-offs

I've always agreed that some of the suspensions were excessive, but that's only from what I have seen so far. I think there is more evidence. You, guido, don't think there is any more evidence. Neither one of us know, but you act as if you know EVERYTHING there is to know about this. You don't know...you only know what you read and you draw your own conclusion from it, but at the same time you fail to realize that conclusion is the most biased out of ANYBODY on this forum.

Once again...let's wait and see the results and while we wait it can be discussed but don't act like you know the whole story.

Drathdon · 09-03-2012, 11:48 PM

Well said Radical.

UCSBDirtyBird · 09-03-2012, 11:59 PM

(09-03-2012 08:44 PM)ATLBound Wrote: This response is for Guido, but this statement is qupted because it is simple and true.

This can't be said enough. Through all the multiple responses this gets lost in the fold. Don't care about the Gregg Williams audio, the ledger, the mike cerullo, the ornstein email, etc. I already broke it down for anybody with reading comprehension. Goodell is using deductive reasoning. This is why he is saying that Vitt and others admitted to it:

1. Saints players got paid for big hits, whacks, etc.

2. Some of those hits or whacks caused injuries and cart-offs

3. Therefore, Saints got paid for big hits that caused injuries and cart-offs

I've always agreed that some of the suspensions were excessive, but that's only from what I have seen so far. I think there is more evidence. You, guido, don't think there is any more evidence. Neither one of us know, but you act as if you know EVERYTHING there is to know about this. You don't know...you only know what you read and you draw your own conclusion from it, but at the same time you fail to realize that conclusion is the most biased out of ANYBODY on this forum.

Once again...let's wait and see the results and while we wait it can be discussed but don't act like you know the whole story.

Doesn't get much more clear than this post.

Beef · (This post was last modified: 09-04-2012 02:51 AM by Beef.)

(09-03-2012 08:44 PM)ATLBound Wrote: This response is for Guido, but this statement is qupted because it is simple and true.

This can't be said enough. Through all the multiple responses this gets lost in the fold. Don't care about the Gregg Williams audio, the ledger, the mike cerullo, the ornstein email, etc. I already broke it down for anybody with reading comprehension. Goodell is using deductive reasoning. This is why he is saying that Vitt and others admitted to it:

1. Saints players got paid for big hits, whacks, etc.

2. Some of those hits or whacks caused injuries and cart-offs

3. Therefore, Saints got paid for big hits that caused injuries and cart-offs

I've always agreed that some of the suspensions were excessive, but that's only from what I have seen so far. I think there is more evidence. You, guido, don't think there is any more evidence. Neither one of us know, but you act as if you know EVERYTHING there is to know about this. You don't know...you only know what you read and you draw your own conclusion from it, but at the same time you fail to realize that conclusion is the most biased out of ANYBODY on this forum.

Once again...let's wait and see the results and while we wait it can be discussed but don't act like you know the whole story.

But don't you remember? He has that one guy who gave him a thumbs up? I mean how can he not know everything after THAT ONE GUY WHO GAVE A THUMBS UP!?

It's a fucking thumbs up, dude. A thumbs up!

He knows he knows, because he just knows he knows. You know?

His heart is omnipotent AND omniscient, for fuck sakes. And no, it's no paradox. If his heart says so, then by GOD it is so. Arguing with his passion, THE PASSION, is futile.

And a source is a source of course of course, and no one can talk to a source of course, that is of course unless the source is as biased as Mr. Guido.

Go right to the source and ask the source, he'll give an answer that only Guido can endorse, he's always on the steady course, bias of Mr. Guido.

People yakkity yak a streak and waste your time of day, but Mr. Guido will never speak unless he has something biased and full of shit to say.

A source is a source of course of course, and this one'll talk 'til his voice is hoarse. You never heard of a talking source?

Well listen to this.

GUIDO IS FULL OF SHIIIIIITTTT!!