NFL: Saints Bounty Thread

[mdrake34]

(09-04-2012 04:53 PM)Radical Wrote:  With reputation on the line, possible punishment, and potential legal ramifications, I've never heard of anyone lying under oath.

[AsylumGuido]

(09-04-2012 04:45 PM)ATLBound Wrote:  You posted it as a supportive basis for your theory in regards to the Saints. Don't try to act like you didn't. For all we know, this could be a miscommunication. One of the official representatives said one thing and another one said something totally different.

You're just buying into any and everything that shows the NFL in a negative light. Even if it's the bare minimum or something that may not even be true. For someone who hates the media response to everything, u sure do use them a lot.

When all the media outlets were showing the Saints in the negative light, then they were your worst enemy. So it isn't difficult to realize that everybody is against the NFL in regards to the official situation, so any article related to it whether it be something minimal or not, will be read and will most likely be against the NFL.

No, I hated the initial response of the media's taking everything they were spoon fed by Goodell to be cold hard facts and continuing to hold them as cold hard facts even after they were debunked. This is because today's media is lazy. Over the past couple of months more and more media outlets have begun questioning the league findings because of the lawsuits which have shown the numerous inaccuracies used by the league in their "investigation".

Oh, and the NFLRA does have a direct tie to the Saints situation as exemplified by the following tweet from Jon Vilma in reply to the report on Sunday afternoon:

Jonathan Vilma ‏@JonVilma51

Nflra says the nfl has provided false info to its teams and media...ha! Join the club!! I definitely know that feeling

[AsylumGuido]

(09-04-2012 04:53 PM)Radical Wrote:  With reputation on the line, possible punishment, and potential legal ramifications, I've never heard of anyone lying under oath.

None of the players that testified were implicated, nor were they facing any possible punishment, nor are there any legal ramifications at all. With absolutely nothing on the line why would they volunteer to testify and lie in District court. Nobody is that stupid. Especially not a whole group of individuals.

[ATLBound]

(09-04-2012 04:50 PM)AsylumGuido Wrote:  If the injury came as the result of a bad play or an illegal hit, then no, they didn't get paid. In turn, they would have had to pay a fine to the pot.

And once again, causing pain is what these guys do for a living. Even without any monetary incentive every defense in the league goes over the game tape and the players are congratulated for big hits and whacks (plays where a DB knocks his opponent off his feet).

But, regardless, the Saints were NOT accused of or punished for inflicting pain or causing injury to opposing players. The Saints were accused of and punished for placing bounties on specific players with the intent of injuring them, not just causing pain. And once again, the players and coaches were sure enough that this was not going on that they opened themselves to Federal perjury charges by swearing that this did not occur.

Straight from the horse's mouth:

"In assessing player discipline," Commissioner Goodell said, "I focused on players who were in leadership positions at the Saints; contributed a particularly large sum of money toward the program; specifically contributed to a bounty on an opposing player; demonstrated a clear intent to participate in a program that [b]potentially injured opposing players[/b]; sought rewards for doing so; and/OR obstructed the 2010 investigation."

It certainly is a play on words, but he didn't falsely punish anybody because of this statement and the parts that I bolded, italicized, and underlined.

Also because he used the word "OR", then any ONE of those things listed there will suffice.

Which is why I say the punishment was excessive, but not false.

[ATLBound]

(09-04-2012 04:58 PM)AsylumGuido Wrote:  Oh, and the NFLRA does have a direct tie to the Saints situation as exemplified by the following tweet from Jon Vilma in reply to the report on Sunday afternoon:

Jonathan Vilma ‏@JonVilma51

Nflra says the nfl has provided false info to its teams and media...ha! Join the club!! I definitely know that feeling

WTFFFF? Jonathan Vilma's TWEET EXEMPLIFIES a connection between the NFLRA and the Saint's bounties situation???

Can you get off of Vilma's nutsack? I would love to hear how his tweet EXEMPLIFIES a connection. All he is saying that he feels like he can relate. Sure is exemplary

[AsylumGuido]

(09-04-2012 04:50 PM)Radical Wrote:  I still don't get the logic that cart-offs are different than injuries.

So let me get this straight, if I pay someone to put you in a body bag, it isn't the same as hiring someone to kill you...

A cartoff was a play with a "legal, clean hit" that resulted in a player leaving the game for at least one play. That is the definition given by Joe Vitt and several other players. If the play resulted in a penalty or was deemed to be an illegal hit the player was fined.

Yes, a player could indeed be injured by a "legal, clean hit", but that is not what the definition of a cartoff entailed. The intent of the pay for performance plan was to reward hard hits, among other key plays, NOT to reward injuries. And the rewards were a mere pittance, anyway.

[AsylumGuido]

(09-04-2012 05:02 PM)ATLBound Wrote:  Straight from the horse's mouth:

"In assessing player discipline," Commissioner Goodell said, "I focused on players who were in leadership positions at the Saints; contributed a particularly large sum of money toward the program; specifically contributed to a bounty on an opposing player; demonstrated a clear intent to participate in a program that [b]potentially injured opposing players[/b]; sought rewards for doing so; and/OR obstructed the 2010 investigation."

It certainly is a play on words, but he didn't falsely punish anybody because of this statement and the parts that I bolded, italicized, and underlined.

Also because he used the word "OR", then any ONE of those things listed there will suffice.

Which is why I say the punishment was excessive, but not false.

Yes, he conveniently added those additional caveats AFTER announcing the punishment to the front office personnel when he said there were 22-27 players who took part in a bounty program that targeted specific opposing players for injury and offered $10000 in the case of Jon Vilma on the head of Warner and Favre.

Going back to my earlier example, that would be like the District Attorney saying the defendant should get 20 years for grand theft auto OR running a red light after it became doubtful that the car was actually stolen.

Yes, quite crafty.

[ATLBound]

(09-04-2012 05:21 PM)AsylumGuido Wrote:  Yes, he conveniently added those additional caveats AFTER announcing the punishment to the front office personnel when he said there were 22-27 players who took part in a bounty program that targeted specific opposing players for injury and offered $10000 in the case of Jon Vilma on the head of Warner and Favre.

Going back to my earlier example, that would be like the District Attorney saying the defendant should get 20 years for grand theft auto OR running a red light after it became doubtful that the car was actually stolen.

Yes, quite crafty.

On the contrary sir, this was his first statement after announcing the penalites for the players back in May.

[AsylumGuido]

(09-04-2012 05:08 PM)ATLBound Wrote:  WTFFFF? Jonathan Vilma's TWEET EXEMPLIFIES a connection between the NFLRA and the Saint's bounties situation???

Can you get off of Vilma's nutsack? I would love to hear how his tweet EXEMPLIFIES a connection. All he is saying that he feels like he can relate. Sure is exemplary

He is saying that it doesn't surprise him that the NFL lied to the NFLRA and the media since they lied to the NFLPA and the media in dealing with his case. That exemplifies a pattern in the NFL's behavior. They have a staff of spin doctors, but I really feel the media is finally beginning to see past the spin.

[Anomaly]

Why the fuck are we still even talking about this? It's less than a week before the season starts.

The troll is never going to change its' idiotic stance so there is no point in arguing with it.