Threaded Mode | Linear Mode

JDaveG · 10-19-2012, 11:54 AM

(10-19-2012 11:09 AM)AsylumGuido Wrote: Except for the fact there is still nothing on the books that states it is against the rules. And even if it was it could not be addressed by suspensions, only fines. It is hard to label something as "conduct detrimental" when the league has already given the practice its stamp of approval.

The league has given the commissioner authority to determine these matters. Conveniently glossing past that won't change the fact.

There is no law on the books saying you cannot carry a gun in the non-terminal areas of an airport, either. But there is a regulation. Congress gave the administrative arm of the executive rulemaking authority to prohibit this.

Now, if you want to test that by strolling into an airport with an openly exposed sidearm, be my guest. I don't think your logic is going to sway the TSA, though.

JDaveG · 10-19-2012, 11:58 AM

(10-19-2012 11:15 AM)papachaz Wrote: Also, I'm not a lawyer, so I really don't know this. it's why I'm asking. Is it up to the NFL to produce their witnesses in court? Am I missing something, why is Vilma whining now that the NFL is not 'producing' Williams? can't they subpoena him and require him to be at court? or was he talking about the NFL appeal.....

The article refers to the NFL appeal.

**papachaz** · 10-19-2012, 12:00 PM

(10-19-2012 11:58 AM)JDaveG Wrote: The article refers to the NFL appeal.

ah ok, guess I need to work on my reading comprehension this morning, LOL

AsylumGuido · 10-19-2012, 12:41 PM

(10-19-2012 11:15 AM)papachaz Wrote: clothes lines, chop blocks, horse collars, head slaps.....know what those all have in common? they were legal at one time. might even have been legal in '96. why do they throw a flag for a horse collar, or a head slap if the league once gave it a stamp of approval?

that argument is gonna get tossed so quick it won't even be funny.

Also, I'm not a lawyer, so I really don't know this. it's why I'm asking. Is it up to the NFL to produce their witnesses in court? Am I missing something, why is Vilma whining now that the NFL is not 'producing' Williams? can't they subpoena him and require him to be at court? or was he talking about the NFL appeal.....

He was talking about the appeal. Cerullo, Williams AND the lead investigator Hummel have all already been subpenaed for the defamation lawsuit.

As for the first part of your post, all of those things had rule changes that addressed them. There is nothing that has been written into the rules any different than 1996 concerning pay for performance or "bash for cash".

JDaveG · 10-19-2012, 12:45 PM

(10-19-2012 12:41 PM)AsylumGuido Wrote:

Fixed

AsylumGuido · 10-19-2012, 12:49 PM

(10-19-2012 11:54 AM)JDaveG Wrote: The league has given the commissioner authority to determine these matters. Conveniently glossing past that won't change the fact.

There is no law on the books saying you cannot carry a gun in the non-terminal areas of an airport, either. But there is a regulation. Congress gave the administrative arm of the executive rulemaking authority to prohibit this.

Now, if you want to test that by strolling into an airport with an openly exposed sidearm, be my guest. I don't think your logic is going to sway the TSA, though.

But, there isn't even a regulation against pay for performance. Here is what the NFLPA says in filing this info with the Louisiana court:

Packers: NFL approved Super Bowl XXXI champs' bounty system, players union says

Quote:In the reports, an NFL spokesman is quoted as saying the incentive programs are permitted as long as players use their own money and the amounts players pledge are not exorbitant.

NFL spokesman Greg Aiello said Thursday night that the league would defer comment to its forthcoming arguments in court.

The NFLPA seized upon the NFL's 1996 stance particularly as it related to Fujita, who Goodell suspended this for one game this season even though he said he could not verify that Fujita participated in the bounty program the league says the Saints ran for three seasons from 2009 to 2011. Goodell said Fujita, now with Cleveland, was still guilty of violating NFL rules by offering his own incentives for big plays and also, as a team leader, by failing to try to stop to the cash-for-hits program overseen by then-Saints defensive coordinator Gregg Williams.

The union said that while the NFL's player safety goals may have evolved since 1996, it is unfair to punish players for behavior it previously permitted without formally spelling out that such behavior is no longer allowed.

"The fact that the NFL has a different agenda today than it did in 1996 cannot change the unequivocal language of the NFL Constitution & Bylaws, which has never prohibited this type of behavior," the union wrote in its legal briefs. "The Commissioner's attempt to nonetheless suspend and scapegoat Mr. Fujita for conduct - incentivizing undisputed, legitimate plays — never before punished or prohibited by the NFL not only violates the 'essence of the (collective bargaining) agreement' but further demonstrates the Commissioner's evident partiality."

AsylumGuido · 10-19-2012, 01:22 PM

Another fresh story for those of you who have said that Goodell would never lie:

Jimmy Kennedy blasts Roger Goodell

Former Minnesota Vikings defensive lineman Jimmy Kennedy, identified as a "whistleblower" in the New Orleans Saints bounty scandal, called NFL commissioner Roger Goodell a liar in regard to his role in the league's investigation.

Kennedy issued a lengthy statement Friday in response to a recent memo the NFL gave to all teams that listed him as the person who originally told former Vikings coach Brad Childress in early 2010 that the Saints had a bounty on Brett Favre in the 2010 NFC title game.

"The commissioner of the NFL recently distributed a memo to all 32 NFL teams regarding the alleged Saints bounty program that contained blatant lies about me, thereby adding me to the list of men whose reputations and character have been irreparably damaged by the shoddy, careless, shameful so-called investigation behind this sham proceeding," the statement read. "Roger Goodell identifies me as the 'whistleblower' who approached former Viking coach Brad Childress about an alleged bounty on Brett Favre in the NFC Championship Game.

"That is a lie. I had no knowledge about any alleged bounty to reveal to anyone, and I never informed anyone that I did. Contrary to the false information disseminated by the NFL, coach Childress approached me and asked me if I knew anything about such an allegation, and I told him the truth: I did not. I had no knowledge of any such alleged bounty."

Kennedy also reiterated that he never discussed the Favre bounty with the NFL.

"Roger Goodell also states that I was interviewed by the NFL about the alleged bounty. That is another lie; I was never interviewed by the NFL, unless the NFL considers two 30-second conversations when I told NFL Security that I had no knowledge of any such allegations 'interviews.' I certainly do not," Kennedy said.

"After the second phone call that I received from NFL, in which I once again told the person that I had absolutely no knowledge of any alleged bounty, I called my agent, who then retained an attorney for me. We informed the NFL Security person that further contact with me should occur through my attorney, and interestingly, we never heard from the NFL again."

Previously, Kennedy vehemently denied via Twitter he had knowledge of any bounty on Favre. The NFL had said former Saints defensive end Anthony Hargrove, suspended in the scandal, informed Kennedy about the bounty on Favre.

"The third lie that Roger Goodell told about me is perhaps the most upsetting because it involves a man for whom I have great respect and affection, Anthony Hargrove," Kennedy said. "The NFL states that Anthony Hargrove told me about the alleged bounty on Brett Favre. That is an utter lie; it simply never happened. I never discussed an alleged bounty with Anthony Hargrove before, during or after the NFC Championship Game. The only discussion I have had with Anthony about the alleged bounty occurred when we recently spoke about the NFL's egregiously flawed and unjust investigation and proceeding.

"I am not one of the players who has been officially disciplined by the NFL as part of this sham, but I now know that I too have been damaged by the NFL's complete disregard for truth and integrity."

__________________________________________________________

That's pretty scathing, huh? This whole thing has been built upon lies and misinformation. Yes, if the league had told the truth and and "played fair" this whole thing should have blown over in two weeks, but now I hope it continues until Goodell's reputation is totally destroyed and that will happen as soon as this thing hits the courts.

Beef · 10-19-2012, 01:39 PM

Right, a whistleblower denying he blew the whistle. He has no motive to claim he's not a rat. Not.

If you were an NFL player, would you want every other player in the league to know you were a rat?

You're killing us with this shit still.

You've gone from contending there was no pay for injury to now showing us "precedent" that "bash for cash" was allowed.

Stop the madness.

AsylumGuido · 10-19-2012, 01:46 PM

(10-19-2012 01:39 PM)Beef Wrote: Right, a whistleblower denying he blew the whistle. He has no motive to claim he's not a rat. Not.

If you were an NFL player, would you want every other player in the league to know you were a rat?

You're killing us with this shit still.

You've gone from contending there was no pay for injury to now showing us "precedent" that "bash for cash" was allowed.

Stop the madness.

There was no pay to injure/intent to injure as I have stated since day one. There was pay for performance which the league had previously okayed.

And it is you, sir, who appears to be the fairly tale land of La La. You still choose to take everything stated by Goodell and the league as absolute fact even as it continues to be proven wrong over and over again. The league has even backed off substantially on their original accusations and still can't get them right. You would continue your belief in your version of the truth even if Goodell's lying ass came right up to your face and admitted that he was wrong.

ATLBound · 10-19-2012, 01:56 PM

Calling all Ryan Braun and Roger Clemens stories. I think I can win because of a technicality. It doesn't make it less true. You've moved on from it didnt happen to a technicality.

AND if this does go thru it only absolves folks like Fujita who was not found to be a part of the pay to injure program but put up money for incentives.

This doesn't help Vilma.