NFL: Saints Bounty Thread

[ATLBound]

(12-11-2012 05:28 PM)papachaz Wrote:  ahh, so then Vilma as a grown man isn't held responsible for his actions, because where he thinks it's wrong or not, the environment crafted by the coaches made him do it......in other words, he could just say "but buckwheat said it was otay" and not be responsible for his own actions.

something else that strikes me as odd, is what your quote of PT says about intent.....I say intent, because of the 'was it serious, was it inspirational'....in other words He can't prove the intent.....because someones intent is only known to themselves. This is also why I don't believe Vilma wins the defamation suit, if Vilma was the only person singled out, then maybe it could be construed as 'goodell was out to get vilma' but since there are multiple people as well as the whole organization suspended/fined, I really don't see it. I know he specifically named Vilma, but based on what he had, which was enough to make PT say that there was MORE THAN ENOUGH evidence to suggest that vilma offered the money....of course I've already read your spin on that.

I'm just tired of hearing the whole mess, I really wish it HAD blown over in a few weeks.

just curious, since I don't do twitter, do they have a thumbs up smiley they can use when all these players are tweeting each other about this?

This is exactly what I said before and Peyton and Guido basically said I was wrong. I will say it again from what you posted above and this statement below...

"I find there is more than enough evidence to support Commissioner Goodell's findings that Mr. Vilma offered such a bounty (on Brett Favre),"

Tags basically said:

1. Bounties happened

2. Players shouldn't be punished, the organization should

3. Evidence shows Vilma pledged 10k but unsure of intent