Threaded Mode | Linear Mode

UCSBDirtyBird · 12-12-2012, 09:46 PM

(12-12-2012 06:38 PM)AsylumGuido Wrote: Sorry, but you obviously don't understand the reason for the suit. It has nothing to do with money. It really doesn't even have anything to do with winning. It has EVERYTHING to do with making every piece of the evidence and the damning of the supposed witnesses public domain. This will clear Vilma's name and that is all that he wants.

As I have discussed within this very thread with our resident attorney, Dave, there is no way to win the suit because I also believe Goodell believed the lies told by Cerullo so there was no malice. I have said that all along. But, until the public, and the corporations that were supporting Jon Vilma's Haiti Foundation see everything it hurts his ability to help his people and to have a successful life after football. That is what this is all about.

Jon Vilma is extremely intelligent and well respected across the league. He simply wants to clear his name. If Tagliabue were to release all transcripts from the hearings I would guarantee you that Vilma would drop the suit.

I must have missed your admission that the suit had no merit. My mistake, I should have read all 180 pages.

I fully expect to see the transcripts in whole at some point. There is too much interest in them to not see their release, legal or otherwise. Unlike you though, I don't see Vilma dropping his suit. There will likely be things in that transcript that will muddy the waters of Vilma's "I had no part in a bounty program" defense. Heck, you posted an article since my last post that shows that Williams wanted to shut down the bounty program (I don't know how you can split a hair so fine as to draw a distinction between pay for pain and bounty) but Vitt overruled him. That statement goes a long way toward showing that there was much more than a mere pay for performance program scheme going on. Whether or not Vilma held up money will not be the deciding factor in the general public's mind. To many, the main leader on a defense that was paid for injuring other players is going to take a credibility hit. His name won't be cleared no matter how hard he tries.

googlywoogly · 12-12-2012, 10:13 PM

(12-12-2012 02:38 PM)mdrake34 Wrote:

The above gets the "blue ribbon" for most accurate portrayal of what this conversation is now about. Well played Sir.

Earned a guffaw from me when you put it in race baiter Stylo 2.0's thread on the other message board too.

ATLBound · 12-13-2012, 12:49 AM

I can't believe that I am saying this but I believe Gregg
Williams more than anybody involved.

Cerullo, from what Ive read so far, seems to be discounted because he had a vendetta.

Vitt has come off as an evil genius in this whole spiel and may have been the one that should have been suspended for a year or more, not Payton or Williams. He seems to be the one in the leather chair with a white cat controlling the whole thing.

Williams seems to be the most genuine.

Sounds like Vilma did pledge the 10k but more for getting the defense hyped.

Fujita has been absolutely absolved even before Tags took over.

Will Smith was just there

And Hargrove did what Vitt told him to do.

Goodell is only focused on the performance pool based on his statements, but he comes off arrogant. He's going by his last reduction of the suspensions prior to Tags taking over, the lies involved, the language involved etc. I dont think his statements are speaking to the beginning of the whole thing.

Thats what I got out of it

JDaveG · 12-13-2012, 08:42 AM

(12-12-2012 09:46 PM)UCSBDirtyBird Wrote: I must have missed your admission that the suit had no merit. My mistake, I should have read all 180 pages.

I fully expect to see the transcripts in whole at some point. There is too much interest in them to not see their release, legal or otherwise. Unlike you though, I don't see Vilma dropping his suit. There will likely be things in that transcript that will muddy the waters of Vilma's "I had no part in a bounty program" defense. Heck, you posted an article since my last post that shows that Williams wanted to shut down the bounty program (I don't know how you can split a hair so fine as to draw a distinction between pay for pain and bounty) but Vitt overruled him. That statement goes a long way toward showing that there was much more than a mere pay for performance program scheme going on. Whether or not Vilma held up money will not be the deciding factor in the general public's mind. To many, the main leader on a defense that was paid for injuring other players is going to take a credibility hit. His name won't be cleared no matter how hard he tries.

To clarify on my end, since Guido cited our conversation -- I don't think the suit has no merit. I just don't think it can be won.

A suit that has no merit, as I see it, is one where the person bringing the suit knows the facts and law do not support the argument being made. This suit is just one where Vilma cannot demonstrate what he claims, because it's too difficult to show that Goodell knew the statements to be false (which is an element of slander or libel). He could, theoretically, believe Goodell has slandered or libeled him. And he could have some facts to support that claim. But if he cannot prove one element, he loses. I don't think he can prove that element of his claim.

There are other problems with the claim as well. I think it is likely pre-empted by the CBA, and that (if true) gets closer to a truly frivolous claim. But that's an issue the Court will have to sort out.

mdrake34 · 12-13-2012, 09:21 AM

(12-12-2012 10:13 PM)googlywoogly Wrote: The above gets the "blue ribbon" for most accurate portrayal of what this conversation is now about. Well played Sir.

Earned a guffaw from me when you put it in race baiter Stylo 2.0's thread on the other message board too.

That guy is the WORST stereotypical angry black man I have ever come across. Someone called him racist months ago and I "liked" their post, and he flipped out on me. I actually apologized to him and unliked the post. Then he flipped out on me again in that thread, it was probably the first time I had addressed him since then.

***Peyton*** · 12-13-2012, 10:59 AM

(12-13-2012 12:49 AM)ATLBound Wrote: I can't believe that I am saying this but I believe Gregg
Williams more than anybody involved.

Cerullo, from what Ive read so far, seems to be discounted because he had a vendetta.

Vitt has come off as an evil genius in this whole spiel and may have been the one that should have been suspended for a year or more, not Payton or Williams. He seems to be the one in the leather chair with a white cat controlling the whole thing.

Williams seems to be the most genuine.

Can't say I feel the same way. Dude is telling Tagliabue he was trying to stop it and was overruled by his own Assistant? UH......OK.

I can't reconcile the Greg Williams that was trying to stop the program with that raged lunatic I heard on that audiotape before the Niners playoff game.

**papachaz** · 12-13-2012, 11:26 AM

(12-13-2012 10:59 AM)Peyton Wrote: Can't say I feel the same way. Dude is telling Tagliabue he was trying to stop it and was overruled by his own Assistant? UH......OK.

I can't reconcile the Greg Williams that was trying to stop the program with that raged lunatic I heard on that audiotape before the Niners playoff game.

wait, the assistant head coach is also the assistant DC? I thought Vitt was SP's assistant, not GW's.

call it whatever, but it really sounds to me like Williams just trying to say the right things to get to coach again.....

and I'm going to say this again, people are resposible for their actions, saying they had to continue doing something they knew was wrong just to keep their jobs or so they wouldn't have to worry about their jobs is total BS. any of these guys wanted out of it all they had to do was report it......yeah I know all the talk about snitches and stitches, etc etc...... but wrong is wrong

AsylumGuido · 12-13-2012, 11:26 AM

(12-12-2012 09:46 PM)UCSBDirtyBird Wrote: I must have missed your admission that the suit had no merit. My mistake, I should have read all 180 pages.

I fully expect to see the transcripts in whole at some point. There is too much interest in them to not see their release, legal or otherwise. Unlike you though, I don't see Vilma dropping his suit. There will likely be things in that transcript that will muddy the waters of Vilma's "I had no part in a bounty program" defense. Heck, you posted an article since my last post that shows that Williams wanted to shut down the bounty program (I don't know how you can split a hair so fine as to draw a distinction between pay for pain and bounty) but Vitt overruled him. That statement goes a long way toward showing that there was much more than a mere pay for performance program scheme going on. Whether or not Vilma held up money will not be the deciding factor in the general public's mind. To many, the main leader on a defense that was paid for injuring other players is going to take a credibility hit. His name won't be cleared no matter how hard he tries.

There is a very discernible difference between what the Saints had going on and a bounty program as presented by Goodell to the public. You yourself just demonstrated that by your next to last sentence.

Quote:To many, the main leader on a defense that was paid for injuring other players is going to take a credibility hit.

Yesterday morning on Mike & Mike, Golic said that almost every team had the same program in their defensive locker rooms and the one they had when he was with the Eagles was just like the Saints. They had a pool funded by the players that awarded big plays including hard hit that potentially knocked opposing players out of games. But, he stressed, just as all of the Saints players and coaches, that there was never any intent to injure involved. He said that any illegal hit, whether flagged or not, was not eligible. Any hit on a player that resulted in a true injury was also not eligible. The Saints had the same stipulation according to the players and coaches.

Golic added on this morning's show that if a defense truly wanted to injure a player they could ... easily. The fact that the Saints were among the least penalized teams in the NFL over the three years in question in regards to person fouls supports the team's claims.

The Saints players have always maintained that they were never awarded for injuring other players and according to Vilma's attorney, Peter Ginsberg, who heard all of the testimony and saw all of the evidence, there was nothing to indicate that the player were ever paid to injure another player ... aka, a bounty.

De Smith of the NFLPA also received a full transcript of the hearings and stated that it contained no evidence that the Saints ever had bounties on other players and called for the transcript to be released to the public so that they can see the truth.

ATLBound · 12-13-2012, 11:26 AM

(12-13-2012 10:59 AM)Peyton Wrote: Can't say I feel the same way. Dude is telling Tagliabue he was trying to stop it and was overruled by his own Assistant? UH......OK.

I can't reconcile the Greg Williams that was trying to stop the program with that raged lunatic I heard on that audiotape before the Niners playoff game.

I understand that point. I'm just thinking criminally speaking, this would be the ABSOLUTE worst time for him to lie about something. I don't think he has been "under oath" until that point.

He came forward with some withheld info from previous things he said before, like he never mentioned before that he thought the 10k was just something to get the defense riled up. He withheld that info. Also wasn't Vitt Assistant HC so isn't he technically next in command? Im not sure how the coaching hierarchy works in the NFL.

AsylumGuido · 12-13-2012, 11:31 AM

(12-13-2012 11:26 AM)papachaz Wrote: wait, the assistant head coach is also the assistant DC? I thought Vitt was SP's assistant, not GW's.

call it whatever, but it really sounds to me like Williams just trying to say the right things to get to coach again.....

and I'm going to say this again, people are resposible for their actions, saying they had to continue doing something they knew was wrong just to keep their jobs or so they wouldn't have to worry about their jobs is total BS. any of these guys wanted out of it all they had to do was report it......yeah I know all the talk about snitches and stitches, etc etc...... but wrong is wrong

That's the whole point. They never felt they were doing anything wrong because every other team they played on did the exact same thing. There were no bounties and they were not rewarded for injuring opponents.