![]() |
|
NFL: Saints Bounty Thread - Printable Version +- Atlanta Falcons Talk (http://atlantafalconstalk.com) +-- Forum: Falcons Fans Message Boards (/Forum-Falcons-Fans-Message-Boards) +--- Forum: Talk About The Falcons & So Much More (/Forum-Talk-About-The-Falcons-So-Much-More) +--- Thread: NFL: Saints Bounty Thread (/Thread-NFL-Saints-Bounty-Thread) Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 |
RE: Saints Bounty Thread - mdrake34 - 09-04-2012 04:55 PM (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.
RE: Saints Bounty Thread - AsylumGuido - 09-04-2012 04:58 PM (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. 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 RE: Saints Bounty Thread - AsylumGuido - 09-04-2012 05:02 PM (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. RE: Saints Bounty Thread - ATLBound - 09-04-2012 05:02 PM (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. 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. RE: Saints Bounty Thread - ATLBound - 09-04-2012 05:08 PM (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: 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
RE: Saints Bounty Thread - AsylumGuido - 09-04-2012 05:12 PM (09-04-2012 04:50 PM)Radical Wrote: I still don't get the logic that cart-offs are different than injuries. 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. RE: Saints Bounty Thread - AsylumGuido - 09-04-2012 05:21 PM (09-04-2012 05:02 PM)ATLBound Wrote: Straight from the horse's mouth: 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. RE: Saints Bounty Thread - ATLBound - 09-04-2012 05:22 PM (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. On the contrary sir, this was his first statement after announcing the penalites for the players back in May. RE: Saints Bounty Thread - AsylumGuido - 09-04-2012 05:25 PM (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??? 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. RE: Saints Bounty Thread - Anomaly - 09-04-2012 05:31 PM 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. |