(05-12-2012 06:41 PM)ATLBound Wrote:  That article is the epitome of my argument the wholr finger-lickin' time. Lol.

Well the last paragraph at least referring to Mary Ho White's role and how she "thinks." I'm not even a lawyer and I could get that. Her role was can this be used to prove in a court of law. Guess what? It can. That's the problem tho. The grievances filed are not to deny the bounty. The grievances are filed so that Goodell doesn't have the ability to punish. Look at it veru closely Guido and that is your and the Saints players ONLY saving grace right now.

If they aren't able to get whomever to agree that Goodell can't punish then they are screwed and even if they are then they will be considered guilty in the public eye and got off on a technicality.

At this point there is no need to argue did they or didn't they. The focal argument right now is Can Goodell punish them based on the CBA rules. If that don't go thru, then the players are screwed.

(05-12-2012 04:41 PM)AsylumGuido Wrote:  I don't care about any of that. The issue on the table right now is player punishment and the document gives absolutely no proof, as Goodell and White claimed, that players engaged in donating and collecting money directly related to injury. It also did not state that Hargrove admitted to participating himself.

That is the issue. You are dwelling on something totally different.

But, to answer your questions, let's say Williams and Vitt knew that Hargrove was being called in for questioning. They knew it was going to be about claims that the Saints were engaging in a bounty program. They knew they weren't, but they were engaging in a pay for performance program that is against the rules.

Now, it can be interpreted that monies paid for picks or sacks could loosely be called bounties. They were concerned that even in telling the truth Hargrove may make some statement that could be taken in the wrong light. Lawyer commonly coach a witness telling them exactly what to say. They aren't telling them to lie, but to tell the truth in the most efficient way.

Could Williams and Vitt not have been trying to run a little damage control trying to keep a pay for performance program as being interpreted as something quite worse? It even makes more sense with Williams claiming those ******** at the league have been out to get him for years.

It sounds to me like it is very plausible that they were just "getting their ducks in a row" or all "getting on the same page" so they wouldn't say something that could be taken out of context.

Unfortunately, that appears to have happened anyway with the email, for sure, and also with the declaration.

(05-12-2012 07:02 PM)Beef Wrote:  Of course you conveniently "don't care about any of that", because it DOES prove a bounty program existed and players such as Hargove and coaches were involved in it. You don't get to dismiss this like it doesn't matter simply because you see now that it's indefensible logic that proves you're wrong.

You keep saying it doesn't prove anything, but you don't follow it up with any rational logic that can answer every question.

No, it is NOT plausible that this was simply getting on the same page about pay for performance. If it were supposed to be about pay for performance and not bounties, Vitt wouldn't be claiming that Hargove is lying about the entire declaration.

And more than that, Hargove got suspended for participating in "pay for injury bounties", not "pay for performance rewards". Why would Hargove try to pass blame in an attempt to lessen his punishment with a declaration that has nothing to do with what he was punished for?

NFL: We're suspending you for your participation in pay for injury bounties.
Hargrove: But Williams and Vitt told me to deny, play dumb, and stay on the same page about pay for performance rewards!
NFL: So? What's that got to do with why we're suspending you?

You see, the declaration's existence ONLY makes sense if it's about injury bounties, lying, and a cover-up.

(05-12-2012 07:10 PM)AsylumGuido Wrote:  I answered it with logic which could cover every question but you refuse to consider it. In every thread on this subject you have been a single minded antagonist. I seriously doubt anyone here would debate that fact. If Goodell himself came out and admitted that he had depended too much on extended possibilities you will still keep demanding that the Saints were guilty.


Now I have a question for you. Explain in detail exactly of what you think the Saints are guilty. Don't forget that you bought hook, line and sinker early on.

Your turn.

(05-12-2012 08:24 PM)Beef Wrote:  No, your "answer" was not only illogical, but it didn't come close to answering every question.

I gave you clear follow-up rational that makes your "answer" not remotely reasonable. But yet again, you're ignoring it.

Hargrove was punished for "pay for injury". Why would he make a declaration about "pay for performance" only???????????

And here's the difference in this situation... Everyone knows that Goodell isn't going to come forward and admit he was wrong because he isn't going to need to. At this point, all anyone in the media REALLY wants, is to just see all the explicit unquestionable indefensible evidence that you don't have to draw inferences from and that can't be spun by biased Saints fans.

The media knows that the Hargrove declaration infers a true bounty program, his involvement, the coaches involvement, and their attempt to cover it up. But just how you continually keep misrepresenting it's real context to spin it to your liking, many others out there are doing the same thing. You, in turn, are using this as indirect support of your illogical and irrational defense. The media and detractors are using it to make money (sensationalizing stories sells).

You're also using the NFL's reluctance to release certain evidence as some how being proof that they are lying and the evidence doesn't exist. And the media is also running away with this because it's "sensational" and helps sell papers and attract viewers. The realists out here, however, understand that it's not prudent to release the names and statements of "Whistle-blowers" because of the dangers and ill effects it can create for them by doing so. Conveniently, though, you are choosing to ignore that as well.

As for your question, I think every coach and player from the Saints who has been punished to date, is guilty of participating in pay for injury bounties, pay for performance rewards, and lying to NFL investigators or attempting to cover it all up.

And I believe that because of the combination of Hargrove's declaration, William's recording, the "pay me" comment after Farve was knocked out of a game that has been well documented, Mary Jo White's independent analysis and overwhelmingly damning summation which asserts there are multiple independant sources who have come forward and confirmed everything, and the no-brainer logic that the NFL isn't so dumb they would create a massive conspiracy without proper evidence to support their actions.

(05-12-2012 09:25 PM)AsylumGuido Wrote:  First, post the documentation, preferably the audio of the supposed "pay me" comment. And post, if you can find it, the exact text claimed.

Next, Hargrove's declaration means nothing and is getting ripped apart as a source of evidence.

Next, what part of the William's statement gives any proof of a bounty system or the cooperation of any player?

Next, Mary Jo's comments and her supposed independence are already getting butchered by the press. It is in your best interest to distance yourself from her if you hope to retain any degree of believability.

You also mention the press running with what is "sensational". You are absolutely right. The same press that was running with the "sensational" that was being released by by Goodell and the league is now running with the more recent "sensational". I would think that the more recent news would be a bit more reliable, wouldn't you? Oops! That would require you to be even vaguely objective to answer. Sorry.

As for "Whistle Blowers", the league has already said that none of the Saints players fit that category. Yet, other sources have identified a "Whistle Blower" that was fired by the Saints in 2009.

The rest of your inane ramblings are all based upon your irrational belief with absolutely no solid proof.

But, I give you a break. Tell me exactly what you think the Saints actually did. Detail it.

Quote:If the complaint is about the multiple, independent sources, I have verified that there are multiple, independent sources with first-hand knowledge who are credible. Their identities have not been provided. That is something that is exactly what the league should be doing. You must faceguard the identity of people who provide information to you in order to protect them and also to encourage others in the future to come forward with evidence of wrongdoing. This is certainly not a one-on-one, he-said-she-said record at all. This is multiple, independent sources.