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 - ATLBound - 05-12-2012 06:43 PM
Haha I meant Mary Jo...my bad
RE: Saints Bounty Thread - ATLBound - 05-12-2012 06:46 PM
"Innocent people have been convicted many times."
This is your way of telling us basically that regardless of the results you are still going to believe in their innocence and that's sad. Lol.
RE: Saints Bounty Thread - AsylumGuido - 05-12-2012 06:55 PM
(05-12-2012 06:41 PM)ATLBound Wrote: That article is the epitome of my argument the wholr finger-lickin' time. Lol.
The whole point is that if Vilma's lawyer can get third party appeal then someone else will be able to see that there is no evidence. And, yes, you are right. It doesn't matter whether anything happened or not. If it goes to Goodell they are guilty. If it goes to someone else the truth hopefully comes out.
I'm not on an island here. Public opinion is quickly turning toward the Saints in this issue. Y'all have a vested interst in the Saints catching hell. The rest of the country doesn't and they are starting to question Goodell bigtime.
RE: Saints Bounty Thread - Beef - 05-12-2012 07:02 PM
(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.
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.
RE: Saints Bounty Thread - AsylumGuido - 05-12-2012 07:10 PM
(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.
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.
RE: Saints Bounty Thread - Beef - 05-12-2012 08:24 PM
(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.
No, your "answer" was not only illogical, but it didn't come close to answering every question.
I gave you clear follow-up rationale 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.
RE: Saints Bounty Thread - AsylumGuido - 05-12-2012 09:25 PM
(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.
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.
RE: Saints Bounty Thread - AsylumGuido - 05-12-2012 09:29 PM
What do you think the Saints players did in detail? I know it is impossible to do it with no real evidence, but what is your belief in what happened?
RE: Saints Bounty Thread - Beef - 05-12-2012 09:50 PM
(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.
Ok, so that's your tactic. Ignore all the true logic and the questions you don't have a rational comeback for and just state the opposite of everything I've said.
Dave Archer has mentioned the "pay me" comment several times on the radio and he said it was one of the 4 players who was overheard saying it but I can't remember which one he said it was.
Again, if you try to dispute Dave Archer, you're making a really big mistake.
So now Hargove's declaration just "means nothing". Really? That's all you can come up with anymore? Seriously dude, just openly give up rather than take this route.
If Mary Jo White goes down, then her firm goes down. And anyone who thinks this firm is going to risk losing several dozen multi-BILLION dollar corporations as clients just to get caught lying about the fucking Saints, you're just beyond delusional.
"As for "Whistle Blowers", the league has already said that none of the Saints players fit that category".
Umm, first of all I never said "Saint's players".
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.
RE: Saints Bounty Thread - ATLBound - 05-12-2012 09:54 PM
If I may intervene because this is obviously going 12 rounds between Guido and Beef *LETS GET READY TO RUMBLEEEEE*
A few things...Hargrove's declaration isn't getting pounded. It's the interpretation of it which I have already explained is based on how the evidence can be represented in a court of law to prove or disprove someone's innocence. This statement should END all discussion of its credibility or lack there of. It's not normal circumstances folks and obviously Mike Florio or whomever else don't understand this. It doesn't take a rocket scientist.
Next, Mary Jo from what I have seen has not been called out by MULTIPLE media sources. If so, then I would like to see where and by whom. I'm not discussing biased Nawlin's articles or bleacher reports.
Next, Willians statement has a lack of denial for the bounty along with no mention of it. It's easy to fovus on the side of the coin that represents your opinion but your glass is onlu half full. Yes, Williams does not mention the "bounty" but a key thing you're forgetting is that he doesn't deny it either. It's very peculiar that the LEADER of the whole ordeal is the ONLY one that has not denied it. Hmmm?
Lastly, why would the most recent news be the most accurate? That makes absolutely no sense to me