+- 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 - JDaveG - 12-11-2012 02:55 PM
Guido, you said earlier this was about clearing Vilma's good name. I wonder if you still think that in light of this:
Quote:"Having reviewed the testimony very carefully, including documentary evidence that is at the center of the conflict, and having assessed the credibility of the four central witnesses on these matters, I find there is more than enough evidence to support Commissioner Goodell's findings that Mr. Vilma offered such a bounty (on Brett Favre)," Tagliabue wrote.
Do you like apples?
RE: Saints Bounty Thread - TeamPlayer1 - 12-11-2012 03:15 PM
Vilma, by trying to embarrass the NFL, has made a mistake. How much interest has Hargrove received from other teams? If Vilma and his lawyer think they can get a huge settlement from the defamation lawsuit they are are delusional. The NFL will drag this out until Vilma is in a nursing home.
Don't think that the NFL will settle because that would set a precedent and every suspension would take that route. So what if a New Orleans judge finds in favor of Vilma? Appeals can go on for a long time and if Vilma loses he is busted by legal fees. Dumbass!
RE: Saints Bounty Thread - mdrake34 - 12-11-2012 03:19 PM
(12-11-2012 02:55 PM)JDaveG Wrote: Guido, you said earlier this was about clearing Vilma's good name. I wonder if you still think that in light of this:
Do you like apples?
RE: Saints Bounty Thread - AsylumGuido - 12-11-2012 03:31 PM
(12-11-2012 02:55 PM)JDaveG Wrote: Guido, you said earlier this was about clearing Vilma's good name. I wonder if you still think that in light of this:
Do you like apples?
That will still happen. Ginsberg has already said that Vilma's suit versus Goodell is still going to take place. There can be quite a bit of difference between the findings of a league puppet and a truly impartial court of law. You know that. Tagliabue's firm still represents Goodell in that case. How else could he rule? Talk about conflict of interest.
RE: Saints Bounty Thread - AsylumGuido - 12-11-2012 03:35 PM
(12-11-2012 03:15 PM)TeamPlayer1 Wrote: Vilma, by trying to embarrass the NFL, has made a mistake. How much interest has Hargrove received from other teams? If Vilma and his lawyer think they can get a huge settlement from the defamation lawsuit they are are delusional. The NFL will drag this out until Vilma is in a nursing home.
Don't think that the NFL will settle because that would set a precedent and every suspension would take that route. So what if a New Orleans judge finds in favor of Vilma? Appeals can go on for a long time and if Vilma loses he is busted by legal fees. Dumbass!
Vilma doesn't want a settlement and he isn't trying to embarrass the NFL. He wants his named cleared and the only way to do that is to have an impartial hearing. Vilma has stated he is not in this for the money. Would Goodell appeal if he lost the case and was ordered to pay court costs plus one dollar? I doubt it.
RE: Saints Bounty Thread - Dale4Saul2Red0 - 12-11-2012 03:36 PM
Affirms Goodell's findings, vacates suspensions.
That's some NCAA stuff right there LOL. Doesn't change much though, everyone knows what they did, they know what they did. It'll affect the rest of their careers and their piggy banks, no matter what a ruling states and rightfully so. Vilma is not going to clear his name ever.
RE: Saints Bounty Thread - AsylumGuido - 12-11-2012 03:51 PM
(12-11-2012 03:36 PM)Dale4Saul2Red0 Wrote: Affirms Goodell's findings, vacates suspensions.
That's some NCAA stuff right there LOL. Doesn't change much though, everyone knows what they did, they know what they did. It'll affect the rest of their careers and their piggy banks, no matter what a ruling states and rightfully so. Vilma is not going to clear his name ever.
You keep thinking that.
He affirms Goodell's findings because it helps his client's cause in the defamation case and he vacates the suspensions because there was no evidence of any bounties. He stated as much in his 22 page findings.
RE: Saints Bounty Thread - AsylumGuido - 12-11-2012 03:57 PM
(12-11-2012 02:55 PM)JDaveG Wrote: Guido, you said earlier this was about clearing Vilma's good name. I wonder if you still think that in light of this:
Do you like apples?
You might find this interesting:
Paul Tagliabue vacates all player penalties in New Orleans Saints bounty scandal
Here's an excerpt from Tagliabue's thought process in vacating Vilma's twice issued season-long suspension: "It is essential to recognize that Vilma is being most severely disciplined for 'talk' or speech at a team meeting on the evening before the Saints-Vikings game. He is not being punished for his performance on the field and, indeed, none of the discipline of any player here relates to on-field conduct.
"No Saints' player was suspended for on-field play by the League after the game in question. If the League wishes to suspend a player for pre-game talk including 'offers' to incentivize misconduct, it must start by imposing enhanced discipline for illegal hits that involve the kind of player misconduct that it desires to interdict. The relationship of the discipline for the off-field "talk" and actual on-field conduct must be carefully calibrated and reasonably apportioned. This is a standard grounded in common sense and fairness. ...
"If one were to punish certain off-field talk in locker rooms, meeting rooms, hotel rooms or elsewhere without applying a rigorous standard that separated real threats or "bounties" from rhetoric and exaggeration, it would open a field of inquiry that would lead nowhere. ...
"Adding to the complexity, there is little evidence of the tone of any talk about a bounty before the Vikings game. Was any bounty pledged serious? Was it inspirational only? Was it typical "trash talk" that occurs regularly before and during games? The parties presented no clear answers. No witness could confirm whether Vilma had any money in his hands as he spoke; no evidence was presented that $10,000 was available to him for purposes of paying a bounty or otherwise. There was no evidence that Vilma or anyone else paid any money to any player for any bounty-related hit on an opposing player in the Vikings game.
"I neither excuse nor condone the alleged offer of a bounty on Favre, whether offered by any player, coach, other Saints' employee or third party. Such conduct has no place in the game of professional football. I cannot, however, uphold a multi-game suspension where there is no evidence that a player's speech prior to a game was actually a factor causing misconduct on the playing field and that such misconduct was severe enough in itself to warrant a player suspension or a very substantial fine. Nor can I find justified a suspension where Williams and other Saints' personnel so carefully crafted an environment that would encourage and allow a player to make such an ill-advised and imprudent offer. I therefore vacate the suspension of Jonathan Vilma."
____________________________________________________
Tagliabue clearly states that there was no evidence that Vilma truly offered any bounty on Favre. Once again, there still has not been any evidence presented that any bounties ever existed. Yes, I know they are now calling the performance pool bounties, but that is not what the initial claims implied.
RE: Saints Bounty Thread - JDaveG - 12-11-2012 03:58 PM
(12-11-2012 03:51 PM)AsylumGuido Wrote: You keep thinking that.
He affirms Goodell's findings because it helps his client's cause in the defamation case and he vacates the suspensions because there was no evidence of any bounties. He stated as much in his 22 page findings.
Please cite to the exact language where Tagliabue said he affirms Goodell's findings "because it helps [the NFL's] cause in the defamation case."
RE: Saints Bounty Thread - AsylumGuido - 12-11-2012 04:34 PM
(12-11-2012 03:58 PM)JDaveG Wrote: Please cite to the exact language where Tagliabue said he affirms Goodell's findings "because it helps [the NFL's] cause in the defamation case."
That was interpretations I have read today from some of the legal experts out there. They said that Tagliabue carefully worded his response so that not only could he state that he affirms Goodell's finding, but still clears the way to vacate all player penalties.
If he had simply vacated the penalties without the stated affirmation it would have weakened Goodell's stance in the defamation case being handled by the firm in which Tagliabue is a partner.
Oh, and it is not "[the NFL's] cause in the defamation case", it is Goodell's cause given it is Vilma vs. Goodell.