(12-13-2012 11:26 AM)ATLBound Wrote:  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.

(12-13-2012 11:26 AM)AsylumGuido Wrote:  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.

(12-13-2012 11:37 AM)AsylumGuido Wrote:  He wasn't under oath at this hearing either. This isn't a court of law. The only testimony truly under oath legally was during the hearing in Louisiana District Court on the TRO request by Vilma. Seven players and Vitt all testified that there were no bounties and no player on the Saints ever received payment for injuring an opposing player.

(12-13-2012 11:47 AM)ATLBound Wrote:  Oh ok....my bad. I thought otherwise. Well it seems they did know the pool was wrong, not anything more. Also wasn't Vitt Assistant HC....so couldnt he override Williams.

(12-13-2012 11:40 AM)ATLBound Wrote:  I can't bold because Im on my phone but I think you basically stated what I have been trying to explain to you since the reduced suspensions came about and for why Goodell is staying true to his SECONDARY, not initial reaction. You said in the above statement:

" They had a pool funded by the players that awarded big plays including hard hit that potentially knocked opposing players out of games."

I think what is being missed here is the very basic definition that Goodell is putting on the word injure. I will agree that it is very broad, but all in the same very true....no matter how "cheap" it may seem. Although minor, it is considered on the field of play and INJURY when a player is knocked out of a game or even just a few plays. It doesn't matter whether its a legal hit or not. It doesn't matter if it was a play, quarter, or just a game. It is still logged as an injury that the players potentially got paid for. This is why Goodell is sticking to his guns.

Lets get this straight. The only thing this Tag situation cleared up was the Vilma situation and nothing else. By that statement above thats a bounty. It ain't a 10k worth bounty and its very small by the nature of the injury but technically and cheaply speaking....its a bounty.

I would also like to say that since the new info with Tags came out I have been leaning your way Guido. So this isnt about the Saints. This is about me seeing where Goodell is coming from, although cheap.

(12-13-2012 12:08 PM)AsylumGuido Wrote:  I'm not sure if he was assistant HC back in 2009 or if that came later. He has always been LB coach and reported to Williams in that capacity.

(12-13-2012 12:17 PM)AsylumGuido Wrote:  I know where you were coming from, but the severity of the punishment laid on the Saints, the staff and the players was always based upon the initial interpretation by Goodell and not his redefinition later on. Tagliabue even pointed this out when he said that the Packers in 2007 and the Patriots in 2008 were each fined $25,000 for the same violations and the players that took part received no sanctions.

My beef in this whole matter has been how the Saints have been portrayed by Goodell from the beginning and how it has been perceived by the public. I know most of you around here have been able to see the light, but there are even a few here with all of the information available in this thread that still believe the fantastic story that Goodell first threw out to the media last March.

(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.

(12-13-2012 12:21 PM)ATLBound Wrote:  Not sure if its the proper venue to check but Wikipedia says he was hired in as Assistant HC back in 2006. Also Williams didn't get there until 2009 so it is easy to see that Vitt had more clout than Williams.

How do you feel about the comments Williams made about Vitt? surprised you haven't made any comments about it

I personally think its naive to think that Vitt wasn't a key player in this performance pool thing. I believe he was the head honcho. Another thing to note....anything that has been said about the players, the Saints, or Vitt himself he has come out seemingly the next day with a press conference to deny it. He hasn't said a word this time. Just sayin'

(12-13-2012 12:26 PM)ATLBound Wrote:  Who knows what Vitt has said that isn't recorded as well?