+- 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 - AsylumGuido - 05-15-2012 09:33 PM
(05-15-2012 08:32 PM)Beef Wrote: That's just not true. You're basing this notion on the idea that there wasn't really ever a bounty program. So for someone to say Gregg put me down for $5k on Rodgers, it would appear to be a farce if there actually is no bounty program.
But if there really IS a bounty program, it looks absolutely 100% like direct participation.
And right now, the league believes there was a bounty program, so there's no question they are taking that email on it's face value and considering it evidence of participation.
Exactly! Where is there a shred of real evidence (that we have seen) that there was an organized bounty program targeting individual hits? But, if the league is taking it upon what you call "face value" and it has no correlation to actual truthful events how do they have a leg to stand on?
RE: Saints Bounty Thread - TeamPlayer1 - 05-15-2012 09:44 PM
AG, "What if" the arbitrator rules that Goodell has the final say? Then what do you say?
RE: Saints Bounty Thread - AsylumGuido - 05-15-2012 09:47 PM
(05-15-2012 09:11 PM)Falconidae Wrote: So, guido, Sorry if I'm making you repeat yourself but, when the coaches suspensions ruling came down, this was part of it:
10. When interviewed in 2012, Sean Payton claimed to be entirely unaware of the program, a claim contradicted by others. Further, prior to the Saints' opening game in 2011, Coach Payton received an email from a close associate that stated in part, "PS Greg Williams put me down for $5000 on Rogers (sic)." When shown the email during the course of the investigation, Coach Payton stated that it referred to a "bounty" on Green Bay quarterback Aaron Rodgers.
When did he change that statement and why didn't he say it was a running joke then?
He said it was/could be referring to a bounty. It doesn't mean that a real "bounty" was in place. He also stated, not included in Goodell's release, that he had never seen that email it was presented. Given that it was forwarded on from media contact from the team wouldn't you think that the week of the opening game He would have missed it?
If you were asked what that PS sounded like what would you say? Now, don't forget that the Saints were accused by a player on the losing Vikings of a bounty.
Now, if that was presented to you what would you say? I would say it sounded like someone "kidding about a bounty."
Now, Goodell's statement said that Payton "mentioned a bounty" when addressed with the email for the first time.
Back off here and see what is going on.
RE: Saints Bounty Thread - AsylumGuido - 05-15-2012 09:52 PM
(05-15-2012 09:44 PM)TeamPlayer1 Wrote: AG, "What if" the arbitrator rules that Goodell has the final say? Then what do you say?
Then the Saint's player are screwed because the facts can't be reviewed by an outside body.
It doesn't matter what the facts are because they cannot be reviewed or interpreted by anyone but Goodell.
I say that I want to know that whatever was governed by Goodell wasn't solely for the protection of his league (ie. his job) without regard for collateral damage.
RE: Saints Bounty Thread - AsylumGuido - 05-15-2012 09:55 PM
(05-15-2012 09:44 PM)TeamPlayer1 Wrote: AG, "What if" the arbitrator rules that Goodell has the final say? Then what do you say?
If the arbitrator decides that it can be reviewed outside of Goodell's authority I expect his player punishments to be overturned.
But, the coaches and front office have no recourse through a union. They are screwed regardless.
RE: Saints Bounty Thread - Falconidae - 05-15-2012 09:58 PM
(05-15-2012 09:47 PM)AsylumGuido Wrote: He said it was/could be referring to a bounty. It doesn't mean that a real "bounty" was in place. He also stated, not included in Goodell's release, that he had never seen that email it was presented. Given that it was forwarded on from media contact from the team wouldn't you think that the week of the opening game He would have missed it?
If you were asked what that PS sounded like what would you say? Now, don't forget that the Saints were accused by a player on the losing Vikings of a bounty.
Now, if that was presented to you what would you say? I would say it sounded like someone "kidding about a bounty."
Now, Goodell's statement said that Payton "mentioned a bounty" when addressed with the email for the first time.
Back off here and see what is going on.
So, where did he elaborate on that? sorry again, but I put Payton, bounty , email into Google, don't get anything about Payton explaining that away. Where did you?
And why, if that was a just a running joke,didn't he just say that?
RE: Saints Bounty Thread - phocis850 - 05-15-2012 10:28 PM
Goodell just got a fat paycheck. You think he is stupid enough to rip it in half?
Goodell isn't going to make a move he isn't sure of. There is zero panic attack in the comish's seat.
RE: Saints Bounty Thread - AsylumGuido - 05-15-2012 10:38 PM
(05-15-2012 09:58 PM)Falconidae Wrote: So, where did he elaborate on that? sorry again, but I put Payton, bounty , email into Google, don't get anything about Payton explaining that away. Where did you?
And why, if that was a just a running joke,didn't he just say that?
Who is to know he didn't? All we heard from Goodell is that when Payton was asked, blindsided, about the email with the PS from Ornstein was this in the official announcement from Goodell:
When interviewed in 2012, Sean Payton claimed to be entirely unaware of the program, a claim contradicted by others. Further, prior to the Saints' opening game in 2011, Coach Payton received an email from a close associate that stated in part, "PS Greg Williams put me down for $5000 on Rogers (sic)." When shown the email during the course of the investigation, Coach Payton stated that it referred to a "bounty" on Green Bay quarterback Aaron Rodgers.
Now, the media has reported that Payton said that the email referred to an ongoing bounty system. You see Goodell's official statement here. It doesn't say that. Does it not make since that when Payton was shown this email for the first time that he might say that it referred to a bounty, but that it was not a real bounty but an ongoing joke? At that point Goodell possibly had his mind made up and knew that by punishing a team for systematically injuring opponents may weaken the case against the league over the concussion issues.
Even if we could believe what Goodell stated that Payton said, it still doesn't give any proof whatsoever of a bounty system.
RE: Saints Bounty Thread - Beef - 05-15-2012 10:42 PM
(05-15-2012 09:33 PM)AsylumGuido Wrote: Exactly! Where is there a shred of real evidence (that we have seen) that there was an organized bounty program targeting individual hits? But, if the league is taking it upon what you call "face value" and it has no correlation to actual truthful events how do they have a leg to stand on?
Ugh, not this fucking shit yet again.
We have seen real evidence, you just choose to ignore it or misrepresent it. However, that doesn't even matter. Goodell has seen all the evidence and for the sake of protecting the whistle blowers and the integrity of future whistle blowers, he hasn't let us see it all, and rightly so.
You can't act like there is no evidence just because you haven't seen it all when you know damn well it just hasn't been released for a good reason.
As a result, you are not in a position the claim the email is absolutely a joke. You simply do not have any proof of that and you are significantly less informed than those who have actually investigated everything and contend its relating to an actual bounty.
RE: Saints Bounty Thread - Beef - 05-15-2012 10:49 PM
(05-15-2012 10:38 PM)AsylumGuido Wrote: Who is to know he didn't? All we heard from Goodell is that when Payton was asked, blindsided, about the email with the PS from Ornstein was this in the official announcement from Goodell:
When interviewed in 2012, Sean Payton claimed to be entirely unaware of the program, a claim contradicted by others. Further, prior to the Saints' opening game in 2011, Coach Payton received an email from a close associate that stated in part, "PS Greg Williams put me down for $5000 on Rogers (sic)." When shown the email during the course of the investigation, Coach Payton stated that it referred to a "bounty" on Green Bay quarterback Aaron Rodgers.
Now, the media has reported that Payton said that the email referred to an ongoing bounty system. You see Goodell's official statement here. It doesn't say that. Does it not make since that when Payton was shown this email for the first time that he might say that it referred to a bounty, but that it was not a real bounty but an ongoing joke? At that point Goodell possibly had his mind made up and knew that by punishing a team for systematically injuring opponents may weaken the case against the league over the concussion issues.
Even if we could believe what Goodell stated that Payton said, it still doesn't give any proof whatsoever of a bounty system.
Huh??
Find the quote where Payton said he'd never read the email before and that it was just an ongoing joke. Adding words like "blindsided" is your own bias just being tossed around.
You're trying to spin you BS here and it isn't working. You're making up shit from pure speculation and so much bias it's just gotten beyond lame.