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 - Falconidae - 06-03-2012 07:30 AM
(06-02-2012 05:26 PM)AsylumGuido Wrote: Apparently, Mike Florio of NBC Sports, who has begun to increasingly doubt the validity of Goodell's accusations, was the one that noted the blatant discrepancy between the supposed ledger and the two games they referenced according to the "source". Soon after he challenged the claims that the three $1000 cart offs could not have applied to the 2009 Buffalo game, Yahoo retracted and republished that it was actually the Carolina game in October. Well, how is it that the only Carolina player injured in that game was a LB? Big problem there too, right?
Here's the cycle of denial for a Saints fan[SF]:
sources say there's a ledger. SF: There is no ledger.
Multiple sources confirm existence. SF: It doesn't show payment for injuries.
It shows payment for injuries. SF: Not bounties, bounties are only if player is targeted beforehand.
Uh, payment for injury IS a bounty. SF: Hey I explained earlier why you were wrong, case closed.
RE: Saints Bounty Thread - ATLBound - 06-03-2012 10:16 AM
(06-02-2012 10:13 PM)Templar Wrote: My second and third favorite expressions are God Damn and Fuck.
I will preface this by saying that you can curse all you want to and I do not believe that it shows ignorance
being ignorant doesn't mean you are not smart. So while a 3.9 GPA and working on 2 Masters degree is very admirable, it does not absolve someone from being ignorant.
The correct definition would be...I will put it in a sentence
"It's ignorant to think that your education removes all ignorance"
I am in no way calling you ignorant, just educating.
And Yes, back to the thread. This ledger can not be spun. A payment amount set for cart-offs is a pay to injure program....plain and simple. There is no way around it and there is prolly more evidence as well. You asked for it Guido. I really don't know how you can possibly deny it at face value.
RE: Saints Bounty Thread - ATLBound - 06-03-2012 10:39 AM
Also an injury doesn't have to come from dirty hits. If you get paid because someone was cwrted off or helped the field and you hit him clean that is still a pay to njure program. So Ginsberg advising the ledger were for clean hits does not make it right. On an ethical standpoint it makes it slightly better that they were punished for illegal hits, but the fact remains that it still represents a pay to injure program regardless if the hit was clean or not
RE: Saints Bounty Thread - AsylumGuido - 06-03-2012 11:47 AM
First of all, the "ledger", which does not correspond to either game which the source claimed, does not in any way prove that a Saints player donated money or collected money for injuring another player. That "ledger" could have been handwritten last week. It is totally unsubstantiated, even if it had any relevance to what the players were punished for doing. Goodell said that the Saints players targeted specific opposing players.
All the "ledger" does, if even real, is prove that the Saints had someone tracking what could have been a pay for performance pool. Knockouts and whacks or whatever you want to call them are not components of an organized bounty program. They happen in every locker room in the league. But, they are not bounties which Goodell characterized the Saints as promoting.
Do y'all not remember all of that?
RE: Saints Bounty Thread - AsylumGuido - 06-03-2012 11:58 AM
(06-03-2012 07:30 AM)Falconidae Wrote: Here's the cycle of denial for a Saints fan[SF]:
How do you explain why the supposed ledger was reported as pertaining to a game with three $1000 cartoffs and the game originally reported as the game had four cartoffs and three were defensive players and the fourth was an offensive lineman?
How do you explain Yahoo then retracting the story and re-releasing it naming the Carolina game in October as the real game? How do you explain the only cartoff in that game was a linebacker?
How is this proof of a defensive bounty program? Can you explain that?
The more that comes out the worse it makes Goodell look. Not one thing Goodell has "leaked" has done anything but poke holes in his claims of an organized bounty program being run by the Saints targeting specific players. THAT is what was claimed and THAT is what has Saints fans in an uproar. Not some chicken shit locker room pool, cartoffs or not. That isn't what they were pushed for. They were punished for specific bounties on four named players - Warner, Favre, Newton and Rodgers.
RE: Saints Bounty Thread - Beef - 06-03-2012 12:02 PM
(06-03-2012 11:47 AM)AsylumGuido Wrote: First of all, the "ledger", which does not correspond to either game which the source claimed, does not in any way prove that a Saints player donated money or collected money for injuring another player. That "ledger" could have been handwritten last week. It is totally unsubstantiated, even if it had any relevance to what the players were punished for doing. Goodell said that the Saints players targeted specific opposing players.
You're so full of bullshit. Nothing you're saying here is realistic. It's all delusional spin.
The ledger is legit and it has names of Saints players in it along with a reward schedule that includes "cart-offs". It proves a pay for injury program and nothing you can say will change that. Stop bold face contradicting this shit. You look like a complete moron for trying.
RE: Saints Bounty Thread - ATLBound - 06-03-2012 12:09 PM
(06-03-2012 11:58 AM)AsylumGuido Wrote: How do you explain why the supposed ledger was reported as pertaining to a game with three $1000 cartoffs and the game originally reported as the game had four cartoffs and three were defensive players and the fourth was an offensive lineman?Wrong, wrong, wrong
They were punished for running a bounty program that paid for performance AND injuries. Once again you are "MISSING" the focus here.
The focus is there was a pay for injure program. This is it. This is where it stops. The ledger proves that regardless of which players got hurt. I don't know how much better I can explain it.
Let's try it this way. The ledger proves an INTENT to pay for cart-offs. Just because the cart-offs didn't happen in that particular game and there were no payouts for that particular game it doesn't make it false or show "holes" in Goodell's case. You're so gung ho over the results that you're ignoring the fact that the ledger shows proof of an ATTEMPT or INTENT. The result is just an extra incentive but not the end of it.
Please tell me that you understand this concept because it's not hard to figure out.
Once again if I INTEND to murder somebody, but I fail, then I am STILL GUILTY regardless of the result. This is the same concept.
RE: Saints Bounty Thread - AsylumGuido - 06-03-2012 12:25 PM
(06-03-2012 12:09 PM)ATLBound Wrote: Wrong, wrong, wrong
How do you explain the total lack of validity of the supposed ledger?
It didn't correspond to the Buffalo game as originally reported. It doesn't correspond to the Carolina game that was reported after the retraction of the original story.
Please explain that!
Also, this is from the ESPN story on the supposed ledger:
"The NFL has not discussed the ledger in any of its official reports or public comments, but the document's existence appears to support the league's contention that the Saints operated an improper pay-for-performance program. Whether it confirms that actual bounties were placed on targeted opponents is not yet clear, as the document has not been made public."
Note the key phrase "actual bounties ... placed on targeted opponents". That is the crux of the penalties laid down on the players and staff. If it was just the pay for performance part it would never have gotten so big.
RE: Saints Bounty Thread - AsylumGuido - 06-03-2012 12:33 PM
(06-03-2012 12:09 PM)ATLBound Wrote: Once again if I INTEND to murder somebody, but I fail, then I am STILL GUILTY regardless of the result. This is the same concept.
What if you inadvertently or accidentally killed somebody in the act of doing your job? Are you then guilty of murder? This is the same concept.
If a player was doing his job and as a result an opponent got carted off it would be no different.
RE: Saints Bounty Thread - Drathdon - 06-03-2012 01:19 PM
You quote "as the document has not been made public" in your reply, and then go on to say the Yahoo story mistakes prove that the NFL is lying. You realize Yahoo's story is pieced together from leaked reports, and yet still claim its inconsistencies somehow tarnish Goodell. You really do like having it both ways.
Face facts, man. The ledger shows what bounties were placed. That doesn't mean each one was claimed, so whether players were carted off in games makes no difference. If I place a bet to win, and I lose, does that mean I never made a bet? You're delusional.
And your constant attempts to move the bar do not work. They were not suspended for just targeting individual players, which you claim the lack of proof of clears their names, but for conduct unbecoming the game, which included payments of any kind as well as an organized bounty pool - which I remind you they were warned to stop, and could have stopped, to avoid penalties.