(06-03-2012 03:05 PM)AsylumGuido Wrote:  So is payment for a sack, (EDITED), but that isn't the issue. It is the claim that Saints players targeted specific players for injury. Hell, if that was true the fact that money traded hands doesn't mean anything, even if it would have happened.

The whole issue is that Goodell made his claim and punished the Saints based upon that claim and to date, zero evidence of targeting player for injury for pay has not been presented.

MOD EDIT: Warned. Name calling is name calling, regardless of who did it first.

(06-03-2012 03:40 PM)AsylumGuido Wrote:  Radical, I simply corrected Beef's misspelling of his insult as a tongue in cheek response. I'm surprised that gets censored while being called far worse constantly does not.

(06-03-2012 03:48 PM)Radical Wrote:  I'll admit I'm pretty lax about things and don't always jump on the situation after the first shot is fired. At this point though, I'm going to clamp down on it. Like I said before, from here on out it's going to be a suspension.

(06-03-2012 03:00 PM)AsylumGuido Wrote:  Once again, Goodell's use of the word bounty was in reference to targeted players in specific games. He also said they were involved in a pay for performance program that included such things as cartoffs and knockouts. Of course, the ledger called them whacks, instead.

It is that aforementioned use of the term "bounty" which has caused the stir.

(06-03-2012 04:29 PM)Drathdon Wrote:  I was going to list all the "circumstantial" evidence that has come to light already, each time being dismissed by you through faulty logic, and laugh about how you said this would all blow over in a week, but I'm not sure you'd get the irony of having "Saints" who wear Black (and Gold) tarnished by their evil and greed.

At this point, no sane or unbiased jury of 12 people would ever believe the Aints aren't guilty of this and much more, despite how much you or any defense attorney rants and raves to nitpick at the language and context to find any excuse to ignore the elephant in the room. Sadly for you, your own players seem to want to embarrass your team even more by dragging this further into the mud. I'll enjoy each attempt to refute the proof that continues to spill. You would even find a way to discredit direct video of money changing hands (CGI anyone? Disgruntled ex-coach faked it), so I do not expect you to ever concede... even as it drags your team lower and lower.

I really can't wait for the '30 for 30' film in 20 years when all the bankrupt ex-Saints will tell the truth on camera just for meal money!

(06-03-2012 03:05 PM)AsylumGuido Wrote:  So is payment for a sack, (EDITED), but that isn't the issue. It is the claim that Saints players targeted specific players for injury. Hell, if that was true the fact that money traded hands doesn't mean anything, even if it would have happened.

The whole issue is that Goodell made his claim and punished the Saints based upon that claim and to date, zero evidence of targeting player for injury for pay has not been presented.

MOD EDIT: Warned. Name calling is name calling, regardless of who did it first.

(06-03-2012 05:03 PM)Beef Wrote:  Bullshit. You've only just now started narrowing this down to some story about the exact words of Goodell. Only since the ledger story broke have you begun this nonsense that Goodell punished the 4 players, 3 coaches, and 1 GM only for paying to injury only Farve, Warner, Rodgers, and Newton. Your weeks of prior arguments have been focused on a pay for injury bounty program not existing at all. Even after Hargrove's declaration and his being told to play dumb shot that notion down, you continued misrepresenting it's context and true logical inferences and meaning. And now, in the face of "cart-offs" and absolutely no way to realistically spin it's meaning (even though you're trying real hard to), you've suddenly changed your entire argument to some narrow version of it that's actually very different from your original.

You've lost dude. You have nothing anymore. You've been wrong at every spin attempt and now you've gone so far off the deep end of what's rational, you just look silly.

Give it up. You're burnt toast.

(06-03-2012 04:29 PM)Drathdon Wrote:  I was going to list all the "circumstantial" evidence that has come to light already, each time being dismissed by you through faulty logic, and laugh about how you said this would all blow over in a week, but I'm not sure you'd get the irony of having "Saints" who wear Black (and Gold) tarnished by their evil and greed.

At this point, no sane or unbiased jury of 12 people would ever believe the Aints aren't guilty of this and much more, despite how much you or any defense attorney rants and raves to nitpick at the language and context to find any excuse to ignore the elephant in the room. Sadly for you, your own players seem to want to embarrass your team even more by dragging this further into the mud. I'll enjoy each attempt to refute the proof that continues to spill. You would even find a way to discredit direct video of money changing hands (CGI anyone? Disgruntled ex-coach faked it), so I do not expect you to ever concede... even as it drags your team lower and lower.

I really can't wait for the '30 for 30' film in 20 years when all the bankrupt ex-Saints will tell the truth on camera just for meal money!