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 - pauliwood - 06-16-2012 12:25 PM
(06-16-2012 03:41 AM)papachaz Wrote: no, because there is a tremendous difference in Falcons fans discussing what is going with our division rivals, and letting one of the division rivals fans completely dominate the board.
I started a Bucs thread. it's around here somewhere. it only got a handful of replies. It's possibly on page 2.
RE: Saints Bounty Thread - AsylumGuido - 06-16-2012 03:26 PM
Hell yes OJ did it. But, the fact is that the Saints did not target players for injury as Goodell claimed and STILL, to date, no evidence presented has shown that they did what they are accused of doing.
New article here from Mike Florio of NBC Sports:
Vilma’s lawyer says possibility of fair hearing is “pure fantasy”
Posted by Mike Florio on June 16, 2012, 12:25 AM EDT
The players suspended for their roles in the alleged Saints bounty program believe the proof against them is roughly as real as the chances they have at getting a fair appeal hearing on Monday.
“After what Jonathan [Vilma] and the other players have been put through, to suggest the players are being presented with any kind of fair hearing based on what has been presented today is pure fantasy,” lawyer Peter Ginsberg told Jim Varney of the New Orleans Times-Picayune. ”The thin production today doesn’t link any of the players to a bounty system, and that’s consistent with what we know to be true — there was no bounty system.”
Varney’s report regarding the contents of the evidence confirm everything reported by PFT on Friday. The league produced fewer than 200 pages of evidence that will be used at Monday’s quartet of appeal hearings, along with no list of witnesses to be called to provide raw evidence of bounties that could then be tested by the NFLPA and lawyers representing the individual players.
Also, the evidence to be presented by the NFL includes two items that didn’t even exist when the suspensions were implemented: a June 6 article written by Mike Triplett of the Times-Picayune and filmmaker Sean Pamphilon’s rambling 10,000-plus-word diary regarding the events leading up to and following his decision to release audio of former Saints defensive coordinator Gregg Williams’ comments recorded the day before a January 2012 playoff loss to the 49ers.
While it’s possible that, given Vilma’s pending defamation lawsuit against Commissioner Roger Goodell, the league has opted to keep in its back pocket for now any “smoking gun” evidence that would establish conclusively that Vilma offered $10,000 to anyone who knocked Brett Favre or Kurt Warner out of playoff games in January 2010, Ginsberg believes the league has chosen not to use any raw evidence of guilt at the Monday appeal hearings because it has no raw evidence of guilt.
“That’s because there are no credible witnesses who could substantiate the Commissioner’s allegations,” Ginsberg said.
And that’s ultimately what Goodell and the NFL need. If Vilma truly offered to pay $10,000 to anyone for injuries to be inflicted on Favre, Warner, or any other opponent, someone presumably heard Vilma say it. If the NFL doesn’t produce that person to testify at Monday’s hearing, how can Vilma ever obtain anything remotely resembling a fair opportunity to prove his innocence? Coupled with the league’s likely refusal to make available coaches who would have been in the room when Vilma said what he said — coaches who possibly would say “I never heard Vilma said that” — the process becomes a sham.
Instead of giving the players a chance to get to the truth, the league seems to be relying on the same “take our word for it” approach that has characterized its entire handling of the pay-for-performance/bounty scandal. It’s an approach that was launched the moment the league duped the media on March 2 into thinking there had to be conclusive proof of a bounty system, and that has lasted through each subsequent effort not to share evidence but to characterize and/or summarize it in a way that was skewed toward the league’s desire to hammer the Saints for using bounties, presumably to serve as the ultimate warning for any other players or coaches who may be tempted to use bounties in the future.
Though a truncated appeal hearing makes plenty of sense when there’s no dispute about what a player did and the only issue is the extent of his punishment, something far more detailed is necessary where, as in this case, the suspended players sharply disagree with the serious allegations made against them. For a league that is so concerned about public confidence in the integrity of the game, the NFL should at least be a little concerned about public confidence in the integrity of the league.
RE: Saints Bounty Thread - AsylumGuido - 06-16-2012 03:27 PM
(06-16-2012 12:25 PM)pauliwood Wrote: I started a Bucs thread. it's around here somewhere. it only got a handful of replies. It's possibly on page 2.
I commented in that thread myself.
RE: Saints Bounty Thread - Beef - 06-16-2012 04:09 PM
(06-16-2012 03:26 PM)AsylumGuido Wrote: But, the fact is that the Saints did not target players for injury as Goodell claimed and STILL, to date, no evidence presented has shown that they did what they are accused of doing.
Yes they did and yes it has. Continuing to say the same damn bullshit over and over again here is useless. You're wrong and you're being an obnoxious troll for doing it.
RE: Saints Bounty Thread - AsylumGuido - 06-16-2012 04:32 PM
(06-16-2012 04:09 PM)Beef Wrote: Yes they did and yes it has. Continuing to say the same damn bullshit over and over again here is useless. You're wrong and you're being an obnoxious troll for doing it.
Sorry, but they have not. Goodell said that the Saints had targeted specific players for injury and that they ran a bounty system that paid for intentional injuries to opposing players. There has still been ZERO evidence of any of that, including what was released yesterday as EVERYTHING the league has to present in the appeals. And why is that? Because it never happened!
It is you that are wrong and you would not change your mind even if Goodell resigned and admitted to the whole bounty crap being the sham that it is.
The media has become aware that they were made fools of by believing everything that Goodell claimed back on March 2nd. Anyone still falling for that story is choosing to remain a fool. Present company hopefully not included.
RE: Saints Bounty Thread - AsylumGuido - 06-16-2012 04:42 PM
If NFL is using Times-Picayune article as evidence, then its case against New Orleans Saints is in bad shape
Mike Triplett, The Times-Picayune
In an extremely disappointing - if not unexpected - turn of events Friday, the NFL didn't shed much light on its evidence against the suspended New Orleans Saints players for their alleged roles in a bounty program. Colleague James Varney is covering the news today, so read here and check back with nola.com/saints for further details.
According to sources we've talked to, the NFL didn't provide the accused players with any direct evidence of their intent to injure other players, payments received for injuring players, the existence of a "bounty program," evidence that linebacker Jonathan Vilma offered a bounty on quarterbacks Brett Favre or Kurt Warner or evidence that defensive tackle Anthony Hargrove lied to investigators, among other crimes for which they've been severely punished.
As Varney pointed out, it's important to keep in mind that the NFL did not have to furnish all of its evidence today - just what it plans to use during the players' appeal hearing with commissioner Roger Goodell on Monday.
So does that mean the NFL kept all its "damning evidence" to itself? Or does that mean the NFL doesn't have much damning evidence? Either way, it's a disturbing sign that the league apparently feels like it doesn't have to prove its case or justify its decisions to anybody.
Even more disturbing - and awfully ironic - is that part of the evidence the NFL did share with players was a column I wrote last week after talking with linebacker Scott Shanle. For one thing, that article was written well after the league handed out its punishments, so it shouldn't have had any bearing on the punishments handed out by the league (the same goes for a recent essay written by filmmaker Sean Pamphilon that the NFL included Friday).
For another thing, Shanle didn't confirm the existence of any bounty program, any specific bounties or any intent to injure opponents. And in that column, I stressed that the NFL needs to be more forthcoming with its evidence on the Saints because, "it sure does seem like the NFL has painted their actions to be much worse than they really were. And if that's not true, then the NFL should do a better job of proving its point."
Shanle was open about the fact that the Saints had a pay-for-performance program in place, which is illegal. He also confirmed that big, legal hits were rewarded as part of that program, including ones that led to opponents' injuries. And he confirmed that sometimes those types of hits were referred to as cart-offs and knockouts, "in Gregg's language," referring to fiery former defensive coordinator Gregg Williams.
However, Shanle stressed that players didn't take Williams' words literally, and he insisted that the NFL's claims have been blown way out of proportion. I wholeheartedly agree.
Also ironic is that later in that Shanle article, I stressed that we can't just take the NFL's word on these allegations because we already caught them lying about the details of Hargrove's signed declaration to the league earlier this year.
So now, apparently, the NFL is asking both the players and the public to just take their word for it again. And clearly that is not being received well.
RE: Saints Bounty Thread - Beef - 06-16-2012 05:12 PM
I'm done playing your stupid game. There's been plenty of evidence provided. Logical inferences and common sense application of a bunch of things that have been released are enough proof. You just refuse to acknowledge anything... ANYTHING, even when it's obvious about it's inference or hell, what it directly states. You've twisted clear language even just to suit your agenda of denial. You can't even accept what the term "cart-off" means for fuck sakes.
"$1000 for a cart-off isn't about injuries and doesn't prove anything!!!" "Hargove is being told to play dumb about something that didn't exist!!" "Shanle is a jaded 2nd stringer and he said it's all just blown out of proportion, so that means no bounties existed!!" "Williams video is just a motivational speach!!" "Mary-Jo White is lieing, the fact she is an independant and her and her entire firm's reputation is at stake means nothing!!" "Goodell is lieing and simply making an example of the Saints to help the owners against their class-action suit on head injuries. The fact it's a devistating blow to the image of the league and it could spell the end of his job, a giant lawsuit, and possibly cost the league 100x more if they are in fact lieing and making everything up, NONE OF THAT MATTERS!!" "This will all be blown over in a couple weeks!!" "My uncle's best friend who knows this reporter who overheard someone on the inside say All is well and give a thumbs up said so!!"
Yeah, whatever you say chief. You're hopeless and I'm done with your batshit crazy nonsense. You really need to get lost and stop harassing us.
RE: Saints Bounty Thread - AsylumGuido - 06-16-2012 05:23 PM
(06-16-2012 05:12 PM)Beef Wrote: I'm done playing your stupid game. There's been plenty of evidence provided. Logical inferences and common sense application of a bunch of things that have been released are enough proof. You just refuse to acknowledge anything... ANYTHING, even when it's obvious about it's inference or hell, what it directly states. You've twisted clear language even just to suit your agenda of denial. You can't even accept what the term "cart-off" means for fuck sakes.
Well I am happy to hear that considering you continue to believe every fairy tale you've been fed concerning this whole matter. It's best if you move on. I'll continue to share the true story as it continues to erode Goodell's claims on a regular basis.
RE: Saints Bounty Thread - JDaveG - 06-16-2012 08:00 PM
Guido, you are the most obnoxious, irritating dude I've come across in quite some time. Seriously, give it a rest.
And the rest of you, quit arguing with him. If he's the only one talking in this thread and he keeps bumping it to the top all the time, my guess is the problem will take care of itself right quick. Either he'll get tired of talking to himself or (more likely) he'll go on a SPAM tirade and get himself banned. Either way, I'm done with it. It's a waste of time and it's really making this board a drag. That's my fault first and foremost for clicking this thread, so I'm going to try and rectify that behavior.
RE: Saints Bounty Thread - Drathdon - 06-16-2012 09:04 PM
Sorry, I enjoy watching the Aints implode, and replying to see just how delusional Guido will get. It's to one thread guys. Make others and ignore this one if it gets to you.
Guido - EVERY defense lawyer will look right at a smoking gun in their clients hand and claim it doesn't mean anything. Quit using Vilma's lawyer's quotes as "proof" of their being no evidence. You are just ignoring it like he is.
Those 200 pages are evidence enough to prove what the league wants to prove... that they have the right to suspend these players. They do not need to drag out all the dirty laundry just to please you or the players.
You are only parroting the words of the defense. Of course you and they will claim no evidence... they always will whether there are 200 pages or 2000. It's what "defense" means - to deny the opposition's claims.
It is the players trying to use the media to paint a new picture here. The NFL has their proof, has made their judgment, and wants to move on. The players would be smart to do the same.
The players KNOW they are guilty. They just want to push the issue whether you can prove it or not. Ray Lewis got off. So did OJ (once) because of the inability to "prove without a shadow of doubt" their guilt. Problem is, this is not a courtroom, but a business decision not held to the same standards. Would Vilma get convicted of this in court? Probably not. Should he get suspended for a year by the NFL for it? Yep!