Tags vacates suspensions

[Mr. WEO]

1) you know i agree that the NFLPA has no one to blame but themselves for agreeing to the terms. it was an amateur style mistake really. embarassing on their leaderships part.

 

2) the legal hits i support 100% and many of those were legal. the illegal hits have penalties in the form of fines, flags, and suspensions. the sytem the saints had in place penalized illegal hits additionally even, and when bobby mccray picked up a flag in that game he was taken out and CHEWED out on the sidelines (i was at the game and saw it). lets not act like they went leaps and bounds beyond hard physical football - which is exactly what you want out of any defense. pressure the qb, rattle him and he will make mistakes. ESPECIALLY favre. every game plan for the last decade against favre read "hit favre early and often"

 

I've never seen a QB take a beating like that before. And fines and penalties are all well and good--they are meant to deter a player from taking a cheap shot next time. But the Saints were operating a system where such hits were being planned with malice aforethought, so to speak.

 

The players had little leverage on this issue. They gave up a lot of authority to the commissioner's office to get a deal done. But although they agreed to this "unbalanced" relationship that doesn't necessarily mean that they agree with all the inconsistent and unfair decisions stemming from their weak position. In this case Vilma fought against the stronghold of the commissioner's office, and he won. The system was stacked against him, yet he still won. What does that say about RG,s judgment?.

 

 

 

 

 

Let's not be naive here. Do you really believe that the behavior of the Saints' players was much different from how players on other teams behaved? Roger Goodell elevated this "tawdry" affair to a level that made it seem as if it rose to a historically bad level. Taglabue reviewed all the evidence. His conclusion is that the players who acted so egregiously bad should have no punishment. What the hell? The league fines players because their socks don't conform to the rules. But in this case that supposedly rose to a historical level the arbitrator determines that the players should suffer no sanctions.The Goodell judgment was a colossal sham. Tags was brought in to clean the mess. And he did.

 

RG's judgment was flawed perhaps when he didn't vet his plan more fully with others, although there is no doubt the owners knew of his plan for punishment before he announced it.

 

Tags sort of cleaned things up. But other than Fujita, he reaffirmed Goodell's findings--just not his punishment. It really doesn't matter what I think of other teams doing this. But the Saints were investigated. Their coaching staff was found fully culpabable by Tags (and Goodell) of running a system that was unique. Obviously the players are guilty of carrying out this system. Tags said as much. He indicates Vilma is guilty of offering bounty money.

 

This is not about socks. It's about players seeking to go outside of "good clean football" to actually injure their colleagues for extra cash and obviously for a competitive advantage. I can't salute that. Vilma will lose his suit and will be fully exposed as a liar to those who still believe he is innocent of what the NFL charged him with.

 

The most cynical party here is the NFLPA, who will promote class action suits against the league for a litany of vague and broad maladies suffered by countless players for simply playing the game--yet they have not a single word to say against the system highlighted by the Saints. They are the sham.

[NoSaint]

 

 

I've never seen a QB take a beating like that before. And fines and penalties are all well and good--they are meant to deter a player from taking a cheap shot next time. But the Saints were operating a system where such hits were being planned with malice aforethought, so to speak.

 

 

 

RG's judgment was flawed perhaps when he didn't vet his plan more fully with others, although there is no doubt the owners knew of his plan for punishment before he announced it.

 

Tags sort of cleaned things up. But other than Fujita, he reaffirmed Goodell's findings--just not his punishment. It really doesn't matter what I think of other teams doing this. But the Saints were investigated. Their coaching staff was found fully culpabable by Tags (and Goodell) of running a system that was unique. Obviously the players are guilty of carrying out this system. Tags said as much. He indicates Vilma is guilty of offering bounty money.

 

This is not about socks. It's about players seeking to go outside of "good clean football" to actually injure their colleagues for extra cash and obviously for a competitive advantage. I can't salute that. Vilma will lose his suit and will be fully exposed as a liar to those who still believe he is innocent of what the NFL charged him with.

 

The most cynical party here is the NFLPA, who will promote class action suits against the league for a litany of vague and broad maladies suffered by countless players for simply playing the game--yet they have not a single word to say against the system highlighted by the Saints. They are the sham.

 

Hargrove and McCray were the only two fines from what I recall. McCray was playing reckless and as I said was benched for a good stretch after his hit on favre and coaches chewed him out for it on the sideline . Fines were also levied by the saints for flags so I'm not sure why you insis that it was to get guys to play dirty.

 

Leaks of the transcripts from the appeal are starting. I've seen cerullo quoted as wanting to take down joe vitt cause MC was fired for lying but joe vitt had lied before and still had a job- that was his primary motivation, revenge on vitt. MC also says the nfl misrepresented his statements, and Gregg says no actual money was ever put in the pool or favre yet alone paid out. Williams now saying he had nothing to do with it that vitt came up with it, ran it and refused to stop it when told by Gregg to do so (another direct contradiction to earlier statements). Williams referred to the case as "somewhat of a witch hunt." He said he wants to coach in the NFL again, and "took responsibility so that nobody else had to," and that Vilma has "been made a scapegoat." That Vilma said something about it but they frequently spoke in hyperbole and bold terms and he'd never seen money ever actually collected or paid for any injuries. Another direct contradiction to MCs story. But then again MC did have a dirty napkin with "favre out Vilma 10k" scribbled on it saved from over 2 years earlier so I suppose that's enough proof.

 

What say you to this disaster unfolding Weo? Think there's a reason the nfl is trying to make this go away without releasing anything?

 

I also enjoy vitt calling cerullo an idiot and liar

 

And tags making a joke about how he thought coffee would get him through the meeting but it looked like he'd need a Bloody Mary..... Apparently tags really got what it felt like to be in N.O. with all this going on.

 

And goodell has now opened the door on Sean Peyton returning before the Super Bowl - I get the feeling this appeal process went disastrously behind closed doors.

 

Ha! Just saw some more quotes - vitt offered to take a lie detector and pledged to sue cerullo over all this in the meeting. I wish we could get video highlights of this.

Edited December 13, 2012 by NoSaint

[JohnC]

I've never seen a QB take a beating like that before. And fines and penalties are all well and good--they are meant to deter a player from taking a cheap shot next time. But the Saints were operating a system where such hits were being planned with malice aforethought, so to speak.

 

 

 

RG's judgment was flawed perhaps when he didn't vet his plan more fully with others, although there is no doubt the owners knew of his plan for punishment before he announced it.

 

Tags sort of cleaned things up. But other than Fujita, he reaffirmed Goodell's findings--just not his punishment. It really doesn't matter what I think of other teams doing this. But the Saints were investigated. Their coaching staff was found fully culpabable by Tags (and Goodell) of running a system that was unique. Obviously the players are guilty of carrying out this system. Tags said as much. He indicates Vilma is guilty of offering bounty money.

 

This is not about socks. It's about players seeking to go outside of "good clean football" to actually injure their colleagues for extra cash and obviously for a competitive advantage. I can't salute that. Vilma will lose his suit and will be fully exposed as a liar to those who still believe he is innocent of what the NFL charged him with.

 

The most cynical party here is the NFLPA, who will promote class action suits against the league for a litany of vague and broad maladies suffered by countless players for simply playing the game--yet they have not a single word to say against the system highlighted by the Saints. They are the sham.

 

Your position on this called scandal that was elevated by RG to the point that it was portrayed as threatening to the institution of the NFL makes little sense. The end result is that the arbitrator selected by RG decided that the players merited no punishment. How can that be? It was a RG created sham that ultimately ended up with a former commissioner writing a decision that contorted himself into a pretzel for the main goal of getting the league out of this self made fiasco.

 

RG's judgment was flawed perhaps when he didn't vet his plan more fully with others,

 

That's like saying Al Capone is a crook. You are stating the obvious! Maybe if he was a little less arrogant he would have asked people with common sense and better judgment for some wise feedback before making a ruling that ultimately others had to dig him out of.

Edited December 13, 2012 by JohnC

[dave mcbride]

he only had 3 fined hits over 2 seasons, not in one game. and the last one was far from vicious. it was clear hed get fined but it was very obviously just trying to separate the ball in a bam-bam kind of play that he happened to catch him high. could happen to any player. Unless ive completely missed something.

 

i think your broad based anger is getting in the way of seeing situations related to the topic clearly. that and the fact that the 3 players youve called out by name all went to the U, which youve also called out a strong distaste for leads me to believe you are a bit agenda driven here.

 

Actually, it's not really about the U despite how it may appear. That school hasn't really been relevant for some time, so I don't have any sort of special animus towards it. As for Reed, I watched the game where he had the three vicious hits, flags or no. I know what I saw, and I saw a guy trying to injure people. I could name many others -- Jason Babin, Laron Landry, Haynesworth, Suh, etc. etc. Those guys and many others deliberately try to injure players and suffer no real consequences. Hell, I wouldn't have been opposed to Brooks being tossed from the game after his blatant cheap shot on Cecil Shorts.

 

Maybe I should stick to baseball, which is a sport I increasingly prefer the older I get.

Edited December 13, 2012 by dave mcbride

[NoSaint]

 

 

Actually, it's not really about the U despite how it may appear. That school hasn't really been relevant for some time, so I don't have any sort of special animus towards it. As for Reed, I watched the game where he had the three vicious hits, flags or no. I know what I saw, and I saw a guy trying to injure people. I could name many others -- Jason Babin, Laron Landry, Haynesworth, Suh, etc. etc. Those guys and many others deliberately try to injure players and suffer no real consequences. Hell, I wouldn't have been opposed to Brooks being tossed from the game after his blatant cheap shot on Cecil Shorts.

 

Maybe I should stick to baseball, which is a sport I increasingly prefer the older I get.

 

It's a fast game. He's a moving body hitting a moving target - with split second adjustments or guesses its easy to make an illegal hit totally unintentionally. I honestly don't recall even 2 yet alone 3 bad hits in that game and even the one wasn't terribly offensive.

 

Heck, he only even made two tackles all night. I know that doesn't tell the whole story but I don't think he belongs in the suh, Landry, haynseworth discussion. While his job is to put a hurt on the other team (which I get the mixed emotion of that given what we're learning) reed seems to be very respected among other players, and like I said has only had 3 hits the nfl has deemed fine worthy in his last 2 seasons. When you think about how often he is hitting guys in defenseless positions that's really not that bad.

[Mr. WEO]

 

Leaks of the transcripts from the appeal are starting. I've seen cerullo quoted as wanting to take down joe vitt cause MC was fired for lying but joe vitt had lied before and still had a job- that was his primary motivation, revenge on vitt. MC also says the nfl misrepresented his statements, and Gregg says no actual money was ever put in the pool or favre yet alone paid out. Williams now saying he had nothing to do with it that vitt came up with it, ran it and refused to stop it when told by Gregg to do so (another direct contradiction to earlier statements). Williams referred to the case as "somewhat of a witch hunt." He said he wants to coach in the NFL again, and "took responsibility so that nobody else had to," and that Vilma has "been made a scapegoat." That Vilma said something about it but they frequently spoke in hyperbole and bold terms and he'd never seen money ever actually collected or paid for any injuries. Another direct contradiction to MCs story. But then again MC did have a dirty napkin with "favre out Vilma 10k" scribbled on it saved from over 2 years earlier so I suppose that's enough proof.

 

What say you to this disaster unfolding Weo? Think there's a reason the nfl is trying to make this go away without releasing anything?

 

I also enjoy vitt calling cerullo an idiot and liar

 

And tags making a joke about how he thought coffee would get him through the meeting but it looked like he'd need a Bloody Mary..... Apparently tags really got what it felt like to be in N.O. with all this going on.

 

And goodell has now opened the door on Sean Peyton returning before the Super Bowl - I get the feeling this appeal process went disastrously behind closed doors.

 

Ha! Just saw some more quotes - vitt offered to take a lie detector and pledged to sue cerullo over all this in the meeting. I wish we could get video highlights of this.

 

Williams blames Vitt. Vitt blames Cerullo and calls him an idiot. Yeah, that clears it up. Tags obviously didn't agree with Williams's new "none of this ever happened" claim:

 

"Making matters far more serious – as well as challenging for Commissioner Goodell and League investigators – Saints' coaches and managers led a deliberate, unprecedented and effective effort to obstruct the NFL's investigation into the program and the alleged bounty,"

 

And it's probably more than a 'note on a napkin".

 

"Having reviewed the testimony very carefully, including documentary evidence that is at the center of the conflict, and having assessed the credibility of the four central witnesses on these matters, I find there is more than enough evidence to support Commissioner Goodell's findings that Mr. Vilma offered such a bounty (on then-Minnesota Vikings quarterback Brett Favre),"

 

Rgarding the witnesses: "Ginsberg said Tagliabue did a good job in the appeals hearing that included testimony from Williams and whistleblower Mike Cerrulo, although Tagliabue said in his ruling that "neither was shown to be not credible on the specific issue of whether Vilma offered a bounty on Favre."

 

 

Your position on this called scandal that was elevated by RG to the point that it was portrayed as threatening to the institution of the NFL makes little sense. The end result is that the arbitrator selected by RG decided that the players merited no punishment. How can that be? It was a RG created sham that ultimately ended up with a former commissioner writing a decision that contorted himself into a pretzel for the main goal of getting the league out of this self made fiasco.

 

 

 

That's like saying Al Capone is a crook. You are stating the obvious! Maybe if he was a little less arrogant he would have asked people with common sense and better judgment for some wise feedback before making a ruling that ultimately others had to dig him out of.

 

The bolded portion is absolutely incorrect. He said they can be punished by fines as the discretion of Goodell. He ruled they shoulden't be suspended.

 

As you can see above, as have others who have reviewed the evidence, Tags concluded that Vilma did offer money for a bounty on Favre. If you're argument is that such an act is never punishable by suspension and therefore Goodell is in the wrong--then just say so.

 

At this point you can't continue to argue Vilma did nothing wrong and his noble fight to clear his name must be supported by the public. He's dirty. He got busted. His initial sentence was commuted by the ex-governor. Changing the punishment does not change the verdict.

[JohnC]

Williams blames Vitt. Vitt blames Cerullo and calls him an idiot. Yeah, that clears it up. Tags obviously didn't agree with Williams's new "none of this ever happened" claim:

 

"Making matters far more serious – as well as challenging for Commissioner Goodell and League investigators – Saints' coaches and managers led a deliberate, unprecedented and effective effort to obstruct the NFL's investigation into the program and the alleged bounty,"

 

And it's probably more than a 'note on a napkin".

 

"Having reviewed the testimony very carefully, including documentary evidence that is at the center of the conflict, and having assessed the credibility of the four central witnesses on these matters, I find there is more than enough evidence to support Commissioner Goodell's findings that Mr. Vilma offered such a bounty (on then-Minnesota Vikings quarterback Brett Favre),"

 

Rgarding the witnesses: "Ginsberg said Tagliabue did a good job in the appeals hearing that included testimony from Williams and whistleblower Mike Cerrulo, although Tagliabue said in his ruling that "neither was shown to be not credible on the specific issue of whether Vilma offered a bounty on Favre."

 

 

 

 

The bolded portion is absolutely incorrect. He said they can be punished by fines as the discretion of Goodell. He ruled they shoulden't be suspended.

 

As you can see above, as have others who have reviewed the evidence, Tags concluded that Vilma did offer money for a bounty on Favre. If you're argument is that such an act is never punishable by suspension and therefore Goodell is in the wrong--then just say so.

 

At this point you can't continue to argue Vilma did nothing wrong and his noble fight to clear his name must be supported by the public. He's dirty. He got busted. His initial sentence was commuted by the ex-governor. Changing the punishment does not change the verdict.

 

You are distorting what I have stated. You haven't read my posts very carefully. Vilma and the other players are no angels. That is understood. This fiasco created by RG was made out to be at a level of historic proportions. The transgressions were never at the ominous and momentous level that RG made it out to be.

 

Tags wrote a ruling that anyone using common sense recognizes that he repudiated the rulings of RG. Instead of receiving career threatening punishments for the players the punishments were basically rescinded. The way Tags wrote his ruling he allowed for some face saving commentary for RG. What most people realize (not you) is that Tags purpose in his intervention (hired by RG) was to end the unending fiasco created by RG so it wouldn't end up in an outside court. Tags was acting on behalf of the interest of the league, not the players.

 

What you fail to acknowledge is that Tags realized that the information that RG had was very contradictory. RG even recognized that his evidence was inconclusive and inconsistent. How do I know that? Because Goodell was adamant in not showing Vilma and the other players all the information that he had. He was only willing to show selected material. Nothing more. The reason might not be obvious to you but it is to me.

 

The bottom line is that Vilma received no punishment for a case that the powerful commissioner portrayed as historical in scope. Players who dance in the end zone after a TD receive greater punishment than what Vilma ultimately received. So much for the NFL being imperiled by renegade players!

Edited December 13, 2012 by JohnC

[NoSaint]

 

 

Williams blames Vitt. Vitt blames Cerullo and calls him an idiot. Yeah, that clears it up. Tags obviously didn't agree with Williams's new "none of this ever happened" claim:

 

"Making matters far more serious – as well as challenging for Commissioner Goodell and League investigators – Saints' coaches and managers led a deliberate, unprecedented and effective effort to obstruct the NFL's investigation into the program and the alleged bounty,"

 

And it's probably more than a 'note on a napkin".

 

"Having reviewed the testimony very carefully, including documentary evidence that is at the center of the conflict, and having assessed the credibility of the four central witnesses on these matters, I find there is more than enough evidence to support Commissioner Goodell's findings that Mr. Vilma offered such a bounty (on then-Minnesota Vikings quarterback Brett Favre),"

 

Rgarding the witnesses: "Ginsberg said Tagliabue did a good job in the appeals hearing that included testimony from Williams and whistleblower Mike Cerrulo, although Tagliabue said in his ruling that "neither was shown to be not credible on the specific issue of whether Vilma offered a bounty on Favre."

 

 

 

it seems you are still going with the "they must have a smoking gun somewhere" approach. i think theyve burned through that goodwill and either they put it out there or they let it sit as accusations.

 

Cerullo (a disgruntled ex employee fired for fabricating elaborate stories) says he did it to get back at vitt. He also says his statements were massaged a bit by the nfl. Cerullo claims different things than williams (who seems to be essentially saying, ill say whatever you want as long as it doesnt implicate me too badly), but williams does say he thinks that vilmas being made a scapegoat of and that part is a witch hunt.

 

truly the ONLY thing they have shared that backs up 10k on favre is Cerullos statement, and a dirty two year old cocktail napkin. thats a bit flimsy.

 

did they lie about all kinds of stuff in the process? Im sure they didnt say to the league "oh yea were breaking the rules but everyone else is doing it." but does that lying end up warranting 2 high draft picks, million plus in fines and coach/gm suspensions totaling 46 games? Dear. Lord.

 

the tags is just saying that this one was messed up, but i need to find a way to put it behind us. i cant undo the suspensions that already happened. i can either come up with a justification for the LARGEST ORGANIZATIONAL PENALTY IN THE HISTORY OF THE SPORT or I can come up with reperations and say it was a total flub. Saying "they lied a whole lot, and what we found was generally true, but we wont enforce these punishments" was the easiest way out.

 

the organization deserved some punishment, for sure, but even with the player punishment wiped out - its pretty extreme.

 

 

 

You are distorting what I have stated. You haven't read my posts very carefully. Vilma and the other players are no angels. That is understood. This fiasco created by RG was made out to be at a level of historic proportions. The transgressions were never at the ominous and momentous level that RG made it out to be.

 

Tags wrote a ruling that anyone using common sense recognizes that he repudiated the rulings of RG. Instead of receiving a career threatening punishments for the players the punishments were basically rescinded. The way Tags wrote his ruling he allowed for some face saving commentary for RG. What most people realize (not you) is that Tags purpose in his intervention (hired by RG) was to end the unending fiasco created by RG so it wouldn't end up in an outside court. Tags was acting on behalf of the interest of the league, not the players.

 

What you fail to acknowledge is that Tags realized that the information that RG had was very contradictory. RG even recognized that his evidence was inconclusive and inconsistent. How do I know that? Because Goodell was adamant in not showing Vilma and the other players all the information that he had. He was only willing to show selected material. Nothing more. The reason might not be obvious to you but it is to me.

 

The bottom line is that Vilma received no punishment for a case that the powerful commissioner portrayed as historical in scope. Players who dance in the end zone after a TD receive greater punishment than what Vilma ultimately received. So much for the NFL being imperiled by renegade players!

 

i generally agree - they did something wrong - but not worst ever type of wrong. whats amazing is that even the stuff that has come out is contradictory and poorly sourced. i can only imagine what smoking guns arent worthy of public scrutiny in this.

 

[JohnC]

i generally agree - they did something wrong - but not worst ever type of wrong. whats amazing is that even the stuff that has come out is contradictory and poorly sourced. i can only imagine what smoking guns arent worthy of public scrutiny in this.

 

RG's response to Vilma's request to see the evidence is that he will selectively choose what evidence to reveal to him. That is preposterous! The league has an army of lawyers working for it. They knew that that absurd position was untenable if an outside authority, the courts, got involved. Hence, Tags to the rescue to clean up the mess. The problem is that Vilma and his lawyers aren't satisfied.

Edited December 13, 2012 by JohnC

[NoSaint]

 

 

RG's response to Vilma's request to see the evidence is that he will selectively choose what evidence to reveal to him. That is preposterous! The league has an army of lawyers working for it. They knew that that absurd position was untenable if an outside authority, the courts, got involved. Hence, Tags to the rescue to clean up the mess. The problem is that Vilma and his lawyers aren't satisfied.

 

i enjoy that vilma is sticking to his guns. hes had a few offers on the table that had "and you will drop the lawsuit" and hes declined them all. they even tried to get him to do it in exchange for letting tags hear the case

[Mr. WEO]

You are distorting what I have stated. You haven't read my posts very carefully. Vilma and the other players are no angels. That is understood. This fiasco created by RG was made out to be at a level of historic proportions. The transgressions were never at the ominous and momentous level that RG made it out to be.

 

Tags wrote a ruling that anyone using common sense recognizes that he repudiated the rulings of RG. Instead of receiving career threatening punishments for the players the punishments were basically rescinded. The way Tags wrote his ruling he allowed for some face saving commentary for RG. What most people realize (not you) is that Tags purpose in his intervention (hired by RG) was to end the unending fiasco created by RG so it wouldn't end up in an outside court. Tags was acting on behalf of the interest of the league, not the players.

 

What you fail to acknowledge is that Tags realized that the information that RG had was very contradictory. RG even recognized that his evidence was inconclusive and inconsistent. How do I know that? Because Goodell was adamant in not showing Vilma and the other players all the information that he had. He was only willing to show selected material. Nothing more. The reason might not be obvious to you but it is to me.

 

The bottom line is that Vilma received no punishment for a case that the powerful commissioner portrayed as historical in scope. Players who dance in the end zone after a TD receive greater punishment than what Vilma ultimately received. So much for the NFL being imperiled by renegade players!

 

We can quibble about the dramatic description of "historical in scope", and I certainly understand the motivation of everyone in bringing in Tags to rule on this (who, by the way has been praised by the NFLPA, Vilma's lawyer--everyone except....Goodell, really) and its "face saving" nature for Goodell. All of that is plain to see.

 

But none of this changes the fact that Tagliabu has concurred with all of Goodell's findings except in the case of Fujita. Specifically, he syas there is enough evidence to conclude that Vilma is guilty of offering a bounty for Favre (in other words, that Vilma is lying). This is also not negated by the punishent Goodell chose to hand out. As the arbitrator before him, Tags is telling Goodell he may punish these guys, but he may not suspend them.

 

I'm pretty sure you understand this. If you want to salute a guy like Vilma who has not been exonerated in any way by Tagliabu (who feels Vilma is guilty of the charge) then that is your choice. If Tagliabu had instead concluded (as he did with Fujita) that there was no basis to accuse Vilma of putting a bounty on a QB, then I would agree with you 100%. But he didn't--he did the opposite.

[NoSaint]

 

 

We can quibble about the dramatic description of "historical in scope", and I certainly understand the motivation of everyone in bringing in Tags to rule on this (who, by the way has been praised by the NFLPA, Vilma's lawyer--everyone except....Goodell, really) and its "face saving" nature for Goodell. All of that is plain to see.

 

But none of this changes the fact that Tagliabu has concurred with all of Goodell's findings except in the case of Fujita. Specifically, he syas there is enough evidence to conclude that Vilma is guilty of offering a bounty for Favre (in other words, that Vilma is lying). This is also not negated by the punishent Goodell chose to hand out. As the arbitrator before him, Tags is telling Goodell he may punish these guys, but he may not suspend them.

 

I'm pretty sure you understand this. If you want to salute a guy like Vilma who has not been exonerated in any way by Tagliabu (who feels Vilma is guilty of the charge) then that is your choice. If Tagliabu had instead concluded (as he did with Fujita) that there was no basis to accuse Vilma of putting a bounty on a QB, then I would agree with you 100%. But he didn't--he did the opposite.

 

despite the only proof being one of the accusers saying "vilma was a scapegoat" and that no money was ever collected or paid, and the other (who was fired for making up big fantastical lying stories to explain his disappearing acts with the saints) being the only two on record accusing him of this. while 10+ coaches and players in the room that evening all have testified it never happened.

 

im still baffled how you still give the league the benefit of the doubt, and accept their rulings as hard fact, and not possibly true accusations.

[CarolinaBill]

There's still the issue of compensation. Tags findings indicated that fines were appropriate for players, not suspensions, so how much $$$ in game checks were lost during these wrongful suspensions. Plus, in the case of Hargrove, he's a UFA, and its very likely that he could take action against Goodell under the premise that the bogus suspension has significantly impacted his financial future. He lost a year of his career.

[NoSaint]

There's still the issue of compensation. Tags findings indicated that fines were appropriate for players, not suspensions, so how much $$$ in game checks were lost during these wrongful suspensions. Plus, in the case of Hargrove, he's a UFA, and its very likely that he could take action against Goodell under the premise that the bogus suspension has significantly impacted his financial future. He lost a year of his career.

 

players havent missed games yet. thats why it was easy to "let them off the hook" here. you might see some fines, but nothing astronomical would be my guess. i believe they said wed know the final call on tuesday of next week.

[Mr. WEO]

despite the only proof being one of the accusers saying "vilma was a scapegoat" and that no money was ever collected or paid, and the other (who was fired for making up big fantastical lying stories to explain his disappearing acts with the saints) being the only two on record accusing him of this. while 10+ coaches and players in the room that evening all have testified it never happened.

 

im still baffled how you still give the league the benefit of the doubt, and accept their rulings as hard fact, and not possibly true accusations.

 

I don't know the "hard facts"--none of us do. But Tags (and others) have reviewed what the league has and has concluded the commish was right about Vilma.

 

You don't really think 10 or even a single player would admit to paying money to have another player carted off the the emergency department, do you? And the fact that a coaching staff is now claiming they were misquoted or contradicting what they may have said before they were suspended (which would have been the time to claim your innocense, as opposed to now...) is hardly surprising, given that they sense blood in the water for Goodell and they want their jobs back.

 

players havent missed games yet. thats why it was easy to "let them off the hook" here. you might see some fines, but nothing astronomical would be my guess. i believe they said wed know the final call on tuesday of next week.

 

Hard to believe people think these guys actually missed games due to this.

[NoSaint]

Ha - now going through more of cerullos statements on this - he previously claims (in his sworn affidavit) to have personally handled and collected the money from JV, and in the most recent he says he never touched any cash and just recorded it on paper. thats a pretty big discrepancy from a guy that allegedly saved a cocktail napkin for 2 years to exploit this event.

Edited December 13, 2012 by NoSaint

[Mr. WEO]

Ha - now going through more of cerullos statements on this - he previously claims (in his sworn affidavit) to have personally handled and collected the money from JV, and in the most recent he says he never touched any cash and just recorded it on paper. thats a pretty big discrepancy from a guy that allegedly saved a cocktail napkin for 2 years to exploit this event.

 

We'll know all during testimony at Vilma's trial, I guess.

 

I find this stuff fascinating though. Beats endless threads about "Spiller's wind".......

[NoSaint]

 

 

We'll know all during testimony at Vilma's trial, I guess.

 

I find this stuff fascinating though. Beats endless threads about "Spiller's wind".......

 

It'll be interesting if he does keep pushing. The fact that it could be so mishandled, even if the nfl did actually get the end narrative right is just.... Astonishing. They very well might've (which gets me killed when I say it in N.O.) but its been such an absolute disaster in public that..... I just don't know.

 

I would pay to watch the vitt cerullo and Williams interviews at this point. As a season ticket holder that's been dragged through a terrible season, I think the nfl should send a copy on over to me.

[JohnC]

I would pay to watch the vitt cerullo and Williams interviews at this point. As a season ticket holder that's been dragged through a terrible season, I think the nfl should send a copy on over to me.

 

If you get a copy of the transcripts you can be sure that they will be redacted more than a CIA enhanced interrogation session recording in Guantanamo Bay.

 

In general I like Roger Goodell, even realizing that he works primarily for the owners. In this bounty saga the mistake he made was not taking his time to consult with a variety of people before making a determination. I feel that he was genuinely outraged at what he thought was going on and became a bull on a rampage. The source of his anger probably had to do with the fact that the Saints' organization was warned about the questionable behavior. When it didn't stop he was determined to hammer everyone in sight. There is an appropriate time to be angry and also an appropriate time to be judicious. These two different qualities shouldn't be mixed together.

[NoSaint]

 

 

If you get a copy of the transcripts you can be sure that they will be redacted more than a CIA enhanced interrogation session recording in Guantanamo Bay.

 

In general I like Roger Goodell, even realizing that he works primarily for the owners. In this bounty saga the mistake he made was not taking his time to consult with a variety of people before making a determination. I feel that he was genuinely outraged at what he thought was going on and became a bull on a rampage. The source of his anger probably had to do with the fact that the Saints' organization was warned about the questionable behavior. When it didn't stop he was determined to hammer everyone in sight. There is an appropriate time to be angry and also an appropriate time to be judicious. These two different qualities shouldn't be mixed together.

 

Lots of bad blood between goodell and New Orleans the past few years. I think he's been ready and waiting to get them and thought he finally got his chance. (Saints denying press access, vicodin issue, getting rebuffed on this the first go around, SP employing a man convicted of defrauding the nfl etc....)He might've had that chance too - as it could be valid stuff- but he's blundered it so damn bad.... Like you said - he turned into a bull when the email from cerullo came in.