OT: Vilma walks on out Bounty-Gate hearing

[Joker]

This is about Goodell retaining the power to discipline these clowns without having to watch them bamboozle some arbitrator or judge who thinks he's in court or worse yet some gullible jury

jeezus....this snippet is just so ridiculous it defies reason...deeming players "clowns" then placing these "clowns" as the intellectual superiors to any arbitrator and then painting any jury with the broad "gullible" brush is distinctly fascist.I have read "judge who thinks he's in court" over and over and STILL have no idea what you mean... a man ascends to the position of judge but is so stupid he doesn't know whether he is in court or not??? Arrogance such as this I haven't read since William Shirer penned his supreme opus of non fiction, the Rise and Fall of the Third Reich and described Josef Goebbels.

Let me use a few substitutions to illustrate..

This is about Der Fuhrer retaining the power to discipline the army without having to watch them bamboozle some military liason or general who thinks he's in command or worse yet some gullible common citizens

here's hoping JoGoebbelsDoesn'tRock...as a fan I want 100% transparency from Roger Goodell at this point...only a total fool trusts this man's motives vis a vis ANY issue with the events of the past five years.

 

[Deus Irae]

You can run with that narrative if you want, but it's not the least bit accurate. The players were facing an avalanche of criticism from fans and their leverage was eroding quickly by the end of the lockout. The collective groan from fans once the issue of player discipline was broached was palpable. Headlines read "Goodell won't budge on Player discipline," and the prospect of a long protracted fight against his "appeals process" would have eroded the players position drastically.

It simply wasn't in the cards because most "fans" of the NFL are inclined to take the side of those in power, which is the way support trended consistently the longer the holdout continued. The De Smith scapegoating started almost right away, and now it's the copout du jour when in actuality the guy did a damn good job considering the climate he had to work with.

And it's not a "civics lesson." To reduce it to "two private parties who've legitimately and contractually agreed to a method of discipline" ignores the reality of it on almost every level. And it still makes no sense whatsoever to adjudicate this case in favor of Goodell simply because of the fact that he has the sole power to punish.

My narrative is accurate, and the reason I suggested that we not make this a civics lesson is because your argument about "due process" is a lousy one, but I don't really want to smack you down because you've generally been a solid read. And before you retort, you should know that I've been harping on the problems with this disciplinary structure, and the need for the players to get it changed in the CBA for a long, long time.

Here's just one example, from back in 2007:

The union needs to get this changed in the next CBA, they need to get the punishments all noted down as guidelines and followed, and they need to insure that overzealous commissioners like the current one don't have the power to make these unilateral rulings without checks and balances.

http://www.patsfans.com/new-england-patriots/messageboard/10/60394-bb-summoned-nfl-office-new-york-team-denies-rumor-page3.html#post513753

 

[TyronePoole]

Needing to do bargain for something and it being possible to do so are two totally different things, and I never said anything about your individual stance towards the NFLPA's bargaining priorities in the past (it's irrelevant to my argument).

You seem to think that something that is not bargained for (due process) is therefore not a principle that the NFL ought to adhere to in disciplining a player. I strongly disagree.

Many (though I'm not sure if you are one of them based on your posts) also seem to think that the absence of bargained for due process has relevancy in determining the guilt of the players as an outside party. I find that absurd.

I appreciate the compliment, if that's what it was, about my being generally a solid read. But please, I'm far from fragile, if you think you can "smack me down" about my "lousy argument" then have at it.

 

[mayoclinic]

This is about Goodell retaining the power to discipline these clowns without having to watch them bamboozle some arbitrator or judge who thinks he's in court or worse yet some gullible jury...And thank god he did. The players had their chance to change the process. Didn't happen because their leadership remains enamored with % points. They should be lambasting their NFLPA leadership, the clowns they just re-elected. Same ones who set them up with a rookie wage scale and a flat cap for the next 5 years...

The players are getting exactly what they deserve because it's what they collectively bargained for.

Absolutely...

The players could have beaten the owners had they just taken it all seriously once the owners opted out of the previous deal. Instead, they ignored what was coming, voted in a clown to lead them, and got slaughtered.

So why do you think we have due process enshrined in the constitution then?

Basically you and everyone else who rants constantly about Goodell being power mad are now saying that Goodell's accusations are automatically believable only because those who he accuses have zero legal recourse. Pretty bizarre logic.

I think both sides on this argument have something to offer, though I tend to side with Mo and Deus on this one.

I doubt many people on this board think that Goodell is anything other than a clown, and a power hungry one at that. He's a pompous buffoon, he's heavy handed and clumsy in how he handles things, and some of his responses to situations have been "unjust".

OTOH, the players are often a bunch of spoiled children, and they need some parental guidance. They collectively bargained away their rights, so due process is being followed - they are getting exactly the process that they bargained for, as Mo and Deus note. The alternative would be anarchy - every dispute getting litigated up the wazoo, and no control over the players. It wouldn't work. I hate Goodell was a passion, but I tend to side with the league office on this one, because the alternative is worse, and because the players collectively agreed to this process.

Florio put it best: "If this is labor peace, I’d hate to see what labor unrest would look like."

 

[Deus Irae]

Needing to do bargain for something and it being possible to do so are two totally different things, and I never said anything about your individual stance towards the NFLPA's bargaining priorities in the past (it's irrelevant to my argument).

You seem to think that something that is not bargained for (due process) is therefore not a principle that the NFL ought to adhere to in disciplining a player. I strongly disagree.

Many (though I'm not sure if you are one of them based on your posts) also seem to think that the absence of bargained for due process has relevancy in determining the guilt of the players as an outside party. I find that absurd.

I appreciate the compliment, if that's what it was, about my being generally a solid read. But please, I'm far from fragile, if you think you can "smack me down" about my "lousy argument" then have at it.

It would be a waste of my time. Let me just ask you when the NFL was determined, by the courts, to be a state actor for the purposes of due process requirements.....

Then, if you find that for all of us, perhaps you could tell us, specifically, which requirements of due process have not been met.

 

[TyronePoole]

It would be a waste of my time. Let me just ask you when the NFL was determined, by the courts, to be a state actor for the purposes of due process requirements.....

You seem to have misread my posts if you think I said anything like this. I have never once argued that the NFL is legally obligated to provide due process.

 

[TyronePoole]

Then, if you find that for all of us, perhaps you could tell us, specifically, which requirements of due process have not been met.

To respond to your edit - are you really asking me to enumerate every principle of procedural and substantive due process that the NFL does not currently embrace? Talk about a wate of time.

 

[Deus Irae]

You seem to have misread my posts if you think I said anything like this. I have never once argued that the NFL is legally obligated to provide due process.

So why do you think we have due process enshrined in the constitution then?

Basically you and everyone else who rants constantly about Goodell being power mad are now saying that Goodell's accusations are automatically believable only because those who he accuses have zero legal recourse. Pretty bizarre logic.

1. Whether the players were stupid/naive/ignorant in not collectively bargaining for better disciplinary protections.

2. Whether the players now are guilty/should be suspended/deserve to have their names smeared without being able to mount a defense.

Two totally different questions.

The reasons for due process don't change simply because the forum does. And there's a whole host of different reasons why analogizing regular businesses and contracts to the NFL is faulty (monopoly), not the least of which is the hypocrisy of "fans" who spent the entire lockout lambasting players and giving the owners a pass only to turn around now and criticize the players for not having dug in their heels hard enough.

The players had an opportunity to meet with the Commissioner, but chose not to talk. Also, there have already been rulings that the commissioner does, in fact, have the right to make the rulings he's made. You seem to have missed them.

NEW YORK — An arbitrator ruled Monday that NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell has the authority to discipline New Orleans Saints players for their role in a bounty system.

The NFL Players Association challenged Goodell’s power to impose penalties for what the league says was a three-year bounty program that targeted specific players. Stephen Burbank, a University of Pennsylvania law professor, took only five days to determine that Goodell has the power to punish the players under the collective bargaining agreement reached last August to end the lockout.

RN-T.com - Arbitrator rules in favor of Goodell

Now, let's have an end to this. You did bring up due process, despite its inapplicability. You haven't produced any evidence that such "due process" was violated even if required. You've either not known or ignored the reality that Goodell's ability to act is something that's already been ruled upon. You've ignored/glossed over the fact that the players had the opportunity to present a case and chose not to, and you seem to be minimizing the reality that the players also have the ability to appeal. You made the absolutely moronic comment that

"Basically you and everyone else who rants constantly about Goodell being power mad are now saying that Goodell's accusations are automatically believable only because those who he accuses have zero legal recourse. Pretty bizarre logic."

when that's not what's being said.


In short, you got pretty much everything wrong.

 

[Deus Irae]

To respond to your edit - are you really asking me to enumerate every principle of procedural and substantive due process that the NFL does not currently embrace? Talk about a wate of time.

That's clearly not what I asked you, and you know that. This is why I didn't want to get into this. You made a crap argument. You have nothing to back that argument. As a result, you're going to try playing games.


No thanks.

 

[TyronePoole]

so you've gone through all of this just to straw man me?

You took that post out of the context of what it was responding to. I asked about why the poster thinks due process is in the constitution to show that the reasons for due process in a judicial proceeding don't evaporate simply because the legal requirement to abide by due process does. I don't know how many different ways I can say this.

Even in that post you quoted I spelled it out for you:

1. The league is under no legal obligation to provide due process.

2. The fact that they are not has no relevance to the factual guilt or innocence of a player.

You've responded by repeating ad nauseum that the NFL is under no legal requirement to abide by due process. I can really only conclude at this point that you are either trolling or not in a very clear mental state.

 

[Deus Irae]

so you've gone through all of this just to straw man me?

You took that post out of the context of what it was responding to. I asked about why the poster thinks due process is in the constitution to show that the reasons for due process in a judicial proceeding don't evaporate simply because the legal requirement to abide by due process does. I don't know how many different ways I can say this.

Even in that post you quoted I spelled it out for you:

1. The league is under no legal obligation to provide due process.

2. The fact that they are not has no relevance to the factual guilt or innocence of a player.

I didn't straw man you at all, as my follow up posts developed the comments.

Your argument was crap.

 

[TyronePoole]

I didn't straw man you at all, as my follow up posts developed the comments.

Your argument was crap.

This was in my very first post:

They may not be entitled to "due process" in regards to the CBA but that doesn't make it right; we have due process in our legal system for a reason. Without it you have the potential for one guy like Goodell to hold a kangaroo court solely for the purposes of mitigating future lawsuits, and then only making certain evidence available.

I then went on to say that without due process the evidence presented selectively by the NFL is largely meaningless in determining guilt in response to this:

everyone seems to forget sean payton and gregg williams probably gave the commish enough evidence so they could be re-instated. as commish, roger has the right and obligation to clean up this mess.vilma has sued has he not? he should shut up and prepare his case, when heloses that he can move on to his next career.

My entire argument from the get go was that the whole point of due process in our legal system is that verdicts are not reliable in any way without it. A poster disagreed and chose to link the players not having due process with them being guilty. You chose to jump in and make an argument out of complete ignorance and now that you've likely realized your mistake you are going to stick with it out of stubbornness.

If you took the time to actually read and absorb what other posters say it would go along in helping you avoid embarrassing exchanges like this in the future.

 

[MoLewisrocks]

The last paragraph in King's summation pretty much sums it up. This is about a handful of grown men who refused to be accountable dragging everyone through the mud because for the first time in their lives they are facing consequence. And a worthless union that has never been more than an association devoted to inflating the wealth of the top 10% of it's membership and lining it's own pockets at the lifelong expense of the majority of it's members.

Bedard summed up the Saints defense pretty well tonight too.

Greg A. Bedard‏@GregABedard

Straight denial, straight denial...good to see Saints' defense is same everyone learned....in high school. Wasn't me. Wasn't even there

Well, they were there and it did exist and they did participate to varying levels and Goodell chose to punish select players and coaches and the organization accordingly. Everyone punished was well aware of what was going on and whether they actively participated or not (and all of these players did) they were in position to stop it. Loomis was the GM who hired all of them, Payton was the head freakin' coach who pushed for Williams hire and retention, Vitt was actually tasked with keeping tabs on Williams, Vilma was a team captain and the leader of the defense, Fujita was the players union rep and a member of the gd NFLPA Executive Committee. Hargrove is on tape demanding payment for his presumed knockout of a QB after Vitt told the team Favre was out. Doesn't matter that he returned to play any more than it matters whether money actually changed hands or was intended to... Just being in on the whole stupid program whether you "intended" to follow through or not or were just bs'ing like big men for your teamates benefit is enough to warrant the punishment. If they had much more evidence that the approach succeeded they'd have had to ban most of them permanently.

There are only two foolish reasons why players are supporting this bs. It pits the players against the league which is job 1 for a players association that doesn't want it's membership focusing on what really matters and the mere concept of consequence scares the crap out of the vast majority of them moreso than having a bounty placed on them. Defensive players close ranks to protect their own and most offensive players are reticent to piss them off by disagreeing.

These guys can't help themselves. Hell, a staggering percentage of them will be bankrupt in 5 years. Vilma's legal fees alone should insure he is. They don't need due process at this juncture, they need tough love discipline. There will be plenty of time for due process down the road, trust me..




NFL reveals 'overwhelming evidence' to reporters in Saints case - Peter King - SI.com

 

[ausbacker]

Seems like a perfect time for Shaggy and RikRok to make an appearance.

 

[Joker]

There's little doubt the aggrieved players will find a way to take action against the league for the sanctions. But now that the league has shared its case with the press -- and, as a result, the public -- it's not quite the slam-dunk case of negligence the players have charged. Either way, this is a black eye that won't soon go away, and league officials seemed to take little joy in smearing such a charismatic franchise in a Manhattan boardroom at the start of a long, hot Monday.

"Does anyone think this is how we wanted to spend the offseason?'' Pash said, "taking one of the great stories of the NFL, the New Orleans Saints, where we're playing the Super Bowl this year, and having it dominate the headlines?''

No. But it is.

just read the entire article twice just to make sure....how the hell you arrive at this ludicrous "Goodell Slam Dunks The Players" stance you keep parroting defies reality...if anything, this column makes Goodell look even WORSE.Isn't it great that the league officials don't take any joy in SMEARING such a charismatic franchise...but smear they shall at any cost. Well then, what is good for the goose is good for the gander MY grandparents used to tell us....therefore,the players should continue with their efforts to show negligence even though, post this dog and pony Goodell show with the press yesterday, it's not quite the slam dunk it looked like. THAT means there is STILL a case there...any other interpretation suggesting finality is intergalactically moronic.

Beyond this issue,anyone associated with the players union should be able to open up the Sal Alosi tripping scandal which, as anyone who was alive and breathing witnessed, Goodell quickly swept under the rug as he took at face value that Rex Ryan knew nothing of the organized actions of his players and coaching staff, even as the reprehensible and blatant breaking of NFL rules on national television were aired, re-aired, and archived for posterity. Why no press conference with the press explaining THAT unilateral decision by Goodell? Ryan said he knew nothing...that's it, case over! Fujita says he knows nothing...SMEAR SMEAR SMEAR..."even though I don't like it one bit...nope...don't like it...but YOU did it because I say so"....a two year old kid could see through this sham.

I don't like the whole sordid mess...I think what Williams was involved in was despicable...but for the life of me I cannot see why ANYONE would side with Goodell's intransigent stance against any transparency whatsoever. If what he says is true then meet the players in court and bury them...ON THE RECORD. THAT is the American way.

 

[Gumby]

......Beyond this issue,anyone associated with the players union should be able to open up the Sal Alosi tripping scandal which, as anyone who was alive and breathing witnessed, Goodell quickly swept under the rug as he took at face value that Rex Ryan knew nothing of the organized actions of his players and coaching staff, even as the reprehensible and blatant breaking of NFL rules on national television were aired, re-aired, and archived for posterity. Why no press conference with the press explaining THAT unilateral decision by Goodell? Ryan said he knew nothing...that's it, case over! ....a two year old kid could see through this sham.

good luck holding your breath on that one.
In the distasteful position of Goodell's defense: Is probably not an easy one to investigate (if he even tried). Only if sexy rexy was stupid enough to send e-mails saying 'make sure we have the wall working on sunday' or if they actually practiced the lining up in practices would you be able to put the kaybosh on 'plausible deniability'.

I don't like the whole sordid mess...I think what Williams was involved in was despicable...but for the life of me I cannot see why ANYONE would side with Goodell's intransigent stance against any transparency whatsoever. If what he says is true then meet the players in court and bury them...ON THE RECORD. THAT is the American way.

I would take issue with half of this: I can understand the NFL (and Goodell as their head) not wanting to set precedent of going to a court. As others have said they negotiated the issue and have a private contractual agreement (the CBA). The commissh has the authority to assess penalties (suspensions and fines) for behavior detrimental to the game. They aren't going to start subordinating that right to an unpredictable outside agency.

The problem is the current commissh has class pets and is inconsistent with that authority and ....

As to your transparency point - there I would agree. If he is going to start holding PCs and releasing stories that go down the road toward defamation then he needs to provide more info to all.

& Part of that transparency should be some kind of conduct guidelines somewhat like Deus suggested. I would prefer something with several broad categories with a maximum penalty for each category: Maybe NFL-infractions, NFL-misdemeaners, and NFL-felonies. Then within the categories specific common offenses should be identified and the catch-all or "similar-level offenses".
( If something like this was in place way-back when; the field operating guide offense would have been identified for the "infraction" that it was.)

 

[Urgent]

-
- Saints should always be judged guilty until they are proved innocent.

from 1984...

 

[WhiZa]

For someone that says he doesn't want his name associated with bountygate he sure is making a circus of it

 

[PatsSox363804]

I can't help but wish the Patriots fought spygate this hard. Even if it didnt matter in the end I hate that we just rolled over and accepted the punishment.

 

[MoLewisrocks]

The Saints aren't fighting this. Four players and their so called union are. And they aren't even willing to go on the record under oath denying their involvement because they can't. Easier to frame plausible denials in the media, or for that matter just deny that the accuser has any real proof. This really wouldn't have played out much differently in a court of law. The league's evidence is largely circumstantial, but they have a boatload of it. They also have eye witness testimony, so the players and the union characterize that as heresay. They'd be the typical defendents who opt not to take the stand in their own defense because they wouldn't want to perjure themselves under cross examination. At the end of the day they don't even want their day in court. They just want the threat of it to somehow get them off the hook. Didn't work last spring, won't work now. True to form these guys never learn from their mistakes. Had they just owned up rather than lying and stonewalling the investigation their coaches made me do it do it might have carried enough weight to at least mitigating their suspensions by half. But that wasn't what they wanted. They wanted immunity and absolution. And the league couldn't and wouldn't provide that three years and countless inquiries and multiple opportunities to come clean after the fact. They are trying to change a culture and punishing coaches and FO personnel and organizations alone won't accomplish that as long as players believe they will never be punished even for willingly participating in that culture.

The NEP never denied doing what they were accused by the league of doing. They did deny doing what the media attempted to portray them as doing. And they vigorously defended themselves when they were accused of doing something far more eggregious that never happened. And they were vindicated on that score for all the good it did them. The Saints organization is likely pissed that they got caught and punished, but they aren't denying why they did. The players in question aren't even denying it, just denying that the league can prove it and wailing about the inherent unfairness of the process they signed off on just ten months ago. Apparently no one ever explained to them or their legion of supporters in principle that no one ever said it woud be fair. Welcome to the real world.