OT: Vilma walks on out Bounty-Gate hearing

[pherein]

There doesn't have to be evidence of anyone being paid for injuring someone or even anyone injured. You just don't get it. And LOL at what it would take you to participate in a bounty program. Would those assurances need to be in writing...:bricks:

Yeah, I know, I read Duncan to at NOLA NFL is not a court of law.

There is plenty of evidence the bounty aspect of the pay for play existed. The way it works is similar to the way it works in civil matters as opposed to criminal matters. Preponderance of evidence as opposed to beyond a reasonable doubt. Meanwhile guys like yourself and Tyrone seem to be arguing for jury nullification...

Pay for play. I think yes, I can't even say that for certain. To me they admitted to it. So thats a closed chapter. Pay to injure no. No one has ever admitted to that. I don't see it as a real possibility , but yes ID love to see this go to court. Their is no preponderance of evidence that a pay to injure program was in place in NO, so far.

So far Goodell's legal team has carried the day, fwiw. In fact as usual the only winners in all of this are the lawyers, including Florio - who is driving his own sites ratings by championing as many overwrought tin foil theories as he can. Media frames these debates, and in this case and in this twitter age, they have done their damndest to make it the kind of soap opera drama that grabs and spins audiences through an entire off season. Kind of like what they did throughout the lockout...which at the end of the day turned out just about the way rational observers always predicted it would.

The NFL has had this story plastered on their site, leaked information, and talked about it constantly on the NFL channel. They are just as much to blame for keeping this alive. I don't even think this story would have gain this much ground if so much of what they are releasing as evidence was found to be misrepresented, disputed, and/or flawed later. Its pretty incompetent to do so.
They should have just released nothing but blanket statements, and said this is in the past now. They were never required to explain themselves to anyone. But, the building controversy is really their own fault.
Lawyers are making bundle on this one.

And Kraft and Belichick weren't gagged, just accountable and smart enough to know that winning wars is more important than flailing around fighting unwinnable individual battles.

well we never professed to be as smart as Kraft and BB So, I hope you don't mind if we just don't decide to lay down on this one. Its really not our style anyway.

 

[MoLewisrocks]

So, if I understand this correctly, the suspensions given to hargrove, fujita, vilma and smith are for participating in a pay-for-performance activity not pay-to-injure?

Yup. That the program as run in NO also incorporated a pay to injure aspect was just the frosting on the cake. It has always been against the rules to have such a program but they are almost impossible to police because they are so loosly run by players. This was an organized program that coaches were not only aware of but participated in, as were and did leaders on the team. And the pools that accumulated, even if not fully funded, were exponentially larger than run of the mill player run pools. And records were created and maintained documenting payouts, and it doesn't matter what you were paid for or whether you recontributed those amounts to the pool. Bounties also clearly existed within the pool whether any ever played out or not being immaterial. The players punished in lieu of punishing almost everyone on the roster and crippling the Saints and perhaps other teams, were either team leaders and/or their union rep who is now a member of the Executive Committee, and players with suspension records preceding this incident or guys who flat out lied or refused to cooperate during the course of the investigation - whether instructed or advised to or not.

And like the lemmings they all are they chose to close ranks and take the advice of counsel or their union to refuse to cooperate or participate in the process, including even in their own appeal and instead focus their defense on spinning the unfairness of the process they and their union again signed off on 10 months ago. The hope being they will gain support from those who just hate the system for ever penalizing anybody's potential fantasy player or home town team, not to mention those simply succombing to the latest gate fatigue.

 

[MoLewisrocks]

The NFL has had this story plastered on their site, leaked information, and talked about it constantly on the NFL channel. They are just as much to blame for keeping this alive. I don't even think this story would have gain this much ground if so much of what they are releasing as evidence was found to be misrepresented, disputed, and/or flawed later. Its pretty incompetent to do so.
They should have just released nothing but blanket statements, and said this is in the past now. They were never required to explain themselves to anyone. But, the building controversy is really their own fault.

Oh, pahleeeeeeese...You were demanding evidence as was the media. That was the battle cry. You wanted all 50K pages and names of sources...LOL

Goodell should have handled this like BB would have. No comment. It is what it is. Moving on to...whatever.

 

[pherein]

thanks Pherein. What was the logic behind giving different suspension lengths? For example, is there a portion of Vilma's suspension that can be attributed to pay-for-performance and a portion for pay-to-injure?

Im not sure. I think everything has been bunched together and presented as an example to the NFL teams that the Days of pay for performance or injury are over in the NFL, because we can't handle the law suits.
We are more of an example to the rest of the teams. Like NE was with Spygate.

As far as I know the severity of the fines, draft picks, and suspensions are based on a Pay to Injure only + lying. I say that because its pretty historic.
Most of the fines are for team captains, and people in authority. I say that because they didn't fine Harper.
I think the media would have gone nuts if they fined the Saints this badly for a pay to performance only. The truth is I don't really know. Just how I see it at this time.

 

[pherein]

Oh, pahleeeeeeese...You were demanding evidence as was the media. That was the battle cry. You wanted all 50K pages and names of sources...LOL

Goodell should have handled this like BB would have. No comment. It is what it is. Moving on to...whatever.

Well, turns out there are only 200 pages right, lol ? The NFL was exaggerating greatly, again to the fans and we knew it. So they were right to ask. They never had to answer.

I completely agree. Goodell should have done exactly what you said. That would have worked perfectly. Thats why I was saying Goodell dorked this up, and their seems to be a level of incompetence as to how this was handled.
I don't think for a second that this is turning out the way Goodell wanted it to. I think he greatly misjudged our reaction.

 

[TyronePoole]

Apparently like Fujita, you Tyrone have a comprehension problem. That sometimes happens to guys who suffer from smartest guy in the room syndrome. Just ask Bill how that worked out for him. As Bedard tweeted in a series of comments last night before beginning his summer vacation...

I quoted the NFL's official release on it's justification for the suspensions of the 4 players. You quoted Greg Bedard's tweets. You were incorrect on what they were suspended for.

As to your other post on "jury nullification" and criminal v. civil cases, this analogizes to a criminal case, since they are being accused of something and then being given punishment. And jury nullification has nothing to do with it (there is no jury here so I'm not even sure what you are talking about with this). It's about the evidence the NFL says it has, how it has presented it to the public and what the NFL is claiming happened v. reality.

I brought up the reasons behind "due process" before to make the point that in any situation where an authority has the ability to punish, if the accused isn't given some kind of basic rights (access to evidence, right to confront their accuser, appeals etc.) then the conviction is inherently unreliable. Goodell has the right to punish them, but as far as any reasonable person is concerned there is nothing you can go on to say "I know X did what he is accused of here" because you don't. You have a one sided system of punishment where only selective evidence is released and some of it has already been shown to have been exaggerated/lied about/falsified etc.

Fujita fully accepted that he was part of something technically illegal that has been ingrained in football for a long time, and if you read his quote he would have no problem being punished for that if that is what had happened here. But it isn't, and Goodell and the NFL has created a narrative way beyond the baseline participation in a bounty program act you claimed.

You talk about "comprehension problems" but apparently you won't even read what Fujita said and don't understand that just because he did something technically wrong (participate in a pay for performance program that has existed since the dawn of time in football) that it gives the NFL the right to claim any number of wild things about what it was and how it went down simply because they are trying to posture themselves in a way that they can later bring up when they are sued by injured NFL alumni.

And I'm not sure why it's necessary for you to throw in your little "smartest guy in the room" quip, but it certainly doesn't help your argument. In fact it's a pretty obvious sign of weakness.

It's kind of disappointing to see this from Pats fans after spygate; making sure that all the FRAMe stuff and other good points we make about why that was such a joke looks like nothing more than complete homerism.

 

[MoLewisrocks]

I quoted the NFL's official release on it's justification for the suspensions of the 4 players. You quoted Greg Bedard's tweets. You were incorrect on what they were suspended for.

You just don't grasp what the NFL official press release stated. Bedard and I do.

As to your other post on "jury nullification" and criminal v. civil cases, this analogizes to a criminal case, since they are being accused of something and then being given punishment. And jury nullification has nothing to do with it (there is no jury here so I'm not even sure what you are talking about with this). It's about the evidence the NFL says it has, how it has presented it to the public and what the NFL is claiming happened v. reality.

No, it's not. That's just what the players and the union and the critics persistently want to make it out to be. The jury in this instance is public opinion.

I brought up the reasons behind "due process" before to make the point that in any situation where an authority has the ability to punish, if the accused isn't given some kind of basic rights (access to evidence, right to confront their accuser, appeals etc.) then the conviction is inherently unreliable. Goodell has the right to punish them, but as far as any reasonable person is concerned there is nothing you can go on to say "I know X did what he is accused of here" because you don't. You have a one sided system of punishment where only selective evidence is released and some of it has already been shown to have been exaggerated/lied about/falsified etc.

And as DI pointed out to you that argument is immaterial.

Fujita fully accepted that he was part of something technically illegal that has been ingrained in football for a long time, and if you read his quote he would have no problem being punished for that if that is what had happened here. But it isn't, and Goodell and the NFL has created a narrative way beyond the baseline participation in a bounty program act you claimed.

The bounty program existed within the framework of the pay for play program in NO. Fujita admitted he kicked in money. He claims he never intended for any of his to be used to reward injury. Unfortunately he made no such distinction at the time, and the funds were comingled. He knew what was going on. He rationalized he wasn't really part of it. Although he cried crocodile tears as he and his wife watched the tape (the existence he knew about and along with Brees and the NFLPA debated the release of only because they felt it would shift focus/blame off of players and onto their coach) of a meeting he actually had attended in person (while a member of the NFLPA Executive Committee) and he lamented to her that he was once that guy...remorse and innocence aren't one in the same.

You talk about "comprehension problems" but apparently you won't even read what Fujita said and don't understand that just because he did something technically wrong (participate in a pay for performance program that has existed since the dawn of time in football) that it gives the NFL the right to claim any number of wild things about what it was and how it went down simply because they are trying to posture themselves in a way that they can later bring up when they are sued by injured NFL alumni.

And I'm not sure why it's necessary for you to throw in your little "smartest guy in the room" quip, but it certainly doesn't help your argument. In fact it's a pretty obvious sign of weakness.

It's kind of disappointing to see this from Pats fans after spygate; making sure that all the FRAMe stuff and other good points we make about why that was such a joke looks like nothing more than complete homerism.

The Patriots did what they did. For some FRAMe was little more than homerism. What it did document was the timeline and nature of offense. Unfortunately few in the media or other fan bases cared and the simple fact remained we broke a rule (however ambiguous) and were punished because of what we or others could have done with the information and because Bill chose to rationalize he had them on language ambiguity rather than simply comply with what he knew they wanted and because a first term Commissioner was determined to change that culture too the discipline was severe in relation to the actual offense. And that is why this organization chose to be accountable and accept their discipline anyway. Another was apparently prepared to as well, at least until the players refused to.

Unfortunately for them the only way to put an end to the pay for play culture that opens up the possibility of bounty culture continuing to exist is to punish coaches and players who were clearly involved in one for three seasons - even moreso when they refuse to simply be accountable. Because this **** encourages injury, and there is inherently enough of that in this league without encouragement.

 

[TyronePoole]

You just don't grasp what the NFL official press release stated. Bedard and I do.

You said that they were suspended merely for their involvement at any level in the pay for performance program. The NFL's release explicitly says you are wrong. Even Bedard's tweets that you posted don't support your position. I'm not sure what you are having so much trouble with.

No, it's not. That's just what the players and the union and the critics persistently want to make it out to be. The jury in this instance is public opinion.

Yes, it is. It is a punishment from an authoritative body. Why you would try and analogize that to a civil proceeding is incomprehensible.

If the jury is public opinion then "jury nullification" has absolutely zero to do with it. I think you should re-check what the term means. The jury in this case should remain unconvinced of what the NFL has claimed due to insufficient evidence and because the elements of the alleged crime have not been satisfied by the prosecution.

It's pretty illuminating that you'd tell me I'm wrong about it being analogous to a criminal and not civil proceeding and then bring up jury nullification though.

And as DI pointed out to you that argument is immaterial.

Actually DI has yet to respond to that argument in any coherent way. Instead he chose to argue endlessly that the players aren't legally entitled to due process.

The bounty program existed within the framework of the pay for play program in NO. Fujita admitted he kicked in money. He claims he never intended for any of his to be used to reward injury. Unfortunately he made no such distinction at the time, and the funds were comingled. He knew what was going on.

As did two dozen other Saints players and hundreds of NFL players for decades. But the NFL distinguished him on several grounds that I've already enumerated and singled him out for punishment on extremely disingenuous grounds, and they've since painted a picture that is inconsistent with the evidence provided.

He rationalized he wasn't really part of it.

Do you have a link for this claim? I haven't seen him say anything like this.

Although he cried crocodile tears as he and his wife watched the tape (the existence he knew about and along with Brees and the NFLPA debated the release of only because they felt it would shift focus/blame off of players and onto their coach) of a meeting he actually had attended in person (while a member of the NFLPA Executive Committee) and he lamented to her that he was once that guy...remorse and innocence aren't one in the same.

You don't know anything about the guy if you think those were "crocodile tears." You also don't seem to understand that remorse for one thing does not amount to admission of another.

 

[ausbacker]

I quoted the NFL's official release on it's justification for the suspensions of the 4 players. You quoted Greg Bedard's tweets. You were incorrect on what they were suspended for.

As to your other post on "jury nullification" and criminal v. civil cases, this analogizes to a criminal case, since they are being accused of something and then being given punishment. And jury nullification has nothing to do with it (there is no jury here so I'm not even sure what you are talking about with this). It's about the evidence the NFL says it has, how it has presented it to the public and what the NFL is claiming happened v. reality.

I brought up the reasons behind "due process" before to make the point that in any situation where an authority has the ability to punish, if the accused isn't given some kind of basic rights (access to evidence, right to confront their accuser, appeals etc.) then the conviction is inherently unreliable. Goodell has the right to punish them, but as far as any reasonable person is concerned there is nothing you can go on to say "I know X did what he is accused of here" because you don't. You have a one sided system of punishment where only selective evidence is released and some of it has already been shown to have been exaggerated/lied about/falsified etc.

Fujita fully accepted that he was part of something technically illegal that has been ingrained in football for a long time, and if you read his quote he would have no problem being punished for that if that is what had happened here. But it isn't, and Goodell and the NFL has created a narrative way beyond the baseline participation in a bounty program act you claimed.

You talk about "comprehension problems" but apparently you won't even read what Fujita said and don't understand that just because he did something technically wrong (participate in a pay for performance program that has existed since the dawn of time in football) that it gives the NFL the right to claim any number of wild things about what it was and how it went down simply because they are trying to posture themselves in a way that they can later bring up when they are sued by injured NFL alumni.

And I'm not sure why it's necessary for you to throw in your little "smartest guy in the room" quip, but it certainly doesn't help your argument. In fact it's a pretty obvious sign of weakness.

It's kind of disappointing to see this from Pats fans after spygate; making sure that all the FRAMe stuff and other good points we make about why that was such a joke looks like nothing more than complete homerism.

That's a throw away comment if ever I read one. Most Patsfans supporters accept Spygate. We know the Patriots transgressed committing a minor rules infraction. We also accept that Goodell excessively punished the Patriots. That's the kicker. Every man and his dog realises by now it was a nothing story and a major overkill. Outside of that, it's a nonsensical point to raise when considering Bountygate.

 

[TyronePoole]

That's a throw away comment if ever I read one.

Let's see.

Most Patsfans [Saints] supporters accept Spygate [bountygate].

check.

We know the Patriots [Saints] transgressed committing a minor rules infraction.

check.

We also accept that Goodell excessively punished the Patriots [Saints].

check.

That's the kicker. Every man [Pats fan, Saints fan] and his dog realises by now it [spygate, bountygate] was a nothing story and a major overkill.

check.

Outside of that, it's a nonsensical point to raise when considering Bountygate.

Totally.

 

[ausbacker]

Let's see.



check.



check.



check.



check.



Totally.

That's where you and I obviously differ. I don't believe the Saints were punished excessively.

 

[pherein]

That's where you and I obviously differ. I don't believe the Saints were punished excessively.

I believe that is the dominate position of most other teams fans, and the public, so your in good company.
Its probably easier to bow down and not respond to all of the exaggerated / misrepresented / and fabricated evidence the NFL leaks or produces on a weekly basis, because we know we are GUITY of a pay for performance.

But, our entire team is saying their was no pay to injure at NO, and the NFL is behaving very weird. We need to stick with the team and believe they are not lying to us, in loo of all the non-evidence and half-truths coming from Goodell.

Thats where most of the fans and our fans differ aus. We don't know how we deserve to be punished, lol. ...yet.

 

[Ring 6]

I believe that is the dominate position of most other teams fans, and the public, so your in good company.
Its probably easier to bow down and not respond to all of the exaggerated / misrepresented / and fabricated evidence the NFL leaks or produces on a weekly basis, because we know we are GUITY of a pay for performance.

But, our entire team is saying their was no pay to injure at NO, and the NFL is behaving very weird. We need to stick with the team and believe they are not lying to us, in loo of all the non-evidence and half-truths coming from Goodell.

Thats where most of the fans and our fans differ aus. We don't know how we deserve to be punished, lol. ...yet.

I don't want to get into the whole balliwick of what the evidence is or isn't, but I do have one question regarding your position.
How do you reconcile your position that there was no bounty system with just 2 of the indisputable issues?
1) Hargroves admission
2) The documentary makers tape of Williams comments before the SF game?

 

[pherein]

I don't want to get into the whole balliwick of what the evidence is or isn't, but I do have one question regarding your position.
How do you reconcile your position that there was no bounty system with just 2 of the indisputable issues?
1) Hargroves admission
2) The documentary makers tape of Williams comments before the SF game?

Hardgrove : Ill post some of what was found out and add to it a bit.

1 *ALLEGATION:
Anthony Hargove's Declaration verifies existence of a bounty program.*


Initially, the NFL presented Anthony Hargrove's "declaration" as proof that a bounty system existed. Specifically, the NFL's hired gun,*Mary Jo White,*said this about Hargrove's declaration.*Emphases*mine:*

There hasn't been any denial of the existence of that program. One of the Saints players (current Packers DE Anthony Hargrove) who was disciplined yesterday actually submitted a declaration in which he acknowledged that the program existed, acknowledged his participation and admitted that he lied to the NFL investigators in 2010.*

Untrue:
When Hargrove's declaration was*subsequently*made public by Yahoo!, we learned that Hargrove actually said this, verbatim. Again, emphasis mine:

The NFL security personnel then asked several questions about whether there was a bounty program, whether Saints' players contributed*money to a bounty pool, and whether I had ever received bounty money. In response to these questions, I followed the clear directions I had received from Coach Williams and Coach Vitt, and I repeatedly denied any knowledge of any bounty or bounty program.

No matter how you interpret what Hargrove said, it's (ahem) proof that he denied the existence of a bounty*program*when the NFL just days prior said he "acknowledged that the program existed, [and] acknowledged his participation in it." Which, of course, he didn't.
*
This is one line of text was also the evidence used by the NFL to say Hargrove was force by Vitt and GW.

“I followed the clear directions I had received from Coach Williams and Coach Vitt”

How is that being forced ? And if he felt forced, he didn't say it, and why in the world would he say their names when it supposed to be a secret,lol.
Later hardgrove said he had meetings with the coaches before his statement to the NFL. That would be a pretty standard practice anywhere. You would want to know your players position.

Why would the NFL publicly lie about this? Were they not anticipating this document being leaked to the public? Were they trying to deceitfully sway public opinion by delivering what now appear to be stark, transparent falsehoods? Did they some how misinterpret yet again another statement? I mean what happened there. You can't get the conclusion the NFL got from what he said.


Furthermore, Hargrove responded to the NFL's initial characterization of his statements by saying the

NFL "grossly mischaracterized [his] words."

*



2*ALLEGATION: Anthony Hargrove on video, demanding bounty payment.*


Initially, the NFL accused Anthony Hargrove of asking for a bounty payment related to a hit on Brett Favre in the NFC Championship game during the 2009 season.*


Months ago, Peter King reported that Hargrove was overheard on camera saying "Pay me my money!" Later the NFL claimed Hargrove said "Bobby, give me my money!" For whatever reason, Hargrove's alleged words were either*altered, misinterpreted, or falsified.*

If you watch the film Ayodele probably said it.
NBC Sports: Breaking down the Hargrove tape
And if said by someone, are you kidding me? You know how many players say "give me my money" on a football field each week. Play for performance.

Untrue: Even if you're unconcerned with the disparity in the descriptions of what Hargrove was accused of saying, Hargrove took to the streets on Monday and stridently defended himself by delivering a lengthy statement in front of NFL headquarters. In part, about the demand for payment in that game, he said:

I felt similar to how I had felt when I read the NFL's statement about my declaration. Bewildered ...*
The NFL has a sideline shot of our defense gathered around Joe Vitt discussing what we might should expect if the backup quarterback comes into the game. It shows me off to the side with some of our other defensive linemen on the bench with their backs to the camera. The final snippet has an arrow pointed at me with the caption indicating that I had said, “give me my money.”*
Here's the problem with that. It wasn't me. That's right. The NFL got their evidence all wrong. In their rush to convict me, they made a very serious error. Is it intentional? I don't know. But one thing I do know with absolute certainty...it...was...not...me! *
Like I said, lean in closer, look closer, listen closer. It is not my voice. Anyone who knows me well knows that it is not me. But the NFL does not know me well. They simply make assumptions.*

Furthermore, on Wednesday an ex-Saint came to Hargrove's defense. Earl Heyman, a Saints' player during the '09 season, had this to say:

I was right there, right there in that closeup [of the defensive huddle] they're talking about ... Every time they came off the field I was standing right there talking to them, and I know who said it, and I can say with 100 percent accuracy who said it, and I know 100 percent it wasn't Anthony

.

So why did the NFL get this wrong? Why was Hargrove implicated? Did they believe Hargrove was an easy target for coercion because he's twice violated the NFL's drug policy? Did they select him as a participant because he'd likely fear for his career prospects if he didn't go along with the allegations? Did they decide to incriminate him with these words because there's another video--shown far and wide--of Hargrove shouting on the sideline "Favre is done!" after a particularly vicious hit?*

Twice the NFL has publicly accused Hargrove of something and twice they've wholly misrepresented it. Doesn't this call into question the quality of the NFL's investigation as a whole? If not, doesn't it at least undermine the authenticity of the public*characterizations*of what they've claimed as evidence?

2) The documentary makers tape of Williams comments before the SF game?

for one I don't see how that tape can be released without NFL approval. ITs a copy write infringement. The NFL allowed that tape to be released I believe.

There hasn't been a player of any team that GW coached for that didn't say that is a completely normal speech for GW. We hear it every day. Other players said they heard that kind of talk in every team they played for by a DC.

WE were shocked by it initial, but none of us has ever heard a DC speech before. I think Fujita said it best.

”The problem with this whole thing is that it’s just an unfortunate situation where you have a defensive coordinator [Gregg Williams] who I like a lot, but said a lot of really vulgar, inappropriate, outlandish things. You couple that with some guys who occasionally throw in some money for big plays — which I have admitted to doing — and it becomes a perfect storm,

GW had a big mouth, and complete autonomy on the Saints. SP couldn't force him to do anything according to his contract.
As GW used to say to our reporters " I have a FU clause in my contract".
Many times and 2x during the playoffs alone in 2009 SP told GW to shut up. He even sent him a glass of sand and some crackers with peanut butter one time to get his point across. GW just didn't give a damn. That tape is just typical GW, dosnt prove and organized bounty system that everyone knew about.
Personally we didn't know he was this nuts, and think he should never coach again, but every player that played for him loves him, not sure why.

Goodell said GW admitted to having a bounty program. Later GW said that never happend.

Writes Triplett: “[A]ccording to a source close to [former Saints defensive coordinator Gregg] Williams, the NFL has also misrepresented what Williams said in interviews with the league. According to the source, Williams never admitted a ‘bounty program’ was in place and that the league ‘rephrased his statements to satisfy its needs.’ The source also said Williams never identified any players for their involvement in a pay-for-performance or bounty program.”

Those are strong, stunning allegations. Given the mounting attacks on the quality of the league’s evidence, the time has come for the NFL to disclose it. All. Publicly. Every piece and shred of it.

Though its a little know fact that SP and GW were not on good speaking terms sense mid season 2010, and that SP was going to fire him regardless at the end of the season.
SP said in a interview mid November 2010 said " We believe Gregg has better opportunities elsewhere".

Hope Ive made a little sense.

 

[Ring 6]

Hardgrove : Ill post some of what was found out and add to it a bit.

1 *ALLEGATION:
Anthony Hargove's Declaration verifies existence of a bounty program.*


Initially, the NFL presented Anthony Hargrove's "declaration" as proof that a bounty system existed. Specifically, the NFL's hired gun,*Mary Jo White,*said this about Hargrove's declaration.*Emphases*mine:*



Untrue:
When Hargrove's declaration was*subsequently*made public by Yahoo!, we learned that Hargrove actually said this, verbatim. Again, emphasis mine:



No matter how you interpret what Hargrove said, it's (ahem) proof that he denied the existence of a bounty*program*when the NFL just days prior said he "acknowledged that the program existed, [and] acknowledged his participation in it." Which, of course, he didn't.
*
This is one line of text was also the evidence used by the NFL to say Hargrove was force by Vitt and GW.



How is that being forced ? And if he felt forced, he didn't say it, and why in the world would he say their names when it supposed to be a secret,lol.
Later hardgrove said he had meetings with the coaches before his statement to the NFL. That would be a pretty standard practice anywhere. You would want to know your players position.

Why would the NFL publicly lie about this? Were they not anticipating this document being leaked to the public? Were they trying to deceitfully sway public opinion by delivering what now appear to be stark, transparent falsehoods? Did they some how misinterpret yet again another statement? I mean what happened there. You can't get the conclusion the NFL got from what he said.


Furthermore, Hargrove responded to the NFL's initial characterization of his statements by saying the *



2*ALLEGATION: Anthony Hargrove on video, demanding bounty payment.*


Initially, the NFL accused Anthony Hargrove of asking for a bounty payment related to a hit on Brett Favre in the NFC Championship game during the 2009 season.*


Months ago, Peter King reported that Hargrove was overheard on camera saying "Pay me my money!" Later the NFL claimed Hargrove said "Bobby, give me my money!" For whatever reason, Hargrove's alleged words were either*altered, misinterpreted, or falsified.*

If you watch the film Ayodele probably said it.
NBC Sports: Breaking down the Hargrove tape
And if said by someone, are you kidding me? You know how many players say "give me my money" on a football field each week. Play for performance.

Untrue: Even if you're unconcerned with the disparity in the descriptions of what Hargrove was accused of saying, Hargrove took to the streets on Monday and stridently defended himself by delivering a lengthy statement in front of NFL headquarters. In part, about the demand for payment in that game, he said:



Furthermore, on Wednesday an ex-Saint came to Hargrove's defense. Earl Heyman, a Saints' player during the '09 season, had this to say:

.

So why did the NFL get this wrong? Why was Hargrove implicated? Did they believe Hargrove was an easy target for coercion because he's twice violated the NFL's drug policy? Did they select him as a participant because he'd likely fear for his career prospects if he didn't go along with the allegations? Did they decide to incriminate him with these words because there's another video--shown far and wide--of Hargrove shouting on the sideline "Favre is done!" after a particularly vicious hit?*

Twice the NFL has publicly accused Hargrove of something and twice they've wholly misrepresented it. Doesn't this call into question the quality of the NFL's investigation as a whole? If not, doesn't it at least undermine the authenticity of the public*characterizations*of what they've claimed as evidence?

2) The documentary makers tape of Williams comments before the SF game?

for one I don't see how that tape can be released without NFL approval. ITs a copy write infringement. The NFL allowed that tape to be released I believe.

There hasn't been a player of any team that GW coached for that didn't say that is a completely normal speech for GW. We hear it every day. Other players said they heard that kind of talk in every team they played for by a DC.

WE were shocked by it initial, but none of us has ever heard a DC speech before. I think Fujita said it best.



GW had a big mouth, and complete autonomy on the Saints. SP couldn't force him to do anything according to his contract.
As GW used to say to our reporters " I have a FU clause in my contract".
Many times and 2x during the playoffs alone SP told GW to shut up. He even sent him a glass and some crackers with petnutbutter on time to get his point across. GW just didn't give a damn. That tape is just typical GW dosnt prove and organized bounty system that everyone knew about.

Goodell said GW admitted to having a bounty program. Later GW said that never happend.



Though its a little know fact that SP and GW were not on good speaking terms sense mid season 2010, and that SP was going to fire him regardless at the end of the season.
SP said in a interview last November " We believe Gregg has better opportunities elsewhere".

Hope Ive made a little sense.

It seems you have taken Hargrove admitting he was told to lie as proof that when he admitted it later, the lie he admits to telling becomes the truth.
Of course you also create a conspiracy theory that the NFL for some reason created the whole thing and picked on a substance abuser so they could misrepresent his story.

And as far as the audio evidence that the players were coached to injure, its not true because Gregg Williams is now a jerk?

 

[MoLewisrocks]

I believe that is the dominate position of most other teams fans, and the public, so your in good company.
Its probably easier to bow down and not respond to all of the exaggerated / misrepresented / and fabricated evidence the NFL leaks or produces on a weekly basis, because we know we are GUITY of a pay for performance.

But, our entire team is saying their was no pay to injure at NO, and the NFL is behaving very weird. We need to stick with the team and believe they are not lying to us, in loo of all the non-evidence and half-truths coming from Goodell.

Thats where most of the fans and our fans differ aus. We don't know how we deserve to be punished, lol. ...yet.

There is a difference between what you say under oath and penalty and what you say to the media (let alone what media sources claim you said you never said...). Not to mention the ample use of plausible deniability (intent...) in this case. And rationalization (was it really a bounty system if no one got hurt).

You aren't being punished. You're confusing that with being embarassed, and the guys who did that to you wear or wore fleur de lis. Remember, it wasn't the league that released the Williams tape, that was an independent film maker who was consulting with Brees and Fujita (who somehow thought it would help the players if released at the right time...).

Twenty or thirty years ago the league defended the shield by covering up or dismissively sweeping indiscretions under the rug. Goodell doesn't have that leeway these days. Between social networks and media in the information age, partisan politics and the litigious nature of modern society, he has to rule with an iron fist or outside forces will step in and potentially tear the league apart to serve their own ends. Fans may not always agree with his approach or approve of his initiatives, but they probably beat the hell out of the alternatives.

I think he was too heavy handed with NE, but I appreciate now more than before why he felt he had to be. Culture change doesn't come easy. We were made an example of, and anyone who failed to heed that warning shot was going to be punished even more severely. Same approach he's undertaking with players. Fines don't faze them, they blow that and more on idiotic bling. Take away their stage, like Bill always said, and you get their attention. Maybe half the games would have been sufficient for the players, but maybe if they'd been honest and forthcoming or even taken part in their own appeals instead of playing games at their lawyers and the unions direction they'd have had their penalties reduced. Instead they chose to attempt to put the system on trial.

This is why they will never be actual partners, nor should they be. They are terminally short sighted. Like most of their fans.

PS Payton lobbied for Williams and even took a pay cut to help fund a sufficient contract to keep him in NO after 2009. And if he and Payton had a falling out mid way through 2010, he could have been canned prior to the 2011 season, which was what last year was and he was still the DC of the NOS.

PPS Fujita is right about one thing, it was a perfect storm. Saints fans want us to believe it was just a run of the mill thunder shower. Too bad Fujita didn't realize that until the tape came out following a series of text discussions between himself and Brees and the filmmaker debating whether and when to release it. The league had nothing to do with releasing the tape. Beyond any contractual stipulations between the film maker and his partner, the team granted permission for him to film and the film is his property. The league didn't even know of it's existence, although Fujuita and Brees did. Heck, Fujita was in the room when it was made.

 

[lurker1965]

It wouldn't surprise me if Favre gets his nose wet in all of this even if it's just to be interviewed as a victim. He loves the limelight. He can stir the ashes about a comeback then too.

Or the basis of his claim can be injuries from that game stopped him from earning a player salary past the last "comeback" where he sucked because of said "injuries."

 

[pherein]

It seems you have taken Hargrove admitting he was told to lie as proof that when he admitted it later, the lie he admits to telling becomes the truth.
Of course you also create a conspiracy theory that the NFL for some reason created the whole thing and picked on a substance abuser so they could misrepresent his story.

And as far as the audio evidence that the players were coached to injure, its not true because Gregg Williams is now a jerk?

Were pretty confused to Andy,lol. Its not like we have any answers.

If Goodell did exactly what MoLewisrocks said. I don't believe this would have ever gotten this out of hand. I put it to our forum and they all agreed.

No, I said Hargrove was never told to lie. He was told by the Saints coaches what he should say. Hargrove is not the smartest guy in the world.
Even I would talk to him before he talked to the NFL and say " Look kid, this is serious business, you need to tell them we have no bounty program here, and be very clear about that, these guys are serious".

Ok, so a lot of what the NFL has said has been proven wrong or misinterpreted. I call it incompetent.

But,you would rather believe that their is a huge conspiracy theory with the Saints ?
That SP ,the mastermind, and benson, are telling everyone to do this, and for people to shut up ?
That this is somehow orchestrated on the Saints to cover this all up?

I mean, pick your side for a conspiracy theory. So far none of the players or coaches have been proven to be lying at all. While the NFL and Goodell have been incompetent on a number of ocasions.

We don't think their is a conspiracy theory, we think they messed up, jumped the gun, and are trying to pump out info to support their claim of a bounty program, but their really instant any.
Im not creating a conspiracy theory, Im asking why are they doing this?
I mean its silly to be wrong this many times. It makes them look silly, and makes everyone not trust what they say next. Why say theses things at all?

How many times do the NFL and Goodell have to be proven wrong before other fans think, hmm thats weird ?
apparently more than 10,lol.
Has anyone Saints coach , owner,or player made statements that later was found to be complete lie or fabrication of the truth ?

If you can get proof from that tape of a organized bounty system in NO, be my guest. As for me its just a really embarrassing tape, that proves very little.

 

[lurker1965]

Yeah, no one is disputing a pay for performance program, that I know of. The Saints are absolutely in violation of that, and 100% of our fans understand that. We needed to be punished for that alone. Its the other stuff that bothers us...

I've got bad news for Saints fans. Goodell has tactical reasons to drag this out.

The concussion suits are coming and they face a PR nightmare. They need to find another villain.

The NFLPA is falling into the trap. Goodell spokesman can say "We the NFL tried to make the game as safe as possible, but the EVIL NFLPA fought us at every turn. Heck, look how the defended the Saint's players that were clearly out only to castrate other players."* Oh it does not matter what really happened, once the spin is accepted as "TRUTH."

Unfortunately the Saints are collateral damage.

BTW, you know how you can tell that Goodell is either lying or not telling the whole truth? His lips move.

* That is the hypothetical Goodell spokesman, not me.

 

[lurker1965]

...

What intrigues me the most is that the NFL with its millions for brilliant lawyers, can display evidence that is so contrary to reality, found to be untrue or misrepresented, and denied at almost every level by the people that they say admitted it, or are witnesses. GW is probably their only witness left, that the NFL says admitted a bounty program. But he has already denied he said their was a bounty program threw a 3rd party. Just not in person yet.
...

Bait. Now put out crap. When the NFLPA takes this to court and calls the "bluff," then present the real evidence and act surprised that the EVIL NFLPA took it this far.

And I would not put it beyond them to imply to Greg Williams that shading the truth -or plain old perjury if you prefer- is the quickest way to get his ban lifted