Saints bounty evidence released to players

[Anonymous]

To be fair to the players, there was far, far more evidence of the pay-for-performance claims than the bounty claims," SI.com's Peter King wrote. "In fact, the [Saints safety Roma] Harper claim was the only one the league showed that resulted in a payout to a player for knocking a player out of a game. However, the NFL has maintained all along that all it needs is evidence that a bounty program was in place and that money was offered to try to take opponents out of the game -- not that players were actually taken out of the game."

And that's where Fujita had a real leg to stand on when he responded to the process once Monday's hearings were over.

Yeah well King and Farrar need to read the league constitution. It clearly states that just the OFFER of a non-contractual reward is illegal. It doesn't even mention bounties specifically. The offer of any kind alone is illegal.

 

[Ram Quixote]

This has a different smell to me.

The grandstanding by Fujita, Vilma, etc, isn't all about them (of course, they're looking out for their interests) or the Bountygate investigation. This is the NFLPA's attempt to put the appeals process into the spotlight. Forget the executioner. They don't like that Goodell is both judge and jury.

It has never seemed appropriate that the man handing down suspensions rules on whether a suspension is appropriate.

I was in an unrelated situation once, in which I made a stupid mistake. Yet the punishment handed down was unrealistic. I was forced to make my case to the same people who judged me in the first place. You can guess how that went.

 

[DR RAM]

This has a different smell to me.

The grandstanding by Fujita, Vilma, etc, isn't all about them (of course, they're looking out for their interests) or the Bountygate investigation. This is the NFLPA's attempt to put the appeals process into the spotlight. Forget the executioner. They don't like that Goodell is both judge and jury.

It has never seemed appropriate that the man handing down suspensions rules on whether a suspension is appropriate.

I was in an unrelated situation once, in which I made a stupid mistake. Yet the punishment handed down was unrealistic. I was forced to make my case to the same people who judged me in the first place. You can guess how that went.

GUILTY, without evidence!

 

[Ram Quixote]

This has a different smell to me.

The grandstanding by Fujita, Vilma, etc, isn't all about them (of course, they're looking out for their interests) or the Bountygate investigation. This is the NFLPA's attempt to put the appeals process into the spotlight. Forget the executioner. They don't like that Goodell is both judge and jury.

It has never seemed appropriate that the man handing down suspensions rules on whether a suspension is appropriate.

I was in an unrelated situation once, in which I made a stupid mistake. Yet the punishment handed down was unrealistic. I was forced to make my case to the same people who judged me in the first place. You can guess how that went.

GUILTY, without evidence!

Naw, there was evidence. You see, when you get a job after being on unemployment for many months, you're not supposed to mail the form you got in the habit of filling out (this was in 93). But that wouldn't have been a problem except my wife opened the mail and deposited the check. Two months later I get a notice saying I owe them that money back, plus a fine. That all got taken care of. Three years later, I get laid off and apply for unemployment. Denied. Appeal fails. Meanwhile, I know my brother is getting paid under the table and collecting unemployment. The system was setup to catch naive fools while the scam artists skate past. I don't know if it's any better today.

 

[Thordaddy]

Well IMO the union is trying to portray this as about bounties instead of PFP , sort of the way Clinton spun perjury to be irrelevant because it was about a BJ.

As far as whether Goodell aught to have the power he has ,the SAME union leadership that bargained that power away are IMO in CYA mode and trying to portray this as the Tagliabue Crime family against the St. Louis School for the deaf ,dumb and clueless.
It's ALL pretty bazaar,I agree with the proposition that some of the player sanctions are disproportionate, but Vilma and Fujita aught to reserve a significant amount of rage for their player reps, the union leadership AND their agents who could have read the new CBA before they advised them to ratify it, ALL PLAYERS SHOULD.

Union leaders channel Otter here, "hey you f-ed up ,you trusted me". But WHAT? IS NEW? ABOUT THAT?

 

[Stranger]

Well IMO the union is trying to portray this as about bounties instead of PFP , sort of the way Clinton spun perjury to be irrelevant because it was about a BJ.

As far as whether Goodell aught to have the power he has ,the SAME union leadership that bargained that power away are IMO in CYA mode and trying to portray this as the Tagliabue Crime family against the St. Louis School for the deaf ,dumb and clueless.
It's ALL pretty bazaar,I agree with the proposition that some of the player sanctions are disproportionate, but Vilma and Fujita aught to reserve a significant amount of rage for their player reps, the union leadership AND their agents who could have read the new CBA before they advised them to ratify it, ALL PLAYERS SHOULD.

Union leaders channel Otter here, "hey you f-ed up ,you trusted me". But WHAT? IS NEW? ABOUT THAT?

I totally agree with you here, the Union leaders either F'd up or sold-out the players on this point. At the time of the CBA negotiations, I was all over that process like I am now over this sham of due-process. I hope, as you say, that the players turn an equal amount of their rage at their own leadership, and perhaps make some changes there.

PS. I'm certainly no fan of unions, as many have had their leadership taken over by the same interests that run the corporations that the Union workers work for. It's all pretty ugly.

 

[Anonymous]

Well IMO the union is trying to portray this as about bounties instead of PFP , sort of the way Clinton spun perjury to be irrelevant because it was about a BJ.

As far as whether Goodell aught to have the power he has ,the SAME union leadership that bargained that power away are IMO in CYA mode and trying to portray this as the Tagliabue Crime family against the St. Louis School for the deaf ,dumb and clueless.
It's ALL pretty bazaar,I agree with the proposition that some of the player sanctions are disproportionate, but Vilma and Fujita aught to reserve a significant amount of rage for their player reps, the union leadership AND their agents who could have read the new CBA before they advised them to ratify it, ALL PLAYERS SHOULD.

Union leaders channel Otter here, "hey you f-ed up ,you trusted me". But WHAT? IS NEW? ABOUT THAT?

I totally agree with you here, the Union leaders either F'd up or sold-out the players on this point. At the time of the CBA negotiations, I was all over that process like I am now over this sham of due-process. I hope, as you say, that the players turn an equal amount of their rage at their own leadership, and perhaps make some changes there.

PS. I'm certainly no fan of unions, as many have had their leadership taken over by the same interests that run the corporations that the Union workers work for. It's all pretty ugly.

C'mon.

Everyone knew what was in the CBA. The union didn't "not advise" guys. They even tried to directly alter the "Goddell as final say on violations" thing and lost. This was common every day reported news.

Everyone knew what was what. They knew all about it. The union didn't "fail to tell" anyone anything.

The guilty as hell Saints players are just all using a bunch of player speak and lawyer jargon now to try and get out of it. They're whiners. To me it sounds exactly like an old player who gets cut and denies he lost his game. Players ride on big egos...they have to. This is no different. It's even kind of funny.

But they knew.

 

[Stranger]

C'mon.

Everyone knew what was in the CBA. The union didn't "not advise" guys. They even tried to directly alter the "Goddell as final say on violations" thing and lost. This was common every day reported news.

Everyone knew what was what. They knew all about it. The union didn't "fail to tell" anyone anything.

The guilty as hell Saints players are just all using a bunch of player speak and lawyer jargon now to try and get out of it. They're whiners. To me it sounds exactly like an old player who gets cut and denies he lost his game. Players ride on big egos...they have to. This is no different. It's even kind of funny.

But they knew.

This post shows us exactly why transparent due-process is so essential, because we have judgements being made based upon a media PR campaign. None of us know what really went down, because no one has seen all the evidence. It's just so easy to slamn someone in the media these days, especially when you own your own network and control the vast majority of sportswriters. There is just no way to have a fair hearing without the matter being heard in a neutral venue with appropriate rules of evidence inforced.

I'll continue to rally for due-process and withhold judgement about the guilt or innocense of the players until the above happens.

 

[-X-]

None of us know what really went down, because no one has seen all the evidence.

What more evidence do you need in addition to what was already provided in those links?

But before you answer that...

Do you think there was no rule violation at all here? Take away all the talk about intent to injure, because that's not really the core issue. Do you think the Saints' coaches and players are NOT guilty of awarding non-contract bonuses via a pool of both player and coach contributions?

 

[Stranger]

None of us know what really went down, because no one has seen all the evidence.

What more evidence do you need in addition to what was already provided in those links?

But before you answer that...

Do you think there was no rule violation at all here? Take away all the talk about intent to injure, because that's not really the core issue. Do you think the Saints' coaches and players are NOT guilty of awarding non-contract bonuses via a pool of both player and coach contributions?

Tell me, would you like your livelihood and your reputation, as played-out on the national stage, subjected to a process like this?

And tell me this, have you ever had your name dragged through the mud in the media, without some reasonable due process?

We might as well go back to the Salem witch trials, because I can't really see much of a difference here.

Bottom line, I have no idea what the heck happened nor do I understand the motivations of all the parties, and there is just no way to tell until ALL the evidence is presented and ALL that evidence is subject to a challenge process.

 

[-X-]

None of us know what really went down, because no one has seen all the evidence.

What more evidence do you need in addition to what was already provided in those links?

But before you answer that...

Do you think there was no rule violation at all here? Take away all the talk about intent to injure, because that's not really the core issue. Do you think the Saints' coaches and players are NOT guilty of awarding non-contract bonuses via a pool of both player and coach contributions?

Tell me, would you like your livelihood and your reputation, as played-out on the national stage, subjected to a process like this?

And tell me this, have you ever had your name dragged through the mud in the media, without some reasonable due process?

We might as well go back to the Salem witch trials, because I can't really see much of a difference here.

Bottom line, I have no idea what the heck happened nor do I understand the motivations of all the parties, and there is just no way to tell until ALL the evidence is presented and ALL that evidence is subject to a challenge process.

Would I like it? No, I wouldn't. Would I expect it? Sure I would. I'd be naive to think otherwise.

I have had my name dragged through the mud, but not through the media. I'm not a celebrity (see above). I did get my vindication though in court, so there's that. Nobody is immune to scrutiny, so I'm not really in disbelief over the idea that NFL players are right now.

I see a MONUMENTAL difference between the Salem witch trials and this.

You have no idea what happened and you don't understand the motivations? Seriously? I think you're kidding me. The Saints' coaches and players were involved in offering (and collecting) non-contract bonuses, and that violates the CBA. The FACT that the word "cart-offs" and other similar phrases were used, only fueled the fire - although it did take the core issue off track and into an oncoming locomotive. I provided several links earlier which presented all the evidence offered to the players and media. The documents are rather lengthy, but you should probably read them.

 

[Anonymous]

C'mon.

Everyone knew what was in the CBA. The union didn't "not advise" guys. They even tried to directly alter the "Goddell as final say on violations" thing and lost. This was common every day reported news.

Everyone knew what was what. They knew all about it. The union didn't "fail to tell" anyone anything.

The guilty as hell Saints players are just all using a bunch of player speak and lawyer jargon now to try and get out of it. They're whiners. To me it sounds exactly like an old player who gets cut and denies he lost his game. Players ride on big egos...they have to. This is no different. It's even kind of funny.

But they knew.

This post shows us exactly why transparent due-process is so essential, because we have judgements being made based upon a media PR campaign. None of us know what really went down, because no one has seen all the evidence. It's just so easy to slamn someone in the media these days, especially when you own your own network and control the vast majority of sportswriters. There is just no way to have a fair hearing without the matter being heard in a neutral venue with appropriate rules of evidence inforced.

I'll continue to rally for due-process and withhold judgement about the guilt or innocense of the players until the above happens.

First, the players via the union ratified a set-up which by league constitution gives the commissioner final authority in judging all rules infractions. So what the commish did is legal.

2nd, we have enough evidence to know the rule was violated. On top of it they were told to stop, lied, and didn't.

All the rest, to me, is hand-wringing.

 

[Stranger]

None of us know what really went down, because no one has seen all the evidence.

What more evidence do you need in addition to what was already provided in those links?

But before you answer that...

Do you think there was no rule violation at all here? Take away all the talk about intent to injure, because that's not really the core issue. Do you think the Saints' coaches and players are NOT guilty of awarding non-contract bonuses via a pool of both player and coach contributions?

Tell me, would you like your livelihood and your reputation, as played-out on the national stage, subjected to a process like this?

And tell me this, have you ever had your name dragged through the mud in the media, without some reasonable due process?

We might as well go back to the Salem witch trials, because I can't really see much of a difference here.

Bottom line, I have no idea what the heck happened nor do I understand the motivations of all the parties, and there is just no way to tell until ALL the evidence is presented and ALL that evidence is subject to a challenge process.

Would I like it? No, I wouldn't. Would I expect it? Sure I would. I'd be naive to think otherwise.

I have had my name dragged through the mud, but not through the media. I'm not a celebrity (see above). I did get my vindication though in court, so there's that. Nobody is immune to scrutiny, so I'm not really in disbelief over the idea that NFL players are right now.

I see a MONUMENTAL difference between the Salem witch trials and this.

You have no idea what happened and you don't understand the motivations? Seriously? I think you're kidding me. The Saints' coaches and players were involved in offering (and collecting) non-contract bonuses, and that violates the CBA. The FACT that the word "cart-offs" and other similar phrases were used, only fueled the fire - although it did take the core issue off track and into an oncoming locomotive. I provided several links earlier which presented all the evidence offered to the players and media. The documents are rather lengthy, but you should probably read them.

Great, I'm glad that you were vindicated in court. Why should these players not be afforded the same before we cast judgement?

I also agree that no one, especially someone in the public eye, is not immune from scrutiny. But are we going to rely on a system of PR practitioners operating via media that they own, are are we to use impartial systems where rules of evidence are firmly established?

C'mon.

Everyone knew what was in the CBA. The union didn't "not advise" guys. They even tried to directly alter the "Goddell as final say on violations" thing and lost. This was common every day reported news.

Everyone knew what was what. They knew all about it. The union didn't "fail to tell" anyone anything.

The guilty as hell Saints players are just all using a bunch of player speak and lawyer jargon now to try and get out of it. They're whiners. To me it sounds exactly like an old player who gets cut and denies he lost his game. Players ride on big egos...they have to. This is no different. It's even kind of funny.

But they knew.

This post shows us exactly why transparent due-process is so essential, because we have judgements being made based upon a media PR campaign. None of us know what really went down, because no one has seen all the evidence. It's just so easy to slamn someone in the media these days, especially when you own your own network and control the vast majority of sportswriters. There is just no way to have a fair hearing without the matter being heard in a neutral venue with appropriate rules of evidence inforced.

I'll continue to rally for due-process and withhold judgement about the guilt or innocense of the players until the above happens.

First, the players via the union ratified a set-up which by league constitution gives the commissioner final authority in judging all rules infractions. So what the commish did is legal.

2nd, we have enough evidence to know the rule was violated. On top of it they were told to stop, lied, and didn't.

All the rest, to me, is hand-wringing.

What the commish did is within the terms of the contract between the NFL and the NFLPA, it is neither legal or illegal.

The so-called evidence you see is PR, run through a very tightly corporate controlled machine.

I think the quintissential difference between my orientation and those express here is that I simply do not trust the media nor do I trust multinational corporate PR. They lie all the time. In fact, in my experience, they lie far more than then they tell the truth. I just see no basis for trusting or accepting any of the narratives we've been told so far.

 

[Thordaddy]

None of us know what really went down, because no one has seen all the evidence.

What more evidence do you need in addition to what was already provided in those links?

But before you answer that...

Do you think there was no rule violation at all here? Take away all the talk about intent to injure, because that's not really the core issue. Do you think the Saints' coaches and players are NOT guilty of awarding non-contract bonuses via a pool of both player and coach contributions?

Tell me, would you like your livelihood and your reputation, as played-out on the national stage, subjected to a process like this?

And tell me this, have you ever had your name dragged through the mud in the media, without some reasonable due process?

We might as well go back to the Salem witch trials, because I can't really see much of a difference here.

Bottom line, I have no idea what the heck happened nor do I understand the motivations of all the parties, and there is just no way to tell until ALL the evidence is presented and ALL that evidence is subject to a challenge process.

Would I like it? No, I wouldn't. Would I expect it? Sure I would. I'd be naive to think otherwise.

I have had my name dragged through the mud, but not through the media. I'm not a celebrity (see above). I did get my vindication though in court, so there's that. Nobody is immune to scrutiny, so I'm not really in disbelief over the idea that NFL players are right now.

I see a MONUMENTAL difference between the Salem witch trials and this.

You have no idea what happened and you don't understand the motivations? Seriously? I think you're kidding me. The Saints' coaches and players were involved in offering (and collecting) non-contract bonuses, and that violates the CBA. The FACT that the word "cart-offs" and other similar phrases were used, only fueled the fire - although it did take the core issue off track and into an oncoming locomotive. I provided several links earlier which presented all the evidence offered to the players and media. The documents are rather lengthy, but you should probably read them.

Great, I'm glad that you were vindicated in court. Why should these players not be afforded the same before we cast judgement?

I also agree that no one, especially someone in the public eye, is not immune from scrutiny. But are we going to rely on a system of PR practitioners operating via media that they own, are are we to use impartial systems where rules of evidence are firmly established?

C'mon.

Everyone knew what was in the CBA. The union didn't "not advise" guys. They even tried to directly alter the "Goddell as final say on violations" thing and lost. This was common every day reported news.

Everyone knew what was what. They knew all about it. The union didn't "fail to tell" anyone anything.

The guilty as hell Saints players are just all using a bunch of player speak and lawyer jargon now to try and get out of it. They're whiners. To me it sounds exactly like an old player who gets cut and denies he lost his game. Players ride on big egos...they have to. This is no different. It's even kind of funny.

But they knew.

This post shows us exactly why transparent due-process is so essential, because we have judgements being made based upon a media PR campaign. None of us know what really went down, because no one has seen all the evidence. It's just so easy to slamn someone in the media these days, especially when you own your own network and control the vast majority of sportswriters. There is just no way to have a fair hearing without the matter being heard in a neutral venue with appropriate rules of evidence inforced.

I'll continue to rally for due-process and withhold judgement about the guilt or innocense of the players until the above happens.

First, the players via the union ratified a set-up which by league constitution gives the commissioner final authority in judging all rules infractions. So what the commish did is legal.

2nd, we have enough evidence to know the rule was violated. On top of it they were told to stop, lied, and didn't.

All the rest, to me, is hand-wringing.

What the commish did is within the terms of the contract between the NFL and the NFLPA, it is neither legal or illegal.

The so-called evidence you see is PR, run through a very tightly corporate controlled machine.

I think the quintissential difference between my orientation and those express here is that I simply do not trust the media nor do I trust multinational corporate PR. They lie all the time. In fact, in my experience, they lie far more than then they tell the truth. I just see no basis for trusting or accepting any of the narratives we've been told so far.

So they make this whole thing up and drop the shit bomb on the Saints,fantastical.

 

[Ram Quixote]

So they make this whole thing up and drop the shyte bomb on the Saints,fantastical.

I don't think he meant it quite that extreme. Obviously, the investigation had some kind of evidence that convinced Greg Williams to confess. It's the evidence against the players that he's mostly contesting, and the severity of their punishment (I think).

I don't believe anyone can say there wasn't a pay-for-play system functioning in NO. Even if some want the evidence laid out through litigation. I can't say I'm against forcing transparency on corporate NFL.

 

[Thordaddy]

So they make this whole thing up and drop the shyte bomb on the Saints,fantastical.

I don't think he meant it quite that extreme. Obviously, the investigation had some kind of evidence that convinced Greg Williams to confess. It's the evidence against the players that he's mostly contesting, and the severity of their punishment (I think).

I don't believe anyone can say there wasn't a pay-for-play system functioning in NO. Even if some want the evidence laid out through litigation. I can't say I'm against forcing transparency on corporate NFL.

So you don't interpret this :

"I think the quintissential difference between my orientation and those express here is that I simply do not trust the media nor do I trust multinational corporate PR. They lie all the time. In fact, in my experience, they lie far more than then they tell the truth. I just see no basis for trusting or accepting any of the narratives we've been told so far."

to be an allegation that things are being made up?

OK but it sounds that way 2 me.

The one thing I think that has to be done though is to protect the whistle blowers and JMO a lot of this is to ferret them out and "deal with them"

Clearly what is being alleged has evidential basis ,and yeah the appeal aught to have a vehicle included wherein Vilma and others can lessen their punishment , but if transparency only chills the ability to discover this sort of thing going forward I'm not for it, there have been enough confessions to satisfy my tendencies toward disbelief.

 

[Ram Quixote]

So they make this whole thing up and drop the shyte bomb on the Saints,fantastical.

I don't think he meant it quite that extreme. Obviously, the investigation had some kind of evidence that convinced Greg Williams to confess. It's the evidence against the players that he's mostly contesting, and the severity of their punishment (I think).

I don't believe anyone can say there wasn't a pay-for-play system functioning in NO. Even if some want the evidence laid out through litigation. I can't say I'm against forcing transparency on corporate NFL.

So you don't interpret this :

"I think the quintissential difference between my orientation and those express here is that I simply do not trust the media nor do I trust multinational corporate PR. They lie all the time. In fact, in my experience, they lie far more than then they tell the truth. I just see no basis for trusting or accepting any of the narratives we've been told so far."

to be an allegation that things are being made up?

OK but it sounds that way 2 me.

The one thing I think that has to be done though is to protect the whistle blowers and JMO a lot of this is to ferret them out and "deal with them"

Clearly what is being alleged has evidential basis ,and yeah the appeal aught to have a vehicle included wherein Vilma and others can lessen their punishment , but if transparency only chills the ability to discover this sort of thing going forward I'm not for it, there have been enough confessions to satisfy my tendencies toward disbelief.

No, I don't interpret that paragraph as anything but philosophical rhetoric. Certainly not as specific as your interpretation. But I'll grant, interference does go a bit over the top. I'm thinking of renting him my armor and helmet for his tilting.

I don't doubt there's an agenda to discover the NFL's whistle-blowers, but there's a precedence in the NFL's opaqueness that I find disturbing, and until they are found to be lying (in this or some other event) they surely won't temper their tactics.

 

[-X-]

05:24 – As one of 12 reporters to see the NFL's "bounty" evidence, Steve Wyche shares his findings with co-host Jason Smith.

[YouTube]09000d5d82a083f5[/YouTube]
http://www.nfl.com/videos/new-orleans-s ... -breakdown

 

[Stranger]

So they make this whole thing up and drop the shit bomb on the Saints,fantastical.

Can you say "weapons of mass destruction"?

Yeah, I think it is very possible that this case is contrived for alterior motives. I think it is possible that in a court of law, with a reasonably fair jury, and a good cross-examination attorney, that the case could be destroyed. So yeah, I don't put much stock into any of the media driven noise everyone else seems to be relying upon.

 

[Stranger]

05:24 – As one of 12 reporters to see the NFL's "bounty" evidence, Steve Wyche shares his findings with co-host Jason Smith.

[YouTube]09000d5d82a083f5[/YouTube]
http://www.nfl.com/videos/new-orleans-s ... -breakdown

1. Wyche works for a media subsidiary of NFL Corporate.

2. Wyche is not a lawyer, judge, and I don't think he has any legal background.