| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
J Pep 4 Step
Joined: 01 Apr 2007
Posts: 25248
Location: Greenvillain, NC
|
 Posted: Mon Jun 25, 2012 3:58 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
|
| Harper41 wrote: | | jrry32 wrote: | http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/8090950/scott-fujita-sees-bounty-probe-smear-campaign
I found this interesting...especially the part about Joe Vitt who has maintained that same story all along. |
And the sketchy gets sketchier. |
Not really.
It's just another conspiracy angle. If that makes things sketchy to you, a lot in life must be sketchy.
_________________
| jrry32 wrote: | | Faulk's argument style is reminiscent of Mark Sanchez's passing style. Inconsistent as hell and all over the place. I'm just waiting for him to run into iPwn's butt and fumble. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
EliteTexan80
Joined: 30 Apr 2007
Posts: 37190
Location: Three time Mr. fanTASTic!
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 25, 2012 4:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| J Pep 4 Step wrote: | | Harper41 wrote: | | jrry32 wrote: | http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/8090950/scott-fujita-sees-bounty-probe-smear-campaign
I found this interesting...especially the part about Joe Vitt who has maintained that same story all along. |
And the sketchy gets sketchier. |
Not really.
It's just another conspiracy angle. If that makes things sketchy to you, a lot in life must be sketchy. |
That's kind of how I see it. Shooter in the grassy knoll if I've ever seen one.
_________________
iPwn, Kempes and Flaccomania: The official sig makers for THE ET80! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
khodder
Joined: 19 Dec 2005
Posts: 48021
Location: New New York
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 25, 2012 4:14 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| spilltray wrote: | | It just boggles me. What would the NFL gain by smacking the Saints? Why would they just hammer the Saints? I realize they want to be tough on player safety issues, but why would the league create a fake bounty scenario to try and prove they will come down hard on it. It would have been better if it were never an issue to begin with. I've never seen one good reason for the conspiracy theory yet (not that that is so unusual with the types of people that wear tinfoil hats). |
What the NFL has to gain has nothing to do with the Saints individually. The Saints are just a pawn in the game that is the 2000 strong class action law suit of former players against the NFL. The NFL are pushing this hard because it sends a message to the judiciary system that the NFL does take it's player safety seriously. This "bountygate" is a small fry in the eyes of the NFL, however the want to swing a heavy axe on this becasue of the media attention and the fact that is portrays the NFL as going all out whatever the cost to tend to a player safety issue.
_________________
Patrick Peterson - 92 targets, 40 catches allowed, 602 yards, 6 TD's, 7 INT's
The Big Brain am winning again, I am the Greetest. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
spilltray
Joined: 09 Jan 2006
Posts: 8650
Location: Green Bay, WI
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 25, 2012 4:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| khodder wrote: | | spilltray wrote: | | It just boggles me. What would the NFL gain by smacking the Saints? Why would they just hammer the Saints? I realize they want to be tough on player safety issues, but why would the league create a fake bounty scenario to try and prove they will come down hard on it. It would have been better if it were never an issue to begin with. I've never seen one good reason for the conspiracy theory yet (not that that is so unusual with the types of people that wear tinfoil hats). |
What the NFL has to gain has nothing to do with the Saints individually. The Saints are just a pawn in the game that is the 2000 strong class action law suit of former players against the NFL. The NFL are pushing this hard because it sends a message to the judiciary system that the NFL does take it's player safety seriously. This "bountygate" is a small fry in the eyes of the NFL, however the want to swing a heavy axe on this becasue of the media attention and the fact that is portrays the NFL as going all out whatever the cost to tend to a player safety issue. |
I still say PR-wise, the NFL would have been better off if they never had the bounty issue to deal with rather than being able to come down hard on it. Also, IF they were going to find a team to make a scapegoat of, picking the Saints just doesn't make sense. Yes I understand that IF THERE WAS A BOUNTY ISSUE, the NFL would want to come down hard on it for PR reasons and maybe the suspensions were harder than they would have prior to the whole "crackdown" on player safety, but that's been ongoing for a while now.
I agree that the severity of the suspensions might be somewhat inflated for PR reasons, but manufacturing a fake scandal to have an excuse to punish something? I just can't buy it.
_________________
| Wilfred wrote: | | Memory is like the Packers when they are behind by two touchdowns in the 4th quarter... It comes back. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
The LBC
Joined: 12 Jan 2008
Posts: 15538
Location: Long Beach, CA
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 25, 2012 5:06 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| khodder wrote: | | spilltray wrote: | | It just boggles me. What would the NFL gain by smacking the Saints? Why would they just hammer the Saints? I realize they want to be tough on player safety issues, but why would the league create a fake bounty scenario to try and prove they will come down hard on it. It would have been better if it were never an issue to begin with. I've never seen one good reason for the conspiracy theory yet (not that that is so unusual with the types of people that wear tinfoil hats). |
What the NFL has to gain has nothing to do with the Saints individually. The Saints are just a pawn in the game that is the 2000 strong class action law suit of former players against the NFL. The NFL are pushing this hard because it sends a message to the judiciary system that the NFL does take it's player safety seriously. This "bountygate" is a small fry in the eyes of the NFL, however the want to swing a heavy axe on this becasue of the media attention and the fact that is portrays the NFL as going all out whatever the cost to tend to a player safety issue. |
I agree that there is something to gain for the NFL. But (and thankfully I can get this bit in here in preface of someone comes out on a massive rail), I don't think for one instant that this was a case of the NFL targeting the Saints specifically or being out to put the screws to the Saints. If anything, because they were the Saints I could see where they'd be more inclined to normally sweep this under the rug.
It's a combination of bad timing and everyone (teams, players, the union, to some extent Goodell, coaches, fans, members of the media) turning a conveniently blind eye to the matter prior (and don't think for one second that both sides - players and the league/owners - were perfectly happy to walk that razor's edge so long as doing so put considerably more $$ in their pockets than making more drastic safety-centric changes to the game). The point is that if the sufficient evidence had been there to drop this ball on the Rams, the Ravens, the Titans, the Lions, or any other team. The Saints just happened to be the ones who had made the mistake of creating the perfect storm (a pay-for-performance system, a coach with, at minimum the oversight to allow an assistant to use bounty-conspicuous terminology and references like "cart off" "kill the head" & "collect our $$$$," and the isolation of someone within the organization enough to provide motivation for someone with access to that evidence to come forward).
And even all that that I just listed is still something of a stretch, assuming it's all true. So these outlandish "NFL's been out to get specifically the Saints" conspiracy theories are pushing it way too far. Unfortunately, not everybody that breaks rules/laws get punished... only those that (are dumb enough to) get caught. It doesn't change the fact that if a party broke the rule they shouldn't be held responsible.
_________________
| The Cryptkeeper wrote: | | He's Long, he's strong, and down to get the hittin' on. Russell got whacked. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jrry32
Joined: 04 Jan 2011
Posts: 31454
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 25, 2012 5:33 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| J Pep 4 Step wrote: | | Harper41 wrote: | | jrry32 wrote: | http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/8090950/scott-fujita-sees-bounty-probe-smear-campaign
I found this interesting...especially the part about Joe Vitt who has maintained that same story all along. |
And the sketchy gets sketchier. |
Not really.
It's just another conspiracy angle. If that makes things sketchy to you, a lot in life must be sketchy. |
I don't know. Vitt has claimed he never added to the pot. He never said it didn't happen. He's only expressed his innocence in that one aspect. I remember a couple other players speaking up on his behalf prior to this and now Fujita says that Vitt wasn't involved in that capacity.
It certainly makes you say hmmm. We all know it happened, I just wonder if the NFL didn't "spruce up" some of the evidence. I think it's possible...not likely but possible. It's also possible that the source they got it from might have mislead them.
_________________
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
khodder
Joined: 19 Dec 2005
Posts: 48021
Location: New New York
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 25, 2012 7:46 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
Just to make it clear I don't think this is the NFL being "Out to get the Saints" it is just that the Saints were the unfortunate team that had enough evidence put on the table against them and the NFL took the ball and ran with it, ran with it all the way to PR heaven.
It makes them look like a league that really cares about player safety, regaardless of if they annoy an entire teams fan base, suspend four players and get on the wrong side of the Union.
However bedhin the scenes that same NFL is still pushing for a longer season. Makes sense right.
_________________
Patrick Peterson - 92 targets, 40 catches allowed, 602 yards, 6 TD's, 7 INT's
The Big Brain am winning again, I am the Greetest. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
J Pep 4 Step
Joined: 01 Apr 2007
Posts: 25248
Location: Greenvillain, NC
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 25, 2012 8:05 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| khodder wrote: | Just to make it clear I don't think this is the NFL being "Out to get the Saints" it is just that the Saints were the unfortunate team that had enough evidence put on the table against them and the NFL took the ball and ran with it, ran with it all the way to PR heaven.
It makes them look like a league that really cares about player safety, regaardless of if they annoy an entire teams fan base, suspend four players and get on the wrong side of the Union.
However bedhin the scenes that same NFL is still pushing for a longer season. Makes sense right. |
It makes perfect sense. The NFL is a business. It's here to make money. Theyre trying to balance safety and profit.
Would staying at 16 games prove theyre more interested in safety than pushing for an 18 game season? Would fans be more satisfied with a 12 game season? Would players be more satisfied if the NFL limited careers to 6 years for the players own good?
Safety and profit arent necessarily mutually exclusive. And the NFL shouldnt feel obligated to swing entirely one way or the other. At some point the players are going to have to recognize and understand the risk and be willing to accept the risk or walk away. Whether its a 12 game season, a 16 game season or an 18 game season.
_________________
| jrry32 wrote: | | Faulk's argument style is reminiscent of Mark Sanchez's passing style. Inconsistent as hell and all over the place. I'm just waiting for him to run into iPwn's butt and fumble. |
Last edited by J Pep 4 Step on Mon Jun 25, 2012 8:07 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
DaveDX
Joined: 21 Mar 2007
Posts: 2808
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 25, 2012 8:06 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| 91jmay wrote: | Would anyone have believed that the RAIDERS D was taking bonus money to do anything other than get gashed  |
Valid. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
tytalton
Joined: 12 Jan 2010
Posts: 844
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 25, 2012 9:38 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
Was Goodell's investigation really launched 3 years ago or was it just retroactive to whatever he could document something resembling an investigation?
Three years and this is the evidence the NFL has? Does anyone believe you could bring this into a civil court, call it evidence of a bounty system, and win a civil case agsinst Vilma, Fujita or any of the accused? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Jeebs
Joined: 18 Aug 2008
Posts: 2400
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 25, 2012 9:48 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| tytalton wrote: | | Three years and this is the evidence the NFL has? |
No, it isn't. Nobody ever claimed this was all of the evidence. I believe I was hearing that the document list was in the tens of thousands.
| tytalton wrote: | | Does anyone believe you could bring this into a civil court, call it evidence of a bounty system, and win a civil case agsinst Vilma, Fujita or any of the accused? |
This is far from a court of law so the analogy doesn't really matter. The players gave Goodell this power when signing the current CBA.
_________________
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
tytalton
Joined: 12 Jan 2010
Posts: 844
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 25, 2012 10:33 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| Quote: | This is far from a court of law so the analogy doesn't really matter. The players gave Goodell this power when signing the current CBA.
|
A civil court is what Goodell is going to get with Vilma et al....I don't think the judge is going to factor in the CBA as much as you think if/when he hears the case. Agreeing to a collective bargain doesn't give someone the right to fabricate or contort 'evidence' (using the term loosely) to fit an ego driven agenda, which is what this appears to be at this point. And this is flimsy circumstantial junk that cites events unsupported by the same video it claims is evidence.
| Quote: | No, it isn't. Nobody ever claimed this was all of the evidence. I believe I was hearing that the document list was in the tens of thousands.
|
I doubt Goodell is leading with his weakest evidence and saving his ace in the hole for a rainy day. Because if destroying a player's career and reputation isn't worth coming correct for I don't know what is? I don't believe he has anything remotely substantial in his document list based on what he has produced up until this point. Do you think Hargrove or Vilma's lawyers can't produce an equally tall pile of garbage to haul into a hearing that contradicts Goodell's garbage pile? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
J Pep 4 Step
Joined: 01 Apr 2007
Posts: 25248
Location: Greenvillain, NC
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 25, 2012 10:38 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| tytalton wrote: | | A civil court is what Goodell is going to get with Vilma et al....I don't think the judge is going to factor in the CBA as much as you think if/when he hears the case. Agreeing to a collective bargain doesn't give someone the right to fabricate or contort 'evidence' (using the term loosely) to fit an ego driven agenda, which is what this appears to be at this point. And this is flimsy circumstantial junk that cites events unsupported by the same video it claims is evidence. |
Are you talking about Vilma's case against the NFL/Goodell? You realize it's Vilma that is going to have to "prove his case" in that courtroom, right? Not the other way around.
| Quote: | | I doubt Goodell is leading with his weakest evidence and saving his ace in the hole for a rainy day. Because if destroying a player's career and reputation isn't worth coming correct for I don't know what is? I don't believe he has anything remotely substantial in his document list based on what he has produced up until this point. Do you think Hargrove or Vilma's lawyers can't produce an equally tall pile of garbage to haul into a hearing that contradicts Goodell's garbage pile? |
Do you think Goodell decided to proceed one way or the other without the thumbs up from the NFL's million dollar legal team?
Do you think you might be in a bit over your head here?
_________________
| jrry32 wrote: | | Faulk's argument style is reminiscent of Mark Sanchez's passing style. Inconsistent as hell and all over the place. I'm just waiting for him to run into iPwn's butt and fumble. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
tytalton
Joined: 12 Jan 2010
Posts: 844
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 25, 2012 11:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| Quote: | | Are you talking about Vilma's case against the NFL/Goodell? You realize it's Vilma that is going to have to "prove his case" in that courtroom, right? Not the other way around. |
Proving that Goodell doesn't have squat on him and he is getting slandered? Yeah - I think he can show a tape of every game he has played in since the investigation and show he hasn't injured anyone nor done anything outside the mean for an NFL player. I think he can prove that easily. Very easily in fact.
| Quote: | Do you think Goodell decided to proceed one way or the other without the thumbs up from the NFL's million dollar legal team?
Do you think you might be in a bit over your head here? |
I thought Goodell had total CBA granted power and authority? Why would he feel the need to consult his million dollar legal team? Why would he feel compelled to listen to them if they wrote up his iron clad power as a disciplinarian? Why would Vilma's legal team even agree to bring suit if they are going to face Goodell's million dollar legal team?
Why would I think I am in over my head any moreso than yourself with that comment and analysis of the bountygate situation? Why would my post be any more or less valid than yours? Are you implying you have some kind of specialized knowledge of the bountygatge situation and you alone are qualified to comment on it? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jonu62882
Joined: 17 Nov 2008
Posts: 18416
Location: Philadelphia, PA
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 25, 2012 11:27 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
^Sam Waterston, is that you?  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
|
FAQ
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
