NFL Re-Issues Suspensions on Bounty Players - Dallas Cowboys Forum

DWhite Fan · 10-09-2012

"The NFL “reaffirmed” discipline on the alleged bounty players on Tuesday, but adjusted certain aspects of the penalties."

http://msn.foxsports.com/nfl/story/N...eissued-100912

Joshmil53 · 10-09-2012

hahahahha

67CowboysFan · 10-09-2012

Quote:

Originally Posted by Joshmil53

hahahahha

burmafrd · 10-10-2012

waiting for the whining Aint's fan....

Andrew76021 · 10-10-2012

Quote:

Originally Posted by burmafrd

waiting for the whining Aint's fan....

So you could make some more unsubstantiated claims without any facts of the case? BTW, the Ommissioner still has not shown any proof to the players/personel suspended or the media to warrant his charges.

Some day the truth will surface and you'll see how corrupt this entire sham of case is. The evidence presented over the past 7 months has been pathetic and contradictory along the way.

You just like to think its true so you don't have to feel so dissappointed about the team you follow. Takes the sting out of fan embarrassment when others have issues.

Cowboys&LakersFan · 10-10-2012

Good. Should've never been undone in the first place.

67CowboysFan · 10-10-2012

Quote:

Originally Posted by Andrew76021

So you could make some more unsubstantiated claims without any facts of the case? BTW, the Ommissioner still has not shown any proof to the players/personel suspended or the media to warrant his charges.

Some day the truth will surface and you'll see how corrupt this entire sham of case is. The evidence presented over the past 7 months has been pathetic and contradictory along the way.

You just like to think its true so you don't have to feel so dissappointed about the team you follow. Takes the sting out of fan embarrassment when others have issues.

Would you like to explain the details to those of us who are not familiar with the evidence?

Kimball19 · 10-10-2012

Quote:

Originally Posted by 67CowboysFan

Would you like to explain the details to those of us who are not familiar with the evidence?

The poster you quoted might come back w/his own take but this is the stuff I recall just off the top of my head. I doubt you truly want to read any of this, but here goes.

-It started with 50,000 pages. It's been whittled down to a cocktail napkin with handwritten scribbles. Literally. (I tried to post the pic but it's not letting me)

-It began with 22 - 27 players being implicated, then shrunk to four. Three, if you consider Goodell's most recent letter to Fujita essentially saying, "I can't prove you did anyhting, but I know you did something."

-There are two affidavits from former Saints coaches that contradict each other. One from a coach who was fired for repeatedly lying about horrific family crisis that dictated he be off for weeks at a time... He supposedly told them (as he was escorted from the building) they would regret firing him and he made good on that promise.

-There are nine sworn testimonies from players that contradict the two coaches.

-Goodell first said there was intent to injure, then switched it and said even if intent wasn't there - it's still wrong. The NFL panel said, "Um. No. That's not how it works."

-Goodell had to backtrack and obtained one of the signed statements mentioned above or otherwise he would only be allowed to fine players for salary-cap violations.

-The signed statements emphasize a performance pool with a footnote mentioning Vilma's alleged 10k offer on Favre.

-Somewhere along the way, the NFL produced a Saints ledger and pointed to a game where players received bounty payments. Journalists noticed that there were no injuries in that game.

-The NFL retracted that info and specified a different game. Journalists pointed out that the injuries in the second game were to the opponents defensive players.

-The NFL threw out that piece of evidence until earlier this week when it was revealed that the games in question had been revised for a third time.

-The NFL produced a 200 page Saints defensive playbook where only one page was used to levy suspensions.

-Correction: a half page was used. The NFL said to ignore one side of the page with Vitt's name on it (after Vitt said the info was tampered with and wanted to take a lie detector test to prove it).

-The NFL said the players originally didn't want to meet with them to discuss case. Hargrove produced evidence demonstrating that he tried to get a flight to NYC multiple times to meet w/Goodell, but the NFL kept giving him the run-around.

-The NFL said Hargrove was on film saying "Give me my money" after a play that injured Brett Favre. Hargrove wasn't involved in the play and was not on film saying any such thing.

-Goodell said Hargrove admitted to participating in bounty proram in his signed statement to the league. The next day, someone leaked the statement. It said nothing of the sort. Not even close.

Every single thing the NFL has produced has been contradicted and the NFL has had to issue revisions. But no one notices the revisions; the small print. People only pay attention to the original story with the attention-grabbing headlines.

The NFL has never laid out their entire case, only releasing bits and pieces of inaccurate and contradictory info strewn out over seven months. It feels like they're making it up as they go along.

-For the longest time, they hid behind the claim that they were protecting ther witness, but Jonathan Vilma named the witness - and his motive - months ago. No one bothered to read those statements.

I could literally go on for ten more paragraphs about all the discrepancies in this thing, but you get the picture. Naysayers latch on to what they recall from seven months ago - "The coaches apologized so it must be true!" - and haven't bothered to pay much attention since. I don't blame them. It's kinda boring if it doesn't directly affect your team.

-Players told CBS Sports that they had seen the original letters to the coaches and that the letters from Goodell indicated it was in their best interest to accept the punishment, to not make waves.

But I think Sean Payton explained his stance when he spoke at SMU a few days ago, "Coaches don't have a union. We don't have a voice. We're on our own. I'm doing what I have to do to get my job back."

IMHO, I think this is some of the evidence the OP was talking about being pathetic and contradictory.

RoyTheHammer · 10-10-2012

Fujita got screwed.

RoyTheHammer · 10-10-2012

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kimball19

The poster you quoted might come back w/his own take but this is the stuff I recall just off the top of my head. I doubt you truly want to read any of this, but here goes.

-It started with 50,000 pages. It's been whittled down to a cocktail napkin with handwritten scribbles. Literally. (I tried to post the pic but it's not letting me)

-It began with 22 - 27 players being implicated, then shrunk to four. Three, if you consider Goodell's most recent letter to Fujita essentially saying, "I can't prove you did anyhting, but I know you did something."

-There are two affidavits from former Saints coaches that contradict each other. One from a coach who was fired for repeatedly lying about horrific family crisis that dictated he be off for weeks at a time... He supposedly told them (as he was escorted from the building) they would regret firing him and he made good on that promise.

[View Full Quote]

Well hell.. they all got screwed. Wow.

burmafrd · 10-11-2012

more BS from ain'ts fans.

The truth is there was a bounty program. all the whining in the world does not change that.

Now maybe if it had gone to court the Ain'ts could have beaten it- I mean OJ did.

But all the bs just described still leaves a substantial amount of evidence that it did indeed happen.

And affidavits from Ain'ts players are not worth the paper they are printed on.

Just like Lie Detector evidence is not admissable in court. Because it is EASY to beat the machine with a little preparation.

what that aint's refuse to admit is that Williams ADMITTED early on there was a bounty program.

Bottom line is the aint's got caught.

Are they really so stupid as to think the NFL would have spent more than a year investigating, and then have a former FEDERAL PROSECUTER examine the evidence and tell them that she would have taken this to court, if it was not true?