Whitlock's argument is bull****.
Because Vilma's playing window is much more limited than other key contributors windows in their respected profession, he should get a lesser punishment?
Furthermore, his commentary on "following orders" holds little weight with me.
I have yet to see anything that said that Loomis or Payton ordered the bounties. I don't even think Williams did. He damn sure was the ring leader but he wasn't giving directives under an umbrella of potential punishment for dissenting opinion. Loomis and Payton simply turned a blind eye.
From what I read when this first broke, wasn't it Vilma who threw money on the table as payment to the guy who took out whatever player?
Sorry Whitlock, telling someone they get 10K in cash for injuring someone is just a step below threatening reprimand for not following an order.
Last July, in the aftermath of Pittsburgh linebacker James Harrison's anti-Goodell rant in Men's Journal magazine, I wrote about Steelers-James-Harrison-remarks-on-Roger-Goodell-over-the-top-but-understandable-071311">the foolishness of Goodell electing himself as the front man for the NFL's player-conduct policy and crackdown on dangerous hits.
Sorry Whitlock. Roger was elected and then re-elected unanimously by the 32 guys who own the league. Furthermore, his duties as defined by the previous CBA are what put him as the front man on player-conduct, in addition to the fact that players specifically asked him to clean up the league.
Goodell wants us — media, fans, players, coaches, executives — to blindly trust that his motives are pure and just. No way. Trust the man/woman who tells you to solely trust his/her level of transparency and his/her willingness to have his/her actions vigorously questioned and reviewed.
So what are you suggesting? His motives are not pure and just? This reminds me of the perception of cops by the general population. Always seems to be those who have run-ins with the cops who think they are all crooked. Just coincidental I suppose. Not that Whitlock has had run-ins with Goodell so the analogy isn't without it's flaws but the fact that he's taking the victimized players side puts him in close enough proximity.
Even if he got caught up in the bounty culture fostered by the Saints' leaders, does Vilma deserve that, a suspension far more punitive than the one received by Payton?
Hell, no. I hope Vilma wins his defamation lawsuit or Goodell is forced in a court of law to reveal the evidence that justifies such harsh punishment.
Sean Payton didn't pay anyone, did he? That's the difference. Plain and simple, Vilma put a price on someone's livelihood and to a certain extent their life. Why do you think Gregg Williams is getting the most severe punishment right now? He might never coach again. Where's the defense Whitlock? The closer you are to the ugliness of the situation, the more severe your punishment will be. Williams was the ring leader and it appears as though Vilma was the most responsible of the players.
As far as evidence goes, guess what........it isn't needed. Even if it didn't exist, he is an employee of the NFL and his representatives have agreed to punishments at the commissioners discretion. There is no guarantee of fairness, in fact I suggest you not even look for it because the punishments IMO are largely perception based. But that's the nature of the game and those are the rules they agreed to play under.
I think Whitlock puts out some good material and he's often well spoken but I can't agree with this article.
What evidence are people expecting to see? All the information was based on player accounts and admittance of partaking.
Vilma is getting what he has coming.
