sparky151 Posted May 21, 2012 Report Share Posted May 21, 2012 Even if the evidence that Vilma participated and led the bounty program is rock solid, the league waived its right to discipline him in the side letter to the new CBA. Thus Vilma is on reasonably solid ground in saying that he's been damaged both under the CBA (which goes through a grievance process) and under regular law. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
|SF2| Posted May 21, 2012 Report Share Posted May 21, 2012 [quote name='fredtoast' timestamp='1337550700' post='1131666'] But the punishment is not really for the bounty program. when the league found out about the bounty program they didn't suspend anyone. they just told the Saints to stop. The league office only got pissy when they found out the team lied to them. That is when they started suspending everyone. The whole story makes the league office look like a bunch of petty children who don't care about the players getting hurt by the bounty. all they care about is teaching someone not to lie to them. And I think they got a little carried away just because they think they can do whatever they want without any reprecussions. Do you really think Vilma would have filed this suit if their was solid evidence that he was involved? I am sure the league office has something on Vilma, but I also bet it is nothing but hearsay and vindictive lies. [/quote] And Nixon wasn't forced from office because a couple of 3rd rate burglars got caught in the DNC office either, he as forced from office for lying about what he knew, when and the attempted cover-up. Goodell gave them a chance to stop the practice with no penalty attached and the Saints decided to try their luck. They failed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
|SF2| Posted May 21, 2012 Report Share Posted May 21, 2012 [quote name='sparky151' timestamp='1337561410' post='1131679'] Even if the evidence that Vilma participated and led the bounty program is rock solid, the league waived its right to discipline him in the side letter to the new CBA. Thus Vilma is on reasonably solid ground in saying that he's been damaged both under the CBA (which goes through a grievance process) and under regular law. [/quote] I don't think that is right. They waived the right to discipline some players who committed violations during the lockout. This occurred before the lockout. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bengals1181 Posted May 21, 2012 Report Share Posted May 21, 2012 [quote name='sparky151' timestamp='1337561410' post='1131679'] Even if the evidence that Vilma participated and led the bounty program is rock solid, [b]the league waived its right to discipline him in the side letter to the new CBA. [/b]Thus Vilma is on reasonably solid ground in saying that he's been damaged both under the CBA (which goes through a grievance process) and under regular law. [/quote] how so? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bearcat7777 Posted May 21, 2012 Report Share Posted May 21, 2012 [quote name='fredtoast' timestamp='1337550177' post='1131662'] Yeah. I don't know why we even need courts and judges in this country. If the prosecutor says someone is guilty that should be enough to convict and punish, right? [/quote] This is a business not a court of law. Until I'm shown otherwise I have to believe Goodell has significant evidence or witnesses. Once again if the league didn't have solid evidence why would they do this. What is the league's motivation? [quote name='fredtoast' timestamp='1337550700' post='1131666'] But the punishment is not really for the bounty program. when the league found out about the bounty program they didn't suspend anyone. they just told the Saints to stop. The league office only got pissy when they found out the team lied to them. That is when they started suspending everyone. The whole story makes the league office look like a bunch of petty children who don't care about the players getting hurt by the bounty. all they care about is teaching someone not to lie to them. And I think they got a little carried away just because they think they can do whatever they want without any reprecussions. [color=#ff0000]Do you really think Vilma would have filed this suit if their was solid evidence that he was involved[/color]? I am sure the league office has something on Vilma, but I also bet it is nothing but hearsay and vindictive lies. [/quote] Vilma doesn't know what the league has on him. And I'll bet the league has more than hearsay. Hearsay it what the league had early on and questioned the Saints. What's does the league have to gain by doing this? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sparky151 Posted May 21, 2012 Report Share Posted May 21, 2012 [quote name='SF2' timestamp='1337563953' post='1131691'] I don't think that is right. They waived the right to discipline some players who committed violations during the lockout. This occurred before the lockout. [/quote] Yes, but so did some of the other cases addressed in the side letter. The union agreed the league could punish 6 specified players and the league agreed to not punish the rest of the NFLPA members for personal conduct policy violations arising from before the date the letter was signed. The union says that what Vilma did falls under the league's personal conduct policy. The league claims otherwise and the arbitrator will sort it out. Even if the arbitrator sides with the league, Fred's estoppel argument would still apply, saying that the league in effect made it's decision when the allegations were first reported to it a few years ago. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fredtoast Posted May 21, 2012 Report Share Posted May 21, 2012 [quote name='SF2' timestamp='1337563869' post='1131690'] And Nixon wasn't forced from office because a couple of 3rd rate burglars got caught in the DNC office either, he as forced from office for lying about what he knew, when and the attempted cover-up. Goodell gave them a chance to stop the practice with no penalty attached and the Saints decided to try their luck. They failed. [/quote] I agree that there should be strict punishment for lying to the league. All I am pointing out is that Vilma and the Saints seem to be getting punished for what they did to the league instead of what they did to players. So it is more of a personal vendetta than punishment for the bounty program. Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Give anyone unlimited power and I guarantee they will use it for their own purpose. And let me repeat that I am not one of the usual Goodell haters. In fact I often support his punishments. But there is something smelly about this particular case. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phatcat Posted June 4, 2012 Report Share Posted June 4, 2012 http://www.scribd.com/doc/95854749/Nflca-Statement-Re-Nflpa-Strategy-in-Bounty-Case-6-2 Wm. David Cornwell, Sr.Executive Director 3399 PEACHTREE ROAD, NE SUITE 400 ATLANTA, GA 30326 404.601.2860 (office) – 770.969.2381 (fax)dczemail@msn.com THE NATIONAL FOOTBALL LEAGUE COACHES ASSOCIATION The NFLPA’s Strategy of Blaming Coachesin the Bounty Investigation is Misguided and Inappropriate After destroying the best opportunity in the history of sports for NFL players to maximizethe economic benefits of playing the game, NFLPA leadership has now turned its sightson destroying the bond between NFL players and NFL coaches. Its strategy in the bountyinvestigation has been to throw coaches under the bus to save the players involved.As the NFLPA was suing NFL coaches and sponsoring the declaration of AnthonyHargrove, in which it encouraged a young man to admit to lying and then tell a new lieby claiming that his coaches made him do it, we now learn that DeMaurice Smith wasscheming for the release of the Gregg Williams tape because he thought players wouldlook better if he made Williams look worse. The NFLPA's "my coach made me do it"defense is petty and irresponsible and is further evidence that union leadership is not upto the task of leadership.As was the case in March 2011 when Smith refused to review additional league financialdisclosures because he thought ignorance gave the NFLPA the upper hand in its failingpublic relations strategy, the NFLPA's "no evidence" defense in the bounty investigationhas been exposed as nothing more than a directive from Smith that players not meet withthe Commissioner and not look at records uncovered in the NFL’s investigation so thatSmith’s strategy of blaming their coaches would have the illusion of merit.In New Orleans, Coach Payton and Coach Vitt have taken responsibility and theircolleagues across the league have made it clear that NFL coaches do not condone anyplaying technique or motivational tool that compromises the fundamental principles of fair play and sportsmanship. From Pop Warner to the NFL, accountability is the mostimportant attribute in the bond between coaches and players, but the NFLPA’s defense inthe bounty matter is nothing more than finger pointing, which is demeaning to players,offensive to coaches, and destroys the standard of accountability that is expected from a Pro. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fredtoast Posted June 4, 2012 Report Share Posted June 4, 2012 [quote name='Phatcat' timestamp='1338818196' post='1133772'] [url="http://www.scribd.com/doc/95854749/Nflca-Statement-Re-Nflpa-Strategy-in-Bounty-Case-6-2"]http://www.scribd.co...Bounty-Case-6-2[/url] Wm. David Cornwell, Sr.Executive Director 3399 PEACHTREE ROAD, NE SUITE 400 ATLANTA, GA 30326 404.601.2860 (office) – 770.969.2381 (fax)dczemail@msn.com THE NATIONAL FOOTBALL LEAGUE COACHES ASSOCIATION The NFLPA's Strategy of Blaming Coachesin the Bounty Investigation is Misguided and Inappropriate After destroying the best opportunity in the history of sports for NFL players to maximizethe economic benefits of playing the game, NFLPA leadership has now turned its sightson destroying the bond between NFL players and NFL coaches. Its strategy in the bountyinvestigation has been to throw coaches under the bus to save the players involved.As the NFLPA was suing NFL coaches and sponsoring the declaration of AnthonyHargrove, in which it encouraged a young man to admit to lying and then tell a new lieby claiming that his coaches made him do it, we now learn that DeMaurice Smith wasscheming for the release of the Gregg Williams tape because he thought players wouldlook better if he made Williams look worse. The NFLPA's "my coach made me do it"defense is petty and irresponsible and is further evidence that union leadership is not upto the task of leadership.As was the case in March 2011 when Smith refused to review additional league financialdisclosures because he thought ignorance gave the NFLPA the upper hand in its failingpublic relations strategy, the NFLPA's "no evidence" defense in the bounty investigationhas been exposed as nothing more than a directive from Smith that players not meet withthe Commissioner and not look at records uncovered in the NFL's investigation so thatSmith's strategy of blaming their coaches would have the illusion of merit.In New Orleans, Coach Payton and Coach Vitt have taken responsibility and theircolleagues across the league have made it clear that NFL coaches do not condone anyplaying technique or motivational tool that compromises the fundamental principles of fair play and sportsmanship. From Pop Warner to the NFL, accountability is the mostimportant attribute in the bond between coaches and players, but the NFLPA's defense inthe bounty matter is nothing more than finger pointing, which is demeaning to players,offensive to coaches, and destroys the standard of accountability that is expected from a Pro. [/quote] Puh-lees. I thought all this Smith Bashing would die out when the strike was finally resolved. I'll bet this guy was one of the douchebags that [size=4][b]absolutely guaranteed[/b][/size] that Smith would destroy the game and cause the cancellation of the entire '11 season. He completely misrepresents about half a dozen facts in this one short paragraph. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fredtoast Posted June 4, 2012 Report Share Posted June 4, 2012 [quote name='fredtoast' timestamp='1338839867' post='1133830'] Puh-lees. I thought all this Smith Bashing would die out when the strike was finally resolved. I'll bet this guy was one of the douchebags that [size=4][b]absolutely guaranteed[/b][/size] that Smith would destroy the game and cause the cancellation of the entire '11 season. He completely misrepresents about half a dozen facts in this one short paragraph. [/quote] I was wrong. he did not guarantee that Smith would destroy the game, but he did guarantee that the owners would never lock out the players [url="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/wm-david-cornwell-sr/there-will-not-be-a-locko_b_463803.html"]http://www.huffingto...o_b_463803.html[/url] FYI Crnwell is one of the guys who ran for the job of Head of the NFLPA against Smith and lost. he has been spitting out sour grapes ever since. he just this year got the job as head of the NFLCoaches Association. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.