piratesownninjas Posted April 23, 2012 Share Posted April 23, 2012 Easy target but I think this one misses the mark. I don't disagree, but I still think it's time to move on. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ditkaless Wonders Posted April 23, 2012 Share Posted April 23, 2012 The Los Angeles Saints. Sounds heavenly to me. Los Santos? I'm going to hold my water for further developments. I do know that U.S. Attorney language is usually scripted. Usually they would state that they can't say what action, if any, that they took. I find it interesting what import, if any, leaving that phrase out may mean. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rajncajn Posted April 23, 2012 Share Posted April 23, 2012 so the saints are going to sue espn for reporting something confirmed by the US Attorney. Show me where you read that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tbimm Posted April 23, 2012 Share Posted April 23, 2012 Los Santos? I'm going to hold my water for further developments. I do know that U.S. Attorney language is usually scripted. Usually they would state that they can't say what action, if any, that they took. I find it interesting what import, if any, leaving that phrase out may mean. The US attorney became aware of the story at which point Letten has to look at it. He handed the info off to the local FBI offices. While Az would have you believe that Letten confirmed that the accusation is true that is not at all what was said. The local legal community is licking their collective chops on this one. The reporter was calling anyone who would answer their phones to try to dig up any dirt he could find. Somewhere in this digging it appears he found a disgruntled ex employee who likely made all this crap up. While Az would have you believe that there is no grounds for a defamation case here against the ESPN reporter and his "source" the actual lawyers here are going to go ahead and disagree with Az. I think I am going to listen to what the real lawyers have to say and wait for all this to play out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ditkaless Wonders Posted April 24, 2012 Share Posted April 24, 2012 The US attorney became aware of the story at which point Letten has to look at it. He handed the info off to the local FBI offices. While Az would have you believe that Letten confirmed that the accusation is true that is not at all what was said. The local legal community is licking their collective chops on this one. The reporter was calling anyone who would answer their phones to try to dig up any dirt he could find. Somewhere in this digging it appears he found a disgruntled ex employee who likely made all this crap up. While Az would have you believe that there is no grounds for a defamation case here against the ESPN reporter and his "source" the actual lawyers here are going to go ahead and disagree with Az. I think I am going to listen to what the real lawyers have to say and wait for all this to play out. I myself am an attorney. I work not infrequently with U.S. Attorney's and State's Attorneys General. I have not, however, dealt in my work with defamatoin matters. I agree with you that the comments in the story linked do nothing more than acknowlege reciept of an accusation and referring that accusation for preliminary inquiry by the FBI. That inquiry may quickly lead to a decision to not open an investigation of Loomis, or it may lead to an investigation of the accuser if his information was false, or it may lead to an investigation of not just Loomis but of other Saints officials as well under conspiracy or even RICO theories. Right now I know nothing other than an accusation has been recieved by the U.S Attorney. LIke I sai, I'll wait for more info. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Irish Doggy Posted April 24, 2012 Share Posted April 24, 2012 The issue here is not whether we broke a few rules, or took advantage of our opponents privacy. (We did.) But you can’t hold a whole team responsible for the actions of a few sick, perverted individuals. For if you do, then you have to blame the entire NFL system. And if the entire NFL system is guilty, then is this not an indictment of our sports institutions in general? I put it to you, Az! Is this not an indictment of our entire American society? Well, you can do what you want to us – but I am not going to stand here and listen to you bad-mouth the United States of America! 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lennykravitz2004 Posted April 24, 2012 Author Share Posted April 24, 2012 The issue here is not whether we broke a few rules, or took advantage of our opponents privacy. (We did.) But you can’t hold a whole team responsible for the actions of a few sick, perverted individuals. For if you do, then you have to blame the entire NFL system. And if the entire NFL system is guilty, then is this not an indictment of our sports institutions in general? I put it to you, Az! Is this not an indictment of our entire American society? Well, you can do what you want to us – but I am not going to stand here and listen to you bad-mouth the United States of America! Where do I sign, sir?!!? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azazello1313 Posted April 24, 2012 Share Posted April 24, 2012 While Az would have you believe that there is no grounds for a defamation case here against the ESPN reporter and his "source" the actual lawyers here are going to go ahead and disagree with Az. I think I am going to listen to what the real lawyers have to say and wait for all this to play out. put your money where your mouth is. I will bet you whatever you want that the saints never get a penny of restitution from espn for "defamation" or anything of the sort with respect to this matter. they probably won't even file a suit, the whole "we're outraged and we're going to sue" is just lawyerly bluster schtick to keep their dumb fans feeling like victims. appears to be working. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RC94 Posted April 24, 2012 Share Posted April 24, 2012 The issue here is not whether we broke a few rules, or took advantage of our opponents privacy. (We did.) But you can’t hold a whole team responsible for the actions of a few sick, perverted individuals. For if you do, then you have to blame the entire NFL system. And if the entire NFL system is guilty, then is this not an indictment of our sports institutions in general? I put it to you, Az! Is this not an indictment of our entire American society? Well, you can do what you want to us – but I am not going to stand here and listen to you bad-mouth the United States of America! Well played Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rajncajn Posted April 24, 2012 Share Posted April 24, 2012 put your money where your mouth is. I will bet you whatever you want that the saints never get a penny of restitution from espn for "defamation" or anything of the sort with respect to this matter. they probably won't even file a suit, the whole "we're outraged and we're going to sue" is just lawyerly bluster schtick to keep their dumb fans feeling like victims. appears to be working. seriously what do you have against me? and don't try to pretend it wasn't directed at me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azazello1313 Posted April 24, 2012 Share Posted April 24, 2012 seriously what do you have against me? and don't try to pretend it wasn't directed at me. nothing at all against you. I think your knee-jerk defense of your team's while pretending to be objective about it is kind of ridiculous. same kind of thing I've bagged on menudo and others for for years. I WAS responding to tbimm and not you. however, if you'd like to wager on the prospective saints defamation suit against espn, I will accept from you as well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rajncajn Posted April 24, 2012 Share Posted April 24, 2012 nothing at all against you. I think your knee-jerk defense of your team's while pretending to be objective about it is kind of ridiculous. same kind of thing I've bagged on menudo and others for for years. I WAS responding to tbimm and not you. however, if you'd like to wager on the prospective saints defamation suit against espn, I will accept from you as well. you assume I would want anything from you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tbimm Posted April 24, 2012 Share Posted April 24, 2012 nothing at all against you. I think your knee-jerk defense of your team's while pretending to be objective about it is kind of ridiculous. same kind of thing I've bagged on menudo and others for for years. I WAS responding to tbimm and not you. however, if you'd like to wager on the prospective saints defamation suit against espn, I will accept from you as well. You sir are an asshole who has been riding on the edge of my ignore list for years. Congrats you finally earned your seat. In parting... I am sure that no one here in New Orleans could give a rats ass what you think of us or our intellect. I can tell you for certain that condescending pricks like yourself rate very low in my book. One positive thing that has come from the new board layout is that it is much easier to ignore the idiots on this site. You hardly even notice they have posted. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
detlef Posted April 24, 2012 Share Posted April 24, 2012 Wow guys. First off, let me say that I've always basically liked the Saints. In fact, the only time I can remember rooting against them in the last few years was when they played my Niners in the play-offs. So, I don't really have a bone to pick with them, per se. And, honestly, rajn and tbimm, it's hard not to look at your guys' reactions as a bit over the top. In other words, precisely in the way Az is portraying you. You need to understand that, if your team does something horrible, it is not, in and of itself, a reflection on you. You don't need to take up for them. People might give you a hard time in a place like this, but it's only in sport. That is, until you start trying to defend them. In this thread in particular, Az was just challenging you on the "Saints are going to sue ESPN" bit. You know why? Because it's a silly notion. And, if you don't think so, take his bet. If you think he's a dick and out of line, here's your chance to take him for all he's worth, because he laid it out there. "Any amount you want", was how he put it if IIRC. Oh, and based on what I've heard in the car and bits I caught on the TV at the gym this morning, ESPN is not backing off. So there's that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevegrab Posted April 24, 2012 Share Posted April 24, 2012 Somebody slept with somebody elses wife is my guess. Zero chance of getting any info heard from this supposed tap to the field in time for any advantage. My guess is there is some revenge happening here or someones trying to make a quick buck off the guys who already look bad. Easy target but I think this one misses the mark. Did you read the article? The piece where the guy says that he sat with Loomis watching the game, in part of a suite separated by glass from the assistant coaches. So what makes it so hard to take some info he hears on the headset and communicate that somehow to the assistant coaches. Sorry but this smacks of more of the same "yeah we cheated but we didn't gain from it" attitutude. The immtediate defense of the Saints or dismissal of any possible truth to this story is understandable, but no less humorous. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Menudo Posted April 24, 2012 Share Posted April 24, 2012 The issue here is not whether we broke a few rules, or took advantage of our opponents privacy. (We did.) But you can’t hold a whole team responsible for the actions of a few sick, perverted individuals. For if you do, then you have to blame the entire NFL system. And if the entire NFL system is guilty, then is this not an indictment of our sports institutions in general? I put it to you, Az! Is this not an indictment of our entire American society? Well, you can do what you want to us – but I am not going to stand here and listen to you bad-mouth the United States of America! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Menudo Posted April 24, 2012 Share Posted April 24, 2012 seriously what do you have against me? and don't try to pretend it wasn't directed at me. Don't let him bother you. Trust me, he lives for this kind of situation to pounce on. If you defend your team/player, then you are an un-objective homer. If you denounce the team/player, such as I did by wanting the Steelers to trade Roethlisberger, you are lying and you really want to be an un-objective homer. He is what he is. Don't let him bother you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Furd Posted April 24, 2012 Share Posted April 24, 2012 The issue here is not whether we broke a few rules, or took advantage of our opponents privacy. (We did.) But you can’t hold a whole team responsible for the actions of a few sick, perverted individuals. For if you do, then you have to blame the entire NFL system. And if the entire NFL system is guilty, then is this not an indictment of our sports institutions in general? I put it to you, Az! Is this not an indictment of our entire American society? Well, you can do what you want to us – but I am not going to stand here and listen to you bad-mouth the United States of America! Hear, hear! Communists. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Square Posted April 24, 2012 Share Posted April 24, 2012 In this thread in particular, Az was just challenging you on the "Saints are going to sue ESPN" bit. You know why? Because it's a silly notion. And, if you don't think so, take his bet. If you think he's a dick and out of line, here's your chance to take him for all he's worth, because he laid it out there. "Any amount you want", was how he put it if IIRC. Making a bet or not has nothing to do with how much of a an out of line dick someone can be. "Hey you think he is a total tool, let's gamble on legal processes between million dollar corporations" is freaking genius. Besides even if Rajn was correct and they did sue, if because of some lettering of legalese they did not actually receive a penny (or possibly only the lawyers get paid, or the terms are not disclosed, or a judge throws it out, or any of the other possible outcomes happen), Az would win. That is why it would be stupid to take a bet from trolling internet people. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
detlef Posted April 24, 2012 Share Posted April 24, 2012 Making a bet or not has nothing to do with how much of a an out of line dick someone can be. "Hey you think he is a total tool, let's gamble on legal processes between million dollar corporations" is freaking genius. Besides even if Rajn was correct and they did sue, if because of some lettering of legalese they did not actually receive a penny (or possibly only the lawyers get paid, or the terms are not disclosed, or a judge throws it out, or any of the other possible outcomes happen), Az would win. That is why it would be stupid to take a bet from trolling internet people. Based on what AZ said, I'm guessing he would have agreed to, perhaps a much smaller, wager on whether or not a suit was even ever filed. Not putting words in his mouth, mind you. But, the point remains. Almost nobody has it out for the Saints. They've been America's darling since after Katrina. Hell, they've been the NFL's feel good story. So, why the hell would they be singled out. Who benefits? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrTed46 Posted April 24, 2012 Share Posted April 24, 2012 Bellicheck is mad he didnt do this Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rajncajn Posted April 24, 2012 Share Posted April 24, 2012 Based on what AZ said, I'm guessing he would have agreed to, perhaps a much smaller, wager on whether or not a suit was even ever filed. Not putting words in his mouth, mind you. But, the point remains. Almost nobody has it out for the Saints. They've been America's darling since after Katrina. Hell, they've been the NFL's feel good story. So, why the hell would they be singled out. Who benefits? You're kidding, right? The media can't stand Payton & Loomis. This guy who reported this has been hounding everyone in New Orleans trying to dig up more dirt on the Saints. It wouldn't be very difficult to find some disgruntled ex-employee who wanted to stick it to the Saints and make up this story. The fact of the matter is that there's no evidence, only hearsay from, yet again, some unnamed source who also reported it to the US Attorney's office (which BTW conveniently won't do squat because it's past the statute of limitations) and ESPN decided to run with the story regardless of the extremely thin evidence. At this point it doesn't even matter if Loomis sues or not, whether he would win or not. ESPN reported it & now they are pushing it & defending it from every angle they possibly can. The court of public opinion has already spoken. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rajncajn Posted April 24, 2012 Share Posted April 24, 2012 Based on what AZ said, I'm guessing he would have agreed to, perhaps a much smaller, wager on whether or not a suit was even ever filed. Not putting words in his mouth, mind you. This is what Az said: I will bet you whatever you want that the saints never get a penny of restitution from espn for "defamation" or anything of the sort with respect to this matter... ...the whole "we're outraged and we're going to sue" is just lawyerly bluster schtick to keep their dumb fans feeling like victims. appears to be working. I think your knee-jerk defense of your team's while pretending to be objective about it is kind of ridiculous. same kind of thing I've bagged on menudo and others for for years. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Papajohn Posted April 24, 2012 Share Posted April 24, 2012 Now the entire media is gunning for Peyton and Loomis for no adequately explained reason? I am beginning to think we all got leveled! In that case: nice one Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rajncajn Posted April 24, 2012 Share Posted April 24, 2012 Now the entire media is gunning for Peyton and Loomis for no adequately explained reason? I am beginning to think we all got leveled! In that case: nice one it's called ratings. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.