LaCanfora reports Vilma suspended for season

[electricrelish]

Same here. I think in the end it did come down to the evidence on the field for a lot of the players involved. Vilma, Fujita, Smith & Hargrove all ran the show of sorts, so they are the one's who are taking the heat. Just a couple of things I will say though, first & foremost I have no argument over any of these suspensions. I do however think that although it is not mentioned, the penalty on Hargrove is mostly based on the Minnesota game and the hit on Warner. Given the league already penalized him for the hit on Favre & the hit on Warner was completely legal, I'm not so sure the NFL did the smart thing by going that route if in fact that is why his was longer. On Vilma, I am a bit surprised that it was a year long suspension when compared to others who have been suspended for a year. I think the league needs to do a much better job of deciding the length of suspensions as well as deciding monetary fines. When Vilma gets the same length suspension as someone who killed a man while driiving drunk or a person wearing the wrong colored socks recieves a higher fine than one for hitting a defenseless reciever, I just think the priorities there are a bit skewed.

 

 

Let me get this straight, you have no argument over any of the suspensions, but you just presented two arguments that are critical of the suspensions. Sorry rajncajn, just ribbing you a little.

[nuke'em ttg]

that cheap shot on Warner really pissed me off, i need a new favorite team again

[rajncajn]

 

 

Let me get this straight, you have no argument over any of the suspensions, but you just presented two arguments that are critical of the suspensions. Sorry rajncajn, just ribbing you a little.

 

just being critical of the process, don't think more into it than what I write. I'm not going down that road again.

[SLAYER]

and If you think Rodger didn't know in his mind about this last week I got a bridge and good coastal land to sell you.

[flemingd]

and If you think Rodger didn't know in his mind about this last week I got a bridge and good coastal land to sell you.

 

Of course he did. And the last thing you want going into The Draft is discussion by anyone of issues other than The Draft. It's the Orgasm of the Offseason - 3 months without football, a tease of exposure at the combine, and a long, slow, hard buildup of pressure that explodes into your favorite team's first round draft pick. 10+ years worth of work for some of these kids to finally reach a dream. Fans dreaming of turning a downtrodden franchise around, or reloading to make another run, or defending their slice of the top of the hill. Why in the world would they want to release anything negative going into that?

[stevegrab]

Here is verbatim what was said:

 

 

 

This isn't just some local hack on a radio station or a fan on a FF message board. If you believe all the other sources who have been speaking out against the Saints then why not believe somebody like Dan Patrick? He's not saying that this is something he "believes" happened, he's saying that this is something he learned happened. Whether or not that changed anything, I really don't know. But that, among MANY other things are why I question whether the NFL is completely on the up-and-up in this whole situation and it also shows just how much the media can & does form the public perception. You only have to look back a few months for proof of that. I've already sent you a bunch of info dealing with the reporter in New Orleans who broke the wire tapping story for Outside the Lines... The same people who are in hot water over the Bernie Fine mess. But you go on believing everything they report as 100% accurate. I'll keep my homers opinion as well as an open mind.

 

 

Your original statement in another post in this thread said

"It's already come out that the NFL wrote Greg Williams' apology letter, so I could see this happening as well"

 

Which makes it sound to me as if this is common knowledge, and has already been substantiated or proven by somebody. Then you follow up with "I heard it on Dan Patrick" and provide me with the audio (which I appreciate). Ok, so it isn't just something he believes but something he learned. Learned from who, backed up with what proof? My guess is somebody else told Dan Patrick this, and he just believes it. He doesn't know this for a fact, its just a story he's heard elsewhere.

 

Maybe you're right, and it is true and an actual fact. And of course you're right that some of the media is twisting the facts. But I usually go with multiple sources willing to put something in print (the initial bounty repots, then the coach communication tampering) over a single source on a radio program.

 

As flemingd says, what does it really matter who wrote the apology. None of what these guys say at these press conferences are their own words anymore, there's several layers of people telling them what to say.

[rajncajn]

Your original statement in another post in this thread said

"It's already come out that the NFL wrote Greg Williams' apology letter, so I could see this happening as well"

 

Which makes it sound to me as if this is common knowledge, and has already been substantiated or proven by somebody. Then you follow up with "I heard it on Dan Patrick" and provide me with the audio (which I appreciate). Ok, so it isn't just something he believes but something he learned. Learned from who, backed up with what proof? My guess is somebody else told Dan Patrick this, and he just believes it. He doesn't know this for a fact, its just a story he's heard elsewhere.

 

Maybe you're right, and it is true and an actual fact. And of course you're right that some of the media is twisting the facts. But I usually go with multiple sources willing to put something in print (the initial bounty repots, then the coach communication tampering) over a single source on a radio program.

 

As flemingd says, what does it really matter who wrote the apology. None of what these guys say at these press conferences are their own words anymore, there's several layers of people telling them what to say.

 

Think about what you are saying.

[stevegrab]

Think about what you are saying.

 

 

I did, I'm not one that makes comments without giving them some thought.

 

What I'm saying is Dan Patrick has no proof, nor does he say where he learned this. I found no other source from an internet search saying that they KNOW the NFL wrote the apology that Greg Williams read. All I have is your reference to Patrick, and a few people posting on various message boards (who probably heard it from Dan Patrick).

 

If I read this on ESPN, Fox Sports, CBS, AP, etc then I'd be more inclined to be believe it.

 

My point is "its already come out that the NFL wrote Greg Williams apology" is really "there's a rumor that the NFL wrote Greg Williams apology." The first implies a fact, the second makes it clear that it is merely a rumor. I'm a very analytical person, and often have issues with people passing off rumor or opinion as fact.

[i_am_the_swammi]

I find it interesting that Vilma completely denies any involvement, when the rest of the Saints organization is apologizing with their tails between their legs.

 

Maybe he had no chance at any sort of reduced penalty anyway....but completely denying the charges isn't going to endear you to anyone....especially if there are corroborating witnesses and taped evidence.

[rajncajn]

I did, I'm not one that makes comments without giving them some thought.

 

What I'm saying is Dan Patrick has no proof, nor does he say where he learned this. I found no other source from an internet search saying that they KNOW the NFL wrote the apology that Greg Williams read. All I have is your reference to Patrick, and a few people posting on various message boards (who probably heard it from Dan Patrick).

 

If I read this on ESPN, Fox Sports, CBS, AP, etc then I'd be more inclined to be believe it.

 

My point is "its already come out that the NFL wrote Greg Williams apology" is really "there's a rumor that the NFL wrote Greg Williams apology." The first implies a fact, the second makes it clear that it is merely a rumor. I'm a very analytical person, and often have issues with people passing off rumor or opinion as fact.

 

And what of all the "sources say the Saints did ______" with no actual proof provided by the NFL? You seem so willing to accept that as fact. How is that any different? Just because multiple reporters are quoting the same source doesn't make it any more proven.

[rajncajn]

I find it interesting that Vilma completely denies any involvement, when the rest of the Saints organization is apologizing with their tails between their legs.

 

Maybe he had no chance at any sort of reduced penalty anyway....but completely denying the charges isn't going to endear you to anyone....especially if there are corroborating witnesses and taped evidence.

 

Well, it's not just Vilma, it's all the players who are denying it. Players who are backed by the NFLPA. The coaches, the management, they are on their own. If you are faced with never working in the NFL again or signing a letter saying you accept the punishment for your role in all this then what are you going to do? That last sentence is the "if" I'm wondering about. Nobody has seen any of that evidence other than the NFL. If you're going to suspend a player for a year then shouldn't you present the evidence to, at the very least, that player?

[stevegrab]

And what of all the "sources say the Saints did ______" with no actual proof provided by the NFL? You seem so willing to accept that as fact. How is that any different? Just because multiple reporters are quoting the same source doesn't make it any more proven.

 

 

Because people reporting the bounty story have cited facts, players who have admitted doing this (Fujita "I put money in a pot"). Coaches who have admitted doing this (Williams etc.). Dan Patrick just "learned" something, meaning what? All I can take from that wording is that somebody told him this, and he believes them. Where are the other reports backing this up, other media outlets reporting it?

 

We both seem more willing to believe one side of the situation over the other.

[keggerz]

The NFL Players Association received the confidential March 2 and March 21 reports on the Saints matter that were distributed to the clubs. In addition, members of the NFL staff, including the NFL Security investigators, met with NFLPA officials to review the results of their investigation. A number of current and former players, including each player disciplined today, were offered the opportunity to be interviewed with counsel present. One player (Hargrove) submitted a written statement in which he did not dispute the existence of the program, but no player agreed to be interviewed in person. In addition, the NFLPA publicly stated that it conducted its own investigation into this matter, but it has shared no information from that investigation with the NFL.

 

 

So you know that your team is in hot water, and you could also be in hot water, if you did nothing wrong how do you not jump up and down and do everything you can to have that interview?

 

Oh and how dare the NFLPA conduct an interview and not share with the fans what they found

Edited May 3, 2012 by keggerz

[keggerz]

and does anyone else see the NFLPA trying to help these guys as something along the lines of an attorney is in court representing his clients...one is the plaintiff, a guy that got hurt in a car accident due to a faulty part and the other is the defendent, the car company that made the car/part

[rajncajn]

So you know that your team is in hot water, and you could also be in hot water, if you did nothing wrong how do you not jump up and down and do everything you can to have that interview?

 

Oh and how dare the NFLPA conduct an interview and not share with the fans what they found

 

I am pretty sure that everyone here is well aware that teh NFLPA has met several times with the NFL and have come back every time saying the same thing... That the NFL didn't show them any evidence that would support their case.

 

Even as late as today, in response to a Mary Jo White interview with a local network:

 

In response to the conference call the NFL organized Thursday morning

with Mary Jo White, a New York litigator and former federal prosecutor, the players'

union released a statement from its outside counsel, Richard Smith. Smith is also a former prosecutor.

"I was at the meeting with the NFL's lead investigators in March. She was

not there. Anyone, especially former prosecutors like both of us, know

that what the league provided could never be called 'substantial evidence'

of player participation in a pay-to-injure program. Worse yet, Mary Jo

provided nothing new or compelling today beyond another press briefing. My

guess is that a veteran FBI agent like Joe Hummel would agree as well."

Edited May 3, 2012 by rajncajn

[keggerz]

I am pretty sure that everyone here is well aware that teh NFLPA has met several times with the NFL and have come back every time saying the same thing... That the NFL didn't show them any evidence that would support their case.

 

Even as late as today, in response to a Mary Jo White interview with a local network:

 

what does any of that have to do with "if you did nothing wrong how do you not jump up and down and do everything you can to have that interview?"

 

and as for the not having "any" evidence...are you kidding me? That tape that was released, that everyone has heard, is that not evidence? Is the written admission by a player that took part in the bounty stuff not evidence? Is there more info or not? I would like to think that there is, but I guess I could understand why you wouldn't want to....but no matter, there is damning evidence out there...debating if the punishments fit the crime is one thing...but denying that it happened when the team hasn't once taken that stance should speak volumes.

Edited May 3, 2012 by keggerz

[rajncajn]

what does any of that have to do with "if you did nothing wrong how do you not jump up and down and do everything you can to have that interview?"

Um, I was responding to the quote you posted... As for the question here, the players were instructed to not speak to anyone regarding the bounty situation, not sure if it was by their lawyers, the team or the NFLPA. but a couple of the players mentioned not being able to tell their side of the story yet,

and as for the not having "any" evidence...are you kidding me? That tape that was released, that everyone has heard, is that not evidence? Is the written admission by a player that took part in the bounty stuff not evidence?

Oh, I'm not saying that they didn't do anything wrong & I don't think they are either. But I also am not willing to believe the package the NFL has tried to sell lock, stock & barrel either. As for the tape, and I've stated this before, as wrong as I think it is to target players injuries, that IS a very common occurrence in the NFL. Let's get this straight, it shouldn't be & I detest the way Williams used it as a tool for his defense. However, the two things that I will point out again is that nowhere in that audio was there an instance where I thought Greg Williams was referring to a bounty until I saw the video where Pamphilon edited in the text of Williams making a money sign with his fingers. I still greatly question that claim as well as Pamphilon's motives & will continue to do so until the actual video is released. Regardless, we are discussing player suspensions here & absolutely nothing that was said in that audio regarding injuring other players translated onto the field. In FACT, the Saints were not fined for any hits in that game, nor were they even flagged a SINGLE TIME... For anything.

 

Hargrove, I can't answer for. I don't know his reasons, I don't know his circumstance. I hope that eventually it will come out & he will detail his role in all this.

Is there more info or not? I would like to think that there is, but I guess I could understand why you wouldn't want to....but no matter, there is damning evidence out there...debating if the punishments fit the crime is one thing...but denying that it happened when the team hasn't once taken that stance should speak volumes.

 

Yeah, I would like to think that the NFL is not exaggerating the circumstances at the expense of one team to make themselves look better in light of the legal onslaught they are about to face. But the fact of the matter is, the NFL came out initially claiming to have "50,000 pages of documents, emails, spreadsheets & testimony" yet the only real evidence they have put forth is a bunch of contrived (yes I believe Dan Patrick) statements by the coaches & a couple of emails from Orenstien, someone not even affiliated with the club, saying to Payton that he'd pledge money toward taking out Newton & Rodgers. And as I understand from national reports the emails read, the context was reportedly "oh & put me down for $5000 on Rodgers" at the end of the email.

 

So tell me, if their case is so strong, why are they still not allowing the NFLPA to see all these documents? What purpose does it serve & don't you think it would be in their best interest to do so, so that the league & the players can all just move on?

[stevegrab]

Um, I was responding to the quote you posted... As for the question here, the players were instructed to not speak to anyone regarding the bounty situation, not sure if it was by their lawyers, the team or the NFLPA. but a couple of the players mentioned not being able to tell their side of the story yet,

 

Oh, I'm not saying that they didn't do anything wrong & I don't think they are either. But I also am not willing to believe the package the NFL has tried to sell lock, stock & barrel either. As for the tape, and I've stated this before, as wrong as I think it is to target players injuries, that IS a very common occurrence in the NFL. Let's get this straight, it shouldn't be & I detest the way Williams used it as a tool for his defense. However, the two things that I will point out again is that nowhere in that audio was there an instance where I thought Greg Williams was referring to a bounty until I saw the video where Pamphilon edited in the text of Williams making a money sign with his fingers. I still greatly question that claim as well as Pamphilon's motives & will continue to do so until the actual video is released. Regardless, we are discussing player suspensions here & absolutely nothing that was said in that audio regarding injuring other players translated onto the field. In FACT, the Saints were not fined for any hits in that game, nor were they even flagged a SINGLE TIME... For anything.

 

 

 

What does that matter? So they should only be punished for the bounty system if they actually hurt somebody?

 

Seriously your defense (and yes that is what it is) of the team has become comical. Every things that damns them is suspect, everything that supports them is fact. (Like the "yes I ebelieve Dan Patrick" statement.)

[skylive5]

 

 

What does that matter? I have already made up my mind and will not change any part of my stance.

 

Every things that supports the NFL is fact, everything that damns them is suspect.

 

 

 

There...now that reads truer.

 

Probably should read the report located below to fully understand what is wrong with how the NFL went about things.

And in spite of what so called "lawyers" say here... the defense has the right to see all evidence against them and

so does the jury so they can make the correct decision.

 

Bounty questions

 

I don't see rajn' saying that nothing should be done....I see him saying that if they have evidence they should show it

so that the punishment can be seen as fair or not.

 

Personally....it appears to me that there are several here that believe if lethal injection were an option it should be used

on these players. And the sooner the better.

[tbimm]

All I see rajn saying is that he thinks it would be nice for the NFL to share the evidence with the people accused of the crime. If they are unwilling to do so then yes something smells funny here. I have also heard it said in reports that the NFL wanted access to the players and the union said no until the evidence was shared. If that is the case then you have a stalemate and the NFL just lowers the boom with only their side of the story.

 

I believe there was a bounty program in place. I believe that more than the suspended players participated. I believe that once again they got what they had coming to them for lieing about it when asked.

[rajncajn]

There...now that reads truer.

 

Probably should read the report located below to fully understand what is wrong with how the NFL went about things.

And in spite of what so called "lawyers" say here... the defense has the right to see all evidence against them and

so does the jury so they can make the correct decision.

 

Bounty questions

 

I don't see rajn' saying that nothing should be done....I see him saying that if they have evidence they should show it

so that the punishment can be seen as fair or not.

 

Personally....it appears to me that there are several here that believe if lethal injection were an option it should be used

on these players. And the sooner the better.

 

Thank you very much Sky & that article sums up pretty well a lot of what Saints fans are feeling right now.

[rajncajn]

 

What does that matter? So they should only be punished for the bounty system if they actually hurt somebody?

 

Seriously your defense (and yes that is what it is) of the team has become comical. Every things that damns them is suspect, everything that supports them is fact. (Like the "yes I ebelieve Dan Patrick" statement.)

 

If you're just talking about player suspensions then how can you justify punishing the players for something the coach told them to do but they did not carry out? If I told you to take this gun and go kill somebody, you take the gun but don't do the deed, do you deserve to go to prison for murder?

[stevegrab]

Ok, I give up, another endless back and forth that will accomplish nothing. Some (mostly Saints fans) will believe that the NFL is on a witch hunt, the suspensions are unfair, Goodell is acting on personal dislike for Payton & Saints, the media is out to get them, etc. While most of the rest of the NFL fans believe that the Saints did have a bounty system that was against the rules. That most likely included payoffs for injuries not just big plays like interceptions. Several people in the Saints organization (GM, coaches, players) knew about this system, participated in it, or ignored it. They lied to the NFL or just shrugged it off figuring no way they get caught.

 

I agree with one basic view of Rajn and the others, the people being punished deserve to see the evidence that exists. However the rest of the NFL, fans, media, etc have no such right.

 

I really wish we could just move on instead of beating this topic to death, with no end result. I guess I'll take the first step myself, and either avoid reading these threads or at least stop posting in them.

[flemingd]

If you're just talking about player suspensions then how can you justify punishing the players for something the coach told them to do but they did not carry out? If I told you to take this gun and go kill somebody, you take the gun but don't do the deed, do you deserve to go to prison for murder?

 

They aren't being punished for on field actions. Jesus Christ how dense are you?

[HowboutthemCowboys]

If you're just talking about player suspensions then how can you justify punishing the players for something the coach told them to do but they did not carry out? If I told you to take this gun and go kill somebody, you take the gun but don't do the deed, do you deserve to go to prison for murder?

 

 

I think you should be suspended from your job...with pay.

 

And even though I stood on the sideline screaming for you to pay me (even though I shot and missed) I should not be punished.