+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 15
  1. #1
    Moderator RoanokeFan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    98,665

    PETER KING SAYS BOUNTY EVIDENCE "EXPLOSIVE, COMPELLING" [EDITED]

    PETER KING SAYS BOUNTY EVIDENCE "EXPLOSIVE, COMPELLING"

    "The NFLPA challenged the NFL’s bounty evidence Monday.


    So the NFL responded by showing some more.</p>


    The league presented more information to 12 reporters at the league office,
    and word is just getting out now via Twitter.</p>


    Sports Illustrated’s Peter King was among the group, and called the
    charges “explosive, compelling.”</p>


    King said the 2009 playoff bounty on Brett Favre was actually $35,000, not $10,000and also that
    Roman Harper was due $1,000 for knocking
    Giants running back Brandon Jacobs out of a game.</p>


    There’s obviously more to come on this one."</p>EDIT:

    AFTER BOUNTY HEARING, GOODELL RELEASES "EXPLOSIVE" EVIDENCE AGAISNT SAINTS TO REPORTERS

    "The appeal hearing in the NFL's bounty scandal may have gone
    well in comparison to the Roger Clemens trial, but after Jonathan Vilma left the
    proceedings early, and Scott Fujita reamed the process to a host of reporters,
    it seemed that Roger Goodell's standings in the court of public opinion were
    about to take another hit. If the NFL has such compelling evidence against the
    Saints, people keep asking, why does the NFL not show the Saints what it has --
    and why does it not show or tell the public what it has?

    <div id="yui_3_5_1_1_1340120020609_571" class="yom-mod yom-art-content ">
    <div id="yui_3_5_1_1_1340120020609_570" class="bd">

    Following the hearing, the NFLPA released a statement, which said that the
    PowerPoint slides used as a basis for discipline were never shown to the Saints'
    coaches, nor was any explanation ever given. In addition, the NFLPA charged that
    the NFL failed to provide players and coaches with all sorts of exculpatory and
    mitigating evidence.</p>


    <a href="https://images.nflplayers.com/mediaResources/files/NFLPA_Annotated_Exhibits.PDF">From
    the statement</a>, entitled "Information from NFLPA regarding NFL's
    'evidence'":</p>
    <blockquote>


    After the Commissioner's three year investigation, which the NFL publicly
    declared consisted ofreview of "over 18,000 documents," interviews of several
    witnesses, and involved a former USAttorney hired to opine that the
    investigation was "thorough and fair," the League provided the Players Union
    with less than two hundred pages of documents the Friday before Monday's
    hearing.</p></blockquote>
    <blockquote>


    The NFL chose not to identify who created the documents, when they were
    created, the purpose of creating them, where the documents were obtained, or
    whether the players had even seen these documents. In addition to denying the
    Players Union's request for a three-day continuance to learn the answers to
    these questions, the Commissioner nonetheless informed the players that the
    League will not offer any witness at the hearing who created the
    documents.</p></blockquote>


    After the hearing, the NFL brought in 12 reporters, including Peter King of
    SI.com, Mike Freeman of CBS Sports and Bob Glauber of Newsday.com. According to
    several of those reporters, what the league presented was explosive, compelling,
    and quite damning.</p>


    "First, [a] good chunk of the NFL's evidence came from Saints own computer
    system," <a href="https://twitter.com/#%21/realfreemancbs">Freeman wrote on
    Twitter</a>. "[Former Saints defensive coordinator] Gregg Williams was clearly
    the biggest source for NFL but [there's] no question [the] league has many other
    sources. Owner [Tom] Benson was cooperative with the league granting
    investigators access to Saints computer system. Saints kept bounty info on
    [their] computer system. Williams told investigators he was 'rolling the dice
    with player safety and someone could have been maimed.' Saints used Dog the
    Bounty Hunter as motivation."</p>


    King first revealed that according to the evidence presented, the bounty set
    on the head of Brett Favre in the 2009 NFC championship game was actually
    $35,000, not $10,000 as believed at one time.</p>


    "NFL just showed reporters evidence in Saints case, incl[uding] allegation of
    $35k bounty, not just $10k, to knock Favre out of '09 NFC title game," King tweeted. " NFL also showed
    evidence on ledger that S Roman Harper once was due $1000 for knocking NYG RB
    Brandon Jacobs from a game. The $35k bounty on Favre, the league claims,
    included a $5000 pledge from current interim Saints coach Joe Vitt.</p>


    "The NFL's charges are explosive, compelling," King continued. "Twelve
    reporters just heard the league's evidence. To clarify, the 12 reporters were
    told they were getting the same presentation the players got earlier in the
    afternoon."<span id="more-25551"></span></p>


    We'll have much more on this as it becomes clear just what was presented to
    the reporters, and if it differed at all from what the players were allowed to
    see during their appeal."</p></div></div>
    “Never argue with an idiot. They will only bring you down to their level and beat you with experience.” MB Rule # 1


  2. #2

    Re: PETER KING SAYS BOUNTY EVIDENCE "EXPLOSIVE, COMPELLING" [EDITED]

    How dumb is it to keep all of that stuff on computer? Would be cool to see that franchise get the "death penalty" by cutting their salary cap in half for 3 years or something. Dog the Bounty Hunter? Really? SMDH
    Close or you hit the bricks

  3. #3

    Re: PETER KING SAYS BOUNTY EVIDENCE "EXPLOSIVE, COMPELLING" [EDITED]

    King seems to be contradicting himself

    Peter King ?@SI_PeterKing

    Saints info 3: It's abundantly clear there was a mountain of evidence for pay-for-performance, far less (but some) for bounty system ...
    Expand

    Reply
    Retweet
    Favorite

    Peter King ?@SI_PeterKing

    ... Public will be judge if penalties fit the crime. From what I saw, some sanctions altogether justified. These sanctions seemed excessive.
    Expand

    Reply
    Retweet
    Favorite



  4. #4
    Moderator RoanokeFan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    98,665

    Re: PETER KING SAYS BOUNTY EVIDENCE "EXPLOSIVE, COMPELLING" [EDITED]

    [quote user="sharick88"]How dumb is it to keep all of that stuff on computer? Would be cool to see that franchise get the "death penalty" by cutting their salary cap in half for 3 years or something. Dog the Bounty Hunter? Really? SMDH[/quote]

    It would only be dumb if the Saints had been warned previously...OH WAIT!
    “Never argue with an idiot. They will only bring you down to their level and beat you with experience.” MB Rule # 1


  5. #5
    Moderator RoanokeFan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    98,665

    Re: PETER KING SAYS BOUNTY EVIDENCE "EXPLOSIVE, COMPELLING" [EDITED]

    [quote user="bELIeve_in_Giants"]King seems to be contradicting himself

    Peter King ?@SI_PeterKing

    Saints info 3: It's abundantly clear there was a mountain of evidence for pay-for-performance, far less (but some) for bounty system ...
    Expand

    Reply
    Retweet
    Favorite

    Peter King ?@SI_PeterKing

    ... Public will be judge if penalties fit the crime. From what I saw, some sanctions altogether justified. These sanctions seemed excessive.
    Expand

    Reply
    Retweet
    Favorite


    [/quote]

    Best to wait until the media heads write complete articles. I do find it interesting that nothing being said on the NFLPA side seems to indicate the CBA was violated by the NFL. The outside counsel is talking legaleze that doesn't pertain outside the courtroom and a court is not likely to ever here those arguments.

    It will fill in for no football but not much else.
    “Never argue with an idiot. They will only bring you down to their level and beat you with experience.” MB Rule # 1


  6. #6

    Re: PETER KING SAYS BOUNTY EVIDENCE "EXPLOSIVE, COMPELLING" [EDITED]

    [quote user="RoanokeFan"][quote user="sharick88"]How dumb is it to keep all of that stuff on computer? Would be cool to see that franchise get the "death penalty" by cutting their salary cap in half for 3 years or something. Dog the Bounty Hunter? Really? SMDH[/quote]

    It would only be dumb if the Saints had been warned previously...OH WAIT!
    [/quote]

    Yeah, the Saints organization is really dumb. And like I've said, I agree totally with the coaches' and teams' sanctions.

  7. #7
    Moderator RoanokeFan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    98,665

    Re: PETER KING SAYS BOUNTY EVIDENCE "EXPLOSIVE, COMPELLING" [EDITED]

    [quote user="bELIeve_in_Giants"][quote user="RoanokeFan"][quote user="sharick88"]How dumb is it to keep all of that stuff on computer? Would be cool to see that franchise get the "death penalty" by cutting their salary cap in half for 3 years or something. Dog the Bounty Hunter? Really? SMDH[/quote]

    It would only be dumb if the Saints had been warned previously...OH WAIT!
    [/quote]

    Yeah, the Saints organization is really dumb. And like I've said, I agree totally with the coaches' and teams' sanctions.
    [/quote]

    I did think it was very interesting that Benson gave the NFL access to the Saint's network. He seems to have genuinely thought his organization had stopped the program.
    “Never argue with an idiot. They will only bring you down to their level and beat you with experience.” MB Rule # 1


  8. #8

    Re: PETER KING SAYS BOUNTY EVIDENCE "EXPLOSIVE, COMPELLING" [EDITED]

    I like this commentary from deadspin...

    http://deadspin.com/5919636/?utm_cam...ium=socialflow

  9. #9

    Re: PETER KING SAYS BOUNTY EVIDENCE "EXPLOSIVE, COMPELLING" [EDITED]

    There's no additional penalty for losing an appeal and that's why appeals almost always happen even though the success rate may be 0%. The Saints and suspended players are trying to salvage their season and their salaries with nothing to lose in the appeal process. It's not like the suspensiona=s or fines are going to be extended for losing their appeal. Of course, the only thing is that the legal fees are going to add up, but that's pocket change to these guys.

  10. #10
    Moderator RoanokeFan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    98,665

    Re: PETER KING SAYS BOUNTY EVIDENCE "EXPLOSIVE, COMPELLING" [EDITED]

    The problem with media heads is they all have biases, just like we do. I think it's naive to suggest there was no bounty program. At the very least, the organization admitted it existed and they were told to stop the practice. Their owner ordered them to stop the practice. Yet the band played on.

    I'm less concerned with who gets disciplined than I am the practice stop wherever it was in place.
    “Never argue with an idiot. They will only bring you down to their level and beat you with experience.” MB Rule # 1


Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts