Bills mentioned in Saints bounty ledger

[K-9]

I understand that you don't need bodies. In theory villas lawsuit should be the crossroads

 

On Friday they were supposed to hand over any evidence to be used today and there allegedly was nothing though. In fact atleast 3 of the 16 documents were from AFTER the punishment. The leaked ledger fell apart. It's starting to get a bit like they didn't expect to get pressed or maybe someone's statements have changed and the smoking gun no longer exists? Perhaps? I really don't get the nfl approach right now.

 

This from Phil Williams, Hargrove's agent:

 

"Do you actually have any concrete evidence that any player from another team was injured as a result of a 'bounty' and that a player from the Saints was therefore paid accordingly? Can you honestly say that the Saints employed a 3-year 'bounty program' if no one was ever paid for a 'bounty?' Would that not constitute one of the worst followed programs ever witnessed?"

 

Sounds like he doesn't understand or appreciate the nature of the term "conspiracy."

 

Anyway, unless Williams and perhaps Payton decide to join the fray in unison with the players, it looks like Williams' word against theirs. Again, how am I supposed to believe that Williams was simply a rogue general who went off the reservation? It strains credibility for him and him alone to devise a system for nobody.

 

GO BILLS!!!

[Best Player Available]

I understand that you don't need bodies. In theory vilmas lawsuit should be the crossroads as far as info.

 

On Friday they were supposed to hand over any evidence to be used today and there allegedly was nothing though. In fact atleast 3 of the 16 documents were from AFTER the punishment. The leaked ledger fell apart. It's starting to get a bit like they didn't expect to get pressed or maybe someone's statements have changed and the smoking gun no longer exists? Perhaps? I really don't get the nfl approach right now.

 

Vilmas arguing that there's evidence at nfl headquarters that proves he's innocent, which I don't know how he has that info.

 

It's just odd at this point.

I'm wondering on something I've heard regarding the Saints GM wired up in his booth with capabilities too hear the opposing side lines radio communications? What I've heard is he said it was strictly for a local radio feed of the games? Really? It seems this whole thing has been buried, so maybe it was BS. What did the local news rags have to say? I found it interesting that the rumor got no traction that I saw with the talking heads.

[Mr. WEO]

I understand that you don't need bodies. In theory vilmas lawsuit should be the crossroads as far as info.

 

On Friday they were supposed to hand over any evidence to be used today and there allegedly was nothing though. In fact atleast 3 of the 16 documents were from AFTER the punishment. The leaked ledger fell apart. It's starting to get a bit like they didn't expect to get pressed or maybe someone's statements have changed and the smoking gun no longer exists? Perhaps? I really don't get the nfl approach right now.

 

Vilmas arguing that there's evidence at nfl headquarters that proves he's innocent, which I don't know how he has that info.

 

It's just odd at this point.

 

There's no way the NFL would think that these guys wouldn't lawyer up after getting the suspensions.

 

My guess is that they don't want to release Payton and Williams's incriminating statements about the players, and I'm not sure they have to, based on the CBA.

Edited June 18, 2012 by Mr. WEO

[NoSaint]

I'm wondering on something I've heard regarding the Saints GM wired up in his booth with capabilities too hear the opposing side lines radio communications? What I've heard is he said it was strictly for a local radio feed of the games? Really? It seems this whole thing has been buried, so maybe it was BS. What did the local news rags have to say? I found it interesting that the rumor got no traction that I saw with the talking heads.

 

It got a lot of traction, then died when the investigation got quiet. The accuser was a guy that was fired from the team for a variety of misconduct and the impression was that espn pushed him hard to report it. espns reporter had been in town several weeks calling every possible ex-employee, ex-girlfriend, or unhired job applicant it could find and he was the one that said he had a story. No one else can back it up and his claim would put himself in jail as he says he re-wired it knowing the purpose so I think he's clammed up too. Loomis claims he's going to go back at this guy hard and that it's fabricated as revenge for firing him. The police promised a final report a few weeks ago, but i think its still in limbo. thats the quick nuts and bolts of where it stands.

 

There's no way the NFL would think that these guys wouldn't lawyer up after getting the suspensions.

 

My guess is that they don't want to release Payton and Williams's incriminating statements about the players, and I'm not sure they have to, based on the CBA.

Technically they really don't it seems. As the structure stands its coming across as RG can suspend for whatever without proving it. Any hearings or evidence along the way seems to be strictly a courtesy.

Edited June 18, 2012 by NoSaint

[NoSaint]

between the vicodin, friendship with ornstein (who defrauded the nfl for hundreds of thousands), the wire tapping, and these current accusations on one side, and the lack of willingness to produce evidence, the investigator resigning, the other investigators being involved in the star caps fiasco.... its really a made for TV situation - espn couldnt have even written the current script. gregg williams became a character and a half down here to top it off.

[K-9]

Technically they really don't it seems. As the structure stands its coming across as RG can suspend for whatever without proving it. Any hearings or evidence along the way seems to be strictly a courtesy.

 

Aside from the fact that the players gave him the implicit right to do so in the CBA last summer, there is no reason for him to provide any evidence unless compelled. I have no problem with that tactic (I'm sure I'd feel differently if I were a Saints fan). It makes sense on many levels. Not the least of which is to protect the larger interests of the league. It's quite possible that the evidence provided by some of those that have given testimony would have the potential to harm many more than just the suspended players.

 

It looks like Vilma and his team will have to push this to the limit to see the entirety of evidence. The fact that arbitrators have ruled against them already doesn't help their cause, though. It's obvious they are trying to gain the support of public opinion but outside of N.O., there doesn't appear to be much.

 

But like I said months ago, they may not be happy getting what they wished for if and when they do get it.

 

GO BILLS!!!

[NoSaint]

This from Phil Williams, Hargrove's agent:

 

 

 

Sounds like he doesn't understand or appreciate the nature of the term "conspiracy."

 

Anyway, unless Williams and perhaps Payton decide to join the fray in unison with the players, it looks like Williams' word against theirs. Again, how am I supposed to believe that Williams was simply a rogue general who went off the reservation? It strains credibility for him and him alone to devise a system for nobody.

 

GO BILLS!!!

 

I get why someone would bring that up though, especially a paid defense attorney - its not required for proof, but its hard to get on board that these professional monsters were unable to injure someone accordingly over a 3 year gap.... its a little bit of a head scratcher.

 

like i said, certainly not a requirement of proving it, but coupled with the lack of evidence it just helps give a little more pause.

 

without either a victim, or proof of someone targeted... what do we have so far besides "trust us"

 

Aside from the fact that the players gave him the implicit right to do so in the CBA last summer, there is no reason for him to provide any evidence unless compelled. I have no problem with that tactic (I'm sure I'd feel differently if I were a Saints fan). It makes sense on many levels. Not the least of which is to protect the larger interests of the league. It's quite possible that the evidence provided by some of those that have given testimony would have the potential to harm many more than just the suspended players.

 

It looks like Vilma and his team will have to push this to the limit to see the entirety of evidence. The fact that arbitrators have ruled against them already doesn't help their cause, though. It's obvious they are trying to gain the support of public opinion but outside of N.O., there doesn't appear to be much.

 

But like I said months ago, they may not be happy getting what they wished for if and when they do get it.

 

GO BILLS!!!

 

it very well may backfire - if it buys vilma a year of play/pay before retiring, it might just be a huge success for him, even if he ends up looking ridiculous.

 

i will say reading the national press - this has turned quite a bit. florio is pretty well on the "show something" bandwagon, as well as a few others. it seems as this drags out, reporters are having a harder time buying into the "trust us" approach. this weekend seemed to have a pretty strong wave of support towards the players as fridays evidence has come out. if you read articles from march vs articles today, there has been a pretty drastic shift in tone.

Edited June 18, 2012 by NoSaint

[K-9]

I get why someone would bring that up though, especially a paid defense attorney - its not required for proof, but its hard to get on board that these professional monsters were unable to injure someone accordingly over a 3 year gap is a little bit of a head scratcher.

 

like i said, certainly not a requirement of proving it, but coupled with the lack of evidence it just helps give a little more pause.

without either a victim, or proof of someone targeted... what do we have so far besides "trust us"

 

Hard to say. But the "trust us" card is being played by both sides at this point and I gotta believe the testimony of Williams is potentially very damaging. Regardless of how it was elicited or what was promised for it. It comes down to his word against that of his former players. And again, how am I supposed to believe that Williams created a system for nobody to participate in? Hard to reconcile that.

 

GO BILLS!!!

Edited June 18, 2012 by K-9

[NoSaint]

Hard to say. But the "trust us" card is being played by both sides at this point and I gotta believe the testimony of Williams is potentially very damaging. Regardless of how it was elicited or what was promised for it. It comes down to his word against that of his former players. And again, how am I supposed to believe that Williams created a system for nobody to participate in? Hard to reconcile that.

 

GO BILLS!!!

 

I still get some bad feelings from the Gregg williams stuff. something that just feels a bit sour about it. i think that might be where the two of us diverge a little bit. The rumors that the nfl wrote his statements to help fill in the gaps and had him sign in exchange for re-instatement would be a bold play by the nfl, but if they had enough to nail him pretty well without having those loose ends tied up, it might explain why hed go along for the ride. an interesting article it seems recently came out - i havent read the source, but a quote lifted is in pretty hot discussion on saints boards:

 

 

"According to two sources who have seen it, Ornstein gave the NFL and the NFL Players Association a text that he said came from Williams, saying, "I stood up for you & told them just that. I told them we never took that (stuff) serious. I never ever saw you ever give $ and that's just the truth."

http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/8065820/appeal-new-orleans-saints-bounty-suspensions-claim-email-was-joke-sources-say

 

if stuff like that is true, and the nfl is using the ornstein email as a smoking gun... it doesnt quite add up. obviously gregg could be talking out both sides at this point, but... he just isnt a trustworthy star witness for me without something more concrete backing it up. honestly, its part of why i was suggesting there might be a lack of wanting to trot him out as the key piece and why things are so quiet on the evidence front.

 

but like i said, there are a lot of reasons to be skeptical of the saints too - hence i think it falls somewhere in that middle ground.

 

 

and for those curious - ill probably read this later but heres the evidence. its been loading for a bit so i havent seen the page, but im sure is bogged down. allegedly the link will have the full evidence from today provided to the players.

https://www.nflplayers.com/Articles/Public-News/NFLPA-Makes-Exhibits-Available-for-Review/

Edited June 18, 2012 by NoSaint

[NoSaint]

So this note just exists in a vacuum? Is it just on Gregg Williams? If so, how can Williams implement his bounty system without the buy-in of at least one player? This is what's bothered me from the minute Williams was suspended. This idea of a rogue general just acting alone and going off the reservation just doesn't add up. Did the players just pretend not to listen? Did they just pass off Williams' remarks as that of a crazy man and ignore him? I find that hard to believe.

 

GO BILLS!!!

 

It looks like page 85 on the nflpa link below which is documents 1-12 is the smoking gun of this report and contains the vitt comment as well as possibly others. Who, what, where, how's are the obvious questions on that- its a hand written note typed up but where's it coming from?

https://images.nflplayers.com/mediaResources/files/League%20Exhibits%201-12.pdf

 

and then again the link on the original page with all documents

https://www.nflplayers.com/Articles/Public-News/NFLPA-Makes-Exhibits-Available-for-Review/

 

im still scanning and skimming to get an idea. Ive seen a lot of pay for big hits, plays, turnovers, scores, but this is the page so far that has injuries it seems. its a lot to go through though and some of it is a pain to read so im going quick at the moment to get the big picture... it is 200 pages after all.

 

 

 

 

 

edit: i could see someone walking away on either side here. context on 85 seems to be the big one to learn more about. certainly not rogue in its setup, but if gregg stopped when told is a big question still that would address k-9.

 

either way this is a unique read for a casual fan - a lot of powerpoints for the week both reviewing the previous week and upcoming. have to believe some of this (if not bounty, atleast how things were broken down, motivation techniques, etc....) was actual application on our own team when he was head coach.

Edited June 18, 2012 by NoSaint

[NoSaint]

followed up on one note that confused me - the harper payoff for a cartoff in the giants slides...

 

the nfl said it was for brandon jacobs.

 

jacobs was uninjured in the 2011 game and most of this looks old. digging in the 2009 game, and the best i have is he went out hurt on a tackle credited to Sharper, not harper, (easily could have been a mistake by any number of people from the scorer, the transcriber, the guy that wrote harpers name in the slide, just being clear) but jacobs was back on the next drive. havent found video of the hit, but im sure itll be coming. just trying to provide more context as its one of the very few pay for injury references and i had no idea what injury it was referencing and was at both games.

[NoSaint]

Here's roughly what I was waiting to hear:

 

 

Quote:

Ginsberg also claimed that former Saints defensive coordinator Gregg Williams and former Saints assistant Michael Cerullo have since retracted any claim that the players actually were engaged in a bounty program. That’s an allegation that hasn’t previously been made and, if true, would be extremely significant.

 

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2012/06/18/ginsberg-chastises-goodell-for-distortion-of-evidence-demands-reversal-of-suspension/

Edited June 18, 2012 by NoSaint

[K-9]

Here's roughly what I was waiting to hear:

 

 

Quote:

Ginsberg also claimed that former Saints defensive coordinator Gregg Williams and former Saints assistant Michael Cerullo have since retracted any claim that the players actually were engaged in a bounty program. That’s an allegation that hasn’t previously been made and, if true, would be extremely significant.

 

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2012/06/18/ginsberg-chastises-goodell-for-distortion-of-evidence-demands-reversal-of-suspension/

 

I'd like to see the retractions by Williams and others made public. In my eyes, his (and perhaps other coaches' testimony) is the lynchpin of the entire case.

 

Ginsberg also needs to acquaint himself with the term "conspiracy." Him and all the defendants are hung up on the fact that nobody got injured. That's all after the fact. He's playing with words even more than he accuses Goodell of playing with words. I don't blame him though. He's doing his job as an advocate for his client.

 

I found Steve Wyche's report very compelling in the case against the players. On its surface, the little bit of evidence he showed is more than a "trust us" strategy by the league. Catching Hargrove on the sidelines saying, "Give me my money," after being informed on the sidelines that Favre was out with a broken leg, is very telling. That little snippet of video is hard to ignore. It's hard to convince me he meant it in the same "motivational" manner that others have characterized Williams' words as simply being about.

 

I'm gonna look for Williams' retraction. Without his testimony, the league's case is far weaker.

 

GO BILLS!!!

[l< j]

I didn't see this link posted yet: Peter King at SI is among reporters shown evidence by the league:

 

As Mary Jo White, the former federal prosecutor who examined the evidence for the National Football League in its pay-for-performance/bounty case against the New Orleans Saints, went through reams of evidence Monday afternoon for 12 reporters in league offices, I had one overriding thought: All of this cannot be invented.

 

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2012/writers/peter_king/06/18/new.orleans.saints.bounties/index.html?sct=nfl_t11_a0

 

kj

[NoSaint]

I'd like to see the retractions by Williams and others made public. In my eyes, his (and perhaps other coaches' testimony) is the lynchpin of the entire case.

 

Ginsberg also needs to acquaint himself with the term "conspiracy." Him and all the defendants are hung up on the fact that nobody got injured. That's all after the fact. He's playing with words even more than he accuses Goodell of playing with words. I don't blame him though. He's doing his job as an advocate for his client.

 

I found Steve Wyche's report very compelling in the case against the players. On its surface, the little bit of evidence he showed is more than a "trust us" strategy by the league. Catching Hargrove on the sidelines saying, "Give me my money," after being informed on the sidelines that Favre was out with a broken leg, is very telling. That little snippet of video is hard to ignore. It's hard to convince me he meant it in the same "motivational" manner that others have characterized Williams' words as simply being about.

 

I'm gonna look for Williams' retraction. Without his testimony, the league's case is far weaker.

 

GO BILLS!!!

 

the one thing, with hargrove -- he didnt make the hit that led to the vitt statement... if i remember correctly (and it could be wrong, im just going off hand) it was mcray and ayodele that hit favre before the huddle in question. its being backed up by commentary by saints fans, but it could wrong - i havent re-watched the game in quite some time. it could even imply a side bet that hargrove might have had.

 

ill agree that A LOT hinges on what is to be made of gregg williams in all of this. itll be interesting to see where that goes now that its out there publicly like it is.

 

I didn't see this link posted yet: Peter King at SI is among reporters shown evidence by the league:

 

 

 

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2012/writers/peter_king/06/18/new.orleans.saints.bounties/index.html?sct=nfl_t11_a0

 

kj

 

king and schefter - especially schefter on mike and mike this morning - have backed off their comments yesterday. schefter went from pretty firmly on the nfl side to leaning back towards the players if i had to take a rough guesstimate.

 

and again, reading local news, so i get a heavy dose of the "other side"

 

Adam Schefter ‏@AdamSchefter

DT Anthony Hargrove will speak today at 3 pm ouside NFL offices. "He has some important information to share," said his agent Phil Williams.

 

Mike Triplett ‏@TripTP

Former #Saints DT Anthony Hargrove to speak outside NFL offices at 2 pm central time today. Expect a strong challenge against #NFL claims.

 

and vilma is on pft live with his lawyer and florio....

 

new developments on the way perhaps?

[K-9]

the one thing, with hargrove -- he didnt make the hit that led to the vitt statement... if i remember correctly (and it could be wrong, im just going off hand) it was mcray and ayodele that hit favre before the huddle in question. its being backed up by commentary by saints fans, but it could wrong - i havent re-watched the game in quite some time. it could even imply a side bet that hargrove might have had.

 

ill agree that A LOT hinges on what is to be made of gregg williams in all of this. itll be interesting to see where that goes now that its out there publicly like it is.

 

If I read every snippet of evidence separately, I can poke a lot of holes in it by finding another explanation. That will be Ginsberg's challenge moving forward.

 

Taking it as a whole however, it points to a pattern which isn't so easily explained away.

 

If I'm expected to believe that Hargrove's comment, made at the precise time and in response to Vitt's mention of Favre being out with a broken leg, is simply referencing another side bet, I would find that unreasonable. It's also damaging in that I'm expected to believe that Hargrove is engaged in placing bounties "on the side" with other players but never in the context of any other larger bounty system; that Hargrove went off the reservation and acted alone. Again, I think that's unreasonable given the evidence in its entirety. It's like expecting me to believe that all of those Williams comments about head shots and ACLs etc., was merely a motivational tool.

 

I just don't buy it. And I don't think a lot of reasonable people do either. Not yet anyway.

 

GO BILLS!!!

 

... new developments on the way perhaps?

 

I doubt it. Definitely more damage control, though. They needed to get out AHEAD of this story and video of him on the sidelines. It's clear they are playing catch-up at this point. I hope Hargrove's comments don't contradict what he's already testified to.

 

GO BILLS!!!

[berndogg]

I heard the Saints paid Trent Edwards to throw a 2 yard dump pass to Freddie on 4th and 23 down 2 scores in the 4th qtr. Any truth to that?

[NoSaint]

If I read every snippet of evidence separately, I can poke a lot of holes in it by finding another explanation. That will be Ginsberg's challenge moving forward.

 

Taking it as a whole however, it points to a pattern which isn't so easily explained away.

 

If I'm expected to believe that Hargrove's comment, made at the precise time and in response to Vitt's mention of Favre being out with a broken leg, is simply referencing another side bet, I would find that unreasonable. It's also damaging in that I'm expected to believe that Hargrove is engaged in placing bounties "on the side" with other players but never in the context of any other larger bounty system; that Hargrove went off the reservation and acted alone. Again, I think that's unreasonable given the evidence in its entirety. It's like expecting me to believe that all of those Williams comments about head shots and ACLs etc., was merely a motivational tool.

 

I just don't buy it. And I don't think a lot of reasonable people do either. Not yet anyway.

 

GO BILLS!!!

 

 

oh believe me, i get what your saying. the hargrove discussion was in regards to a question along the lines of "why was hargrove getting paid if hes not the one that hit favre?" which i think is a legitimate starting off point in dissecting that video, and not a matter of arguing that he was some rogue guy in all this. what dollars for injuring favre would be going in his pocket if it was bobby mcray doing the hitting

 

at 1:40 you get the hit which was mcray low and ayodele comes high:

 

is hargrove owed money by mcray and thats why hes yelling bobby give me my money, knowing mcray just earned a stack?

 

even if hargroves statement is unrelated to a bounty, it obviously doesnt prove that there was no system in place by any means. not at all what i was arguing. it was trying to put context on a quote that looks AWFUL given the way the nfl framed it.

 

make more sense?

 

 

and yes, i agree that its clear that a Pay for performance was going on. the players admitted as much. pay for injury hinges on what seems to be 3-4 key things which i think are much less of a pattern than you let on

 

1)a handwritten note showing 35k on favre - if valid, totally damning. the nfl will likely have to source this going forward

2)a payout to harper for a hit on brandon jacobs that he returned from on the next drive (involves none of these 4 players)

3)an email from ornstein to the team while he was in jail - 2 of the players no longer on the team, and ornstein claims its a joke, and gregg williams texted him saying he told the league that ornstein had never given money to the pools (text linked above)

4)a slide showing the bounty hunter before the seattle game

 

how fujita and smith are implicated in yesterdays evidence is baffling to me (the only fujita reference being 2500 - general fund and will smith being totally unmentioned in any contributions). will smith has been very quiet on all this but i dont recall seeing his name on anything big yesterday, and if anything id assume harper hits the shelf before he does based on what was given to the players as evidence. hargrove has the questions above that i was asking, as that video is the only proof against him (besides accusations he lied the first time he spoke to investigators). if they have vilma on the dollars on the table, i wont defend him, but id be curious to learn more as he seems pretty firm in his statements that its not true. if statements exist paired with that note, id say its probably solid, but if the statement is from cerrulo (fired ex coach that thinks the saints blackballed him out of the league) and the note is also from him... id have some pause.

 

obviously things were going on, but what, who, and how to punish fairly are still big questions from what the nfl gave out so far.

Edited June 19, 2012 by NoSaint

[K-9]

oh believe me, i get what your saying. the hargrove discussion was in regards to a question along the lines of "why was hargrove getting paid if hes not the one that hit favre?" which i think is a legitimate starting off point in dissecting that video, and not a matter of arguing that he was some rogue guy in all this. what dollars for injuring favre would be going in his pocket if it was bobby mcray doing the hitting

 

at 1:40 you get the hit which was mcray low and ayodele comes high:

youtube.com/watch?v=TPZCVCZNc50&feature=related

 

is hargrove owed money by mcray and thats why hes yelling bobby give me my money, knowing mcray just earned a stack?

 

even if hargroves statement is unrelated to a bounty, it obviously doesnt prove that there was no system in place by any means. not at all what i was arguing. it was trying to put context on a quote that looks AWFUL given the way the nfl framed it.

 

make more sense?

 

Yes. It makes sense. It's just uncanny the amount of coincidence here.

 

Brett Favre leaves the game. Vitt, during a sideline huddle, informs his players that Favre is out with a broken leg. Hargrove then says, "Give me my money."

 

But he only says that because he had a side bet with another player. So Hargrove engaged in a bounty program of his own.

 

Yeah. That clears it all up with regards to Hargrove. He's the only one that engaged in a bounty program of any sort.

 

What else can a reasonable person take away from that? Not much if the Hargrove video is the only piece of evidence provided by the NFL. It's just one player acting on his own who clearly implies he's owed money as a result of Favre's perceived injury. Hargrove has implicated himself.

 

But, like I said, put that together with the rest of the little evidence shared yesterday and a reasonable person would be hard pressed to believe Hargrove was the only Saint player or coach involved.

 

GO BILLS!!!

[NoSaint]

Yes. It makes sense. It's just uncanny the amount of coincidence here.

 

Brett Favre leaves the game. Vitt, during a sideline huddle, informs his players that Favre is out with a broken leg. Hargrove then says, "Give me my money."

 

But he only says that because he had a side bet with another player. So Hargrove engaged in a bounty program of his own.

 

Yeah. That clears it all up with regards to Hargrove. He's the only one that engaged in a bounty program of any sort.

 

What else can a reasonable person take away from that? Not much if the Hargrove video is the only piece of evidence provided by the NFL. It's just one player acting on his own who clearly implies he's owed money as a result of Favre's perceived injury. Hargrove has implicated himself.

 

But, like I said, put that together with the rest of the little evidence shared yesterday and a reasonable person would be hard pressed to believe Hargrove was the only Saint player or coach involved.

 

GO BILLS!!!

 

again, what is hargrove collecting on if he did not hit favre?

 

the best bet on saying its a bounty would have to be that "bobby give me my money" is a result of knowing that bobby mcray was about to get paid, and owed him money, or something along those lines.

 

hargrove isnt the one that knocked favre out, so why would he be paid on vitts statement that favre was out?

 

again, not implying he was rogue or on his own in the slightest. saying that mcray hit favre, and why would hargrove then collect money, unless some sort of context is missing. even giving context that could support a bounty on favre as the possible explanation.

Edited June 19, 2012 by NoSaint

[K-9]

and yes, i agree that its clear that a Pay for performance was going on. the players admitted as much. pay for injury hinges on what seems to be 3-4 key things which i think are much less of a pattern than you let on

 

1)a handwritten note showing 35k on favre - if valid, totally damning. the nfl will likely have to source this going forward

2)a payout to harper for a hit on brandon jacobs that he returned from on the next drive (involves none of these 4 players)

3)an email from ornstein to the team while he was in jail - 2 of the players no longer on the team, and ornstein claims its a joke, and gregg williams texted him saying he told the league that ornstein had never given money to the pools (text linked above)

4)a slide showing the bounty hunter before the seattle game

 

how fujita and smith are implicated in yesterdays evidence is baffling to me (the only fujita reference being 2500 - general fund and will smith being totally unmentioned in any contributions). will smith has been very quiet on all this but i dont recall seeing his name on anything big yesterday, and if anything id assume harper hits the shelf before he does based on what was given to the players as evidence. hargrove has the questions above that i was asking, as that video is the only proof against him (besides accusations he lied the first time he spoke to investigators). if they have vilma on the dollars on the table, i wont defend him, but id be curious to learn more as he seems pretty firm in his statements that its not true. if statements exist paired with that note, id say its probably solid, but if the statement is from cerrulo (fired ex coach that thinks the saints blackballed him out of the league) and the note is also from him... id have some pause.

 

obviously things were going on, but what, who, and how to punish fairly are still big questions from what the nfl gave out so far.

 

I highly doubt the league can't source any of its evidence. The biggest piece being Williams himself as well as other testimony from people inside the Saints' organization. I will need to see retractions before I can simply discount any of that.

 

If all this is just one giant axe to grind between a former coach and the Saints, then how is the league at fault for that? If that turns out to be the case then Vilma et al are going after the wrong party. But as a reasonable person, I need a lot more to convince me that it's just about a disgruntled ex-employee.

 

As to your last sentence, it doesn't matter what, who, or how much to punish fairly. We'd all like to believe it is but Vilma, Fujita, Hargrove, and Smith should have thought about that before they gave Goodell their authority to do so.

 

I'll look forward to Hargrove's comments this afternoon.

 

GO BILLS!!!

 

again, what is hargrove collecting on if he did not hit favre?

 

the best bet on saying its a bounty would have to be that "bobby give me my money" is a result of knowing that bobby mcray was about to get paid, and owed him money, or something along those lines.

 

hargrove isnt the one that knocked favre out, so why would he be paid on vitts statement that favre was out?

 

again, not implying he was rogue or on his own in the slightest. saying that mcray hit favre, and why would hargrove then collect money, unless some sort of context is missing. even giving context that could support a bounty on favre as the possible explanation.

 

Perhaps Hargrove will answer that this afternoon.

 

What would you have me believe in the meantime based on what we have now which is:

 

Favre out of game.

Vitt reports Favre out with broken leg during sideline huddle.

Hargrove demands his money upon hearing that news.

 

Seriously, what possible conclusions can be drawn from that? There are only a couple. And neither one is good.

 

GO BILLS!!!

[erynthered]

K-9 and No Saint, I thought I'd sneak in here for a second and say thianks for a great read by you two. Cheers.

[NoSaint]

I highly doubt the league can't source any of its evidence. The biggest piece being Williams himself as well as other testimony from people inside the Saints' organization. I will need to see retractions before I can simply discount any of that.

 

If all this is just one giant axe to grind between a former coach and the Saints, then how is the league at fault for that? If that turns out to be the case then Vilma et al are going after the wrong party. But as a reasonable person, I need a lot more to convince me that it's just about a disgruntled ex-employee.

 

As to your last sentence, it doesn't matter what, who, or how much to punish fairly. We'd all like to believe it is but Vilma, Fujita, Hargrove, and Smith should have thought about that before they gave Goodell their authority to do so.

 

I'll look forward to Hargrove's comments this afternoon.

 

GO BILLS!!!

 

vilmas statements that just finished with PFT over the lunch hour are asserting that cerullo (sp?) essentially did fabricate the whole thing and is the lynchpin against vilma. at that point vilma still has to get the nfl to acknowledge that the evidence may not be valid, before getting the nfl to re-evaluate his suspension. so those will be hand in hand going forward. if he doesnt have access to the documents the nfl holds, he cant really push to overturn the suspension. the only way to get those documents is to go after goodell. and if a retraction is in those documents - he may still have a case against goodell.

 

i agree that vilma and his lawyer have A TON to prove after their statements - especially those coming at the hearing yesterday, and on pft today. i cant say enough that they have A TON of obligation at this point. it seems pretty far out there, but the fact that they are pushing it so hard, i am curious to see what they think they have to back it. it seems like a bold play if all he has is thin air - much like it would be by the nfl. both sides are pretty high stakes on their claims, so where the truth lies will be very interesting to see.

 

 

Perhaps Hargrove will answer that this afternoon.

 

What would you have me believe in the meantime based on what we have now which is:

 

Favre out of game.

Vitt reports Favre out with broken leg during sideline huddle.

Hargrove demands his money upon hearing that news.

 

Seriously, what possible conclusions can be drawn from that? There are only a couple. And neither one is good.

 

GO BILLS!!!

but if you include that the play before is

 

mcray hits favre in the leg

vitt says favre has broken leg

hargrove yells bobby gimme my money

 

 

my alternate explanation and best guess is.... hargrove knew bobby was getting paid, and wants some money owed to him out of mcrays coming payment that he would be collecting. frankly, it makes more sense to me than hargrove getting 35k for a tackle he didnt make.

 

K-9 and No Saint, I thought I'd sneak in here for a second and say thianks for a great read by you two. Cheers.

 

no prob! honestly, around here (new orleans), i get attacked for not jumping on the bandwagon, and bringing up some of the very points he does. it seems pretty certain that SOMETHING was going on - i mean the pay for picks and big hits etc... was well proven, and previously admitted. id even say im pretty sure that there was money on favres head (barring vilma having some sort of crazy piece of evidence yet to be seen). that said, i dont like how the nfl has gone about it and think there are questions that do deserve to be asked.

 

i also say you guys should check out the slides and such - interesting to see what our former head coach was using during the week in meetings.

Edited June 19, 2012 by NoSaint

[K-9]

vilmas statements that just finished with PFT over the lunch hour are asserting that cerullo (sp?) essentially did fabricate the whole thing and is the lynchpin against vilma. at that point vilma still has to get the nfl to acknowledge that the evidence may not be valid, before getting the nfl to re-evaluate his suspension. so those will be hand in hand going forward. if he doesnt have access to the documents the nfl holds, he cant really push to overturn the suspension. the only way to get those documents is to go after goodell. and if a retraction is in those documents - he may still have a case against goodell.

 

i agree that vilma and his lawyer have A TON to prove after their statements - especially those coming at the hearing yesterday, and on pft today.

 

Wow. I don't envy Ginsberg's position here. I think that in addition to proving Cerullo made the whole thing up, he will have to show that Williams' testimony as well as others in the case, was coerced by Goodell. He has the unenviable task of taking the case to a court, proving its merit, and having that court compell Goodell to show the evidence in its entirety. Just to get to a starting point for proving Cerullo fabricated everything as retaliation against the Saints.

 

That is a mother of a road to hoe.

 

GO BILLS!!!

[NoSaint]

Wow. I don't envy Ginsberg's position here. I think that in addition to proving Cerullo made the whole thing up, he will have to show that Williams' testimony as well as others in the case, was coerced by Goodell. He has the unenviable task of taking the case to a court, proving its merit, and having that court compell Goodell to show the evidence in its entirety. Just to get to a starting point for proving Cerullo fabricated everything as retaliation against the Saints.

 

That is a mother of a road to hoe.

 

GO BILLS!!!

 

yea itll be a mess to sort out - i think the goal is less to get goodell and more to have everything turned over in an early hearing, and in turn get the public on his side to pressure the nfl to re-evaluate. i dont know the legal process on it well enough to really take that guess, but i just did anyway! as a disclaimer - i havent personally watched the pft live, but got a second hand source.

 

the nfl is now claiming Gregg, ornstein, and an unnamed coach (presumably cerullo) were the 3 sources on vilma. vilmas attorney claims 2 of them have recanted the stories (though hasnt said this aspect specifically was recanted, its certainly implied)

Edited June 19, 2012 by NoSaint

[K-9]

...but if you include that the play before is

 

mcray hits favre in the leg

vitt says favre has broken leg

hargrove yells bobby gimme my money

 

 

my alternate explanation and best guess is.... hargrove knew bobby was getting paid, and wants some money owed to him out of mcrays coming payment that he would be collecting. frankly, it makes more sense to me than hargrove getting 35k for a tackle he didnt make.

 

Well, NoSaint, that doesn't change anything for me, unfortunately. Like I said, none of what can be concluded about Hargrove's statement, given the context of that video, is good. It all comes down to him thinking he should be paid after hearing Farve was out with a broken leg. Not good for Hargrove. Not good at all.

 

GO BILLS!!!

[NoSaint]

Well, NoSaint, that doesn't change anything for me, unfortunately. Like I said, none of what can be concluded about Hargrove's statement, given the context of that video, is good. It all comes down to him thinking he should be paid after hearing Farve was out with a broken leg. Not good for Hargrove. Not good at all.

 

GO BILLS!!!

 

i agree, but in hargroves defense, that would hardly be worthy of an 8 game suspension, leaving "lying to an investigator" as the only cause of suspension left

 

im trying to take this out of context of "did the saints mess up" to "why is hargrove suspended and is it fair" on that debate.

 

the hearing yesterday was specifically to those 4 men, not whether something was organizationally wrong - although those two items dont move totally independently obviously.

Edited June 19, 2012 by NoSaint

[The Senator]

K-9 and No Saint, I thought I'd sneak in here for a second and say thianks for a great read by you two. Cheers.

I'd also like to sneak in for a second and say that Drew Brees is a little piece of crap - Joe DeLamielleure

[K-9]

i agree, but in hargroves defense, that would hardly be worthy of an 8 game suspension, leaving "lying to an investigator" as the only cause of suspension left

 

im trying to take this out of context of "did the saints mess up" to "why is hargrove suspended and is it fair" on that debate.

 

the hearing yesterday was specifically to those 4 men, not whether something was organizationally wrong - although those two items dont move totally independently obviously.

 

You won't like hearing this but again, given the context of that video alone, it could be argued that Hargrove's punishment isn't harsh enough.

 

But it's all moot anyway because Hargrove, assuming he voted FOR the CBA, gave RG his blessing to mete out punishments however he sees fit.

 

GO BILLS!!!

[erynthered]

I'd also like to sneak in for a second and say that Drew Brees is a little piece of crap - Joe DeLamielleure

 

 

19-0 Baby!!

 

[NoSaint]

You won't like hearing this but again, given the context of that video alone, it could be argued that Hargrove's punishment isn't harsh enough.

 

But it's all moot anyway because Hargrove, assuming he voted FOR the CBA, gave RG his blessing to mete out punishments however he sees fit.

 

GO BILLS!!!

 

In that case though, dozens of others deserve punishment, if mere knowledge gets 8 games. How does Harper get paid for a "knockout" and get nothing but Hargrove get 8 games?

 

Obviously the CBA leaves all this pointless though, as you reference. Any assertion I'm making would be "if handled ideally" and not what I expect

Edited June 19, 2012 by NoSaint

[wnyBacker]

If this had happened in 2000 then I'd say that Rob Johnson was the one carted off

[NoSaint]

T minus 15 til the Hargrove statements outside nfl headquarters.

 

Odd timing and certainly a purposeful location.

 

He's tweeting "come one come all"

 

Sounds like he's about to put on a show, and not a heartfelt apology, but who knows. Chris brown did assert he has about 10 distinct people living in his head!

Edited June 19, 2012 by NoSaint

[K-9]

T minus 15 til the Hargrove statements outside nfl headquarters.

 

Odd timing and certainly a purposeful location.

 

He's tweeting "come one come all"

 

Sounds like he's about to put on a show, and not a heartfelt apology, but who knows. Chris brown did assert he has about 10 distinct people living in his head!

 

Was hoping NFLN or somebody else would be carrying it but I don't see it anywhere. Keep us posted, NoSaint.

 

GO BILLS!!!

Edited June 19, 2012 by K-9

[NoSaint]

Was hoping NFLN or somebody else would be carrying it but I don't see it anywhere. Keep us post, NoSaint.

 

GO BILLS!!!

 

im getting some live updates from someone attending - so far the nuts and bolts have been nfl misused his statement and has twisted perception the entire way. as I get real details, or if something explosive is claimed, ill be sure to update. so far it has been pretty much in line with what you would guess him to say though

 

a tweet going into this - which i thought hargrove already said it was his? maybe not that specific comment? EDIT: he claimed the "favres out, favres done" comments while running around the sideline, not the "give me my money comment" which laconfora nailed he disputes heavily.

 

Jason LaCanfora twitter:

I expect Anthony Hargrove will claim, strongly, during his public comments that voice heard talking about payments on a videotape is not his

 

heres my latest updates:

 

 

"They do not have the proof - I am a victims of a sophisticated mugging.

 

Call out to NFL brothers, do not buy in. Look closer, you have not been told the truth.

 

Trust you can be next person being mugged.

 

Part of the evidence was a DVD of 2010 NFCCG - showed sideline discussions.

 

DVD was not "explosive" or compelling evidence" Thr NFL is very good as what they do.

 

They showed me hitting Favre hit up high- I was flagged and fined. Favre I'm truly sorry.

 

Favre left game - this is where it gets interesting. NFL has video of me off to side on sideline with backs to the camera with caption of give me my money.

 

Here is the problem with that, it wasnt me. The NFL got their evidence wrong - in their rush to convict me they made an error. It was not me.

 

NFL made me out to be a monster. They can't prove it's me. I wonder of RG is willing to stake out their job on this evidence. This is a mockery - who here is willing to put their job on the line on this evidence.

 

Do really care about us? When willing to twist all of this.

 

It's not my voice.

 

We all seen Dog the bounty hunter - its a great show."

 

well, i guess i was right for questioning why hargrove would be saying "give me my money" for a hit he didnt make. it will be interesting to take another look at the tape later to see if it matches up to what hes saying.

Edited June 19, 2012 by NoSaint

[K-9]

im getting some live updates from someone attending - so far the nuts and bolts have been nfl misused his statement and has twisted perception the entire way. as I get real details, or if something explosive is claimed, ill be sure to update. so far it has been pretty much in line with what you would guess him to say though

 

a tweet going into this - which i thought hargrove already said it was his? maybe not that specific comment? EDIT: he claimed the "favres out, favres done" comments while running around the sideline, not the "give me my money comment" which laconfora nailed he disputes heavily.

 

Jason LaCanfora twitter:

I expect Anthony Hargrove will claim, strongly, during his public comments that voice heard talking about payments on a videotape is not his

 

heres my latest updates:

 

 

"They do not have the proof - I am a victims of a sophisticated mugging.

 

Call out to NFL brothers, do not buy in. Look closer, you have not been told the truth.

 

Trust you can be next person being mugged.

 

Part of the evidence was a DVD of 2010 NFCCG - showed sideline discussions.

 

DVD was not "explosive" or compelling evidence" Thr NFL is very good as what they do.

 

They showed me hitting Favre hit up high- I was flagged and fined. Favre I'm truly sorry.

 

Favre left game - this is where it gets interesting. NFL has video of me off to side on sideline with backs to the camera with caption of give me my money.

 

Here is the problem with that, it wasnt me. The NFL got their evidence wrong - in their rush to convict me they made an error. It was not me.

 

NFL made me out to be a monster. They can't prove it's me. I wonder of RG is willing to stake out their job on this evidence. This is a mockery - who here is willing to put their job on the line on this evidence.

 

Do really care about us? When willing to twist all of this.

 

It's not my voice.

 

We all seen Dog the bounty hunter - its a great show."

 

Thanks, NoSaint. I didn't think it was possible to add another ring to the circus but he did.

 

"They can't prove it's me." That rings hollow.

 

But who was it that wanted to get paid for knocking Favre out of the game, I wonder? Did the NFL doctor the tape and add that audio to cook their evidence? Wow. Just...wow.

 

GO BILLS!!!

[NoSaint]

and thats a wrap. hes done talking.

 

Thanks, NoSaint. I didn't think it was possible to add another ring to the circus but he did.

 

"They can't prove it's me." That rings hollow.

 

But who was it that wanted to get paid for knocking Favre out of the game, I wonder? Did the NFL doctor the tape and add that audio to cook their evidence? Wow. Just...wow.

 

GO BILLS!!!

 

without looking at the tape - my best guess would be mcray saying "baby gimme my money" instead of hargrove talking. i dont have any idea where he is in relation off hand. at that point it could also be someone else that thinks they are about to win the game and get a fat bonus check (my least favorite explanation ive heard, but one that is not bounty related).

 

and i wouldnt put tooooo much stock in wording, as im sure it wasnt verbatim as it was all getting shot out pretty quick during the conference... id be curious for all the people he asked to stake their jobs on it if he would do the same.

Edited June 19, 2012 by NoSaint

[NoSaint]

heres full text:

http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/blog/eye-on-football/19384479/anthony-hargroves-statement-on-nfls-evidence-against-saints-players

[NoSaint]

Well - the circus continues - ornsteins statement:

 

“I never corroborated $10,000,” Ornstein said. “The only thing that I told them was that we had the [pregame] meeting, we jumped around, we screamed around, and I never saw [Vilma] offer one dime. And I never heard him say it.”Ornstein admits that the Saints had a pay-for-performance program in 2009, but he repeatedly denied that he told the NFL that Vilma offered any money knocking any player out of any game.

 

“Did I say to the league that I saw Jonathan Vilma offer $10,000?” Ornstein said. “Absolutely not.”

 

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2012/06/19/ornstein-denies-telling-nfl-that-vilma-offered-money/

 

 

 

 

someone is coming out of this looking really bad at the end of the day. we will see which side.

Edited June 19, 2012 by NoSaint

[K-9]

I guess it's all about semantics.

 

Those God-damned semantics.

 

I can't wait to hear from the secret witness that Hargrove is 99% certain ratted out the Saints. It's nice that he isn't telling us who it is because he can't be 100% sure.

 

You can't get this comedy anywhere else.

 

GO BILLS!!!