Discuss football with over 60,000 fans. Free Membership. Join now!

 FAQFAQ  RegisterRegister   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

FootballsFuture.com Forum Index
FootballsFuture.com Home

Saints players win appeal
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 14, 15, 16, 17  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> NFL News
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
vike daddy


Most Valuable Poster (2nd Ballot)

Joined: 12 Mar 2005
Posts: 74414
PostPosted: Sat Sep 08, 2012 11:11 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

nolafan33 wrote:
Honestly, I can't help but laugh at those of you who actually believe the Saints defenders took the field with the sole purpose to target and intentionally injure players.

Holy Hyperbole, Batman!

it's more laughable to see guys squirming out of this situation by misinterpreting what others say, and then refuting it. the Saints defenders did not show a "sole purpose" in injuring anyone, nor were they suspended or punished for that.

intelligent discussions among people with varying views go so much better if they can limit themselves to the facts of the matter, and not create ridiculous arguments.
_________________


Webmaster wrote:
Can we knock off all the nonsense and stick to football?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Nabbs4u


Moderator
Joined: 28 Jul 2007
Posts: 23061
Location: North Carolina Kiltman on the Sig
PostPosted: Sat Sep 08, 2012 11:13 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Serious question. Since Vilma and Allen were activated and I believe taken off the NI (non injury) list, were there two players cut from the original 53 man roster? Or were they already on it? If not is there any effect with the Saints salary cap? Anyone else think Tom Benson was secretly hoping this decesion was made on Monday rather then yesterday so their contracts were not guaranteed for 2012?
_________________

Bird Watch:
Jeremy Maclin: 6 Gm/ 27 Rec/ 445 Yds/ 4 TD/ 16.5 YPC/
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
spilltray


Joined: 09 Jan 2006
Posts: 10510
Location: Green Bay, WI
PostPosted: Sat Sep 08, 2012 11:25 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

nolafan33 wrote:
The NFL has stated that the evidence released is all the evidence they have against the PLAYERS.


To the players. The only "evidence" any of us or the media saw was what the NFLPA chose to leak.
_________________
Wilfred wrote:
Memory is like the Packers when they are behind by two touchdowns in the 4th quarter... It comes back.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address Yahoo Messenger MSN Messenger
IDOG_det


Moderator
Joined: 02 Mar 2009
Posts: 25989
Location: #JDI
PostPosted: Sat Sep 08, 2012 11:25 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Well, this surprises me a little. But I guess if that's the ruling, then that's that.
_________________
2014 Adopt-A-Lion #1: Eric Ebron
2014 Adopt-A-Lion #2: Martin Mayhew



R.I.P. Stylish
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Colt45fool


Joined: 28 Jul 2008
Posts: 5934
Location: New Haven, CT
PostPosted: Sat Sep 08, 2012 11:30 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I find it hilarious how many people came to Roger Goodell's aide after Vilma took him to court. Serves Goodell right for being a jack- and having no substantial proof.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
tylerdouglass


Moderator
Joined: 21 Dec 2009
Posts: 14168
Location: Bellingham, WA
PostPosted: Sat Sep 08, 2012 11:36 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Colt45fool wrote:
I find it hilarious how many people came to Roger Goodell's aide after Vilma took him to court. Serves Goodell right for being a jack- and having no substantial proof.




This is how I feel after repeating this time and time again.

This ruling has NOTHING to do with any evidence Goodell may or may not have had.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Colt45fool


Joined: 28 Jul 2008
Posts: 5934
Location: New Haven, CT
PostPosted: Sat Sep 08, 2012 11:37 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

J Pep 4 Step wrote:
The LBC wrote:
doomer wrote:
vike daddy wrote:
^yup.


While it was a victory [for the players] on the surface, it was fairly hollow and potentially temporary.

Apart from the fact that the timing of the decision prevented the players from practicing in preparation for Week One, the ruling gives the NFL another chance to impose the suspensions in a way that draws clear lines between conduct detrimental to the game (over which Commissioner Roger Goodell has jurisdiction) and salary-cap violations arising from a pay-for-performance/bounty system (over which Goodell has no jurisdiction).

It’s likely that the league will simply re-issue the same suspensions. Indeed, the memo sent by NFL general counsel Jeff Pash to the various teams on Friday clearly indicates that the league continues to believe that wrongdoing occurred — and that there should be significant punishment for it.

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2012/09/07/leagues-internal-memo-suggests-that-suspensions-will-be-re-issued/related/


Goodell could reinstate the suspensions but the CBA process would kick in and the players would appeal. He would also have to provide the evidence he relied on to prove intent to injure. No notes scribbled on a napkin or "he said, she said" this time. Not to mention a Judge will be scrutinizing his every move.

If the clear cut evidence is truly there, as Goodell has repeatedly claimed, then I have no doubt that there be another punishment coming. That's a pretty big "if" at this point though.

Again... really? We're back on this intent? This isn't criminal court. Intent doesn't have to be proven. All that needs to be proven is that conduct detrimental to the league as a whole occurred and punitive actions can be taken.

And please, because if you're still trying to pretend to the contrary you're being willfully ignorant, stop with the presumption that the evidence that was released to the media by the Players' Association is the whole extent of all the evidence there is. This "well, I haven't seen it, so it must not exist" stance is naive and dumb.


Ignored again... Confused

I think those two points are, without a doubt, the two most widely ignored points in the conversation. And theyve been ignored since day 1.

1. It doesnt matter if its a "Pay To Injure" program or a "Pay For Injure" program. Both are equally reprehensible and both deserve equal punishment.

2. The evidence we have seen isnt necessarily all the evidence. The evidence we have seen is exactly what the NFLPA wanted the fans to see. Thats it. If you dont believe every political ad you see because of the agenda thats fueling it, why would you believe what the NFLPA released is "the case, the whole case and nothing but the case?"
I'm of the belief that if there was substantial evidence this wouldn't have been overturned before the start of the season.

If I tell you I used to date Rihanna and I have proof you ask for the proof. If I beat around the bush and never show the proof what are you to believe other than that I'm a liar?
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
spilltray


Joined: 09 Jan 2006
Posts: 10510
Location: Green Bay, WI
PostPosted: Sat Sep 08, 2012 11:43 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Colt45fool wrote:
I'm of the belief that if there was substantial evidence this wouldn't have been overturned before the start of the season.

If I tell you I used to date Rihanna and I have proof you ask for the proof. If I beat around the bush and never show the proof what are you to believe other than that I'm a liar?


The fact that it was overturned has absolutely nothing at all to do with proof and everything to do with procedure. They are just going to refile suspensions and word it differently. This really changes nothing other than delaying when they have to serve their punishments. The NFL is not obliged to prove anything and you can believe them or disbelieve them as you wish, just like I could if you claimed to have dated Rihanna. You can try and prove it to me if your ego demands it, but it really doesn't matter.
_________________
Wilfred wrote:
Memory is like the Packers when they are behind by two touchdowns in the 4th quarter... It comes back.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address Yahoo Messenger MSN Messenger
J Pep 4 Step


Joined: 01 Apr 2007
Posts: 30059
Location: Greenvillain, NC
PostPosted: Sat Sep 08, 2012 11:47 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

tylerdouglass wrote:



This is how I feel after repeating this time and time again.

This ruling has NOTHING to do with any evidence Goodell may or may not have had.


spilltray wrote:
The fact that it was overturned has absolutely nothing at all to do with proof and everything to do with procedure. They are just going to refile suspensions and word it differently. This really changes nothing other than delaying when they have to serve their punishments. The NFL is not obliged to prove anything and you can believe them or disbelieve them as you wish, just like I could if you claimed to have dated Rihanna. You can try and prove it to me if your ego demands it, but it really doesn't matter.


And this point is now added to the list.
_________________

CK on the sig
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
tylerdouglass


Moderator
Joined: 21 Dec 2009
Posts: 14168
Location: Bellingham, WA
PostPosted: Sat Sep 08, 2012 11:56 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Pookie wrote:
tylerdouglass wrote:
Bobikus wrote:
Looks like the Saints just downgraded at LB.


How do you figure? No matter what happens, this pushes Shanle out of the equation when Vilma gets back.

That's an improvement.


Yeah, I'm not sure anyone could convince me that Scott Shanle is better than Vilma.


Yeah, Vilma could play all 3 positions better than Shanle can play his best.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Harper41


Joined: 29 Aug 2009
Posts: 22259
Location: Roll Tide Country
PostPosted: Sat Sep 08, 2012 12:13 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Why can't this whole issue just die... Brick wall Brick wall
_________________

RTR
#Keepitonehunna
SnA ExclusiVe wrote:
Thought someone broke into my house.
Jumped out of bed (left my brother)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
vike daddy


Most Valuable Poster (2nd Ballot)

Joined: 12 Mar 2005
Posts: 74414
PostPosted: Sat Sep 08, 2012 12:19 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Harper41 wrote:
Why can't this whole issue just die... Brick wall Brick wall

i guess the only way it could have would have been if the players accepted their suspensions.

they might have "won" yesterday on a procedural issue, but they will drag it out even longer now because of it.
_________________


Webmaster wrote:
Can we knock off all the nonsense and stick to football?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Colt45fool


Joined: 28 Jul 2008
Posts: 5934
Location: New Haven, CT
PostPosted: Sat Sep 08, 2012 1:24 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

spilltray wrote:
Colt45fool wrote:
I'm of the belief that if there was substantial evidence this wouldn't have been overturned before the start of the season.

If I tell you I used to date Rihanna and I have proof you ask for the proof. If I beat around the bush and never show the proof what are you to believe other than that I'm a liar?


The fact that it was overturned has absolutely nothing at all to do with proof and everything to do with procedure. They are just going to refile suspensions and word it differently. This really changes nothing other than delaying when they have to serve their punishments. The NFL is not obliged to prove anything and you can believe them or disbelieve them as you wish, just like I could if you claimed to have dated Rihanna. You can try and prove it to me if your ego demands it, but it really doesn't matter.
Just read the full story. My bad Embarassed

I do think, regardless that Goodell probably lacks evidence.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
The LBC


Global Moderator
Joined: 12 Jan 2008
Posts: 24481
Location: Where We Can't Have Nice Things
PostPosted: Sat Sep 08, 2012 2:19 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Colt45fool wrote:
spilltray wrote:
Colt45fool wrote:
I'm of the belief that if there was substantial evidence this wouldn't have been overturned before the start of the season.

If I tell you I used to date Rihanna and I have proof you ask for the proof. If I beat around the bush and never show the proof what are you to believe other than that I'm a liar?


The fact that it was overturned has absolutely nothing at all to do with proof and everything to do with procedure. They are just going to refile suspensions and word it differently. This really changes nothing other than delaying when they have to serve their punishments. The NFL is not obliged to prove anything and you can believe them or disbelieve them as you wish, just like I could if you claimed to have dated Rihanna. You can try and prove it to me if your ego demands it, but it really doesn't matter.
Just read the full story. My bad Embarassed

I do think, regardless that Goodell probably lacks evidence.

Honest question, based upon what exactly?

As has been beaten to death, the evidence publicly spread by the media was only the evidence the NFLPA chose to leak from among the entirety of the evidence that was disclosed to them. Quite frankly, if that was all the evidence there was and they felt that it wasn't enough to justify the suspensions, logic would suggest that the NFLPA would be challenging the suspension much more on a level of evidentiary support rather than procedural loopholes.

However, what's more worth noting is that the manner in which the current CBA frames "conduct detrimental to the shield," which from everything I've read doesn't require irrefutable proof beyond a reasonable doubt... rather reasonable suspicion and proof that the behavior itself is detrimental to the league as a whole. This isn't a court of law, it's the court of the National Football League. And I really don't think I need to go into how rewarding players for injuring other players is detrimental to the league - considering it has resounding effects on multiple levels.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
vike daddy


Most Valuable Poster (2nd Ballot)

Joined: 12 Mar 2005
Posts: 74414
PostPosted: Sat Sep 08, 2012 4:06 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

The ruling was simple. The labor deal gives authority to multiple people to resolve multiple types of disputes.
Arrow The Commissioner has the authority to discipline players for conduct detrimental to the game.
Arrow The “System Arbitrator” (Stephen Burbank) has the authority to resolve issues of discipline arising from salary-cap violations.

The suspensions of Saints players were wiped out because the initial letters from the Commissioner to the suspended players failed to make sufficiently clear the fact that the Commissioner was acting only under his authority to suspend players for conduct detrimental to the game.

And so the process begins again, with the league office fully aware of the line between the two sources of authority — and with the league more than capable of staying in the proper lane the next time around.

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2012/09/04/pfts-week-one-picks-3/related/
_________________


Webmaster wrote:
Can we knock off all the nonsense and stick to football?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   

Post new topic   Reply to topic    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> NFL News All times are GMT - 4 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 14, 15, 16, 17  Next
Page 15 of 17

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum




Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group