Not that it was right, but i understand Hargrove's predicament. It's easy to say that he should have done the right thing, no matter the consequences. But if Hargrove spoke out and this did blow over, his career is over. He'd be labeled a rat, it would spread through the NFL, and he would have a hard time finding a job. He's not Drew Brees. He's Anthony Hargrove, a player who had already been suspended for a year for substance abuse and was likely on his way to a journeyman career playing for a series of short-term, veteran minimum deals. I bet if you asked him, he'd do the same thing over again. Because even though he's been suspended for 8 games, keeping his mouth shut and preserving the sacred "what happens in the locker room, stays in the locker room" makes him trustworthy in the eyes of the rest of the league. Tough situation and i don't necessarily disagree with the suspension, but I understand where Hargrove is coming from.
So Vitt tells Hargrove to lie. Hargrove gets suspended for 8 games and Vitt gets 6 games. 
And yet Ain't fans are convinced the NFL is against them. WOW.
NFL: Anthony, do you deny the existence of any bounty system?
A.H: Joe? Greg?!?!
NFL: Do you deny the existence of any bounty system??
A.H: Joe?!?! GREG!?!?!
NFL: Don't look at them, LOOK AT ME!! Do you deny the existence of any bounty system?!!?!?
Joe Vitt/Greg Williams: Anthony, answer the NFL's question!
A.H: I received a direct order from my squad leaders, Joe Vitt & Greg Williams & I followed it!!
A.H: Joe? Greg?!?!
NFL: Do you deny the existence of any bounty system??
A.H: Joe?!?! GREG!?!?!
NFL: Don't look at them, LOOK AT ME!! Do you deny the existence of any bounty system?!!?!?
Joe Vitt/Greg Williams: Anthony, answer the NFL's question!
A.H: I received a direct order from my squad leaders, Joe Vitt & Greg Williams & I followed it!!
In the Feb 2010 meeting
"...Williams initially talked about football, saying that Hargrove would be given a chance to start in the following season. ..."
NFL met with Hargrove in March 2010.
Hargrove stats in the following year, 2010: 0 games started, 16 games played. Hargrove wasn't re-signed after the season. (He started 6 games in 2009)
Saints don't look great on this one. Did they keep Hargrove for a year so that he would be quiet? Unfortunately, I don't see how Goodell can adjust the sentence. Grown man making his choices. If I were the commish, I wouldn't backtrack on Hargrove. I might rethink Vitt. Williams is now taking courses on how to sell insurance.
"...Williams initially talked about football, saying that Hargrove would be given a chance to start in the following season. ..."
NFL met with Hargrove in March 2010.
Hargrove stats in the following year, 2010: 0 games started, 16 games played. Hargrove wasn't re-signed after the season. (He started 6 games in 2009)
Saints don't look great on this one. Did they keep Hargrove for a year so that he would be quiet? Unfortunately, I don't see how Goodell can adjust the sentence. Grown man making his choices. If I were the commish, I wouldn't backtrack on Hargrove. I might rethink Vitt. Williams is now taking courses on how to sell insurance.
quote:Originally posted by Tdog:
I found this interesting:
Mike Golic (ESPN) looked up the suspended players penalties for the last THREE YEARS, and here is what he found for regular season games over that entire time period:
Vilma: 2 “unnecessary roughness” type penalties called against him (1 roughing the passer, 1 personal foul)
Will Smith: 1 Roughing the Passer, 0 personal fouls
Hargrove: No regular season “unnecessary roughness” type fouls. ZERO
It has nothing to do with actual hits on players. It all has to do with what went on in the lockerroom and what was said or was not said during the resulting investigations. you lie to the boss (Goodell) and you will be punished.
it just makes me doubt the veracity of the so called bounty program - it didn't translate very good to the field it appears. yes, lying to goddell is a mortal sin apparently but keeping an NFL salary coming in is pretty important to a player, too, and pissing off your coaches/bosses isn't a good way to stay on the field.
yeah the saints had a bounty program and yes it certainly appears greg williams is an a$$hole who will instruct his players to target the opposition's injuries, but the reality is that during a football game you don't have the time to contemplate these things and you just play football. "here comes so-and-so, now where was I suppose to tackle him?" no, you just tackle him. IMHO.
my disdain for goddell taints all my perspective though - I'll give anyone that. so, it's easy to find myself rooting against him and hoping he gets knocked down a peg or two.
yeah the saints had a bounty program and yes it certainly appears greg williams is an a$$hole who will instruct his players to target the opposition's injuries, but the reality is that during a football game you don't have the time to contemplate these things and you just play football. "here comes so-and-so, now where was I suppose to tackle him?" no, you just tackle him. IMHO.
my disdain for goddell taints all my perspective though - I'll give anyone that. so, it's easy to find myself rooting against him and hoping he gets knocked down a peg or two.
looks like this is gonna get even deeper into he said/she said... gawd.
http://profootballtalk.nbcspor...old-hargrove-to-lie/
Vitt denies it, according to Mike Triplett of the New Orleans Times-Picayune.
“At no time did I ever tell Anthony Hargrove to lie or deny the existence (of the alleged bounty program),” Vitt said. “He can say whatever he wants to say. It just didn’t happen.”
But here’s the thing. Vitt consistently has denied the existence of a “bounty” program. Instead, he has admitted that the Saints had a pay-for-performance system.
“We had a pot for big plays, the same thing everyone else in the league has, now they call them pay-for-performance. But we never paid for dirty hits,” Vitt said. “I’ll say it again, the exact same thing I told the Commissioner, our players never crossed the white lines with an intent to maim or injure. They never threatened the integrity of the game when they crossed the white lines.”
That’s where the gap in the facts exists. The league says that money was paid for “cart-offs” and “knockouts,” but the league has yet to identify a single cent contributed or paid for a “cart-off” or a “knockout” caused by the Saints in 2009, 2010, and/or 2011.
If it happened, why not disclose the proof of it? If it didn’t, why isn’t this simply being characterized as an illegal pay-for-performance program?
http://profootballtalk.nbcspor...old-hargrove-to-lie/
Vitt denies it, according to Mike Triplett of the New Orleans Times-Picayune.
“At no time did I ever tell Anthony Hargrove to lie or deny the existence (of the alleged bounty program),” Vitt said. “He can say whatever he wants to say. It just didn’t happen.”
But here’s the thing. Vitt consistently has denied the existence of a “bounty” program. Instead, he has admitted that the Saints had a pay-for-performance system.
“We had a pot for big plays, the same thing everyone else in the league has, now they call them pay-for-performance. But we never paid for dirty hits,” Vitt said. “I’ll say it again, the exact same thing I told the Commissioner, our players never crossed the white lines with an intent to maim or injure. They never threatened the integrity of the game when they crossed the white lines.”
That’s where the gap in the facts exists. The league says that money was paid for “cart-offs” and “knockouts,” but the league has yet to identify a single cent contributed or paid for a “cart-off” or a “knockout” caused by the Saints in 2009, 2010, and/or 2011.
If it happened, why not disclose the proof of it? If it didn’t, why isn’t this simply being characterized as an illegal pay-for-performance program?
I'll predict Hargrove cuts a deal for four games after filing his appeal. NFL will agree to keep it all out of public eye.
I concur with Florio on this, from PFT.
quote:The latest chunk of it comes from Mike Triplett of the New Orleans Times-Picayune, who buries a bombshell in an article regarding the fallout of the Anthony Hargrove declaration.
Writes Triplett: “[A]ccording to a source close to [former Saints defensive coordinator Gregg] Williams, the NFL has also misrepresented what Williams said in interviews with the league. According to the source, Williams never admitted a ‘bounty program’ was in place and that the league ‘rephrased his statements to satisfy its needs.’ The source also said Williams never identified any players for their involvement in a pay-for-performance or bounty program.”
Those are strong, stunning allegations. Given the mounting attacks on the quality of the league’s evidence, the time has come for the NFL to disclose it. All. Publicly. Every piece and shred of it.
It’s far too late for the NFL to hide behind “personnel matters” and “privacy rights.” Through a series of detailed statements that the NFL has released containing summaries and characterizations of evidence, the reputations of Gregg Williams, Sean Payton, Joe Vitt, Mickey Loomis, Anthony Hargrove, Scott Fujita, Will Smith, and Jonathan Vilma forever have been sullied. The least the league can do at this point is share with all of us the evidence that justified publicly branding these eight men as cheaters, liars, and worse.
This isn’t about exonerating Williams, who delivered a fatal blow to his own reputation the night before the Saints faced the 49ers in the 2011 NFC playoffs. But the league has painted all of eight men with the same broad brush. The time has come to take a scalpel to the evidence and figured out exactly who did what.
quote:Originally posted by Tdog:
I concur with Florio on this, from PFT.quote:...
It’s far too late for the NFL to hide behind “personnel matters” and “privacy rights.” ...
And Florio's an attorney? Pure Dum.
Is the NFL truly bungling this investigation or is it media spin to make seem like they are? Either way the NFL is looking pretty bad in this. The media has turned these players and coaches from villains into the persecuted and has turned Roger Goodell into a tyrant. The NFL and Goodell need to either start explaining these inconsistencies or show their hand like they did with the Greg Williams audio file.
Personally, I don't think Florio gives a rat's @ss what evidence the NFL has or what it says. He just want's to be the guy to get his hands on it and break it first or proclaim himself to be the guy that pried it away from Goodell.
He's played on both sides of the fence from the start. Screaming of the injustice of the bounty program, the unmerciless beating of Lord Byron, and now demanding to see the evidence.
He's played on both sides of the fence from the start. Screaming of the injustice of the bounty program, the unmerciless beating of Lord Byron, and now demanding to see the evidence.
.
As mentioned earlier, they have to protect the shield of the NFL image - the last thing they need is to open up this can of worms for all to see. Its not a pretty picture.
And the idea that outsiders were influencing the outcome of a game via bounties is a death knell for the integrity of the league. The players were used and they will pay the price and Ornstein goes on his merry way
The League, the networks and their advertisers sell a squeaky clean image to the tune of Billions of dollars in ads and merchandise. Will sharing the details of this effort help or hurt that effort ? Would you trade billions in revenue to spare a couple of players ?
Follow the money and the money says they simply cannot open the details of the investigation without significant damage to their reputation. And just like the idiotic meme of "open the books ! " during the lockout, it appeals to the masses and gains traction. Its a soundbyte full of fury signifying nothing
IF they shared everything it would likley be a major hit to the image of the League - negatively impacting all paychecks going forward.
And as per usual, the NFLPA is too ****ing stupid to figure this out and continues with their Jesse Jackson bombastic rhetoric strategy.
The very definition of cutting off your nose to spite your face
As mentioned earlier, they have to protect the shield of the NFL image - the last thing they need is to open up this can of worms for all to see. Its not a pretty picture.
And the idea that outsiders were influencing the outcome of a game via bounties is a death knell for the integrity of the league. The players were used and they will pay the price and Ornstein goes on his merry way
The League, the networks and their advertisers sell a squeaky clean image to the tune of Billions of dollars in ads and merchandise. Will sharing the details of this effort help or hurt that effort ? Would you trade billions in revenue to spare a couple of players ?
Follow the money and the money says they simply cannot open the details of the investigation without significant damage to their reputation. And just like the idiotic meme of "open the books ! " during the lockout, it appeals to the masses and gains traction. Its a soundbyte full of fury signifying nothing
IF they shared everything it would likley be a major hit to the image of the League - negatively impacting all paychecks going forward.
And as per usual, the NFLPA is too ****ing stupid to figure this out and continues with their Jesse Jackson bombastic rhetoric strategy.
The very definition of cutting off your nose to spite your face
Florio: I WANT THE TRUTH!!
Goodell: YOU CAN'T HANDLE THE TRUTH!!
Am I watching a movie here?
Goodell: YOU CAN'T HANDLE THE TRUTH!!
Am I watching a movie here?
3rd Few Good Men reference I've spotted in the past few weeks.
Does this make BrINT's new name Private Santiago?
Does this make BrINT's new name Private Santiago?
Here is a very good read on the topic from Don Banks at SI and he makes some pretty good points on both sides of the discussion
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.c...x.html?sct=nfl_wr_a2
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.c...x.html?sct=nfl_wr_a2
quote:Personally, I don't think Florio gives a rat's @ss what evidence the NFL has or what it says. He just want's to be the guy to get his hands on it and break it first or proclaim himself to be the guy that pried it away from Goodell.
I could swear I heard an interview with Florio bitching about the release of the Williams audio because it violated the confidence Steve Gleason had with the documentary filmmaker who recorded Williams' speech.
Florio, of course, also being the guy who has no qualms about releasing players' Wonderlic scores.
Just an update, but no real news:
Arbitration Hearing
And, just how many appeals/hearing can their be? Sheesh!
Arbitration Hearing
quote:Arbitrator Shyam Das heard arguments Wednesday from NFL and players union lawyers on whether Commissioner Roger Goodell can discipline players for actions that occurred before the league's current labor agreement was signed last August...
quote:...Wednesday's hearing dealt with whether an agreement between the union and the league as part of last summer's labor negotiations precluded the NFL from punishing the Saints players in this case.
Das did not say when he would rule...
And, just how many appeals/hearing can their be? Sheesh!
quote:...A separate arbitration hearing into whether Goodell has the authority to impose penalties on Saints players who participated in the team's cash-for-hits system has been set for May 30.
The union has asked arbitrator Stephen Burbank of the University of Pennsylvania to decide if the players should be punished for the system that the league says ran for three years and paid improper cash bonuses for hits that injured targeted opponents.
The union argues that Burbank, not Goodell, should hear the four players' appeals...
http://profootballtalk.nbcspor...s-concrete-evidence/
Hargrove agent speaks, he does not think the NFL has the evidence to suspend his client. Who would of thunk he would take that stance.
Hargrove agent speaks, he does not think the NFL has the evidence to suspend his client. Who would of thunk he would take that stance.
Can't fight City Hall and it's lawyers/bureaucrats/monopolies/agencies/larded wallets/apparatchiks. Big government all the way, Babbbyyyyy!!!!!!
What Troy Aikman said about the future of the NFL a few months ago doesn't seem quite as far-fetched anymore. Goodell's stewardship is but one sign of that.
I still am confused as to why the NFL is still refusing to show any concrete evidence that these specific players were part of a bounty program? It's clear there was a bounty program and I do believe these players were a part of it, but I don't believe the NFL can prove it which is what should count. The NFL and Goodell have handled this so poorly.
I would think they would be waiting to show evidence, until required by the court of law. Once this case goes to trial, then they'll show the evidence. They really can't show it beforehand, it will give the NFLPA way too much time to come up with a "defense"?
Or, they showed Vilma and the others the evidence today and while those players and their attorneys were vocal after the hearings today, this could be the end of it.
http://www.nfl.com/videos/nfl-...gram?continuous=true
So the NFL invites these reporters up for a big show that details their evidence. Sounds like their evidence is focused only on the existence of a bounty program, which they clearly have evidence of. What they don't seem to have is concrete evidence that these specific players paid or received money in the bounty program. Sounds like a lot of circumstantial evidence. Even the clip of Hargrove supposedly saying "Give me my money" isn't even really that clear. You can't tell whether the guy the arrow is pointing to is actually Hargrove and you can't even see the guy they're assuming to be Hargrove is actually the one saying those words. That seems super flimsy. I'm inclined to agree with Fujita and Vilma that the NFL is destroying their reputations based on flimsy, circumstantial evidence.
So the NFL invites these reporters up for a big show that details their evidence. Sounds like their evidence is focused only on the existence of a bounty program, which they clearly have evidence of. What they don't seem to have is concrete evidence that these specific players paid or received money in the bounty program. Sounds like a lot of circumstantial evidence. Even the clip of Hargrove supposedly saying "Give me my money" isn't even really that clear. You can't tell whether the guy the arrow is pointing to is actually Hargrove and you can't even see the guy they're assuming to be Hargrove is actually the one saying those words. That seems super flimsy. I'm inclined to agree with Fujita and Vilma that the NFL is destroying their reputations based on flimsy, circumstantial evidence.
It's been a while since Drew Brees chimed in.
He's comparing the NFL bounty evidence to weapons of mass destruction
I'm not sure I've ever seen anyone take a chainsaw to their "Goodguy" persona as Drew has over the past 18 months.
He's comparing the NFL bounty evidence to weapons of mass destruction
I'm not sure I've ever seen anyone take a chainsaw to their "Goodguy" persona as Drew has over the past 18 months.
He needs to STFU. He just continues to embarass himself.
quote:Originally posted by Grave Digger:
http://www.nfl.com/videos/nfl-...gram?continuous=true
So the NFL invites these reporters up for a big show that details their evidence. Sounds like their evidence is focused only on the existence of a bounty program, which they clearly have evidence of. What they don't seem to have is concrete evidence that these specific players paid or received money in the bounty program. Sounds like a lot of circumstantial evidence. Even the clip of Hargrove supposedly saying "Give me my money" isn't even really that clear. You can't tell whether the guy the arrow is pointing to is actually Hargrove and you can't even see the guy they're assuming to be Hargrove is actually the one saying those words. That seems super flimsy. I'm inclined to agree with Fujita and Vilma that the NFL is destroying their reputations based on flimsy, circumstantial evidence.
I think they have an informant. This evidence simply collaborates the info they received from the informant. Apparently, they only released 200 pages of the 50,000 page of evidence they collected.
Wasn't there a rumor/speculation that the snitch was Jeremy Shockey?
In the NFL's mind, they only have to conclude/show evidence that there was a bounty program. It doesn't matter to them, if players actually got paid/hurt, they are trying to prove that there was a "program" in existence. From the evidence that has been reported on, it sounds like it will be hard for the players to deny that a program existed?
SI report
SI report
So why doesn't their document say they have an informant or a witness to these players receiving or contributing money? They've proven a bounty program existed, they've taken some of Gregg Williams words and misconstrued them, but I think they've shown enough evidence that Williams directed his players to intentionally injure opponents and that there was a pool of money that would be distributed for injuries. They've proven that Williams directed it and that Payton and Loomis were aware and did nothing. I don't think they've proven Vitt was actually involved, but I think the suspensions of the other 3 were justified (I would argue Loomis should have been given the same punishment as Payton though). Sounds like a lot of hearsay as far as the players go though. I'm sure a witness/informant told them Vilma said he would pay $10,000 for knocking Favre out or that Fujita and Smith said they would contribute to that, but they can't back that up with facts. End rant.
@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.
DT Anthony Hargrove will speak today at 3 pm ouside NFL offices. "He has some important information to share," said his agent Phil Williams.
Probably got a full year ban for questioning the great and powerful GoodOZ.
Then a public apology and 20 hours of groveling.
Then a public apology and 20 hours of groveling.
quote:Originally posted by Hungry5:
Wasn't there a rumor/speculation that the snitch was Jeremy Shockey?
That idiot Sapp reported it.
Right, that credible source.
