The Star Caps was a completely different type of a case, and the reason why it took so long for the punishments to be finally served and why the appeal process took so long is that it was all about the interpretation of letter of law - in this case the the substance abuse rules of the NFL.

They had to determine whether or not the ingredients in the Star Caps product were on the list of prohibited substances, which is more difficult in practice than just looking at the list to see if the main components appear on the prohibited substances list - at least that is my understanding and I do not have a degree in chemistry, so I don't know how they in the end it all worked out.

I think this Bountygate thing should be more cut & dry when it comes to which players were guilty of having been involved in the PFP program, either contributing to or getting funds from the pool - that is if the league has concrete evidence of such behavior against any players. The more difficult thing is probably determining the type and level of potential punishments the league wants to hand out and to what degree i.e. do they want to punish everyone or just the "ring leaders?"

Legally, the NFL could be sued if they inhibited a players value and opportunity to sign for a maximum amount of money by "speculating" on discipline...

Now once the suspension takes place, it's another matter...

Some good points. I'm sure Goodell has given guidelines to the other owners. Would you sign a player about to be suspended?
He's stuck with his own BS. Why didn't he show proof to the NFLPA?
Now if he comes down hard he will have to show evidence in arbitation. If he's too soft he shows he just covered the NFL owners butt for future law suits. He did it at the expense of the Saints.
Every day that goes by is additional time lost by the Saints to prepare for the draft and get what's left in FA. He only has 13 more days. What an idiot.

PS. Dont think we will forget about the other teams that have admitted bounties!

Have they admitted bounties, or just stated that it goes on everywhere?

Its splitting hairs for you and me, but probably not to commissioner sh!thead.

How is the players that were involved so cut and dry? Show me a picture or video of Vilma actually putting money on a table before the NFCCG or better show me a picture of Remi getting a cash payment from Vilma or GW

Goddell wanted a war, well the NFLPA is going to give him a war

It's probably a good thing that the rulings have not been handed down yet. That indicates a better chance that Saints players will not be handed suspensions. On the flip side, I really do believe that Jon Vilma is going to miss the entire 2012 season, and Malcolm Jenkins probably 8 games. I am most certain at least 10 other players will be hit with 1 or 2 game suspensions. It is obvious that Goodell is going to make an example out of this. I seriously hope that I am wrong, but I do believe Goodell is going to run with this. He honestly has no choice, retired players are lining up to sue the NFL. I am like really?

Enjoy it folks, the NFL may go away in 20 years.

I think it's going to be too hard to nail down that many individual players with real proof and with the NFLPA in the mix, as has been pointed out. That being the case, Goodell went all out after the coaches and management ... that would be how you handle something like this in a large organization where the subordinates run wild ... the leadership of an organization is ultimately held accountable for the actions of the troops regardless of whether they know about it or not.

It is cut & dry if - like I said stated above - the league has concrete evidence against a certain player braking the salary rules by being engaged in one way or another in the pay-for-performance program.

If they can prove a violation, then there's not much debating over whether it actually violates the salary rules and the code of conduct guideline NFL delivers to the teams annually.

Whereas with the Star Caps case it wasn't cut & dry because of the reasons I already went over.

And we if we were to compare the Star Caps case with the Bountygate case, then we would have to assume that there's concrete evidence against certain players involved with the Bountygate, because there was concrete evidence against certain players in the Star Caps case i.e. positive drug test results. Otherwise, it would be pointless to even compare the two, since the circumstances/variables between the two cases would be too different for the purpose of a valid comparison.

I agree, unless of course there is a paper trail that actually says _________ got $1500.
I'll go back to what MANY have said: where were the injuries, cart-offs, knockouts, whatever? Seriously, how many 'bounties' were really paid?