League responds to Vilma suit, reiterates commitment to safety and integrity
 

The NFL has responded to the lawsuit filed Thursday by Saints linebacker Jonathan Vilma against Commissioner Roger Goodell for defamation.

“We have not yet reviewed the filing,” NFL spokesman Greg Aiello told PFT via email. “However, our commitment to player safety and the integrity of the game is our main consideration. We recognize that not everyone will agree with decisions that need to be made.”

Goodell will have 30 days to formally respond to the complaint, once it is officially served. It will be far more detailed than the paragraph appearing above, and it likely will consist of an effort to dismiss the case, possibly under the argument that the labor agreement supersedes the litigation process, forcing Vilma to file a grievance under the CBA.


League responds to Vilma suit, reiterates commitment to safety and integrity | ProFootballTalk

They've already done this right, wasn't that the hearing yesterday?

I love this comment under the write up:

DOH!

Here's where the CBA can't come into play. This is not NFLPA v. NFL. This is Vilma v. Goodell. The NFL has no jurisdiction, therefore the CBA does not come into play. This is a private lawsuit by one individual against the other. The NFL may tell Goodell he is on his own as right now they are not included in any liability.

Very slick move by his lawyer.

Payton vs Goodell and Loomis vs Goodell should be next.

I'm considering Saintfan & Zooey VS Goodell. :goodidea:

Yep, Goodell is probably thinking...

"Holy crap!!! I may have stepped in it big time."

I think as a sign of support for Vilma, we should ALL file lawsuits, personally and individually, against Roger Goodell.....

You know a lawyer that can hook us up with a group discount? If so, count me in.

I got an extra 12 bucks, count me in.

Now you're talking CLASS ACTION baby! Due to the nature of the case, I would want none other than Morris Bart to file a big fat poop sandwich on behalf of all Saints fans.

One Call; That's All!

Hopefully the court will award Vilma $5 Million of Goodell's money. :bng:

http://madamenoire.com/wp-content/up...sign-image.jpg

Hey Florio,

As a former lawyer you should know (if you read the lawsuit documents) that this is mono-y-mono, Vilma v. Goodell under "personal jurisdiction." At NO time does the lawsuit name the NFL!!!!

No NFL = NO CBA

This is ****ing awesome! :grin:

Last place Vilma would want to be is on the stand.
This is just a move to try and scare Goodell.

Well, if you did NOT do it, you have nothing to lose!!!! It's Goodell who's crapping in his pants now!

Why? Vilma has no clue what evidence is against him. Nobody has that information. To assume the one holding that evidence is scared is laughable.

Goodell is smart enough to not go after players by name if he didn't have conclusive evidence on the matter. IMO, punishing the coaches and owner were enough.

If Vilma didn't put down any money then they have no evidence. Possibly circumstantial hear say. Nothing more. Unless of course, it's fabricated evidence.......
Vilma you are still the man.:p

If Goodell had "conclusive" evidence implicating Vilma, he would have already shown what he had the numerous times the NFLPA asked to see it... Just to be all: "See I told you so!"

That's not how it works. You don't show evidence unless absolutely necessary. There has been no point to which any evidence would need to be seen. Right or wrong is beside the point. This is how it works every day in every day legal battles.

Here's a question, why would Goodell and the NFL show evidence before any potential lawsuits? Why would they give those suspended a leg up in a legal battle? Wouldn't it make sense to have a court take down the players statements and THEN provide the proof?

seems goodel 's only card is his ex employee of saints who supposidly heard vill. offer cash and if goofball i mean dipstick i meen goodell told the rat he will never be called on. so this rat may never come forward to show his wiskers. meaning goodell has'nt got a pot to we we in.

Change of topic: What ever happened to that Loomis "eavesdropping" claim? lol

Can't wait to see this. Man its getting crazy.

Depending on the outcome of this case, it may open up the coffers for several lawsuits and settlements.

Roger Goodell = John Travolta

IF Vilma knows for a fact he did not do what Goodell has publicly claimed then he has absolutely nothing to lose. Perhaps someone with a vendetta against the Saints gave Goodell false information or evidence thinking it wouldn't go public.

if vilma gets the proof out there for all to see and it proves to be a lot crap then this could mean SP could be back on the sidelines.

lets see the cards.

Actually, they will be required to give the evidence up before any hearing.

I hope this means trouble for Ayatollah GoodHell. Perhaps the NFL will consider a more rational system of checks & balances in the future - as opposed to the present judge, jury, executioner disaster.

Maybe. Maybe not.

He is 'smart enough' if he can hide behind the CBA and do and say whatever he feels and then destroy evidence on a whim...

BUT, I'd be willing to bet Roger never thought this would go this far. I have to doubt that he considered he'd actually get sued as an individual.

Where I think he miscalculated is the over-the-top punishment to players. Management, assuming there was even a pay-for-performance program, IS ultimately responsible. Roger went way over the top with Sean and Loomie in my opinion...

But with the players, is there any evidence that anyone was directly involved? The league points to Hargrove's statement as the end all be all and it is anything but.

Roger's mistake was to effectively end Jon's career. Heck, guilty or not, had Roger simply imposed a reasonable fine, Vilma might have simply capitulated rather than deal with all the drama. Instead Roger ended his career thus forcing Vilma and the NFLPA into action.

REAL action that I doubt Roger saw coming, smart as I think he is. I think he made a critical error in judgement with the heavy-handed suspensions and fines. I think he's crapping his pants right about now, and I'm happy about it.

Why didn't Goodell just hand down punishment without making a media circus and mentioning Vilma several times specifically?

Apparently Hargrove, Fujita and others were just as culpable, why not mention their name over and over again to hurt the remained of their careers?

Doesn't the punishment itself fit the crime? Or does Vilma worthy of extra opprobrium to the extent that it destroys what's left of his career.

Can we all pitch in to send him some of these?

http://www.disposablemedicalexpress....load/19067.jpg

And if he wears them, He can sell sponsorships to offset the millions he is going to have to pay Vilma! Something like this?

http://www.sportsmansdaily.com/image...ependsBest.jpg

Maybe GoodHell is more the tampon type ...

Here's the problem that the NFL has made a mockery of two separate terminologies, and may have made judgements based off false testimony from a disgruntled ex-employee(s)

Pay-for-performance means a payment system that links compensation measured by work quality or goals - like playing an entire season, or catching x number of passes. These are part of player contracts. They are NOT the same as Bounty Schemes.

Outside of a player's contract it can also mean other players and coaches pay fellow players for pass catches, kicking the winning field goal, TD passes, etc.

Bounty Schemes are similar to pay for performance outside a contract, but they encourage wilful compensation to players who cause damage or hurt to other players on the field.

There probably has to definitely be some intent with a Bounty Scheme from both the players and coaches.

The NFL has bleed the lines with these definitions. They have availed themselves to legal action by using these terms loosely, and attempting to issue justice in the court of public opinion without presenting facts and evidence - giving players like Vilma due process in the public's eye.

This is going to be a HUGE problem with the NFL's defense and their complaints against these players.

Let's hope so. Incentives have long been a part of the game - not to mention a part of contracts. While "pay for play" may be a no-no, it's one thing to give some CB a bonus for 5+ interceptions, and totally another to offer a bonus for inflicting injury.

Either way, looks like the NFL is gonna have to present proof of these allegations now ... and that's really all most of us wanted, right?

Goodell is not the NFL. Even if he wanted to use the evidence it's technically not his evidence to use to defend himself right?

Therein lies one of his challenges ... it would ostensibly result in a default judgement in favor of Vilma if he did not use the evidence to defend himself. How hot can it get for Herr Fuhrer Goodell?

my love for Jonathan Vilma grows by the minute

Classic "I do not know what the fk to say" reply from the league.

Dear NFL... the law suit has nothing to do with the punishment... Its the public defamation of character with no justification from Goodell in front of microphones and cameras you are getting sued for...

Just along the lines I was thinking yesterday... Vilma is not suing the NFL he is suing Goodell personally.

NFL lawyers... Keep Quiet.