New Orleans Saints -

New Orleans Saints - (
-   Saints (
-   -   Agent for suspended former New Orleans Saints player Anthony Hargrove challenges NFL to answer questions on 'bounty' issues (

SmashMouth 06-17-2012 01:15 PM

Agent for suspended former New Orleans Saints player Anthony Hargrove challenges NFL to answer questions on 'bounty' issues
Agent Phil Williams, who represents former New Orleans Saints defensive tackle Anthony Hargrove, released a statement Sunday asking a lengthy series of questions to the NFL about the league's handling of its "bounty" investigation. In it Williams expresses his disappointment with the league's "cloak and dagger" approach to the investigation, and he specifically accuses the league of lying or misrepresenting certain accusations.

Williams said in the statement that Hargrove actually had a meeting with the NFL scheduled before the league handed out its punishments, and he was waiting on flight details before the meeting was cancelled by the league without explanation. The league, however, has said that no players agreed to meet with investigators before punishments were handed out.

"These are legitimate questions that I think myself and others want to know the answer to," Williams said of his reason for releasing the statement on the day before the players' appeals are scheduled to be heard by NFL commissioner Roger Goodell. "And its just an opportunity to get it out there and see If there's any chance they'll answer them."

Here's is Williams' statement in its entirety:

Questions for the League Office in Regards to "Bountygate":

Why is the NFL acting in a way that, to many of us, appears to be so "cloak and dagger"? Even though the CBA gave you the right to wait until Friday afternoon to hand over "evidence", was it really necessary to do so? Why was it important to give them (the NFLPA and players) only a weekend to study what you considered to be the "evidence"? If these men have committed such grievous crimes that you have determined that their careers should be in danger and/or their names sullied, why be so secretive about the "evidence" that you use to condemn them? Do you care about NFL players enough to be above board with them? They are what makes the NFL the NFL, are they not? If there is a large "pool" of players that you could have made examples of from across the NFL (and there is!), why did you choose these men? And do you really think it fair to "make examples" out of them? What if you are the ones chosen to be "made examples of" in the future?

Why must you demand your right to be judge, jury, and executioner? Even if you have the right, must you use it? Is there anything to be lost by allowing those who are impartial to have a say-so in whether these judged men are truly given a shot at justice? And did you sincerely consider what you gave the NFLPA sufficient enough to tarnish men's careers and reputations? If you believe the "evidence" to be so substantial that you would espouse the 50,000-plus page file, why would most of those pages have zero to do with "bounties" or even "pay-for-performance"? 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? Should there not have been dozens of rewards paid out, if in fact, "bounties for injuries" (which is what this was all about in the beginning, I think) paid out money? And why would your "independent" counsel be so highly paid for their counsel (by you) and also be so secretive? Again, if the facts are so obvious, why not allow someone truly impartial to make the final decision and therefore validate your judgments?

Is honesty truly paramount to you? If so, why did you take Anthony Hargrove's declaration and state that it said things that it did not say? Is that honest? Why did you state that Anthony "admitted to lying" when he has done no such thing? Do you hold yourself to the same standard as you hold others? Have you "admitted to lying"? To clarify, would you consider it lying to say someone "admitted to lying" when they did not do so? And why did you not consider the remarkably difficult situation that Anthony was put in by his coaches, who to him were "the NFL"? What would you have done if you had been back in the NFL for less than a year, having served a year-long suspension, with the threat of your career ending (again) hanging over your head? Would you have disobeyed your employer? Would you now? And is it possible that the interview was about semantics, anyway?

read more

The Dude 06-17-2012 01:24 PM

Goodell is such a doosh

CharityMike 06-17-2012 01:32 PM

Those are some GREAT questions but why do I feel like Godell is reading them and laughing at it? Those questions paint a good picture of why this whole mess is a farce!

Rugby Saint II 06-17-2012 03:59 PM


Originally Posted by CharityMike (Post 412661)
Those are some GREAT questions but why do I feel like Godell is reading them and laughing at it? Those questions paint a good picture of why this whole mess is a farce!

I hope he is. Then he won't see it coming and will make himself look even m ore devious than already. He will get his....New Orleans doesn't rollover for anybody.:bng:

saintsfan1976 06-17-2012 05:35 PM

Can't wait to see the signs around the Superdome this season

JimmyB1775 06-17-2012 07:42 PM

How does this make it to ESPN or a larger outlet than That's the problem with all these stories. Things like players feeling railroaded get snubbed and stuck in a drawer while Sean Pampillon gets prime real estate on all the major outlets.

saintfan 06-17-2012 08:24 PM


Originally Posted by The Dude (Post 412656)
Goodell is such a doosh

I'll take it a step further. He is a douchenozzle...

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:15 PM.

Copyright 1997 - 2018 -