I respectfully disagree!:bng:

I agree that the suspensions of Smith & Vilma are inconsequential to the Saints success; the Saints have proven that they can survive a period with out Smith.

If Payton hadn't been so quick to issure his apology, (I have to believe that Benson had a hand in that), then the players wouldn't look like they just dropped their pants and bent over in front of Goodell.

I haven't voted yet...I'm still undecided.

Which is the premise that the league knows very well. In one hand you have coaches apologizing and admitting and accepting responsibility (they couldn't have done it with out the players)... Then you have the players (under advice from the NFLPA) refusing to cooperate fully and go to New York to talk to Goodell.

We seem to only be looking at tangible evidence as the only thing that incriminates any players. Since the coaches issue has passed and seems like it was an eternity ago.... We seem to forget the big picture.

All of the players are fighting tooth and nail to prove their innocence and that nothing happened assuming the league has no hard evidence.

If this were to go to trial and I was the Leagues attorney I would never put a player on the stand, I wouldn't have to. The first person I would put on the stand is Greg Williams, who has already admitted to basically anything that Goodell wants him to admit to. Then I would put the following people on the stand and ask the following questions:

Sean Payton: What did you take responsibility of?
Sean Payton releases statement on Bounty-Gate | KETK

Greg Williams: What are you apologizing for the involvement in?
Bountygate bombshell: Williams, Payton suspended

Mickey Loomis: What violations, and what are you taking responsibility of?
Saints release joint statement from Mickey Loomis and Sean Payton on BountyGate Charges

And while the argument can be made that Greg Williams statements could have been motivated by his desire to be reinstated.... How do you argue that two very well respected people like Payton and Loomis are clueless and nothing happened regardless of what the players claim?

For all those who think this should be fought in a court room:
If you are a member of the jury how to do you find the players innocent after their coaches publicly admit to wrong doing going on????


Payton and Loomis did what they did to "try" and keep all of this from falling on the players.... It didnt work.

Accept nothing! Go down firing & when you run outta bullets, beat 'em with the gun butt!

Heck, it ain't MY money!

If I'm a member of the jury I need to know the difference between a performance pool and a bounty. I need to know what the rules are - is a performance pool legal only if players involved and illegal if coaches participate or flat out against the rules regardless? What constitutes a bounty - and not ROGER's definition, but the true definition.

Once I know those things then I want to know what the Saints were doing, and I want proof of it. Based on what I've seen, there is pretty decent evidence that a pool of some sort was in place. Based on what I've seen there is precisely zero evidence of a bounty taking place. Not he said she said, but proof. There is none - at least none that any of the accused has seen or shared so far.

Now, if there's no bounty and if that's fairly clear (as to me it is fairly clear) then what of Roger broadcasting to the world that there IS a bounty - what damage is he doing to the target team and the target players?

And if the Saints are guilty of a performance pool they should be punished. Fairly. There is precedent of teams having been found with performance pools in operation, and so the draconian measures Roger has taken are clearly too harsh across the board.

Now I know I'm a simpleton when it comes to things like this - I'm no lawyer and I don't play one on TV, but I am most frustrated with the fact that, so far, Roger has been able to hide behind the CBA, and I along with anybody else can clearly see this is exactly what's he doing.

I want to punch Roger in the face.

What what I gather the NFL is playing a two faced card... The term Bounty resonates with the public, and performance is actually what they have all the evidence on... One is a conduct violation and detrimental to the safety of the NFL and the other is circumvention of the salary cap. Neither more legal than the other. You can get if this goes to court it will be framed as salary cap violations and conduct detrimental to the league.

They title everything Bounty to keep the ignorant public on their side, but push pay for performance (salary cap) because that is "off the field" and keeps it all in Goodells hands.

Having the coaches accept responsibility with out defining weather it was bounty or performance does not help the players at all.

We all want the evidence to come out... and stop with the he said...she said... However you do not need the actual murder weapon to get a conviction in a court of law.. Only a first hand eye witness to give testimony... Enter Greg (I will do anything to get my job back) Williams.

Which I would then argue the man has an agenda and would certainly lie to get his job back therefore his testimony is worthless. I suspect this is also true for Roger's other 'sources' which is why he is so adamant about keeping them hidden.

The "agenda card" can be iffy and has to be carefully played. In the case of Big Tobacco, it could have been said that the class action lawsuits were not intended to make cigarettes safer but to put big tobacco out of business. pretty much the SAME EXACT argument is being played now... Goodells actions are not to make the game safer but to put players out of business...

The problem with all of this is that neither you nor I will be on the jury, I dare say 75% of the jury pool will not truly understand how football is actually played. They will be females and elderly that think it is a violent game that needs to be safer and they do understand safety... Its a crap shoot. Screw around and get an Atlanta Falcons fan (I am sure there is 1 in all of New Orleans) on the jury and good luck with anything.

In Vilma vs Goodell for defamation and slander it makes a good case as slanderous comments in the public media hav no positive intent... problem is that Vilma lawsuit is against Goodell personally and if won will reap a monetary award for Vilma, but will not address suspensions etc...

Keep in mind something else, Vilma is risking never playing football again if he loses. The CBA does not have verbiage allowing him to sue Goodell in open court. In fact his suit is in violation of that contract as he is not going through arbitration.

The NFL is not alone in policy like this... Large corporations like Halliburton and Schulmberger have all of their employees sign a paper stating they will not take problems to court or outside council, they will handle them through that companies "dispute resolution program"...

It's over and I don't think that anything will ever change except for the days that we talk about the story.