Good question.

I'm not so sure. The NFL is on record - meaning the doctor they employed - having said NFL players are of no greater risk of head trauma than people who don't play football. They went in front of Congress as recently as 2007 with this statement while the rest of the humans were (and had been for some time) preaching otherwise.

After that 2007 hearing, the NFL began to 'care', all of a sudden, about concussions. Players are saying the league and team doctors were telling them that getting a concussion was no big deal. "Get back out there!"

If that is accurate - if the players can establish that culture - then it seems to me the NFL has some serious 'splainin to do. Of course as I want to make abundantly clear, I'm no lawyer, but I don't think the NFL is going to come out of this clean. In fact I think the NFL is in BIG trouble, and I think Roger Goodell knows it, and I think that's why he's willing to come down in such a public and over-the-top way on the Saints.

Being so heavy-handed is Roger's way of showing the world - and more precisely the judge and jury he will soon be required to stand before - that the NFL 'cares'. It's crap on a stick and we all know it.

What I find interesting is that a lot of the comments underneath the articles seem to be turning somewhat in the Saints favor, as well. What began as just a total outpouring of vitriol and hatred by John Q. Public toward the Saints, underneath these articles, is now running about 50/50 split, in the comments section of most of these different sports/news sites. A lot of people out there are also saying "where is the evidence and why won't they show it?" That's a HUGELY important shift in my book.

It IS an important shift I agree. I've been saying for a while now that, at least in my opinion, this has become bigger than football or sports in general. This is about a man with a clearly perceived agenda thumping his chest and directly affecting the lives and careers of other men without a single shred of evidence against them. That just isn't right.

And I know it's a corporation and a Union and a CBA and all that jazz. Still, this needs to be addressed, and that's why I think the Union should take this all the way to a strike if necessary because Roger should be required to show his evidence to the men he is making responsible for his "The NFL cares about safety" agenda.

I am not a litigious person - I live more by a belief in Karma, but in this case I'd sue somebody's ass off. I really would.

What I have trouble understanding is how the NFL Network crucifies the Saints for their bounty while showing perfectly clean hits. Also defending players who show up on their network who admit to having placed bounties by saying things like Yea but they weren't trying to end anybody's career.
Oh yea and Iv'e had about enough of Jamie Dukes. He says Harper played dirty when he hit Steve Smith but Defends Suh for throwing QBs to the ground by the face mask after the play is over.

I'm surprised that they aren't still pushing the illegal listening device into the forefront. Maybe it's time for some apologies????? No???? Hmmmmm.......
Well they should be forth coming real soon.:wink:

... maybe they're learning from Bountygate that's it's probably better to wait to have some real evidence/facts before pushing the issue ... you know, so they don't look stupid like Goodell and everyone else who threw the Saints under the bus ...

Because the league is still pissed that 2 small market teams went to the superbowl and the Saints won.

and they can't understand this:

The last two Super Bowls, along with the 2010 game between New Orleans and Indianapolis and the finale of ''M-A-S-H'' in 1983, are the only programs to exceed 100 million viewers in U.S. television history.

and they're doing everything they can to keep it from happening again. Screw the media no one listens to that propaganda anymore. it's all about the money.