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

|Mitch| · 05-17-2012, 10:02 PM

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!"

phocis850 · 05-17-2012, 10:13 PM

Originally Posted by |Mitch|

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?

AsylumGuido · 05-18-2012, 02:13 PM

Originally Posted by phocis850

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 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.

saintfan · 05-18-2012, 02:25 PM

Originally Posted by phocis850

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.

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.

SmashMouth · 05-18-2012, 02:35 PM

Originally Posted by saintfan

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.

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

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

Halo · 05-18-2012, 02:48 PM

Originally Posted by saintfan

pay-for-performance program...

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.

st thomas · 05-17-2012, 10:28 PM

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.

|Mitch| · 05-17-2012, 10:30 PM

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

Halo · 05-18-2012, 02:04 PM

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

Roger Goodell = John Travolta

hagan714 · 05-18-2012, 02:16 PM

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.

05-17-2012, 10:13 PM	#2
phocis850 Registered Join Date: Dec 2011 Posts: 31	Originally Posted by \|Mitch\| 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?
phocis850 Registered Join Date: Dec 2011 Posts: 31

05-18-2012, 02:13 PM	#3
AsylumGuido 10000 POST CLUB Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: Bossier City, LA Posts: 26,622	Originally Posted by phocis850 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 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.

05-18-2012, 02:25 PM	#4
saintfan Donated Plasma Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: San Francisco, CA Posts: 18,556 Blog Entries: 5	Originally Posted by phocis850 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. 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. SmashMouth, SaintGup and Elsewheres like this.
	C'mon Man...

05-18-2012, 02:35 PM	#5
SmashMouth I donated, did you? Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: Mandeville, LA Posts: 38,782 Blog Entries: 29	Originally Posted by saintfan 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. Can we all pitch in to send him some of these? And if he wears them, He can sell sponsorships to offset the millions he is going to have to pay Vilma! Something like this? saintfan and foreverfan like this.

05-18-2012, 02:48 PM	#6
Halo Site Donor MONTHLY Join Date: May 2002 Location: New Orleans, LA Posts: 20,894 Blog Entries: 45	Originally Posted by saintfan pay-for-performance program... 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.
	Like blackandgold.com on facebook follow us on Twitter Last edited by Halo; 05-18-2012 at 02:50 PM..

05-17-2012, 10:02 PM	#1
\|Mitch\| 10000 POST CLUB Join Date: Oct 2009 Location: Alexandria, La Posts: 11,303	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!"

05-17-2012, 10:28 PM	#7
st thomas Site Donor 2018 Join Date: Dec 2009 Location: lafayette Posts: 7,753	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. Beastmode likes this.

05-17-2012, 10:30 PM	#8
\|Mitch\| 10000 POST CLUB Join Date: Oct 2009 Location: Alexandria, La Posts: 11,303	Change of topic: What ever happened to that Loomis "eavesdropping" claim? lol saintfan and B005TED like this.

05-18-2012, 02:04 PM	#9
Halo Site Donor MONTHLY Join Date: May 2002 Location: New Orleans, LA Posts: 20,894 Blog Entries: 45	Depending on the outcome of this case, it may open up the coffers for several lawsuits and settlements. Roger Goodell = John Travolta saintfan and hagan714 like this.

05-18-2012, 02:16 PM	#10
hagan714 LB Mentallity Join Date: Dec 2005 Posts: 15,870 Blog Entries: 68	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.

LinkBacks (?) LinkBack to this Thread: https://blackandgold.com/saints/43937-league-responds-vilma-suit-reiterates-commitment-safety-integrity.html
Posted By	For	Type	Date	Hits
League responds to Vilma suit, reiterates commitment to safety and integrity	This thread	Refback	05-17-2012 05:34 PM	3