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

phocis850 · 05-17-2012, 09:55 PM

Originally Posted by SmashMouth

Well, if you did NOT do it, you have nothing to love!!!! 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.

Rugby Saint II · 05-17-2012, 09:59 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 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.

|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, 02:17 PM

Originally Posted by phocis850

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?

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

Halo · 05-18-2012, 02:34 PM

Originally Posted by phocis850

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?

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.

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?

mutineer10 · 05-18-2012, 02:40 PM

Maybe GoodHell is more the tampon type ...

05-17-2012, 09:55 PM	#1
phocis850 Registered Join Date: Dec 2011 Posts: 31	Originally Posted by SmashMouth Well, if you did NOT do it, you have nothing to love!!!! 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.
phocis850 Registered Join Date: Dec 2011 Posts: 31

05-17-2012, 09:59 PM	#2
Rugby Saint II Bounty Money $$$ Join Date: Oct 2008 Location: 5800 Airline Dr. Metairie, LA. Posts: 24,198	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 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.

05-17-2012, 10:13 PM	#4
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, 02:17 PM	#5
AsylumGuido 10000 POST CLUB Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: Bossier City, LA Posts: 26,762	Originally Posted by phocis850 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? Actually, they will be required to give the evidence up before any hearing.

05-18-2012, 02:34 PM	#6
Halo Site Donor MONTHLY Join Date: May 2002 Location: New Orleans, LA Posts: 20,907 Blog Entries: 45	Originally Posted by phocis850 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? 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.

05-17-2012, 10:02 PM	#3
\|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!"

05-18-2012, 02:13 PM	#7
AsylumGuido 10000 POST CLUB Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: Bossier City, LA Posts: 26,762	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	#8
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	#9
SmashMouth I donated, did you? Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: Mandeville, LA Posts: 39,019 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, 02:40 PM	#10
mutineer10 Site Donor Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: Baton Rouge, LA Posts: 1,739	Maybe GoodHell is more the tampon type ... saintfan and foreverfan like this.

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