Rating: (0 votes - average)

Yes. Very wrong. You need to pray this comes back lots sooner, and bites much more than just ass.

SmashMouth

"We have purportedly been disciplined by the Commissioner for alleged activities that the National Football League has grossly misrepresented to the public.

We are in attendance today not because we recognize the Commissioner's jurisdiction to adjudicate regarding these specious allegations, but because we believe the League would attempt to publicly mischaracterize our refusal to attend. We will not address the substance of the NFL's case because this is not the proper venue for adjudication, and there has been no semblance of due process afforded to us.

As veteran players of 11, 9 and 9 years in this League, we are profoundly disappointed with the NFL's conduct in this matter. We know what the NFL has publicly said we did, and the Commissioner has chosen to try to punish us and disparage our characters based on semantics, not facts. Words are cheap and power is fleeting.

Shame on the National Football League and Commissioner Goodell for being more concerned about 'convicting' us publicly than being honorable and fair to men who have dedicated their professional lives to playing this game with honor."

The USA Today quote is a good one with respect to how it should be properly characterized. Goodell is digging a deeper hole for himself.

|Mitch|

Talk about truth! Not attending and Roger would have made them to look like murderers, oh wait we're already to that point

NOLA54

The issue is that it makes all the difference in the world between a bounty to injure and a pay for performance.

Pay for performance would likely fall under a salary cap violation which would be handled totally differently then a bounty to injure.

What Goodell is doing is injuring everyone assoicated with the Saints from the coaching staff to the average fan.

I was born & raised in New Orleans till I joined the Navy in the 70's. I had season tickets from day one while I lived there. I currently live in Denver and will be fortunate enough to go the Saints vs Broncos game here in October 2012. Should I fear for my safety especially if the Saints win?

Is this the type of atmosphere that is being created? Goodell better make the appropriate moves with regards to bounty vs salary cap. Particulary since it is sounding more & more like they do not have enough evidence to make the bounty charges stick.

I think the city of New Orleans should file a class action lawsuit against Goodell.

If anyone out there is going to be attending the game in Denver, please let me know. Perhaps we can all meet outside the stadium prior to the game so we can walk in together.

SmashMouth

An update from NOLA.com...

"We had two fundamental issues that have come to the forefront today," Vilma attorney Peter Ginsberg said. "One is a question about how we ended up in a place, at a proceeding, where the commissioner has so unilaterally and in such a draconian fashion believes that he can take over control of a proceeding like this. Putting aside how we got here, even with regard to the few fundamental rules that should govern these proceedings he cannot abide by them. For an example, the commissioner was obligated to produce the documents to us within 72 hours before the proceeding. The NFL didn't produce any of their documents 72 hours before the proceedings. When you look at those documents it's clear the commissioner whas withheld from us thousands of pages that he gathered during the course of his supposed investigation. He was also unwilling to present any witnesses to us. So we got upstairs and the commissioner has tried to regroup by adjourning today's hearing after we presented our position with regard to the process and with regard to the merits. We're not willing to participate in that kind of sham. The commissioner had legal obligations, procedural obligations. He failed in those obligations and as far as we're concerned these proceedings are over."


The NFL, for it's part, insists it complied with the language of the collective bargaining agreement by turning over some 200 out of tens of thousands of pages it amassed last Friday, three calendar days before the hearing. It was the players side that requested the adjournment, according to the NFL, to give it more time to review what has already been produced.

But it is what has not been produced that is telling, according to Ginsberg. Vilma stands accused of offering $10,000 to any teammate who took out an opposing quarterback in the 2009 playoffs, a chilling allegation he and Ginsberg say is untrue. There was no evidence in Friday's offering to support that charge, according to people favorable to the players who have reviewed it, and Ginsberg contends the massive files the NFL has thus far kept hidden would prove the falsity of the accusation.

"(Goodell) attempted to adjourn it, we closed the record," Ginsberg said. "For more abuse of the process and of Jonathan's rights? No, we've decided enough is enough. (Goodell) knows what the evidence is and if he chooses to ignore the evidence then we have to proceed as best we can to reclaim Jonathan's reputation."

Ginsberg thus left open the possibility, which he declined to address, that Vilma may seek additional recourse through the courts. Vilma has already filed a defamation lawsuit against Goodell personally in federal court in New Orleans.

"I'm an eternal optimist," Ginsberg said. "Perhaps the commissioner will rethink what he's doing."

read more

This poses an interesting wrinkle .... the league, or Goodell, according to Ginsberg, did not comply not only in a timely manner but also in terms of the actual evidence. So it looks like that Vilma now has yet another recourse upon which he can pounce on the NFL and the commissioner.

mutineer10

As much as I hate it, I'm fearful that you're correct.

The bottom line is, Goodell has basically been granted absolute power, and here's what the NFLPA got for their trouble. This is what happens when there are no checks & balances ...

saintfan

Yes. And this is why I think the NFLPA should gather everyone on a conference call and say something like this:

"We believe the Union should strike because, as has been seen, Roger Goodell will stop at nothing to further the league's agenda that it cares about player safety. We submit that he has lied to congress, personally supported the doctor, paid for by the NFL, who boldly stated that you, the players are at no greater risk for head trauma because you play in the NFL than any other person, has a history of destroying evidence, over-the-top fines and penalties, and that each of you are subject to this extremely unfair 'system of justice' simply by stepping onto the field. The ONLY way we can exercise any control over this system which has proven to be completely unfair to you, the players, is to Strike with these two demands: 1) Roger Goodell must step down as Commissioner of the NFL and 2) a system of checks and balances that spreads the decision making power among fair, impartial persons, be put in place immediately."

Now I know it will never happen, but I swear to all that is holy if I were in a position to influence players in the NFL I would do everything in my power to make it happen.

C'mon Man...

Halo

The issue of whether Goodell has the authority, through the CBA, to issue punishment on players is an internal matter between the NFL and the NFLPA interpreted through the CBA. The arbitrator's read the CBA and interpreted that Goodell has the authority to punish players for anything.

The lawsuit is completely separate from the CBA and the aribtrators assigned by agreement from the NFL and NFLPA.

The lawsuit is NOT about the CBA and a completely different matter - it's about SLANDER - false, misleading statements made by Goodell without just reason to say them (ie. using Vilma as a scapegoat) that hurt Vilma's career financially, and Vilma's reputation.

TheOak

Trust me brother... I hate it as much as 1/2 the board combined... Goodells power is just another example of empty suits being paid to do a job and being ill equipped to do it correctly.

DeMaurice Smith is incapable of managing the NFLPA as it needs to be managed. He is a combination of two career paths that are on their own not considered either transparent or remotely honest. He is a lawyer with a Bachelors in Political Science. Lawyer/politician. (no disrespect to any of the lawyers here)... ambulance chasing scum has ruined the names of the good.

I understand he was elected unanimously... by a group of people not exactly known for intelligent choices... If they were, there wouldn't be all the whining from once millionaires that are now broke.

Especially when I read that the Union awarded him a $1M bonus LOL
Union awards $1 million bonus to DeMaurice Smith - The Washington Post

So the NFLPA has the money to give Smith a $1M bonus but not to give retired players investment advice?

So in essence... DeMaurice Smith was given $1,000,000.00 to give complete control to Roger Goodell. I smell something fishy...

Halo

Sure Goodell has absolute power... in the NFL Kangaroo court, but Goodell cannot break the law. The CBA gives Goodell the power to punish players by handing down suspensions, but it does NOT give Goodell is the ability to make false public statements aimed at players to intentionally hurt their reputation and career.

Goodell will get away with whatever he wants in his kangaroo courtroom at the NFL offices, the CBA gives him that power. But when Goodell is called into a federal courtroon, when the plaintiff (Vilma) asks for evidence, a powerpoint will probably not suffice and Goodell will pay $$$$$ proportional to his arrogance and lack of understanding and vision.