The "Bounty" Evidence

[Eefluxx 113]

https://www.nflplayers.com/Articles/Public-News/NFLPA-Makes-Exhibits-Available-for-Review/

 

 

This is what the players received to prove they were part of "Bountygate"

Edited June 18, 2012 by Eefluxx

[Eefluxx 113]

https://www.nflplayers.com/Articles/Press-Releases/Outside-Counsels-Findings-on-Bounty-Investigation/

 

 

NFLPA's outside council, take it for whats it worth.

 

Plus apparently Adam Schefter and about 11 other media members just had an hour long meeting with Roger Goodell and he showed them "new" evidence that apparently he couldn't show the players he is suspending.

[Thanatos 2,847]

That's it? That's all they had?

 

Are you fucking kidding me?

 

I'm gonna need to borrow your tinfoil hat, Eefluxx.

[BC 331]

I don't see what Vilma and the others are bitching about. Apologizing is what reduces suspensions, not saying something is completely untrue when all the evidence shows it clearly is.

[Thanatos 2,847]

I don't see what Vilma and the others are bitching about. Apologizing is what reduces suspensions, not saying something is completely untrue when all the evidence shows it clearly is.

 

Did you read the "evidence"? It shows no such thing.

[AllYouNeedIsLovie 377]

I didn't read all the "evidence" because it was taking forever to load, but from what I read, it didn't really show much. lolRogerGoodell

[BC 331]

The whole "Where's my money" quote from NFL Films is pretty legit.

[Thanatos 2,847]

Let me set this straight.

 

No one on the Saints is denying they had a pay-for-performance program going on. That is clearly shown in the evidence here. THERE IS NO EVIDENCE FOR A PAY-TO-INJURE SYSTEM.

 

That is a HUGE difference, BC. I don't really give two shits if the Saints were giving guys an extra 500 or 1000 bucks for making an INT or a fumble. That's their business. Have at it. Sure it's technically illegal, but I bet you every single team does it. No evidence has come forward that they have a pay to injure system. That's the difference. Their sole piece of evidence that stands up to scrutiny at all is Greg Williams' statement, and considering the NFL *wrote that for him*, its just a little suspect, no?

 

One of their pieces of evidence is Fujita putting up $500- well, if you read the evidence, Fujita is putting that up for every FF, (or perhaps he was paid $500 for an FF, it's unclear). Now what is an FF? Oh well, that's easy for anyone who knows NFL lingo- that's a forced fumble. Nothing to do with injuring a player.

Edited June 18, 2012 by Thanatos19

[Thanatos 2,847]

There’s a funny note in here about a convo that took place between the Iranian Air Defense Radar and a at-first-unidentified aircraft:

IADR: Unknown aircraft, you are in Iranian airspace. Identify yourself!

UA: This is a United States aircraft. I am in Iraqi airspace.

IADR: You are in Iranian airspace! If you do not depart our airspace, we will send interceptor aircraft!

UA: This is a United States Marine Corps FA-18 Fighter. Send ‘em up. I’ll wait.

*Total Radio Silence*

 

And then the note: Saints defense: Come and Get Us!

Edited June 18, 2012 by Thanatos19

[Thanatos 2,847]

I have gone through the entirety of the league's evidence I could get my hands on, (what they gave to the NFLPA and what the PA subsequently released), not just skimming it. There is very little in here at all. I was taking some notes along the way, it comes out to roughly five pages in MS Word. So yes, this will be a long-ass post:

 

Saints Bounty Evidence

 

1- Handwritten Notes

Simple amounts of cash, no reason given for any except “Fujita to DL” which is $500 for a sack or a FF. There is also a note that indicate $1000 reward for anyone who scores a TD on defense.

 

2- Email from Ornstein

Ornstein pledges $5000 towards something. No indication is given as to what.

There is also an email in all caps from Mike Cerullo that mentions “adding the Jets injury to our Monday slide, here is what it looks like.” No cash is talked about at all in this email, and there is no indication that there is anything illegal going on here.

 

3- Saints Defense “Fast Friday”

The first part is simply a motivational speech about following your “inner voice.” There is nothing, however, towards a pay for injury, (PFI), system. It also discusses practice, but nothing in there either.

There is also a page in here on Carolina game fees, and $$ given out to people for no specified reasons, and a note that they need Rams dues.

There is a page on opponents and alerts, nothing here that indicates PFI, as far as I can tell. More practice notes and tips on playing.

Then we have a bunch of preparing for the Falcons, and analysis on what plays the Falcons offense ran against Carolina, New England, and some other games, nothing indicates any PFI.

 

4- Saints Defense “Thu Game 7”

More tips on playing, that it must be “about us.” “Reminder to hydrate.” Nothing to indicate PFI. Now we see that game dues are something the players pay into the pot for messing up. Penalties, MEs, MOBPs, and Loafs, are all fined. Loaf is not giving your full effort, MOBP is missed opportunity for a big play, ME- mental error. Nothing here about PFI.

 

5- NYG Game

Here is the first indication of any foul play whatsoever. Roman Harper is paid $1000 for a hit that is called a “cart-off.” That is pretty solid. Let’s see if we can find what this is referring to and video of the play in question. Certain players, including Vilma, are paid for whacks, but that could just be good hits. Nothing solid there.

 

6- Miami Game

Again, Vilma is paid for whacks. Lots of payment given out, none of it is anything that is questionable beyond paying for “whacks.”

 

7- More Handwritten Notes

Vilma is paid $400 for two whacks and loses $200 for an ME, and gives $200 into the “kitty pool.”

 

8- Saints Defense “Thu September 15th”

More tips on playing, including to learn from mistakes and become stronger.

Notes on which players paid into the kitty pool- Franklin, Jordan, Rogers, Vilma, Patrick, Torrence, and Jenkins all are noted as giving an unspecified amount of $$ to the “kitty pool.” Notes on the Saints 3rd-down philosophy and schedule for “Take-Away Thursday.”

Notes on some plays, and on the Bears game. More notes on more plays, nothing to indicate PFI in here. Analysis on Chicago Bears offense for 3rd downs, including how often specific players are targeted. 3rd downs are broken up into 3rd & 2-6, 3rd & 7-10, 3rd & 11+. More notes on the Bears offensive tendencies, still nothing to indicate PFI.

 

9- Saints vs Seahawks, Jan. 7th

There is a note that says to “Let the animals out, lock the gates, they can leave when we’re done with them.” Obvious hyperbole, typical defensive coach-speak.

Note #4, pg. 69 states to eliminate #17/#24. More coach-speak, perhaps. (Funny little tidbit, he says to stop the f**king run, yet Lynch’s run is what ended this one.)

There is analysis of the ‘Hawks offense, and some notes to the defense telling them to watch for trick plays.

We have a note that lists the “kill the head totals” for each player on pg. 74. Not sure what this means, but since Vilma is #1 with 62, I doubt this is cart-offs.

The next page has whacks and missed whacks totals for each player. Harper has the most with 15 whacks.

Then we have a YAC report.

A picture of a lot of $20 bills is stuck in there.

We have a page, (79) that uses Dog the Bounty Hunter’s strategy. If this is their “hard proof” part, it’s questionable at best. The NFLPA explains this as using examples for points 1-9, and then 10-11 is just what Dog does to finish a bounty, thus the reference to “dead or alive.”

There is a page on General Black Jack. While Black Jack’s tactic of slaughtering pigs in front of Muslims is a questionable story to tell your defensive guys, it in no way shows anything about any PFI system.

 

10- Minny Game

This is the best proof of any wrongdoing. The statement reads “$$ QB [illegible] out.” Knocked would be the best word I can think of to put in there. And Vilma is recorded as giving $10,000 for “QB”, so are Grant and Ornstein. Vitt puts $5000 into the “QB out Pool”, so does McCray. Fujita puts $2000 into the general pool, NOT into the QB [illegible] out pool, as is being erroneously reported by NFL.com's Gregg Rosenthal.

 

11- Saints Defense “Game 16”

There are more typical practice notes.

There is also a page recording the number of times players in the “Carolina game” were on the ground, with their corresponding number. Whether this is Saints players or Carolina players is unclear. No $$s are given out, and considering it looks like defensive numbers, I think this might be referring to Saints players.

More game fees and game dues are assessed, but not for any specified reasons.

More notes on Panthers Game II, and more practice notes. Nothing for PFI.

There is a “deep ball report for Panthers 2009”. Nothing about PFI.

Carolina Panthers’ offensive tendencies on 1st/2nd down are discussed.

 

12- Saints Defense “Fast Friday”

Inner voice page again, and more notes and analysis on offenses.

Dues and Fees for Atlanta game, again for unspecified reasons.

Even more pages of notes on Panthers offensive tendencies.

A page on the word complacency and what it means.

There is a picture of a Saints player, (#20- Porter?) trying to tackle Jonathan Stewart, and they end up looking like they are holding hands. Greg Williams expresses his distaste for this poor attempt at tackling, (pg. 129).

And there is 1st 15 analysis on the Panthers- just the first 15 points Williams wants his defense to think about. Nothing about PFI.

 

13- Saints Defense “Game #6”

More preparation notes, more game fees and game dues handed out for unspecified reasons.

Note on the Dolphins game, analysis of Dolphins offense.

A note for the media this week “Keep your f**king mouth shut.”

Tips and alerts, notes on the Wildcat, notes on the Dolphins offense.

1st/2nd down analysis on the Fins. Page detailing who gets passes and how many they get.

 

14- ???

This is blank.

 

15- Article by Sean Pamphilon “When you kill the head, the body doesn’t die.”

It’s a great article, and explains why he released the tape. I’d encourage a read, definitely worth it. If the article’s claims are true, it’s extremely damning against Greg Williams, (who I hope will never coach in the NFL again), and is harmful to the image of the NFLPA, Scott Fujita in certain places, Drew Brees somewhat, and Steve Gleason.

Starts on page 33 of the second PDF document.

 

16- Interview with Shanle

Shanle admits the Saints did some wrong, but says that it is blown way out of proportion by the NFL in order to make an example of the Saints. He does, however, deny that any money ever changed hands as a result of someone getting injured.

Edited June 19, 2012 by Thanatos19

[Eefluxx 113]

In the Annotation part in the first link it has something like a Gregg Williams dictionary almost explaining what all the terms mean like "Kill the head" and "cartoff" and "whack". That could have been done after all this came out tho.

 

When I tried to read the other two parts it was all sideways and kind of hard to read. I didn't think about downloading it and then reading it.

 

Good job Thanatos on going thru everything.

[Thanatos 2,847]

Jonathan Vilma and Joe Vitt are guilty as charged unless this evidence is fabricated. They paid $10k and $5k, respectively, towards knocking Favre out of that game.

 

In the Annotation part in the first link it has something like a Gregg Williams dictionary almost explaining what all the terms mean like "Kill the head" and "cartoff" and "whack". That could have been done after all this came out tho.

 

Those explanations of the terms are the NFLPA's lawyers interpreting those things. It's not in the evidence itself.

Edited June 19, 2012 by Thanatos19

[Eefluxx 113]

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2012/06/18/cornwell-says-vitt-never-was-accused-of-contributing-to-bounty-pool/

 

 

This case is becoming more and more contradicting

[Thanatos 2,847]

Err, that's his lawyer spewing lawyer-speak.

 

The NFL very clearly just accused Vitt of putting money into the pool- $5,000 worth. Just because they never came up to him before now and said "You put money in the bounty pool," means zilch.

 

Like I said, unless the evidence is fabricated, Vitt and Vilma are guilty as charged.

[Eefluxx 113]

5- NYG Game

Here is the first indication of any foul play whatsoever. Roman Harper is paid $1000 for a hit that is called a “cart-off.” That is pretty solid. Let’s see if we can find what this is referring to and video of the play in question. Certain players, including Vilma, are paid for whacks, but that could just be good hits. Nothing solid there.

 

 

http://www.nola.com/saints/index.ssf/2012/06/nfl_presents_case_against_4_pl.htm1

 

The only listing the NFL showed Monday where a Saints player allegedly received cash for a "cart-off" or "knockout" hit -- that is, one that required an opponent to miss all or part of a game -- was safety Roman Harper. Harper was recorded as receiving $1,000 for a "cart off" for the game against the New York Giants in 2009, according to the league presentation. In that game, White said, Giants running back Brandon Jacobs was forced out of the game with a shoulder injury after Harper tackled him in the third quarter.

 

According to the play by play on NFL.com

 

http://www.nfl.com/gamecenter/2009101804/2009/REG6/giants@saints#menu=highlights&tab=analyze&recap=fullstory&analyze=playbyplay

 

 

(9:00) 27-B.Jacobs right guard to NO 13 for 6 yards (42-D.Sharper). NYG-27-B.Jacobs was injured during the play. His return is Probable.

 

 

Jacobs was never tackled by Harper in the entire game. Of course I can't find any video of it and the only video I have of it is the NFL quick hits where you don't see what happens betweens plays just straight play by play.

Edited June 19, 2012 by Eefluxx

[Thanatos 2,847]

http://www.nola.com/saints/index.ssf/2012/06/nfl_presents_case_against_4_pl.htm1

 

According to the play by play on NFL.com

 

http://www.nfl.com/gamecenter/2009101804/2009/REG6/giants@saints#menu=highlights&tab=analyze&recap=fullstory&analyze=playbyplay

 

Jacobs was never tackled by Harper in the entire game. Of course I can't find any video of it and the only video I have of it is the NFL quick hits where you don't see what happens betweens plays just straight play by play.

 

Lol. Just lol.

 

That's why I wanted to look into that more carefully because of last time they released certain names.

[Eefluxx 113]

Err, that's his lawyer spewing lawyer-speak.

 

The NFL very clearly just accused Vitt of putting money into the pool- $5,000 worth. Just because they never came up to him before now and said "You put money in the bounty pool," means zilch.

 

Like I said, unless the evidence is fabricated, Vitt and Vilma are guilty as charged.

 

But in that article Vitt's lawyer does say that the NFL told Vitt they didn't have any knowledge of him putting money in the bounty pool. But their evidence clearly shows they do.

 

“The NFL has never, in multiple written communications and in three face-to-face meetings, accused coach Vitt of putting money into the program,” David Cornwell told PFT by phone. Cornwell also said that, in one meeting with Vitt, NFL V.P. of Security Jeff Miller specifically said there was no suspicion or assertion that Vitt contributed to the pool.

Not to mention some of the evidence they are using against the players is evidence they obtained after they suspended them.

 

If Roger had just stuck with the coaches being suspended and left it at that this would have all blown over and been done with monthes ago because the coaches have no union to support them and if they want to coach again have to pretty much do what the NFL says.

 

But no he had to go after players as well, and now he has opened up a can worms that he can't control. According to his evidence Joe Vitt (if it is all true about the $5000) should have gotten a year long suspension for donating and being a part of the pool. Whereas Payton should have gotten the 6 to 8 games suspension for not doing enough to get rid of it.

 

Its all one big clusterfuck now because Roger was trying to set an example.

Edited June 19, 2012 by Eefluxx

[Paladin 3]

Joe Vitt has volunteered to take a lie detector test to prove his innocence,will be interesting to see if Roger takes him up on his offer....personally I doubt he will. I am not a Saints fan....never have been, but this deal is shaping up to be a truck load of B.S. The evidence what little there is means nothing,Roger thinks they did it and thats all that currently matters and the players handed him the power to do so when they signed the CBA.

Edited June 21, 2012 by Paladin

[Eefluxx 113]

Joe Vitt has volunteered to take a lie detector test to prove his innocence,will be interesting to see if Roger takes him up on his offer....personally I doubt he will. I am not a Saints fan....never have been, but this deal is shaping up to be a truck load of B.S. The evidence what little there is means nothing,Roger thinks they did it and thats all that currently matters and the players handed him the power to do so when they signed the CBA.

 

 

I might be mistaken in this, but I think every commish has had these powers from Tags to Rozell to probably even before. But most of the past commish's would let someone else do the appeals. Roger's the only one (I am not going to say abusing but it's abusing) using all of his powers to do pretty much whatever he wants.

But its for the integrity of the shield (yes that was sarcasm)

I find it funny the investigation was put on hold in 2010 and then reopened after the new CBA when he knew he still had absolute power. It is what it is. The appeals aren't going to work and I think the players knew this going into it but you do what you got to do in these situations.

[Eefluxx 113]

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2012/06/22/full-text-of-nflpa-letter-asking-for-re-start-of-bounty-investigation/

 

 

NFLPA executive director DeMaurice Smith has sent a letter to NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell asking that the bounty investigation be conducted again, from scratch.

 

Yeh, like thats going to happen.

[Jayrus 51]

This whole thing has gotten extremely murky and it's been difficult for me to figure out how I feel about it. Previously I've expressed my opinion that the Saints are guilty, but I've been asking myself how much of that is just my dislike for the team talking.

 

However, looking at the evidence we have to date and the arguments from both sides I can't see any reason to change my conclusion. On one hand we have Goodell. His story has remained consistant, and he has some proof (such as it is) that seems to back up his allegations. It's not as concrete as I would have liked, but he did at least have SOMETHING.

 

On the other hand we have the Saints. They have done nothing but change their story from day one. "We did it, we admit it! No wait, we only admitted to pay for performance! No wait, we're totally innocent and the league has no proof otherwise! No wait, they made that proof up because they hate us!"

 

They have done nothing but attack Goodell and the League through the media over and over again, and they seem to expect us to believe they are innocent on the strength of their own word that they are. They have even claimed the league just straight invented the evidence against them, and again they expect us to believe it just because they said so. Now their laywer is claiming they should get their punishments lifted because "Goodell is a meanie-head".

 

If the Saints could come up with a rational adult arguement to show their innocence backed by some sort of proof to their claims I would happily apologize for suspecting them, but do they? No, they just parade around shouting "We're innocent! Really! Believe us!", and that is not going to change anyone's mind.

 

Johnathan Vilma and Joe Vitt can protest their innocence, and attack Goodell until they're both blue in the face. It won't mean anything until they can give us more than their word. That may be good enough for Saints fans, but the rest of us are going to need more than "We're innocent because we say so!". Right now, the proof we have (such as it is) suggests the Saints are guilty as charged. Until that changes, neither will my opinion.

Edited June 22, 2012 by Jayrus

[Thanatos 2,847]

This whole thing has gotten extremely murky and it's been difficult for me to figure out how I feel about it. Previously I've expressed my opinion that the Saints are guilty, but I've been asking myself how much of that is just my dislike for the team talking.

 

However, looking at the evidence we have to date and the arguments from both sides I can't see any reason to change my conclusion. On one hand we have Goodell. His story has remained consistant, and he has some proof (such as it is) that seems to back up his allegations. It's not as concrete as I would have liked, but he did at least have SOMETHING.

 

On the other hand we have the Saints. They have done nothing but change their story from day one. "We did it, we admit it! No wait, we only admitted to pay for performance! No wait, we're totally innocent and the league has no proof otherwise! No wait, they made that proof up because they hate us!"

 

Um, that's completely false. The Saints have said from day 1 that they only had a pay for performance, they never admitted otherwise.

 

On the other hand, Goodell's story has changed, as he accused Joe Vitt in this evidence as being part of the bounty program, while having previously told him specifically that he was not accused of donating to any bounty system period, be it pay for performance or otherwise.

 

And the NFL has come out and reaffirmed that, saying Joe Vitt is not accused of donating to this pool again, even though looking at the evidence, it clearly shows just that- assuming the evidence is reliable.

 

If Joe Vitt is said by the NFL to have not donated to the bounty pool, then why are the other listed donations taken as true when apparently that one is completely false?

 

If the Saints could come up with a rational adult arguement to show their innocence backed by some sort of proof to their claims I would happily apologize for suspecting them, but do they? No, they just parade around shouting "We're innocent! Really! Believe us!", and that is not going to change anyone's mind.

 

Johnathan Vilma and Joe Vitt can protest their innocence, and attack Goodell until they're both blue in the face. It won't mean anything until they can give us more than their word. That may be good enough for Saints fans, but the rest of us are going to need more than "We're innocent because we say so!". Right now, the proof we have (such as it is) suggests the Saints are guilty as charged. Until that changes, neither will my opinion.

 

You've got the justice system backwards there, bud. You're supposed to prove the other guy's guilt, not throw out a wild accusation with no solid proof of their guilt, and then demand they prove their innocence. Until Goodell comes out with some solid evidence that he doesn't immediately contradict, the Saints are innocent until proven guilty.

 

Again, they are definitely guilty of a pay for performance system, (who cares), that isn't the issue here.

 

There were only two pieces of evidence that said there was a pay for injury system going on.

 

The first one, Roman Harper being paid $1k after knocking Brandon Jacobs out of the game, has since been shown to be in error, as the person who knocked Jacobs out of the game was actually Sharper, as a matter of fact, Harper never even tackles Jacobs once.

 

The other piece of evidence is the hand-written sheet detailing payments to the QB out pool for the Minnesota game, but this piece of evidence is in serious doubt after the NFL said that Joe Vitt is not accusing of donating to any pool, but this piece of evidence shows him as giving $5k in said pool. If that piece of information is wrong, why is the rest able to be admitted as proof of the rest's guilt?

 

And that is IT. That is everything that points even remotely to a pay for injury system- 2 handwritten notes out of 200 pages of "evidence" submitted, one of which is demonstrably false, and the other of which is in error at least in part.

 

You're willing to convict the Saints on that basis? I think your hatred of the team is still clouding your judgment.

Edited June 22, 2012 by Thanatos19

[Jayrus 51]

I notice you ommited a few things.

 

The $35000 worth of pledges to take out Brett Favre?

 

The video of Fujita demanding his money?

 

The slide taken directly from the Saints computer system that practically advetizes "WE HAVE A BOUNTY PROGRAM!"

 

but I guess if you want to pick and choose which evidence to address you cvan make the Saints look innocent when they obviously aren't.

 

This is the stuff I'm talking about. I want proff that these things don't mean what they say they mean beyond Saints players telling me they are lies because they say they are.

 

Also, the Saints are convicted. They are in the appeals process. That means they are officially guilty unless they can prove they were wrongfully convicted, and "We're innocent because we say so" isn't going to overturn a conviction in any court anywhere.

Edited June 23, 2012 by Jayrus

[Thanatos 2,847]

I notice you ommited a few things.

 

The $35000 worth of pledges to take out Brett Favre?

 

The video of Fujita demanding his money?

 

The slide taken directly from the Saints computer system that practically advetizes "WE HAVE A BOUNTY PROGRAM!"

 

but I guess if you want to pick and choose which evidence to address you cvan make the Saints look innocent when they obviously aren't.

 

This is the stuff I'm talking about. I want proff that these things don't mean what they say they mean beyond Saints players telling me they are lies because they say they are.

 

Also, the Saints are convicted. They are in the appeals process. That means they are officially guilty unless they can prove they were wrongfully convicted, and "We're innocent because we say so" isn't going to overturn a conviction in any court anywhere.

 

The $35k is exactly what I'm talking about. Joe Vitt apparently gave $5k of that $35k, but the NFL says that Joe Vitt gave $0 to it. If that is incorrect- which it is clearly on the document, and the NFL says he didn't give money to any bounty fund- then why is the rest of the document acceptable as evidence? It'd be thrown out in any court of law.

 

The video of Fujita demanding his money- I'd love to see it. I'm pretty sure it's like all the others and could be a jest in poor taste. It's hardly proof of a bounty system designed to injure people.

 

And yes, there is proof of a bounty system on the Saints computer- but only for PAY FOR PERFORMANCE. Not pay for injury which is a HUGE difference, and on which basis the Saints were suspended.

 

The Saints weren't convicted by any process which would have held up in court, either, considering they weren't even shown the evidence they were convicted on. The Saints are not "clearly" guilty, obviously you haven't actually looked at the evidence the NFL presented. Word of advice: this whole thing stinks to high heaven. Don't take Goodell's word that the evidence says the Saints are guilty, go look through it. I've been through the 200 pages they released so far, and the things I said in my previous post are the only things that are remotely indicative of any bounty program that was pay for injury. It's terribly flimsy evidence, at best. I don't even think it qualifies as that.

[Eefluxx 113]

I notice you ommited a few things.

 

The $35000 worth of pledges to take out Brett Favre?

 

The video of Fujita demanding his money?

 

The slide taken directly from the Saints computer system that practically advetizes "WE HAVE A BOUNTY PROGRAM!"

 

but I guess if you want to pick and choose which evidence to address you cvan make the Saints look innocent when they obviously aren't.

 

This is the stuff I'm talking about. I want proff that these things don't mean what they say they mean beyond Saints players telling me they are lies because they say they are.

 

Also, the Saints are convicted. They are in the appeals process. That means they are officially guilty unless they can prove they were wrongfully convicted, and "We're innocent because we say so" isn't going to overturn a conviction in any court anywhere.

 

 

The $35,000 has been disputed. Ornstein who donated to that has said that he never saw Vilma do the whole $10,000 thing and that his emails were meant as a joke to Saints coaches. Granted Orstein is a convicted felon and I am wondering why the Saints continue to talk to him. So thats $20,000 out of the way on that one. Vitt's $5000 has Thanatos has said the NFL says they know Vitt never contributed but they apparently have that evidence which is strange in itself. The final $10000 which I believe is from Charles Grant. I am wondering if he is going to say anything. Plus why wasn't he mentioned in any of this if he donated $10000 as well.

 

The Fujita video, I think you mean the Hargrove video. That has been shredded by the media as well as the players and doesn't prove anything since you can't see Hargrove while the "Bobby give me my money" is being said. Which I will point out why is Hargrove saying this when it was Bobby McCray and Remi Ayodel who basically hurt Favre?

 

The slide saying we have a bounty program. Why does it say that? Because there is a picture of Dog the Bounty Hunter and quotes he uses when he goes to get a bounty?

 

I respect the fact you were willing to actually look thru the evidence and admit maybe your judgment was clouded because of your hate for the Saints. But the evidence clearly shows we had a P4P system (a rather elaborate one at that) and not a P4I system. Even Adam Schefter says that now after looking at the evidence.

 

Its more about the punishment doesn't fit the actual crime. It fits the crime the NFL says we did but not the actual crime. Do I think the players need to be suspended? Yes. I think Vilma and Fujita should. Fujita for only 1 game tho and Vilma for maybe 5-6 games. I don't recall seeing anything in particular on Will Smith and the Hargrove video is a joke.

 

Not too mention the timing of all this. If I wanted to be like the NFL I could easily say, "Well we have some evidence, but if we really want to make an example lets wait until the new CBA is done so I can really get them." It's stupid I know but then it would explain why Roger was so adamant about getting absolute power in the new CBA and why he waited until it was done to hammer these guys.

 

Also not too mention they say it was 2009-2011. All we have really seen is 2009. Main emphasis on the Favre championship game. All the "other" evidence they have shown can easily be discounted by going to NFL.com and reading the play-by-plays.

 

And finally I will leave you with this. With the way this whole investigation has been conducted, I can almost guarentee you if I sent an email to Roger Goodell with this statement "My son was a water boy for the Seattle Seahawks, he says he clearly overheard Marshawn Lynch tell his QB that he would take a certain DB out of the game with a chop block so he can throw on that side of the field easier the rest of the game for only two bags of Skittles."

 

Skittlegate would be born within 2 months.