PDA

View Full Version : Saints win appeal


Fili
09-07-2012, 04:19 PM
Suspensions for four players connected to the New Orleans Saints' bounty scandal have been overturned by a three-man arbitration panel, sources tell ESPN NFL Insider Adam Schefter.

http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/8349080/sources-suspensions-jonathan-vilma-smith-scott-fujita-anthony-hargrove-overturned-arbitration-panel

badboy
09-07-2012, 04:23 PM
I do not understand this. Bounties to put players out of games with injury is ok?

HoustonFrog
09-07-2012, 04:23 PM
From what I've been reading..overturned but not reversed so it is being kicked back to the Commish where he can make suspensions still but probably not in same range. Players will get salaries for being on roster in 2012.

https://twitter.com/DanWetzel

This is a technical victory for the players/NFLPA. But it isn't an overruling and doesn't spare them from future suspensions.

NFL says Saints players are "reinstated and eligible to play" but Goodell, per the ruling, will soon make determination on discipline

Saints ruling vacated by appeals panel. Not overturned. Sent back to Goodell. A win for players but seems they can still be punished

RazorOye
09-07-2012, 04:34 PM
n/m

Thorn
09-07-2012, 04:40 PM
Bullcrap. If a player or coach was found to have been participating in any way, they should be banned for life from the NFL.

Period.

RazorOye
09-07-2012, 04:54 PM
.....

PapaL
09-07-2012, 05:04 PM
Too bad league offices are closed for the weekend huh?
First thing Monday morning they'll look at this.

steelbtexan
09-07-2012, 05:24 PM
All this ruling says, is that God"ell has to provide indisputable evidence to the court that there was a bounty system in place. This is the way it should be. IMHO

BTW, I cant stand God'ell, but the Saints are guilty as he**. IMHO

Does God'ell have the evidence? Doubtful

This all goes back to God'ell covering his a** in the conussion lawsuit?

Rey
09-07-2012, 08:43 PM
From what I read the players can actually go back to playing if the team allows them to.

Is that correct?

Scooter
09-07-2012, 11:06 PM
i'm hearing they'll be eligible to play week 1, and the commish will probably have made a decision on how to handle things before week 2.

GP
09-08-2012, 08:59 AM
So if Goodell does nothing, he displays weakness.

And he can't suspend them the same amount of games he did previously, since it was lifted by the arbitration panel.

So look for him to suspend them maybe 1 or 2 games. Agree?

IDEXAN
09-08-2012, 09:27 AM
Bullcrap. If a player or coach was found to have been participating in any way, they should be banned for life from the NFL.

Period.
OK then, but they'd have to ban the whole league for life.

Thorn
09-08-2012, 09:43 AM
OK then, but they'd have to ban the whole league for life.

I am speaking of a "pay to injure" scheme, not a player simply playing hard. There is a huge difference, and those that can't understand something that simple, please don't bother posting replys.

I say again, if someone was involved in such a thing, they should be banned for life from the NFL.

ObsiWan
09-08-2012, 10:20 AM
I am speaking of a "pay to injure" scheme, not a player simply playing hard. There is a huge difference, and those that can't understand something that simple, please don't bother posting replys.

I say again, if someone was involved in such a thing, they should be banned for life from the NFL.

I think you've cut to the crux of the issue. Was it "Pay to Injure" or simply "Pay for Performance"??
We all know what pay to injure means but pay for performance could mean anything from a bonus for the most tackles or hitting hard enough to cause fumbles or hitting hard enough to separate a WR from the ball thus preventing a catch or getting sacks.... anything beyond those types of things should result in suspension.

In any court, tribunal, or whatever Goodell thinks he's holding, the fair thing is to present the accused with proof of guilt then give them a shot at presenting a defense. I haven't seen or heard where Goodell has publically presented any solid proof regarding pay to injure. That is where the panel of judges tripped him up. Or rather he tripped himself up.

:twocents:

RazorOye
09-08-2012, 10:44 AM
.....

infantrycak
09-08-2012, 11:43 AM
The case has gotten weaker.

I doubt we get Payton back - but wish we would.

None of the coaches will be coming back. They didn't appeal. That should tell you something.

RazorOye
09-08-2012, 12:00 PM
.....

Thorn
09-08-2012, 12:40 PM
I think you've cut to the crux of the issue. Was it "Pay to Injure" or simply "Pay for Performance"??
We all know what pay to injure means but pay for performance could mean anything from a bonus for the most tackles or hitting hard enough to cause fumbles or hitting hard enough to separate a WR from the ball thus preventing a catch or getting sacks.... anything beyond those types of things should result in suspension.

In any court, tribunal, or whatever Goodell thinks he's holding, the fair thing is to present the accused with proof of guilt then give them a shot at presenting a defense. I haven't seen or heard where Goodell has publically presented any solid proof regarding pay to injure. That is where the panel of judges tripped him up. Or rather he tripped himself up.

:twocents:

If Godell got this wrong, then he got it wrong and the judges made the right decision. If If If.

However, my stance on "pay to injure" stands. Pay for performance as you said can be taken many ways, and if it means number of sacks or tackles or TDs, fine. But when it slides into paying players to take out or injure, even disguised in fancy wording, then it's wrong.

IDEXAN
09-08-2012, 12:57 PM
I am speaking of a "pay to injure" scheme, not a player simply playing hard. There is a huge difference, and those that can't understand something that simple, please don't bother posting replys.

I say again, if someone was involved in such a thing, they should be banned for life from the NFL.
I understand the difference, and I believe there was "consideration" offered for knocking key opposing players (of course we are talking principally QBs here) out of the game.

infantrycak
09-08-2012, 02:06 PM
If Godell got this wrong, then he got it wrong and the judges made the right decision. If If If.

People need to understand the court's decision was on procedure and had nothing to do with the merits.

Texecutioner
09-08-2012, 02:09 PM
If Godell got this wrong, then he got it wrong and the judges made the right decision. If If If.

However, my stance on "pay to injure" stands. Pay for performance as you said can be taken many ways, and if it means number of sacks or tackles or TDs, fine. But when it slides into paying players to take out or injure, even disguised in fancy wording, then it's wrong.

I agree with you. Just not on the ban for life thing. I think a substantial suspension and punishment is worthy and I think they got one. Now it is changed around it appears, but yeah these guys tried to injure players and they should be punished for it. Saints fans need to stop whining about it, because if Brees got hurt because Patrick Willis was offered some sort of bonus for injuring him and he did it on a dirty play, then they'd be outraged. Play to win the game and play fair and square. Beat the other team within the rules and between the whistles.

RazorOye
09-08-2012, 02:43 PM
.....