View unanswered posts | View active topics It is currently October 25th, 2014, 10:06 pm



Reply to topic  [ 114 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8  Next
 ***Bounty-Gate*** 
Author Message
Modmin Dude
User avatar

Joined: December 31st, 2004, 9:55 am
Posts: 12141
Post Re: NFL finds that Saints violated “bounty rule”
Interesting 'twist' if Shockey was indeed the whistle-blower:
Fox Sports wrote:
Sapp claims Shockey is whistle-blower
Jeremy Shockey was the whistle-blower in the NFL’s investigation into the New Orleans Saints' pay-for-performance system that resulted in a slew of sanctions Wednesday, according to former NFL defensive lineman Warren Sapp.

Sapp wrote on Twitter he “just heard who the snitch was,” and when a follower asked if it was Shockey, Sapp responded: “BINGO!”

The allegations — which might have violated federal labor laws — drew a swift rebuke from Shockey on his Twitter account.

“My rectum!!” Shockey wrote. “I don’t even play defense.”

Sapp responded: “That’s not the issue.”

Shockey said the next thing he will be blamed for is the unsolved disappearance of union boss Jimmy Hoffa — who vanished five years before Shockey was born — and the recent scandal at the University of Miami, where players at Shockey’s alma mater allegedly received impermissible benefits.

“(Expletive) them,” Shockey wrote. “Sapp ... (knows) where to find me.”

Shockey, a tight end, played for the Saints from 2008 to '10. In announcing its punishments, the NFL said the Saints, under former defensive coordinator Gregg Williams, had an active bounty program from 2009 to '11. The determination led to a one-year suspension of Saints head coach Sean Payton, a suspension of indefinite length against Williams, who was recently hired by the St. Louis Rams, and other suspensions and loss of draft picks.

The league didn’t release what sparked the investigation.

Federal labor law protects employees against retribution as result of complaining about unsafe work environments. The fact that Sapp, an analyst for the NFL Network, might have outed a whistle-blower could pose a problem for Sapp and the league, Los Angeles-based employment lawyer Arthur Whang told FOXSports.com.

“Sapp is technically a league employee,” said Whang, the principal of the Whang Law Firm. “If Shockey is the whistle-blower, he is protected. So, by outing him, Sapp may have opened Shockey up to retaliation, such as someone not signing him.”

The 1970 Occupational Safety and Health Act specifically addresses whistle-blower retaliation:

“No person shall discharge or in any manner discriminate against any employee because such employee has filed any complaint or instituted or caused to be instituted any proceeding under or related to this act or has testified or is about to testify in any such proceeding or because of the exercise by such employee on behalf of himself or others of any right afforded by this act.”

Shockey, who played last season in Carolina, is an unrestricted free agent.

“Shockey might be able to claim in a retaliation lawsuit that he was a protected employee and he blew the whistle, but then the league retaliated against him by releasing his identity to the world," Whang said. "That, in turn, opened him up to all kinds of damages, like ridicule and his ability to sign with a new team."

Whang added that if Sapp’s actions could also have a chilling effect on future NFL employees coming forward to expose wrongdoing for fear of retribution.

NFL Network spokesman Dan Masonson said Sapp was unavailable for comment. Masonson also declined to comment on the possible labor law violations.

http://msn.foxsports.com/nfl/story/Warr ... d=ansfox11

So, it appears that if Sapp is wrong there's nothing Shockey can do about it, but if he's right, then Shockey could have a case against the NFL, Sapp & NFL Network??? Hmm.........

_________________
Quote:
Clowns to the left of me, Jokers to the right....


March 22nd, 2012, 4:28 pm
Profile
Post Re: NFL finds that Saints violated “bounty rule”
That would be an interesting case... Generally the "whistle blower" is protected from his "employer" from retribution, but now Shockey isn't even employed by the Saints, the team he would allegedly need "protection" from. This would get really interesting in court. To extend "whistle blower" protection to 3rd party organizations or 3rd party claims (more or less slander claims) would (I believe) be unprecedented). However, the fact that all of these people technically work for the NFL makes this interesting as well.


March 22nd, 2012, 4:33 pm
Mr. Irrelevant
User avatar

Joined: February 28th, 2007, 12:13 pm
Posts: 967
Post Re: NFL finds that Saints violated “bounty rule”
wjb21ndtown wrote:
That would be an interesting case... Generally the "whistle blower" is protected from his "employer" from retribution, but now Shockey isn't even employed by the Saints, the team he would allegedly need "protection" from. This would get really interesting in court. To extend "whistle blower" protection to 3rd party organizations or 3rd party claims (more or less slander claims) would (I believe) be unprecedented). However, the fact that all of these people technically work for the NFL makes this interesting as well.


Could the NFL be considered his employee from whom he'd need protection as well? Or just the Saints?

_________________
If you think education is tough, try being stoopid.


March 22nd, 2012, 9:59 pm
Profile
RIP Killer
User avatar

Joined: October 20th, 2004, 4:16 pm
Posts: 9891
Location: Where ever I'm at now
Post Re: NFL finds that Saints violated “bounty rule”
TheRealWags wrote:
So, it appears that if Sapp is wrong there's nothing Shockey can do about it, but if he's right, then Shockey could have a case against the NFL, Sapp & NFL Network??? Hmm.........


I would think that if Sapp is wrong, then Shockey could sue him in civil court for defamation of character, particulary since Sapp referred to him as a "snitch", and not a "whistle blower".

Besides which, Warren Sapp is an a**hole anyways, and I've never liked the guy since his hit on Chad Clifton. He should have been raked over the coals for that. His big mouth needs to be taken off TV entirely. The league should fire him for this. He has no business investigating this issue, nor making any allegations against anyone. Particularly given the stuff that was going on at U of Miami when he was playing there.

_________________
Driver of the 'we need a coaching change' bandwagon. Climb aboard.


March 23rd, 2012, 8:39 am
Profile
Modmin Dude
User avatar

Joined: December 31st, 2004, 9:55 am
Posts: 12141
Post Re: NFL finds that Saints violated “bounty rule”
A little more info on this........
PFT wrote:
Shockey wants action from league
Posted by Mike Florio on March 23, 2012, 8:05 AM EDT

As potential whistleblowers go, they don’t get much less sympathetic than tight end Jeremy Shockey. But the man former Giants receiver Amani Toomer described last week as a “bad teammate” and “worse person” nevertheless has rights.

Specifically, Shockey has the right to not be outed as the person who cracked the case of the Saints’ bounty program in 2011. Especially if Shockey wasn’t the person who blew the whistle.

But that’s what happened on Wednesday. Former NFL defensive tackle Warren Sapp identified Shockey as the whistleblower on Twitter. Amazingly, NFL Network thereafter decided (apparently without consulting legal counsel, or perhaps relying on the advice of Lionel Hutz) to put Sapp on the league-owned air and repeat his contention.

Shockey has vehemently denied being the whistleblower. And now he wants something to be done about the potential damage to his prospects for getting another job.

“Is the league going to come down on their own people when someone does something so wrong and outrageous?” Shockey told Jason Cole of Yahoo! Sports. “There should be a standard for punishment, like getting suspended or fined or losing your job. If I say something about officials, the league fines me.”

Shockey said he has been contacted by multiple lawyers about possibly filing suit, and that he has heard nothing from the league.

“I’m 31 years old and this is not good,” Shockey said. “People have asked if this is going to hurt me in finding another team. I don’t know, but it’s not helping me.”

Unfortunately for Shockey, there could be plenty of other factors keeping a team from signing him. Still, being flagged as a potential whistleblower doesn’t help. Even if no other NFL team will ever again use a bounty system, the outdated mentality of the football locker room shuns those who would break the code of silence in any way.

In Shockey’s case, the problem is that few would regard him as someone who succumbed to a crisis of conscience. Instead, many would assume he was simply trying to get back at the Saints for cutting him.

That said, a league source has told us that Shockey wasn’t the whistleblower, and that he wasn’t involved in any way in the investigation. If that’s true, why doesn’t the league simply say so?

Apparently, the NFL is so sensitive about potentially disclosing the name of the whistleblower that it doesn’t want to comment on the matter at all, even by expressly ruling someone out. If that’s the reason for the silence, the league needs to accept the reality that the ship has sailed, via the disclosure of Shockey’s name on the league-owned network by an employee of the league-owned network, which necessarily makes him an employee of the league.

The problem isn’t Sapp. That’s his style and his shtick, and it’s what makes him good on TV. The problem is that the NFL failed to convene a meeting of its NFL Network and NFL.com staff in early March and explain that any reporting or speculation or discussion of the identity of the person who provided information that helped the NFL discover the existence of the bounty program was prohibited, whether because outing a whistleblower violates the law or because it potentially puts him at risk of retaliation by an unstable fan or because it will cause future whistleblowers to not cooperate or, perhaps the best reason of all, because it’s the right thing to do.

That didn’t happen, which means that in the heat of the process of determining the on-air content on one of the craziest offseason days in NFL history, a bad decision was made. Before the NFL punishes any of them, the NFL needs to realize that the failure to issue what should have been an obvious directive directly caused the current problem.

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/20 ... om-league/

_________________
Quote:
Clowns to the left of me, Jokers to the right....


March 23rd, 2012, 10:15 am
Profile
Modmin Dude
User avatar

Joined: December 31st, 2004, 9:55 am
Posts: 12141
Post Re: NFL finds that Saints violated “bounty rule”
and the hits keep on coming
PFT wrote:
Report: Williams put $15,000 bounty on Brad Johnson in 2006
Posted by Michael David Smith on March 23, 2012, 1:51 PM EDT

Everyone’s attention has been focused this week on the Saints after head coach Sean Payton and former defensive coordinator Gregg Williams were banished for the team’s bounty program. But the accusations that Williams doled out bounties aren’t limited to his time in New Orleans, and a new report offers some new details about the bounties that he allegedly oversaw during his time in Washington.

Citing multiple anonymous players, David Elfin writes at the Washington, D.C., CBS affiliate that when the Redskins opened the 2006 season against the Vikings, Williams (who was then the team’s defensive coordinator) made a specific point of telling his players to go after Brad Johnson, the Vikings quarterback who had previously played for the Redskins.

“Gregg came in and dropped $15,000 on the [table] and said, ‘Brad Johnson doesn’t finish this game,’” one player said.

Greg Blache, who was a defensive line coach under Williams at the time and later succeeded Williams as the team’s defensive coordinator, has said that he disliked and discontinued the bounty program. But Elfin quotes that same unnamed player as saying that in reality, Blache was offering players money to compensate them for any fines they got for illegal hits.

“Greg Blache said, ‘If you get fined, it will be taken care of,’” the player said.

Another unnamed player offered similar memories about Williams targeting Johnson before that Week One game in 2006.

“I can’t say for sure it was $15,000, but I definitely remember that happening before that Minnesota game,” the second player said. “And I can’t say for sure that those were G-Dub’s exact words about Brad Johnson, but that was certainly the message. I had never heard anything like that before from a coach, but I wasn’t shocked because that was G-Dub’s character, so in your face. His language was always X-rated and our meetings were usually pretty nuts.”

As it turned out, Johnson was not knocked out of the game, and he led the Vikings to a win over the Redskins. So Williams didn’t get what he wanted, and no players got that $15,000.

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/20 ... n-in-2006/

_________________
Quote:
Clowns to the left of me, Jokers to the right....


March 23rd, 2012, 2:19 pm
Profile
Modmin Dude
User avatar

Joined: December 31st, 2004, 9:55 am
Posts: 12141
Post Re: NFL finds that Saints violated “bounty rule”
More on Sapp / Shockey saga
PFT wrote:
NFL Network tells Warren Sapp he’s an analyst, not a reporter
Posted by Michael David Smith on March 23, 2012, 11:40 AM EDT

Warren Sapp’s on-air claim that Jeremy Shockey was the “snitch” who informed the league office about the Saints bounty program has earned him a talking-to from his NFL Network bosses.

In a statement to PFT, NFL Network Senior Vice President of Programming and Production Mark Quenzel said the matter has been addressed with Sapp.

“We have discussed it with Warren and stressed that he is an analyst and not a reporter for NFL Network,” Quenzel said. “In the future, if he comes across something he thinks is news he will let his producers know and before it is reported or Tweeted, that content will be subject to the same verification procedure that our reporters follow.”

Sapp did not name his source for the information about Shockey, which he first posted on Twitter and then reiterated on NFL Network. He said on the air that he had not asked the league office if his source was correct. Shockey has denied that he informed the league office and posted on Twitter what appeared to be a text message from Saints coach Sean Payton absolving Shockey of having anything to do with getting Payton in trouble. Shockey also said he wants the NFL to come down hard on Sapp, saying Sapp should lose his job or at least be suspended or fined.

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/20 ... -reporter/

_________________
Quote:
Clowns to the left of me, Jokers to the right....


March 23rd, 2012, 2:21 pm
Profile
Post Re: NFL finds that Saints violated “bounty rule”
Footsoldier32 wrote:
wjb21ndtown wrote:
That would be an interesting case... Generally the "whistle blower" is protected from his "employer" from retribution, but now Shockey isn't even employed by the Saints, the team he would allegedly need "protection" from. This would get really interesting in court. To extend "whistle blower" protection to 3rd party organizations or 3rd party claims (more or less slander claims) would (I believe) be unprecedented). However, the fact that all of these people technically work for the NFL makes this interesting as well.


Could the NFL be considered his employee from whom he'd need protection as well? Or just the Saints?



Most likely, just the saints. He could prove "loss of profits" if he can't get another contract, or if his contract is materially less than other TEs in his market, but it's not likely.

Code:
“No person shall discharge or in any manner discriminate against any employee because such employee has filed any complaint or instituted or caused to be instituted any proceeding under or related to this act or has testified or is about to testify in any such proceeding or because of the exercise by such employee on behalf of himself or others of any right afforded by this act.”


Notice that it doesn't say anything about 3rd parties or non-employees "outting" the "whistle blower." In fact, it doesn't say that the whistle blower has a "right to privacy" on the issue at all. What the act does is gives the employee protection by demanding that the employee not be discharged or otherwise treated any differently than he would have otherwise been treated had he not said anything.

m2karateman wrote:
TheRealWags wrote:
So, it appears that if Sapp is wrong there's nothing Shockey can do about it, but if he's right, then Shockey could have a case against the NFL, Sapp & NFL Network??? Hmm.........


I would think that if Sapp is wrong, then Shockey could sue him in civil court for defamation of character, particulary since Sapp referred to him as a "snitch", and not a "whistle blower".

Besides which, Warren Sapp is an a**hole anyways, and I've never liked the guy since his hit on Chad Clifton. He should have been raked over the coals for that. His big mouth needs to be taken off TV entirely. The league should fire him for this. He has no business investigating this issue, nor making any allegations against anyone. Particularly given the stuff that was going on at U of Miami when he was playing there.


Shockey could probably sue Sapp in court, but he wouldn't likely win anything. Sapp is still considered a "reporter" and he's still protected by the First Amendment. Slander is not a protected speech, but Shockey would have to prove 1) that the statement was false, 2) damages, and to a fairly specific degree (how the statement wronged him), and 3) that Sapp either KNEW the statement was false, OR that Sapp didn't do enough research to discredit the statement.

It would be really hard to hold Sapp accountable here. Sapp's "source" or some other person up the chain of the rumor mill may be more accountable, but it's going to come down to someone's word against the word of someone else.


March 23rd, 2012, 3:06 pm
Color Commentator - John Madden
User avatar

Joined: February 12th, 2006, 4:20 pm
Posts: 1861
Location: Des Moines, IA
Post Re: NFL finds that Saints violated “bounty rule”
PFT wrote:
Signs currently point to a lawsuit from Shockey
Posted by Mike Florio on March 23, 2012, 2:26 PM EDT
large_shock524 Getty Images

Former Saints tight end Jeremy Shockey has been saying plenty of about Warren Sapp’s contention that Shockey blew the whistle on the team’s three-year bounty system. Shockey was scheduled to appear on Friday’s edition of the The Dan Patrick Show to talk about it some more.

When the time came for Shockey’s interview, the man described in the ESPN book as the best booker in the history of television, Todd Fritz, told Dan that Shockey is in a meeting and may not be available.

Ultimately, Shockey didn’t show. Ultimately, it was disclosed that Shockey was meeting with a lawyer. (We also made a request for an appearance from Shockey on PFT Live. We were told that Shockey would still be in his meeting.)

Whether or not Shockey actually was meeting with a lawyer, the fact that he has clammed up suggests that a lawyer has told him to clam up. It’s the first bit of advice any lawyer gives when a lawsuit is being considered, because anything the person filing the lawsuit says can be used against him in court.

Shockey faces an interesting dilemma, if he intends to sue. Although federal law protects whistleblowers from retaliation, Shockey has insisted that he’s not the whistleblower. So the first line of defense in any such whistleblower case he may file would be that he’s not protected. Moreover, even if Shockey were protected, he’d have to show that the league in some way retaliated against him, and it will be hard to show that a 31-year-old tight end with a reputation for being a bad guy was blackballed because he blew the whistle on the Saints.

Maybe it’s enough that his name was disclosed by the NFL on the league-owned network; maybe it isn’t. That would be a matter for litigation.

If he’s not the whistleblower, Shockey could sue Sapp and/or the league for defamation of character, since Sapp uttered facts about Shockey that aren’t true. The problem with a defamation of character lawsuit is that damages are determined by assessing the impact on the plaintiff’s reputation. This makes consideration of the player’s pre-existing reputation critical to the process. Which, in Shockey’s case, makes a defamation of character claim not extremely valuable — unless he can prove that a team would have signed him if he hadn’t incorrectly been identified as the whistleblower.

And that simply isn’t going to happen.

Still, regardless of how it all plays out, it looks like Shockey is exploring his options.

_________________
Image


March 23rd, 2012, 4:03 pm
Profile
ST Coordinator – Danny Crossman
User avatar

Joined: March 30th, 2006, 12:48 am
Posts: 3827
Location: Davison Mi
Post Re: NFL finds that Saints violated “bounty rule”
well with any luck the law suit against Sapp will get that boob off of my toob!
He's ALMOST as annoying as Horseface (shannon Sharpe).

_________________
2013 Lionbacker Fantasy Football Champion


March 23rd, 2012, 5:34 pm
Profile
RIP Killer
User avatar

Joined: October 20th, 2004, 4:16 pm
Posts: 9891
Location: Where ever I'm at now
Post Re: NFL finds that Saints violated “bounty rule”
NFL.com wrote:
Porter denies bounties: 'We were just playing football'
By Marc Sessler NFL.com

In a monster week of NFL news, there's still plenty to digest.

Case in point: Former New Orleans cornerback Tracy Porter, now with the Broncos, said Friday he's turned the page on the Saints' "bounty" fiasco.

It wasn't hard for Porter. Why? Because he completely denies its existence.

"It's something the league felt they had evidence on, but, I mean, the thing that I will say about it is, I mean the whole label of bounty is absurd," Porter told The Denver Post on Friday. "There was definitely no bounty on any player out there in any game. We were just playing football."

A mind-boggling take on the matter.

Saints coach Sean Payton has been suspended for the 2012 season. General manager Mickey Loomis is out for eight games. Former Saints defensive coordinator Gregg Williams is en route to Siberia. Player penalties are forthcoming.

The team has owned up to their wrongdoing and apologized.

Porter, a voice from the wilderness, tells us the entire affair is a phantom.

Peter King reported it was not uncommon for Williams to stand at the front of the room during defensive team meetings, passing out cash-filled white envelopes to Saints defenders. How did Porter miss this? How does he interpret what he saw?

"For that term to become bounty is definitely, I think, is harsh, but the league investigated it and they felt they made the right decision," Porter said. "Who am I to come in and say that they didn't make the right decision."

In this case, it probably would have been better if Porter hadn't said anything at all.


How STUPID do you have to be to deny the existence of something that the coaches and organization have already admitted to? Now, based on his pure STUPIDITY, I'm glad the Lions didn't sign Tracy Porter. He must get someone to tie his shoelaces for him in the locker room. This is just mind boggling......

_________________
Driver of the 'we need a coaching change' bandwagon. Climb aboard.


March 25th, 2012, 8:40 am
Profile
Fired Head Coach (0-16 record)
User avatar

Joined: April 5th, 2007, 5:51 pm
Posts: 2284
Post Re: NFL finds that Saints violated “bounty rule”
Exact same thought I had... glad we didnt sign.


March 25th, 2012, 1:26 pm
Profile ICQ WWW
QB Coach

Joined: January 13th, 2006, 4:18 am
Posts: 3216
Location: Maryland
Post Re: NFL finds that Saints violated “bounty rule”
Quote:
Two headlines of the morning. Can't figure out which I like more, so I'll give you both.

• New Orleans is getting really ticked off about the bounty sanctions on the Saints, and fans are responding with their wallets.

• The Eagles are winging their way to Texas to work out Ryan Tannehill today. Hmmmm.

Saints business:

Jimmy Buffett did a concert last night on the waterfront in New Orleans. He wore a "Free Sean Payton'' T-shirt. He dedicated his first song to his friend and Saints head coach Payton: "Sitting Here in Limbo."

There is a town lots of New Orleans-area residents go to when they want to fish, Delacroix, La. It was hit hard by Hurricane Katrina. On the side of the road in Delacroix Sunday morning, as some of the fishermen left camps to return home, a woman with a tent was selling something. As the cars got closer, the drivers could see she was selling "Free Sean Payton'' T-shirts.

Outside the Superdome Sunday afternoon, about 30 locals gathered to protest NFL commissioner Roger Goodell's year-long suspension of Payton. One carried a sign reading, "Go to hell Goodell." Several wore T-shirts that read: "Quit hatin' on my boy Payton."

The Saints had two $100,000-plus suites available for the 2012 season as of the middle of March. Within 24 hours after the league's sanctions of the Saints were announced, both suites were sold. In addition, the Saints ticket office, in the three days after the sanctions were announced, had more than 150 callers asking to buy season tickets, with most saying they were doing it to show support for the team in the wake of the league's sanctions. None were available, the callers were told, but we can add you to our waiting list if you want. Add us to the waiting list, virtually every caller said.

There's a groundswell of anger in New Orleans, from what I can tell. Where it'll lead, I don't know. But I know New Orleans. It's not going to go away, regardless of how Goodell rules in the four appeals he must consider beginning Tuesday.

The Super Bowl is in New Orleans this season. Remember the booing Goodell got at the NFL Draft last year? That could sound charitable compared to the reception he could hear in New Orleans during Super Bowl week.

Read more: http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2012/w ... z1qtX9Wakn


My take on this? Grow up and take your punishment. Obviously I'd be pissed off if the same thing happened to my team but with what they were doing, something had to be done to show the rest of the league, if you do this we will drop the hammer. Sure it's possible and even likely that there was some degree of this going on with other teams, but I feel the Saints deserve what they got. If Goodell lessens any of the suspensions, he'll never be able to make a punishment stick again.


April 2nd, 2012, 10:52 am
Profile
RIP Killer
User avatar

Joined: October 20th, 2004, 4:16 pm
Posts: 9891
Location: Where ever I'm at now
Post Re: NFL finds that Saints violated “bounty rule”
inheritedlionsfan wrote:
My take on this? Grow up and take your punishment. Obviously I'd be pissed off if the same thing happened to my team but with what they were doing, something had to be done to show the rest of the league, if you do this we will drop the hammer. Sure it's possible and even likely that there was some degree of this going on with other teams, but I feel the Saints deserve what they got. If Goodell lessens any of the suspensions, he'll never be able to make a punishment stick again.


Personally I think Saints fans have gained a self-entitlement attitude, stemming from the Katrina debacle and gaining momentum from the Saints turning the ship and becoming a contender. Now Saints fans think Sean Payton and Drew Brees are incapable of making a mistake, and are not subject to the same rules as the rest of the NFL. Saints fans feel like their team can do whatever, because they are entitled to it.

They tend to forget that the league was responsible for keeping that team in New Orleans, when the owner was making preparations to move the team to another city for good. As much as I dislike Goodell, that was one thing he did right and made sure of. Saints fans forget that little fact.

If your child lies to you, they get punished. The Saints got the book thrown at them because they were warned, and then lied when the league followed up on whether things had been taken care of. It was the web of lies that got them in trouble more than anything else. They had a chance to fix the situation without getting punished, but they felt themselves to be above the league. And their fans emulate that exact same line of thinking.

_________________
Driver of the 'we need a coaching change' bandwagon. Climb aboard.


April 2nd, 2012, 12:23 pm
Profile
Fired Head Coach (0-16 record)
User avatar

Joined: April 5th, 2007, 5:51 pm
Posts: 2284
Post Re: NFL finds that Saints violated “bounty rule”
m2karateman wrote:
inheritedlionsfan wrote:
My take on this? Grow up and take your punishment. Obviously I'd be pissed off if the same thing happened to my team but with what they were doing, something had to be done to show the rest of the league, if you do this we will drop the hammer. Sure it's possible and even likely that there was some degree of this going on with other teams, but I feel the Saints deserve what they got. If Goodell lessens any of the suspensions, he'll never be able to make a punishment stick again.


Personally I think Saints fans have gained a self-entitlement attitude, stemming from the Katrina debacle and gaining momentum from the Saints turning the ship and becoming a contender. Now Saints fans think Sean Payton and Drew Brees are incapable of making a mistake, and are not subject to the same rules as the rest of the NFL. Saints fans feel like their team can do whatever, because they are entitled to it.

They tend to forget that the league was responsible for keeping that team in New Orleans, when the owner was making preparations to move the team to another city for good. As much as I dislike Goodell, that was one thing he did right and made sure of. Saints fans forget that little fact.

If your child lies to you, they get punished. The Saints got the book thrown at them because they were warned, and then lied when the league followed up on whether things had been taken care of. It was the web of lies that got them in trouble more than anything else. They had a chance to fix the situation without getting punished, but they felt themselves to be above the league. And their fans emulate that exact same line of thinking.


No point in typing my thoughts because you covered it. My best friend lives in baton Rouge and if he told me they didnt deserve it id tell him to check his ethical compass. They broke the rules, bad, then lied about it repeatedly. They deserve what they got.


April 4th, 2012, 2:47 pm
Profile ICQ WWW
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Reply to topic   [ 114 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8  Next

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group.
Designed by STSoftware.