Page 8 of 11 FirstFirst ... 4567891011 LastLast
Results 106 to 120 of 152
  1. #106

    Re: Saints Player Suspensions Announced



    Bingo. An excellent explanation for why this thread is attracting these circular conversations.

    Foolish me for participating.
    Festivus

    His definitions and arguments were so clear in his own mind that he was unable to understand how any reasonable person could honestly differ with him.




  2. #107
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Frederick, MD
    Posts
    31,832
    Blog Entries
    3

    Re: Saints Player Suspensions Announced

    Any money awarded as a result of a team function outside of a written contract (be it for illegal hits or touchdowns) is and should be considered fraudulent earnings, no? I mean, I'm no brain surgeon, but I can probably deduce that whoever the recipient(s) were of said "bounty money" didn't claim it on their tax returns.

    That in and of itself is deserving of punishment in one form or another.
    Milk is for babies. When you grow up, you have to drink beer.

    -Arnold Schwarzenegger



    Check out Fatherhood Rules - a blog site dedicated to sports, food, music, movies, and politics.
    http://fatherhoodrules.com




  3. #108
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Frederick, MD
    Posts
    31,832
    Blog Entries
    3

    Re: Saints Player Suspensions Announced

    Quote Originally Posted by NCRAVEN View Post
    And because we can't provide it they can claim what ever they want to stir up an argument.
    And we'll never be privy to that evidence, whatever it may be.

    It doesn't matter though. Perception is reality and the current state of things - based on whatever evidence Goodell received and was presented - was that Vilma participated and went even so far as to facilitate these "bounties".
    Milk is for babies. When you grow up, you have to drink beer.

    -Arnold Schwarzenegger



    Check out Fatherhood Rules - a blog site dedicated to sports, food, music, movies, and politics.
    http://fatherhoodrules.com




  4. #109

    Re: Saints Player Suspensions Announced

    Quote Originally Posted by festivus View Post
    Yes, now that I see your "minor" and "dittoes" I understand where you are wrong. So yeah, you could say I get it.

    edit: Again someone with this attitude that he's entitled to know what all the evidence is?
    Sounds like you are saying you would support a 1 year suspension for Vilma had it come out he was "illegally circumventing the salary cap" (by like .1%) with a TD/fumble/Int/sack pool. Like I said, if so, no problem, we can agree to disagree.

    I never said I was entitled to the evidence. But a large amount of it has leaked (the speeches, the $10k from Vilma). And in addition, the league offered the general offenses of all the players (which HR posted), with obstruction being the one I hadn't previously though about. In the same media piece though they mentioned Hargrove as the one accused of obstruction. Obviously this doesn't mean Vilma didn't obstruct, and obviously this doesn't mean the media piece knows what it is talking about.


    But the "evidence" isn't any more relevant to my argument than yours. I am arguing about the correct penalty for infraction X, which is onedefined by me, or hypothetical, or what actually occurred, doesn't matter which. I am saying if Vilma was a leader in a pool that paid teammates for legal hits (accepted football conduct) that knocked guys out of games, the 1 year suspension is too much. That is all I am saying. It is an opinion. Other people are saying "he deserved it", "he got lucky", "he should be banned permanently," etc. My question is whether they are saying this because they think Vilma was doing more than I just described, or rather, what I descibed deserves this (or more) punishment.




  5. #110
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    The Land of Verdite
    Posts
    13,337
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Saints Player Suspensions Announced

    Vilma dropped ten large for whoever knocked Favre out of that game. After thinking back, he might as well have paid out for how badly Favre got messed up in that game.
    "When questioned, the Elders explained that they were in search of magical powers. However, they're actually searching for the whereabouts of a certain ring. This ring is a legendary treasure that long ago was known to exist"




  6. #111
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Frederick, MD
    Posts
    31,832
    Blog Entries
    3

    Re: Saints Player Suspensions Announced

    Regarding the "pool" for touchdowns and things of that nature...generally speaking there are monetary incentives for TD's, INT's, sacks, etc built into almost every player's contracts. So...those things already exist.

    Just a thought.
    Milk is for babies. When you grow up, you have to drink beer.

    -Arnold Schwarzenegger



    Check out Fatherhood Rules - a blog site dedicated to sports, food, music, movies, and politics.
    http://fatherhoodrules.com




  7. #112

    Re: Saints Player Suspensions Announced

    Quote Originally Posted by NCRAVEN View Post
    And because we can't provide it they can claim what ever they want to stir up an argument.
    Huh? No, I am not asking anyone to provide anything other than support for their claims. We could all agree that we have no idea what Vilma did, but then how could we argue about the justness of the penalty? We couldn't.

    What we can do, and what has actually been going on (as opposed to what you claim), is that we can agree first to what it is everyone thinks Vilma did (whether true or not). Then debate what would be a "fair" penalty.




  8. #113
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Clayton,NC
    Posts
    7,742

    Re: Saints Player Suspensions Announced

    Quote Originally Posted by Haloti92 View Post
    Huh? No, I am not asking anyone to provide anything other than support for their claims. We could all agree that we have no idea what Vilma did, but then how could we argue about the justness of the penalty? We couldn't.

    What we can do, and what has actually been going on (as opposed to what you claim), is that we can agree first to what it is everyone thinks Vilma did (whether true or not). Then debate what would be a "fair" penalty.
    If you go through the thread. We've done that and then it led to evidence. Now we don't have it never will, the thread has come to a stand still.




  9. #114

    Re: Saints Player Suspensions Announced

    Quote Originally Posted by NCRAVEN View Post
    If you go through the thread. We've done that and then it led to evidence. Now we don't have it never will, the thread has come to a stand still.
    I went through the thread, and what got me to post at all was the implication that Vilma was rewarding or condoning on-the-field activity that is against the rules (like Williams did). Which is why I asked my question that no one answered (well, HR did answer it equivocally), to clarify what it was people thought he did. It is also why I brought up the hypothetical of Vilma rewarding TDs, to see where people stood regarding the appropriate penalty for that kind of infraction.

    I know one thing, Johnny Unitas would be incredulous at this whole issue/debate.




  10. #115
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Houston, TX Y'all
    Posts
    27,500

    Re: Saints Player Suspensions Announced

    Quote Originally Posted by Haloti92 View Post
    I know one thing, Johnny Unitas would be incredulous at this whole issue/debate.
    WARNING: This post may contain material offensive to those who lack wit, humor, common sense and/or supporting factual or anecdotal evidence. All statements and assertions contained herein may be subject to literary devices not limited to: irony, metaphor, allusion and dripping sarcasm.




  11. #116

    Re: Saints Player Suspensions Announced

    Haloti92, you say "a large amount" of the evidence has leaked out.

    You don't know who was interviewed, what they said, what bank records were reviewed, how many videos and audio recording were reviewed. Is "a large amount" more than half? Less than half? Less than a quarter? Less than your .1 percent?

    I'll give you credit for having a more interesting position than blah3 did. At least you've thought about it and you're being responsive to us. In circles, and exaggerating and wrong, but at least you're trying.
    Festivus

    His definitions and arguments were so clear in his own mind that he was unable to understand how any reasonable person could honestly differ with him.




  12. #117

    Re: Saints Player Suspensions Announced

    Quote Originally Posted by BcRaven View Post
    I've been suspended for a year from the family for putting a 10K bounty on my sister-in-law. Hmmmm, I may actually be ahead because of this... Bc
    Is that all it takes to get a little piece and quiet for awhile?




  13. #118

    Re: Saints Player Suspensions Announced

    Quote Originally Posted by festivus View Post
    Haloti92, you say "a large amount" of the evidence has leaked out.

    You don't know who was interviewed, what they said, what bank records were reviewed, how many videos and audio recording were reviewed. Is "a large amount" more than half? Less than half? Less than a quarter? Less than your .1 percent?

    I'll give you credit for having a more interesting position than blah3 did. At least you've thought about it and you're being responsive to us. In circles, and exaggerating and wrong, but at least you're trying.
    This missed the point entirely. The amount of evidence that has been leaked has nothing to do with my argument, as is plainly clear if you read what I am posting.

    It isn't real hard to just post what you think Vilma did, what you think is the appropriate penalty for that, and what you think the appropriate penalty is for the hypotheticals I have proposed. I realize erecting strawmen to keep the thread alive and arguing for the sake of arguing does appeal to some, but I prefer when everyone shares their opinion. Like I have said many times, only to be ignored, there is a good chance we are in an "agree to disagree" position here. It is hard to say definitively since you refuse to respond to my points.

    For a guy who hasn't answered, dented, or even proven to have comprehended a single thing I have said, you sure are full of yourself.

    "Circles, exaggerating, and wrong." So precious from you.

    In your opinion:

    a) Is one year penalty for Vilma fair if he had rewarded TDs instead of hits? Yes or no?

    b) Is one year penalty for Vilma fair if he has rewarded legal hits that result in the opponent leaving the game? Yes or no?

    c) Do you think the 1 year penalty is for anything other than participating, running, contributing to the pool which rewarded legal hits that resulted in the opponent leaving the game? Yes or no?

    We can start with these.




  14. #119

    Re: Saints Player Suspensions Announced

    Quote Originally Posted by HoustonRaven View Post
    You Grbacing because you disagree?




  15. #120

    Re: Saints Player Suspensions Announced

    How can you say that it doesn't matter how much we know about what happened and then, in the same breath, ask me what a fair sentence would have been?

    I look at Vilma's sentence and I think to myself, the evidence against him must have been pretty damning. Williams and Payton both got pounded like that, and we have been led to believe they lied to investigators.

    So I think Vilma probably did that too.

    Plus as I understand it he was, in the clubhouse, an advocate for the entire scheme.

    I understand your point that the individual hits appear to have been, on a case-by-case basis, within the realm of NFL football.

    You don't appear to care that (a) there was an incentive to injure and cause "cart offs," or (b) this was circumventing the salary cap, or (c) there were lies and a cover up. Each of those things is an aggravating factor. If you reject that they *should* be aggravating factors, that's fine, but they are.

    I find your dismissal of the lies and the cover up particularly troubling. These aren't six year olds with icing on their fingers claiming they didn't poke the birthday cake, this is serious and when the NFL investigators come calling the entire league should know there are serious consequences for failing to cooperate.

    In the end it's often the cover up that gets people in trouble. Al Capone lied on his tax forms to conceal the money he'd brought in, right? It's often the cover up that gets people.

    I don't know what all the facts are leading to the one year suspension, so I don't feel compelled to answer your question about what would be fair. It would be kind of presumptuous of me.
    Festivus

    His definitions and arguments were so clear in his own mind that he was unable to understand how any reasonable person could honestly differ with him.




Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Russell Street Report Website Design by D3Corp Ocean City Maryland