Domonique Foxworth: NFL PLayers Don't Trust Goodell (Saints bounty scandal a big reason) (1 Viewer)

[Guitarzan]

I realize there is an irrational and overwhelming aversion to the truth but for once I would like for the nation to read this with an unbiased eye. This from the lawyer who represented Vitt. It's a good source to learn from. Maybe if the nation could accept this then they might finally let this thing die.

As pointed out:

The players have no option but to deal with Goodell. In 2011 they signed off on a 10-year CBA, giving Goodell clear authority on player discipline.

Cornwell says the players are stuck and they have the leadership of the NFL Players Association Executive Director DeMaurice Smith to blame.

Smith did not respond to interview requests.

“Players should have more of problem with themselves and their leadership if they find the commissioner’s performance unacceptable to 61 percent of the players because this is the era of partnership,” said Cornwell, who was up for the NFLPA executive director's job in 2009 and last year was named executive director of the NFL coaches association. "I don’t think it is appropriate to conclude in the instances where the commissioner is doing his job results in the partisanship, Capitol Hill-type polarization.

Roger Goodell, in a year of high-profile controversy, remains a formidable force as leader of NFL | NOLA.com

 

[kevinh]

To those trumpeting the "should've fought for a better CBA line" -- you could say it's a failure that no one had the foresight to see that Goodell would abuse his power, when the previous commissioners had the same power and did not come close to abusing it like we saw in "bountygate."

Also, I love all these media figures suggesting the players would've gotten everything they wanted if they'd just tried harder. What would it have taken for the players to win that point and get Goodell to relenquish his powers--missing the 2011 season?

 

[Swampy Saint]

To those trumpeting the "should've fought for a better CBA line" -- you could say it's a failure that no one had the foresight to see that Goodell would abuse his power, when the previous commissioners had the same power and did not come close to abusing it like we saw in "bountygate."

Also, I love all these media figures suggesting the players would've gotten everything they wanted if they'd just tried harder. What would it have taken for the players to win that point and get Goodell to relenquish his powers--missing the 2011 season?

BOOOOO! on the article.

Yeeeaaaa! on this response!

 

[Guitarzan]

To those trumpeting the "should've fought for a better CBA line" -- you could say it's a failure that no one had the foresight to see that Goodell would abuse his power, when the previous commissioners had the same power and did not come close to abusing it like we saw in "bountygate."

Also, I love all these media figures suggesting the players would've gotten everything they wanted if they'd just tried harder. What would it have taken for the players to win that point and get Goodell to relenquish his powers--missing the 2011 season?

If you are referencing Cornwell, he is a lawyer and represented Vitt in this case. Also, Tag believes that Roger did his job and agreed with the way he handled the bounty investigation.

I don't know if the Saints are guilty or not. I wasn't there. People can believe what they want. To hate Goodell though and to chastise anyone who doesn't share in that is where my problem begins. Personally I think the Bounty system was in place and that-- as was reported-- Williams had a go **** yourself clause. Whether or not there is proof of it on the field or record of it through more penalties or more injuries does not provide proof that it didn't exist. again, as an analogy, if you try to rob a bank but botch it and get ZERO money you still get arrested and prosecuted. I never found Vilma or Vitt's account credible. Regardless, Roger did what he was paid to do. I feel that he was heavy handed and that the penalties were overly severe, but that's in his judgement and within his authority-- legally vested through the CBA-- and has been meted out in accordance with his vested authority. What i see is folks who hate what happened and blame Roger for all of it. I disagree with them.

 

[Guitarzan]

BOOOOO! on the article.

Yeeeaaaa! on this response!

Exactly, regardless of its merits no message other than the one you want to believe is acceptable. Eyes wide shut.

Predictable

 

[St. Aaron]

If you are referencing Cornwell, he is a lawyer and represented Vitt in this case. Also, Tag believes that Roger did his job and agreed with the way he handled the bounty investigation.

I don't know if the Saints are guilty or not. I wasn't there. People can believe what they want. To hate Goodell though and to chastise anyone who doesn't share in that is where my problem begins. Personally I think the Bounty system was in place and that-- as was reported-- Williams had a go **** yourself clause. Whether or not there is proof of it on the field or record of it through more penalties or more injuries does not provide proof that it didn't exist. again, as an analogy, if you try to rob a bank but botch it and get ZERO money you still get arrested and prosecuted. I never found Vilma or Vitt's account credible. Regardless, Roger did what he was paid to do. I feel that he was heavy handed and that the penalties were overly severe, but that's in his judgement and within his authority-- legally vested through the CBA-- and has been meted out in accordance with his vested authority. What i see is folks who hate what happened and blame Roger for all of it. I disagree with them.

Yeah, because a defensive coordinator saying some crazy things in a locker room and robbing a bank are the same thing.

And Roger handled his duties so well that he was reprimanded by a federal judge, an appeals panel, and his former mentor.

 

[SoggyBottomBoy]

Regardless, Roger did what he was paid to do. I feel that he was heavy handed and that the penalties were overly severe, but that's in his judgement and within his authority-- legally vested through the CBA-- and has been meted out in accordance with his vested authority. What i see is folks who hate what happened and blame Roger for all of it. I disagree with them.

Kevinh's point was RG abused his power. Aren't "overly severe" penalties abusive? No one is arguing that he didn't have the authority, it's what he did with it.

And you mentioned a lack of credibility in Vilma and Vitt's comments, fair enough. How much credence do you give Mary Jo White's disputed claims and testimony from Cerillo and Williams? More credible that Vitt and Vilma? You keep banging the drum that you're impartial and most here have no objectivity when it can easily be said that you're the one that's not being objective. TBH, it's insulting, condescending and tiresome.

Eyes wide shut.

 

[kevinh]

Also, Tag believes that Roger did his job and agreed with the way he handled the bounty investigation.

Did he? I could've sworn I read Tags reprimanding Goodell for implementing a culture change by coming down hard on one scapegoat, and giving his own handling of the league's drug testing policy which gave teams a kind of one year grace period as an example. Among other criticisms of Goodell's handling of the case.

If Goodell handled it so well, why was Tags there in the first place?

 

[AARPSaint]

Kevinh's point was RG abused his power. Aren't "overly severe" penalties abusive? No one is arguing that he didn't have the authority, it's what he did with it.

And you mentioned a lack of credibility in Vilma and Vitt's comments, fair enough. How much credence do you give Mary Jo White's disputed claims and testimony from Cerillo and Williams? More credible that Vitt and Vilma? You keep banging the drum that you're impartial and most here have no objectivity when it can easily be said that you're the one that's not being objective. TBH, it's insulting, condescending and tiresome.

Eyes wide shut.

If you hold the opinion that the Saints were guilty of pay-to-injure, then you believe the words of two disgruntled ex-employees, one of whom is pretty much a proven liar. If I were on a jury, I would tend to believe a bunch of players who signed affidavits under oath rather than a coach who disappeared from his job, lied about his whereabouts, and then acted so as to cause security to be called in when he was dismissed. Second, we have a defensive coordinator whose contract was not renewed. A cross examining attorney would vaporize their credibility in a real court.

There's no doubt that I have a bias in this case, but it's not that difficult to be objective when you consider the nature of the evidence, which, sickeningly enough, will probably never see the light of day in a real courtroom. This fiasco is a terrible combination of rushing to judgment, a corrupt kangaroo court hearing process with highly suspect evidence, and in my view a vindictive and biased commissioner/judge/prosecutor/appellate judge.

 

[miamidolphinsfan]

After reading some of the comments I would just like to know when schools quit teaching English, grammar, spelling and simple composition?

not taking sides here but theres no grammar requirement to posting on the interwebz, incase you didnt know .

 

[thefredman63]

Only liberal progressives would think fox news is the architect. Its been going on since before rush, but many of these liberal keyboard, educated idiots werent born before then, so thats all they have, hence the educated idiot part. IF you have been paying attention, it is everywwhere, but then you probably agree with it, so you cant/wont see it. Shame, because you are robbing our future for gains you think will help, but never do. Personal responsibility and self reliance are what is needed, something progressives know about, but never allow to be practiced, especially by the poor.

 

[pirttihirmu]

FOX-- ahem-- News?

I allways thought it was FOX opinions & hearsay

 

[Guitarzan]

Did he? I could've sworn I read Tags reprimanding Goodell for implementing a culture change by coming down hard on one scapegoat, and giving his own handling of the league's drug testing policy which gave teams a kind of one year grace period as an example. Among other criticisms of Goodell's handling of the case.

If Goodell handled it so well, why was Tags there in the first place?

Tagliabue said if Goodell just continues on his current path, which is being principled, consistent and keeping what is best for the league at the forefront, all will be fine.

“He’s been around long enough to know that when you do the right things in the best interests of the league, at some point some team or teams are going to say our ox was gored. We were being treated unfairly,” Tagliabue said. “By the same token, whether you’re the hero or evil, you do what’s right and you have to understand that A.) you’re going to anger some people; and B.) this, too, shall pass.”
Tagliabue said there was significant evidence that a bounty system had been in place but he thought the right thing to do was punish the team and its coaches and not the players.

 

[insidejob]

Apparently Guitarzan never read Joe Vitt's testimony.

Or he's just trolling guys for the red thumbs he so desperately craves. You know, par for the course.

 

[Guitarzan]

Kevinh's point was RG abused his power. Aren't "overly severe" penalties abusive? No one is arguing that he didn't have the authority, it's what he did with it.

And you mentioned a lack of credibility in Vilma and Vitt's comments, fair enough. How much credence do you give Mary Jo White's disputed claims and testimony from Cerillo and Williams? More credible that Vitt and Vilma? You keep banging the drum that you're impartial and most here have no objectivity when it can easily be said that you're the one that's not being objective. TBH, it's insulting, condescending and tiresome.

Eyes wide shut.

It's insulting you for me to disagree? I've tried over and over again to be respectful only to flamed with personal insults.

Abusing power? It's at Rogers discretion how he doles out his punishment. It's a judgement call. If I think it's too severe that doesn't give proof that he abused it, it just means I don't think his judgement is in line with what mine was.

I'd bet a thousand bucks if this happened to the Falcons and not the Saints that your sentiments and just about everyone else's in here would be the polar opposite. It would be a free for all on Falcons integrity and roger would be a hero. There's your objectivity. It happened to the Saints though and there is the difference.

As far as condescending is concerned, again, my opinion has gotten me very many personal attacks in here. I don't act like i'm better than anyone. I see hysteria in the way this thing has evolved. And Duncan is right, conspiracy theory out the yeng ya is the order of the day.

I respect the work that admins and mods do. I don't have a personal grudge against you. I hope it's not coming across that way.

I believe roger did what he thought was best and did his job.