"Who Dat" Bounty Games...

[GH2001]

And where in the report did the term "cart-off hits" come from? Purely the NFL's words. Not from any alleged "note", slide, or recorded "admission".

http://www.nola.com/saints/index.ssf/2012/06/nfl_presents_case_against_4_pl.html
Now, let's pull up the play-by-play on NFL.com, shall we?

http://www.nfl.com/gamecenter/2009101804/2009/REG6/giants@saints#menu=highlights

The only play in which Jacobs was taken out of the game is here:
So that was Sharper, not Harper who made the tackle. It was in the 2nd quarter, not the 3rd. And he returned to the game shortly after and finished the game. There was no play in which he was taken out of the game after a Harper tackle.

Seems like a lot of facts to get wrong in what is supposed to be such damning "evidence."

Which brings me to this:
So if according to that infallible "evidence", Harper got paid in that game for a "cart-off" on Brandon Jacobs, and yet Harper did not tackle anyone, let alone Jacobs, that removed them from the game. How can that be considered legitimate?

And by the way, Harper wasn't even suspended.
Excuse me, I misspoke. It was originally 5,000 pages of "evidence" that they claimed to have.
http://www.nola.com/saints/index.ssf/2012/06/saints_roman_harper_takes_time.htmlKeep in mind that prior to the NFL's reports and media firestorm, the term "Bounty" had no connotations with a football pool. Its only meaning was its literal meaning of the reward money on a Wanted poster. Now that the NFL has created that buzz word, and told you to look for it in their "evidence", it stands out. At the time, the term "bounty" was used as motivation similarly to the sniper rifle picture. Yet because ESPN didn't scream for two months about a "Sniper" scandal, you can recognize that as hyperbolic, metaphorical motivation.
If you can tell me one thing from that document that is irrefutable "smoking gun" evidence, then fine. As you've ignored, the NFL & Goodell have proven they can't be trusted. Why is it such a stretch that these "transcribed" notes, which they can't provide a source for or even say who wrote them might be bullshit as well?

And again, nothing I've posted came from any message board. I only frequent this one. I provided links to the NBCSports.com & ESPN.com posts. Yes, I posted two articles from the same blog, that if you actually read from top to bottom, does shed some light on some things and raises some critical questions that should be considered. Not based on rumor, speculation, or wild-assed conspiracy theories but based on verifiable facts with links provided.

The PUBLIC "facts" that say they didn't cheat are no more credible than the PUBLIC "facts" that say they did, plus the fact that we don't know everything they know behind closed doors (just like the Trayvon case). IMHO, you are doing a lot of "muddying" of the waters the last few pages.

And I seriously can't believe you like the Saints this much. I'm not sure any of us defended Cam Newton THIS much in one single thread. Holy crap dude, you're gonna have a stroke.

[GH2001]

You think this is bad?  Shit, don't start badmouthing Abita beer, tabasco or Zapp's potato chips.

Shit got serious when Chad relocated.

You can have the Abita and Zapp's but don't you fuck with Tabasco.

[AUChizad]

Holy shit, you care a lot about this...

I'll take that as TL;DR.

Shame because there is far more evidence that the NFL is full of shit than there is of any pay-for-injury scandal.

If I'm concise, you won't take my word for it.

If I spell it out, it's TL;DR.

[GH2001]

I'll take that as TL;DR.

Shame because there is far more evidence that the NFL is full of shit than there is of any pay-for-injury scandal.

If I'm concise, you won't take my word for it.

If I spell it out, it's TL;DR.

Did you just build a strawman out of yourself?

[Saniflush]

You think this is bad?  Shit, don't start badmouthing Abita beer, tabasco or Zapp's potato chips.

Shit got serious when Chad relocated.

Don't forget about thermal imaging.

[GH2001]

Don't forget about thermal imaging.

Yeah but Jay G Tate said they confirmed it and everything.

[War Eagle!!!]

Shit got serious when Chad relocated.

 

[War Eagle!!!]

I'll take that as TL;DR.

Shame because there is far more evidence that the NFL is full of shit than there is of any pay-for-injury scandal.

If I'm concise, you won't take my word for it.

If I spell it out, it's TL;DR.

No...take it as holy shit, you care a lot about this. I am not sure that I have written this much about one thing in my entire life...

[AUChizad]

The PUBLIC "facts" that say they didn't cheat are no more credible than the PUBLIC "facts" that say they did, plus the fact that we don't know everything they know behind closed doors (just like the Trayvon case). IMHO, you are doing a lot of "muddying" of the waters the last few pages.

Muddying the water with what? Facts? What have I said that has been untrue? Please try to actually deconstruct my argument rather than flinging insults.

It's hilarious that everyone is saying "You don't know all the facts, so you're wrong," while I'd gamble to say that they have not been following the case as closely, and thus know less "facts", so they're right? Cam Newton all over again. You'd think some people would learn from that, but apparently not. Guilty before (and after) proven innocent, and nothing can change your steel trap minds about it.

Here's why the evidence against there being pay-for-play is more credible than the evidence for it. All of the evidence for the scandal are based on alleged testimonies that the sources themselves are calling bullshit on. Why can't they find the notes? Why can't they find any hard evidence outside of hearsay that has been denied? Use the critical part of your brain for two seconds, and it's not that hard to at least think that this all might have been fabricated. So you just assume there's more "behind closed doors"? This is the evidence they submitted to the NFLPA when they called their bluff on the 5,000 pages of evidence. They produced about 197 pages of innocuous bullshit, and 3 pages of speculative stretches and "reproduced" letters without even citing the source. That was their evidence in the appeal that they submitted to justify the suspension of Vilma for a full year, Hargrove for half a season, Smith for a quarter season, Fujita for three games, Payton for a full year, Loomis for half a season, Vitt for nearly half a season, and permanantly ending Williams' career. Call me crazy, but I don't think anything they submitted justified that drastic of a punishment. Most rational people agree, hence the PR nightmare and media backlash on the NFL & Goodell that exists outside of this board where it's fun to fuck with Chad.

And I seriously can't believe you like the Saints this much. I'm not sure any of us defended Cam Newton THIS much in one single thread. Holy crap dude, you're gonna have a stroke.

[War Eagle!!!]

This doesn't cover the things he has quoted or any posts less than a paragraph...which are numerous...

If we haven't got it by now Chad......

Muddying the water with what? Facts? What have I said that has been untrue? Please try to actually deconstruct my argument rather than flinging insults.

It's hilarious that everyone is saying "You don't know all the facts, so you're wrong," while I'd gamble to say that they have not been following the case as closely, and thus know less "facts", so they're right? Cam Newton all over again. You'd think some people would learn from that, but apparently not. Guilty before (and after) proven innocent, and nothing can change your steel trap minds about it.

Here's why the evidence against there being pay-for-play is more credible than the evidence for it. All of the evidence for the scandal are based on alleged testimonies that the sources themselves are calling bullshit on. Why can't they find the notes? Why can't they find any hard evidence outside of hearsay that has been denied? Use the critical part of your brain for two seconds, and it's not that hard to at least think that this all might have been fabricated. So you just assume there's more "behind closed doors"? This is the evidence they submitted to the NFLPA when they called their bluff on the 5,000 pages of evidence. They produced about 197 pages of innocuous bullshit, and 3 pages of speculative stretches and "reproduced" letters without even citing the source. That was their evidence in the appeal that they submitted to justify the suspension of Vilma for a full year, Hargrove for half a season, Smith for a quarter season, Fujita for three games, Payton for a full year, Loomis for half a season, Vitt for nearly half a season, and permanantly ending Williams' career. Call me crazy, but I don't think anything they submitted justified that drastic of a punishment. Most rational people agree, hence the PR nightmare and media backlash on the NFL & Goodell that exists outside of this board where it's fun to fuck with Chad.

And where in the report did the term "cart-off hits" come from? Purely the NFL's words. Not from any alleged "note", slide, or recorded "admission".

http://www.nola.com/saints/index.ssf/2012/06/nfl_presents_case_against_4_pl.html
Now, let's pull up the play-by-play on NFL.com, shall we?

http://www.nfl.com/gamecenter/2009101804/2009/REG6/giants@saints#menu=highlights

The only play in which Jacobs was taken out of the game is here:
So that was Sharper, not Harper who made the tackle. It was in the 2nd quarter, not the 3rd. And he returned to the game shortly after and finished the game. There was no play in which he was taken out of the game after a Harper tackle.

Seems like a lot of facts to get wrong in what is supposed to be such damning "evidence."

Which brings me to this:
So if according to that infallible "evidence", Harper got paid in that game for a "cart-off" on Brandon Jacobs, and yet Harper did not tackle anyone, let alone Jacobs, that removed them from the game. How can that be considered legitimate?

And by the way, Harper wasn't even suspended.
Excuse me, I misspoke. It was originally 5,000 pages of "evidence" that they claimed to have.
http://www.nola.com/saints/index.ssf/2012/06/saints_roman_harper_takes_time.htmlKeep in mind that prior to the NFL's reports and media firestorm, the term "Bounty" had no connotations with a football pool. Its only meaning was its literal meaning of the reward money on a Wanted poster. Now that the NFL has created that buzz word, and told you to look for it in their "evidence", it stands out. At the time, the term "bounty" was used as motivation similarly to the sniper rifle picture. Yet because ESPN didn't scream for two months about a "Sniper" scandal, you can recognize that as hyperbolic, metaphorical motivation.
If you can tell me one thing from that document that is irrefutable "smoking gun" evidence, then fine. As you've ignored, the NFL & Goodell have proven they can't be trusted. Why is it such a stretch that these "transcribed" notes, which they can't provide a source for or even say who wrote them might be bullshit as well?

And again, nothing I've posted came from any message board. I only frequent this one. I provided links to the NBCSports.com & ESPN.com posts. Yes, I posted two articles from the same blog, that if you actually read from top to bottom, does shed some light on some things and raises some critical questions that should be considered. Not based on rumor, speculation, or wild-assed conspiracy theories but based on verifiable facts with links provided.

How does anything you just posted confirm that they were rewarded for the injury of other players?

And even still, that's not exactly a smoking gun of even a pay for play scheme. The NFL said they had 2,000 pages of evidence, and that's the best they can come up with? That shit wouldn't hold up in a real court of law, and you of all people should know it. There's also a picture of a sniper rifle scope with someone in its sites. So is this irrefutable evidence that Gregg Williams was paying the players to murder someone?

That being said, I'm not going to get caught up in that argument, because as I've consistently that I do believe there was a pay for performance program.

If not for the fact that the term "bounty" will now forever be associated with a pay-for-injury scheme after the NFL and media lapdogs have created this controversy, the word "bounty" would not carry the connotation that it does now.

I don't know how it's so difficult to understand that the NFL may be lying. There is no "smoking gun" in any of that, sorry. The most damning evidence is a note that they allege to have transcribed, although they can't produce the original note or even will give a name of who allegedly wrote it. Shady at best.

You are not looking at this rationally if you truly believe the NFL has compiled enough evidence to justify torching the program in the way that they did.

Oh, and the latest...

There is a huge difference between just having a gambling pool, that as I've stated before, I am 100% positive (I haz skreetz) happens on virtually every team at every level of professional sports. It may be in the books, but it's Jaywalking at worst. No sane rational person can argue that it warrants the crippling sanctions that were handed down to the organization, fucking with the livelihoods of these men.

Was going to post about this, but figured I'd save my breath.

But we all know that he would file a lawsuit like this knowing full well that he's guilty, and that if there was any evidence of it, it will be brought out into the public, further damaging his career and reputation.

Will be interesting to see if they can't produce enough evidence to not get sued for defamation of character how that factors into the other players' suspensions, and for that matter, Payton's.

I'm trying not to douche this thread up any more than it has to be, but you just can't stand it. I apologize for everyone who doesn't give a shit about JR4AU's petty trolling. Please skip this post.

I haven't been painted into shit, Councillor First Grader.

First of all, at least keep that debate into the goddamn thread it belongs in instead of spraying your douche all over the board.

I touch and go on the political threads, because pretty much everyone that posts in them have steel trap minds and then accuse me of being the stubborn and radical one. And every time I "touch", I end up defending arguments I was never making because certain people have to keep it interesting by inventing positions for me. So I "go". Whatever, fine.

You obviously have 1000x more conviction about that subject, as I could barely give much of a shit from the start, except to say that I feel that both sides of the argument are extreme. Just having a strong opinion about it one way or another is more attention than that case deserves. I posted on it to say I was equally annoyed by the Al Sharptons of the world as I was the racists that are happy the kid's dead because he was "up to no good", and no matter what 100% believed that Zimmerman should be absolved of any guilt. That was all I had to say about it, but then GarMan has to chime in with his satirical-cartoonish rants and build straw men for me, that eventually I end up taking a position I normally wouldn't, and then others, especially you, rah rah right along with GarMan. So I don't hang out there every day, sorry.

At this point, we're cool, but then you have to reply to everything I say in every thread with some ultra-douchey attempt at contradiction or just a general insult. 99% of the time your attempts are a complete failure. But it doesn't sway your persistence in douche-itude. You're doing exactly what Kaos did with certain posters, myself included, a few years ago. Fuck up otherwise perfectly good threads by just waiting perched for me to post so you can play the boorish, belligerent contrarian to whatever I say, no matter what it is. You even contradict yourself just to disagree with me, as evidenced earlier in this thread. Kaos at least had the self awareness to realize what a childish douche he was being and apologize and cease being such a colossal douche.

So just shut the fuck up, already.

And you're not Mike Ditka because you coach a Peewee team.

Now please, back to relevant discussion.

4evar!!! 81% believe that just the fact that ESPN is reporting this allegation, means that the Saints are beyond salvation. Clearly a team full of child murderer/rapists. Permanently. Until the end of time. In the year 3016, people will say "Remember that time ESPN said the Saints' GM could hear the opposing teams' playcalling? Deplorable, right? You knew they were guilty too, because ESPN said they heard it from a guy."

That'd be you. I never said anything definitely of the innocence or guilt, just of the facts of the case that he shot the kid and the kid was unarmed. You're the one that knows he's innocent. But I'm not dragging that debate here any further.

Now because the current whipping boy is the New Orleans Saints and the media loves to kick someone while they're down. While I'm sure ESPN's polls showed 99.9% of people thought the NFL should shut the program down, most rational people were, at least, on the fence about the severity and uniqueness about "Bountygate" compared to how it was being portrayed by the media, and whether or not the punishment was equitable. There is a crusade now to push public opinion over that fence. "Quick! Find some parking tickets! See if anyone on the team cheated on any tests!" It's the exact same tactics we saw early in the Cam Newton allegations.

To be fair, my evoking of Joe Schad was rhetorical. He exclusively covers the college game. Still, it's the same bunch of zero-credibilty hacks at ESPN that have turned their network into a professional wrestling/Jerry Springer circus. They have long ago wiped their ass with journalistic integrity, taking the word of one anonymous source without any fact checking whatsoever before plastering their website with 50 polls about what the implications and punishment should be for the Saints after their most recent transgression, as if it's 100% factual.

In all seriousness, completely removing myself from this situation AND the Cam Newton situation, while hard to do, this absolutely disgusts me. This is the worldwide leader in sports. Because of their monopoly, we're force-fed this bullshit, and what's worse is 95% of the country lacks the critical thinking to do anything besides gulp down each spoonful, and vote "Shut the program down and strip them of their Super Bowl" or "Strip him of the Heisman and his school of the BCS trophy", or "Scrape every last trace of dignity from Joe Paterno in the last days of his life, and let's make sure his legacy will forever be that he was equally as vile as Sandusky in this whole child rape thing."

They are TMZ, and they don't even give a shit. And neither does the public. They buy right in and sharpen their pitchforks, loving every second of it.

Exactly. Not to drudge up the dead horse, but I think there could have been healthy room for debate as to whether or not Joe Pa should have known, and whether or not he could have done more, but the dude was literally in the last days of his life and obviously not all there, and it's not like he was the one diddling boys, and yet from the way it was being reported you'd think he was running a child prostitution ring. Sandusky deserved every bit of criticism and much more. Instead it was all focused on destroying JoePa's legacy. Better story. More sensational.

This 50/50 hindsight, as Dye would say, about the presumed omnipotence of head coaches was my main beef with Sean Payton getting punished and crucified the way he did for Gregg Williams's sins. Not that I expect anyone here to agree, since you've already bought into ESPN's narrative.

This is what I'm talking about.

Not only are the polls all assuming the allegations are true, but the results are proof that the general public is lapping it up, and want as much blood as possible.

http://espn.go.com/sportsnation/polls?pCat=46&sCat=2993

Quote

    If both are true, which would end up being the bigger scandal?

         
        33%
        Patriots' Spygate
         
        67%
        Saints' eavesdropping on opposing coaches

Really? Even assuming the Saints hypothetical cheating is true and comparing it to actual proven violations. So the general manager hearing signals he can't possibly understand or use to any advantage, in real time, that took place a decade prior to the allegation, is more than TWICE as bad as a head coach videotaping opposing coaches' sideline signals and practices for ten years leading up to the day they got caught?

Quote

    How should the NFL punish the Saints if allegations about eavesdropping turn out to be true?

         
        7%
        Fines
         
        6%
        Additional suspensions
         
        5%
        Lost draft picks
         
        81%
        Some combination of the

SOME COMBINATION!!!1! Plus the death penalty, both for the program, and literally for Drew Brees. I know he had something to do with it!!

Quote

    How big of an advantage do you believe the Saints would have garnered from their alleged eavesdropping device?

         
        46%
        Big advantage
         
        39%
        Small advantage
         
        16%
        No advantage

HUGE advantage! 84% think it's some advantage, while nearly half of those posted think it was a "big" one. Nevermind the litany of former and present coaches from teams not called the Saints, sports analysts, and even some ESPN analysts saying it makes zero sense and there would be no discernible advantage.

Quote

    If the eavesdropping allegations against Saints GM Mickey Loomis turn out to be true, how should the NFL punish him?

         
        10%
        Short addition to his extant eight-game suspension
         
        90%
        Season-long suspension or more

90%. If "death by execution" were an option, I guarantee you it would be in the lead.

Quote

    Which would be a bigger scandal for the Saints if both turn out to be true?

         
        35%
        Bounty on opposing players
         
        65%
        Alleged electronic listening devices used on visiting coaching staffs

This thing that we're talking about now is obviously the biggest scandal of all time evarr!!!

So now "unnamed sources" suits your fancy, huh? Zero evidence. Zero facts. Just an "unnamed source." History repeating.

So you're telling me the general manager. Not a coach, the general manager, was deciphering every visiting coach's jargon and communicating that to the Saints sidelines, and those coaches then made decisions based on this information in the 30 seconds between plays? Give me a break. If you were going to have that type of technology, which clearly would be cheating, why not wire it to the coaches, who could actually do something with it? Also, if this were true, wouldn't their home record be better than, or at least as good as, their road record during this time? ESPN at first reported that they did in fact have a better home record from 02-04, which was false. They have since retracted this. They were 12-12 at home while 13-11 on the road.

Also, the article itself says:

So we don't know for sure that he used it, and it makes no sense for him to use it, but of course, we're going to report that he did.

Why now? So he waited almost a decade with this knowledge and coincidentally thought this was the right time to come out with this news? Eight years after the alleged cheating stopped? Holy statute of limitations, McClover. And you're telling me that this happened a decade ago, and yet no one brought this up during spygate with the Patriots? Only now when it's convenient to pile on? Come on. And speaking of expired statute of limitations...

This is purely comical. So in September of 2005,  in a national state of emergency, when people were dying left and right, trying to get their families to safety, the floor of the dome itself was 12 feet under water, and people who lived in New Orleans, couldn't even get into New Orleans...that was a good time for the evil Saints minions to change the wiring.

My thoughts have pretty much been covered.

It's being overblown for a time in sports when there's not a lot going on to talk about.

"Some form of this goes on in every NFL locker room."

Also, Gregg Williams is the coach involved, and he's gone. Fuck him.

I don't believe Payton had shit to do with it.

[AUChizad]

This doesn't cover the things he has quoted or any posts less than a paragraph...which are numerous...

OMG, I cumulatively posted a bunch in an 18 page thread where everyone claims they "just know" something that they don't know shit about. I must be mad.

If we haven't got it by now Chad......

I'll give you that.

[GH2001]

Muddying the water with what? Facts? What have I said that has been untrue? Please try to actually deconstruct my argument rather than flinging insults.

It's hilarious that everyone is saying "You don't know all the facts, so you're wrong," while I'd gamble to say that they have not been following the case as closely, and thus know less "facts", so they're right? Cam Newton all over again. You'd think some people would learn from that, but apparently not. Guilty before (and after) proven innocent, and nothing can change your steel trap minds about it.

Here's why the evidence against there being pay-for-play is more credible than the evidence for it. All of the evidence for the scandal are based on alleged testimonies that the sources themselves are calling bullshit on. Why can't they find the notes? Why can't they find any hard evidence outside of hearsay that has been denied? Use the critical part of your brain for two seconds, and it's not that hard to at least think that this all might have been fabricated. So you just assume there's more "behind closed doors"? This is the evidence they submitted to the NFLPA when they called their bluff on the 5,000 pages of evidence. They produced about 197 pages of innocuous bullshit, and 3 pages of speculative stretches and "reproduced" letters without even citing the source. That was their evidence in the appeal that they submitted to justify the suspension of Vilma for a full year, Hargrove for half a season, Smith for a quarter season, Fujita for three games, Payton for a full year, Loomis for half a season, Vitt for nearly half a season, and permanantly ending Williams' career. Call me crazy, but I don't think anything they submitted justified that drastic of a punishment. Most rational people agree, hence the PR nightmare and media backlash on the NFL & Goodell that exists outside of this board where it's fun to fuck with Chad.

Yes, you have muddied the waters with a ton of rhetorical "information". If you know all that you say you do, maybe you should be contacting some folks. Are you telling me that you know something that Goodell does not? Or that you know everything he knows? Wading past all the shit and rhetoric (that you call facts), there was obvious wrong doing. Maybe not as bad as originally reported - I will give you that, but they did do wrong. And worst of all they lied about it and tried to cover it up - that was real kicker. I could careless what text message a coach sitting in jail got from GW. Its not far fetched to believe that at this point, these guys are in pathological liar mode. They are lying and believe it at this point to minimize any further damage in the future.

[AUChizad]

Yes, you have muddied the waters with a ton of rhetorical "information". If you know all that you say you do, maybe you should be contacting some folks. Are you telling me that you know something that Goodell does not? Or that you know everything he knows? Wading past all the shit and rhetoric (that you call facts), there was obvious wrong doing. Maybe not as bad as originally reported - I will give you that, but they did do wrong. And worst of all they lied about it and tried to cover it up - that was real kicker. I could careless what text message a coach sitting in jail got from GW. Its not far fetched to believe that at this point, these guys are in pathological liar mode. They are lying and believe it at this point to minimize any further damage in the future.

Example of this "rhetorical 'information'"?

I am sharing in this thread much of what I have read and heard and instead of reading it, I get "Damn, you sure care a lot about this. You must be having a stroke."

I've said 1,000 times there was probably a pay-for-performance gambling pool. I've also said from literally the first post that some form of that happens everywhere. Call that a BamaGrad argument if you want, but it's not like saying "everyone cheats". It's technically illegal in pro football so they don't intentionally throw games and shit like that. Pools with payouts for things like pick 6's and hard hits, happen on every team in the NFL as per the testimony of several former players linked previously in this thread.

You keep assuming the players are "pathologically lying", but refuse to believe the NFL and Goodell could stray an inch from the truth? Why is that?

Many things the NFL has said has been empirically proven false (i.e. Harper got paid out for a "cart-off" hit against Brandon Jacobs). Explain that.

[AUChizad]

Here's the NFL PA's annotated exhibits:
https://images.nflplayers.com/mediaResources/files/NFLPA_Annotated_Exhibits.PDF

I won't copy & paste the whole thing so no one here has a stroke, but I suggest you take a look. It's 5 pages of bullet points. Infinitely more concise than the bullshit Goodell offered.

I will, quote this from it, since the question was asked directly in this thread.

    Cart-off - A “cart-off’ is simply a hard hit. It does not literally mean that a player was carted off the field. Coaches and players may use the terms “Knockout,” “Tapout,” “Blowups,” or “Hit Parade” to describe the same type of play.

    Whack -The best way for a small tackler to take on a larger player; it is more commonly called a “Crossbody Tackle.” Saints players were often times undersized and Coach Williams used this term to try to improve tackling technique.

    Impact play - A 4th quarter play when the game was on the line. Usually with less than 2 possessions left. It could be any number of plays, whether it be a great tackle, interception or a pass breakup. It could be a team effort like a strategic stop that denies the offense yardage or touchdowns.

    Kill the Heads - Kill the Head (KH), is part of the “Defend every blade of grass” philosophy that the team played with. Its strategy was to get RB’s and WR’s to mentally vacate the game. The logic is that if you allowed RB’s and WR’s to run straight at you and successfully penetrate your defense, then you would basically validate their superiority. You would by default present a passive approach to defense. The result of this would be catastrophic to any defensive game plan. This came from the Dome Patrol Era - part of the great early defensive teams in New Orleans. Tourists would buy shirts with this slogan as far back as the late 90’s.

[AUChizad]

Statement from "pathological liar" Anthony Hargrove:

http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/blog/eye-on-football/19384479/anthony-hargroves-statement-on-nfls-evidence-against-saints-players

I have sat back over the past few months and watched as the NFL has spent countless hours painting a picture that has left a lot of people convinced that myself and three other players deserve to be punished, not to mention the coaching staff and Mr. Loomis. I have asked myself a million times: why? Why on earth are they trying to make a mountain out of a molehill? I do not have an absolute answer, but I'm guessing it has something to do with image, power, and money.

The words they have used over the months to capture your hearts and minds have been many, practiced, and calculated. But that does not make them true. It just makes them good at what they do. They are, in my opinion, master politicians. Bill Clinton once said, “I did not have sex with that woman."

Semantics. Politicians are good at it.

There is no way I can reveal to you today the depth of their imagination and determination in painting this picture for you, the public, adroitly using the media as their tools of art. But I will dabble a little. And stay with me, because even though they have somberly made it clear that “The Mona Lisa” is not smiling, if we move in closer we notice that ... just maybe she is.

First of all, I watched in shock as they took my declaration a couple of months ago and made it into something it was not. It left from me as a private explanation of certain specific events and, voila, came out as a confession of crimes. Even I had to blink my eyes real hard to see how they did that one. Do you know they never even asked me what I meant? Just assumed I wanted to confess, I guess.

Semantics.

Or in this case, maybe just lies. They publicly said that I said things that I did not say. Is that not lying? Isn't it? Go back and read for yourselves without assuming that it says what they have made you think, and then re-read their synopsis. Please try to have an open mind.

They also said that I declined to be interviewed a few weeks back. Again, untrue. I know it sounds dubious to the public when they hear that I declined to visit with Mr. Goodell, and that was their intent, I'm guessing. But they were the first to decline. After that, I, too, became dubious.

Yesterday I heard that they have a witness who saw me tell Joe Vitt that I lied? Who is this mystery witness? You may come forward. I won't bite. The truth is that I feel certain I know who this supposed witness is, and if you knew you would understand why this is all so shady. The problem is, since I am only 99% sure who this supposed witness is, I will keep it to myself, because that is what honesty and integrity demand... absolute certainty. And even then, why intentionally drag that person's name through the mud, as the NFL has done mine?

But it did not happen as they say!

They say, and I quote, “the circumstances strongly suggest that you told at least one player on another club about the program, and confirmed that Brett Favre was the target of a bounty.” I did no such thing. Do I think someone told them I did? Probably. And I believe it was probably the same mystery witness. But it ... did ... not ... happen! There is no way they have absolute proof, because it does not exist. I would stake my career on it.

I have felt like the target of a sophisticated mugging, watching as many have walked by and minded their own business as if the muggers deserved their prize. Why have most walked by? Because they were not the ones being mugged, or maybe because they felt that they had no vested interest. True, some halve yelped out that maybe someone should help, but even most of them keep on walking by.

I call out to my fellow NFL brothers around the NFL to not buy in. Look closer. You have not been given the full truth. There has been a tactful attempt to cause division among us, but we must not let it work! We should seek the truth out with diligence and band together if at all possible. Trust me, it could be you next time being mugged.

And that brings me to the final issue for the day. And for this we must literally lean in and look and listen very closely. Part of the NFL's evidence so prominently and proudly displayed yesterday included a DVD with interesting excerpts from the NFC Championship Game in January of 2010. They showed it to the players and then to “The Twelve”. It showed certain highlights from the game and a little sideline discussion, among other things. The Twelve, from what I heard, came away very convinced that the NFL had put on...what did they call it...oh yeah, an explosive and compelling show of evidence.

As I watched the DVD, I did not think so. In fact, I felt similar to how I had felt when I read the NFL's statement about my declaration. Bewildered. I looked around the room wondering if anyone else caught what the NFL had done. It seemed no one did. They are very, very good.

To replay it for you, they first showed me hitting Favre in the 2nd quarter, up high. Some debated whether it was a legal hit or not. I was flagged and later fined. It happens. Sorry Brett. Then in the 4th quarter Favre was hurt by a high/low hit by a couple of my teammates. And he left the game temporarily with an ankle issue, it seemed. And stunningly, that happens in NFL games, too.

But this is where it gets interesting. The NFL has a sideline shot of our defense gathered around Joe Vitt discussing what we might should expect if the backup quarterback comes into the game. It shows me off to the side with some of our other defensive linemen on the bench with their backs to the camera. The final snippet has an arrow pointed at me with the caption indicating that I had said, “give me my money.”

Here's the problem with that. It wasn't me. That's right. The NFL got their evidence all wrong. In their rush to convict me, they made a very serious error. Is it intentional? I don't know. But one thing I do know with absolute certainty...it...was...not...me! Like I said, lean in closer, look closer, listen closer. It is not my voice. Anyone who knows me well knows that it is not me. But the NFL does not know me well. They simply make assumptions. With ... my ... life.

Any coach evaluating film would have thought that #69 played a ver exciting, great football game, the way it is supposed to be played. And yet the NFL has cut it up and made me out to be a monster.

They duped “The Twelve” and many others. For example, I have seen the NFL Network broadcast that it was me as if it were fact. But again, it is absolutely not. It will be easily provable. In fact, there is no way they can prove that it is me. I stake my life on the fact that it is not me. I wonder if Roger Goodell is willing to stake his job on this piece of evidence? Or Jeff Pash? Or Adolpho Birch? Or Mary Jo White? Or anyone else associated with this mockery? In fact, since we are here, does anyone want to go up and ask them? And how about you guys? Are any of you willing to put your job on the line and say that this piece of evidence is accurate? By a show of hands, please?

The truth is, this has been embarrassing to have all these lies about me echoing across America. Good Lord have my eyes been opened! Just ask yourself...if they will manufacture this piece of so-called evidence, what else will they do? I know it looks confusing, especially when they tell you what to look for, but don't believe it. This, in my mind, brings everything into question. Everything. And all of this because one man has absolute power and seemingly must use it. We as players have to be very careful. Do they care about us? When they are willing to twist things to hurt us? Come on guys.

As for most of the media, I would hope you would not believe every accusation you hear in the future. Dig deeper before you come up with your story headlines and opinions. You might be interested in what you find. You might even find that “The Mona Lisa” is actually smiling.

[wesfau2]

Kill the Heads - Kill the Head (KH), is part of the “Defend every blade of grass” philosophy that the team played with. Its strategy was to get RB’s and WR’s to mentally vacate the game. The logic is that if you allowed RB’s and WR’s to run straight at you and successfully penetrate your defense, then you would basically validate their superiority. You would by default present a passive approach to defense. The result of this would be catastrophic to any defensive game plan. This came from the Dome Patrol Era - part of the great early defensive teams in New Orleans. Tourists would buy shirts with this slogan as far back as the late 90’s.

This is a fine explanation...but it completely ignores the context in which the phrase was used in the Williams audio.

[AUChizad]

This is a fine explanation...but it completely ignores the context in which the phrase was used in the Williams audio.

How?

"We've got to do everything in the world to make sure we kill Frank Gore's head. We want him running sideways. We want his head sideways. Kill the head and the body will die.

"Every single one of you, before you get off the pile, affect the head. Early, affect the head. Continue to touch and affect the head."

Don't see how this can only be taken to mean "injure his head and try to concuss him" as obviously, or more obviously than it can mean to get into his head mentally.

Now this quote, as I said, was in bad taste, but it was not in the context of "Kill the Head."

"We need to find out in the first two series of the game, the little wide receiver, No. 10, about his concussion. We need to fuckin' put a lick on him."

Is there another quoting of "Kill the Head" by Williams that I am missing?

[GH2001]

This is a fine explanation...but it completely ignores the context in which the phrase was used in the Williams audio.

Bingo. An excellent way to twist context to favor the argument.

And Chad, I said the coaches in the pathological liar comment. And yes, I do believe GW and the jailed coach are lying.

[AUChizad]

Bingo. An excellent way to twist context to favor the argument.

Again, I ask, how is the NFLPA twisting anything?

The audio is consistent with the NFLPA's definition of "Killing the Head", is it not?

It was released, however, to "twist the context" so that those not privy to Saints lockerroom terminology would hear that, combine it with what the NFL was perpetuating, and define "Kill the Head" as some sort of code word for "intentionally concuss".

[GH2001]

Again, I ask, how is the NFLPA twisting anything?

The audio is consistent with the NFLPA's definition of "Killing the Head", is it not?

It was released, however, to "twist the context" so that those not privy to Saints lockerroom terminology would hear that, combine it with what the NFL was perpetuating, and define "Kill the Head" as some sort of code word for "intentionally concuss".

Holy shit you love New Orleans. All we will agree on here is how great Tabasco sauce is. No sense it beating the dead horse's arse.

SaintsGrad03 - I'm still chortling