Scrutiny of the Bounty

[pbmax]

Well, 50,000 pages of evidence turned into 200 pages (http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2012/06/19/haystack-of-nfl-evidence-has-a-few-possible-bounty-needles/) of things the League wished to share. Of those 200, some were funny (http://deadspin.com/5919411/the-beep+beep-awards-and-nine-other-bizarre-slides-from-gregg-williamss-slideshows/gallery/3), some weird (http://deadspin.com/5919411/the-beep+beep-awards-and-nine-other-bizarre-slides-from-gregg-williamss-slideshows/gallery/1) and some were dumb (http://deadspin.com/5919411/the-beep+beep-awards-and-nine-other-bizarre-slides-from-gregg-williamss-slideshows/gallery/5), but only a few of them pertain to the matter at hand.

1. Typed transcriptions of hand written notes of amounts players and coaches apparently pledged, variously to, a kitty or general pool, a QB out pool and a Pick 6. So some amounts were for plays, some for hits and some for targeting players/positions. However, the handwritten notes were not produced, meaning the source material cannot be judged and no one can cross examine the writer or interviewee.

As an example of the trouble this can cause, Joe Vitt (current Saints HC) is down on these transcriptions for $5.000 for the QB Out pool. But his lawyer has publicly stated that the League has never confronted Vitt about this pledge nor was his discipline based on this pledge. So did the League ignore it, or does it not believe its own transcription?

Vilma is suspended one year for a $10,000 pledge to knock out the QB. Shouldn't Vitt be gone longer if this document is to be believed?

2. Hargrove is going to miss time. His initial interview was a fabrication, even if it does appear likely it was encouraged by the coaches. They also have the tape of his saying to Bobby McCray, "Hey Bobby, give me my money" after Favre was knocked out of the game.

The video was in the information showed to the players and media, but his declaration from earlier this year was not included.

3. Florio says that the bulk of the material provides compelling evidence of an illegal pay for performance scheme (less than bounty and more organized than Best Buy cards or holding Adrian Peterson under a 100 yards, etc.) but that the evidence about planning and paying for injuries really comes down to those handwritten notes and the Hargrove tape.

The tape could be explained away as both bravado and an admission about player knowledge of a pay for performance system. The notes, if corroborated, would be damning.

But Vilma is maintaining he never pledged money to any system that paid for injuries. And Vitt is going to be walking the Saints sidelines this year while Vilma sits or is in court with the NFL. So the NFL will be asked to explain why it doubts some evidence and not others.

D coaches talk about cutting the head off all the time (Fritz Shurmur used that metaphor) but combining it with a dollar figure will probably be enough to keep the coaches and players on the sideline. The NFL holds all the cards and players are going to need to convince the Court system to intervene in a closed system. But I think the NFL needs to explain Vitt vs. Vilma regardless.


~ From Pro Football Talk, Peter King and Adam Schefter's Twitter feed.
~~ Yes, I stole that thread title from somewhere.

[Upnorth]

Awesome title PB!

This whole situation is really messed up. One thing that is really beginning to erk me is how seemingly random his punishments are. I know that I don't have all the evidence for the bounty issues, but 4 players each recieve different suspensions for the same type of infraction. Then you take a look at the Neal vrs Brown situation and see another discrepancy. Drunk driving vrs pot use, etc etc.
If they are going to have punishments they should codify it so people know what to expect and there can't be talk of favoritism.

[Smidgeon]

Seifert made an good observation on Hargrove. When he said "give me the money" or whatever, it hadn't been him making the hit.

http://espn.go.com/blog/nfcnorth/post/_/id/43004/odd-timing-on-hargroves-payment-request

[pbmax]

The other question I have, though I am not sure it matters for the NFL, is whether anyone ever pocketed the money. There was public pressure to return winnings back to the pot.

The NFL did not introduce the ledger at the appeal hearing so it is restrained from using it as evidence against the players. I wonder what the ledger would show (or not show) about actual money that left the system. Or if it was a Ponzi scheme of motivation.

[pbmax]

On Florio's webcast, Vilma's lawyer Peter Ginsberg suggests the transcribed page with dollar amounts for performance was created after the fact by a fired Saints coach Mike Cerullo. He says it contains at least one outright falsehood in that Charles Grant is listed with a $10,000 pledge, but that Grant (who was on IR) was not at the meeting the note was supposed to be documenting. Also odd that Ornstein is on there as I think he was in jail (apparently not, see below).

The NFL responded that Williams and Ornstein and one other source can confirm Vilma's offer. Though that witness list is very much in Goodell's pocket, given their status in the League is doubtful.

I am more convinced than ever that Goodell has taken an ordinary, though extensive, pay for performance system and turned it into a player safety issue. By labeling it as such and calling it a bounty, he has mis-characterized it. Mostly bravado and over the top coach speak, he has made his job tougher.

But Hargrove is going to do the time for lying.

[pbmax]

Ornstein now denies he told NFL he could corroborate Vilma offering cash. Private versus public comments, or could the NFL had investigators who did not recognize tales of locker room bravado versus reality?

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2012/06/19/ornstein-denies-telling-nfl-that-vilma-offered-money/

[pbmax]

Hargrove met with the media in NY and made a good impression by answering some tough questions, but more than a few were skeptical of his claim that the audio on tape after Favre was knocked out wasn't him saying "pay me my money" to McCray. There is some question though, as someone else linked to earlier, since Hargrove did not deliver the knockout hit.

His entire statement, via CBSSports online: http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/blog/eye-on-football/19384479/anthony-hargroves-statement-on-nfls-evidence-against-saints-players

I believe I am safe in saying he wrote that himself. That Mona Lisa comment reminds me of a poster .... You have to read it.

[Bretsky]

Hargrove met with the media in NY and made a good impression by answering some tough questions, but more than a few were skeptical of his claim that the audio on tape after Favre was knocked out wasn't him saying "pay me my money" to McCray. There is some question though, as someone else linked to earlier, since Hargrove did not deliver the knockout hit.

His entire statement, via CBSSports online: http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/blog/eye-on-football/19384479/anthony-hargroves-statement-on-nfls-evidence-against-saints-players

I believe I am safe in saying he wrote that himself. That Mona Lisa comment reminds me of a poster .... You have to read it.


Which Poster ?

[MadScientist]

Florio is suggesting that the NFL may have been too late in delivering the documents, meaning the suspension would have to be tossed.
http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2012/06/19/timing-of-evidence-disclosure-could-scuttle-suspensions/

Hate technicalities, but it will help the Packers and the NFL is fucking stupid for failing to turn everything over on time. Even if they thought they were running late on all their checks, they should have just dumped what they had ready in time.

[gbgary]

very clever thread title.

[KYPack]

Yeah, which poster?

Zig, Harlan, B-Man?, who, whom?

One way or the other, this is a five star Goodell fuckup. He's the captain of the ship and it has run up on a sandbar.

I've never liked baby Roger & it's time for him to go.

There is so much screwed up with this case, he should have handled far differently and not have created the PR disaster it has become.

[King Friday]

The NFL is really between a rock and a hard place due to the lawsuits in respect to player safety. I'm guessing they felt they had to do something, even if they didn't have a ton of evidence to support what they wound up doing. There is little that can be done from a legal perspective even if the punishments handed down are unfair, so I think the NFL is content to take the PR nightmare in order to gain some kind of foothold for themselves legally in respect to player safety.

If the NFL did nothing here, it would not bode well for them going forward as these lawsuits play out. I think the NFL is somewhat sheltered because it will be difficult to prove they INTENTIONALLY misled players in respect to player safety (especially since it is difficult to argue that players did not understand playing a violent sport harbored risks to their physical well-being in future years), which is ultimately what had to happen for most of these lawsuits to hold any true weight. However, if there is a public "bounty" scandal that the league does very little with in terms of "cleaning up"...that starts the ball rolling in a direction the league simply cannot tolerate. The league has been consistently siding with caution in respect to hits to the helmet, defenseless receivers, etc. This is just another step in that direction, and I fear it isn't anywhere near the last.

[pbmax]

The NFL is really between a rock and a hard place due to the lawsuits in respect to player safety. I'm guessing they felt they had to do something, even if they didn't have a ton of evidence to support what they wound up doing. There is little that can be done from a legal perspective even if the punishments handed down are unfair, so I think the NFL is content to take the PR nightmare in order to gain some kind of foothold for themselves legally in respect to player safety.

That is the puzzling piece to me. They seem to have a pretty clear case of pay for performance. Bounties for injuries seems far less clear. They have the Saints org, the coaches and Hargrove on record as denying a bounty system. Unless they asked a limited question (did you know about or participate in bounties for injury) rather than an open one (did the team ever discuss incentives for plays), then they can nail each of them twice; once for any payments and again for lying about it.

If they focused exclusively on the injury factor, which seems to be the case in the public pronouncements, then they might have let the thing slip through their fingers.

The other things I would like to know and probably never will, would be why did Vitt get off so light if they thought he contributed to the pot and secondly, did anyone actually deposit or walk with any money?

[MadScientist]

Throwing this out for the conspiracy minded. What if the NFL realized that their case was not strong enough against the players to win. If they sabotage the appeal such that the players get off on a technicality then public opinion will treat the players as guilty but not convicted. (See Braun, Ryan). This allows the NFL to maintain the threat of coming down hard on players who go outside the rules, but without having to show that they can prove their case.

[pbmax]

I think this passage from yesterday explains most of the contretemps over the pay for performance/maiming system.


The first comes from attorney Peter Ginsberg, who represents Saints linebacker Jonathan Vilma.

“Killing the head wasn’t part of the bounty program, it wasn’t part of the pay-for-performance program. It was a statistic that [defensive coordinator Gregg] Williams kept to show the players who was leading the team with good hard and direction-changing hits,” Ginsberg said on Tuesday’s PFT Live. “He led the team in those sorts of tremendous hits, and if you look at his penalties for the year, he was one of the least penalized players.”

The second, far less unequivocal, definition comes from NFL senior V.P. of labor law and policy Adolpho Birch, who also appeared on Tuesday’s PFT Live.

“What does killing the head mean?” I asked.

“Well, I guess I would ask you that,” Birch said. “What would it mean to you?”
Birch could just be spinning, as could Ginsberg. But the fact that Birch thinks Florio should know what it means to a player is revealing.

I think there is a real misunderstanding among the League's people over what, exactly, Williams was asking his players to do. And they obviously do not understand that players interpret their coaches rantings differently. How this confusion could survive interviews with coaches and players is less clear, though I think some individual players do probably treat Williams as being very literal. Others, like Sharper, basically ignore it.

Coaches walk this line all the time, as do players (James Harrison for instance, the Packers according to Kurt Warner). Williams (like many coaches before him) coaches close to the line so to get maximum performance and violence. Does adding a pay for performance change the nature of what he is requesting?

Of course, if this version of the definition is true, then it might be even worse than the League has stated (since its ostensibly legal):


According to the source, Williams defines it to mean applying a helmet-to-helmet hit to a runner whose progress is in the process of otherwise being stopped.

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2012/06/19/three-perspectives-on-the-term-killing-the-head/

[Smeefers]

The "taking the head" comment is moot. They're arguing about symantics when they should be arguing about the "what would the rubbing your finger thumb, index and middle finger together quickly signify to you?" You know, the money sign. A coach can say whatever he wants to motivate the player. The problem is the pay for play.

[pbmax]

The "taking the head" comment is moot. They're arguing about symantics when they should be arguing about the "what would the rubbing your finger thumb, index and middle finger together quickly signify to you?" You know, the money sign. A coach can say whatever he wants to motivate the player. The problem is the pay for play.

Probably, and according to most who attended the presentation, the League has good evidence they were paying for performances.

But don't players get paid in contracts by making big hits? Don't players make incentives by earning playing time? Don't players talk about rules and fines that take away their livelihood by changing the game under their feet? Even that gesture is open to interpretation in the locker room that might be different than in the outside world.

If they knew money had reached the players and not gone back into the kitty (pay for performance Ponzi scheme), that would close the pay for performance case.

The wider question is why Goodell and the League publicly focused on intent to injure. Because their case on that is far weaker. And if they lose their case while mishandling the appeal (which was fostered in part by the NFL's public accusations of intent to injure and $10,000 bounties to knock Favre/Warner out) then they deserve it. Rather than treat it as the more mundane option, they trotted the investigation out as an example of the League doing everything it could to prevent harm to players.

[jdrats]

IMHO the only question that matters to the 2012 Packers at this point is how has Hargrove looked in camp, and can he help to improve the DL. Because, basically Hargrove and his lawyer have now at least sown the seeds of "reasonable doubt" in public opion and I fully expect them to take Hargrove's 8 game suspension to court.

Everything I read prior to this stated that if it should go to court it would: A) include an injunction staying the suspension until the case is resolved, and B) any actual verdict would likely come well after the season and the playoffs.

So, it appears to me that the Packers will have Hargrove available for 16 games and the playoffs this year.

[pbmax]

I wonder how many shoes the NFL has to drop? Aldopho Birch (which might be the greatest name ever) confirms that the typed transcription of handwritten notes (whose author is suspected to be Mike Cerullo) was not sufficient evidence to accuse Joe Vitt of contributing money to the Brett Favre bounty pool.

So the major role played by the notes about the amounts contributed by players, coaches and hangers on to the bounty pool? Even the NFL does not trust it. Explosive and compelling, indeed.

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2012/06/20/league-confirms-vitt-wasnt-accused-of-contributing-to-bounty-pool/

[Joemailman]

Hargrove met with the media in NY and made a good impression by answering some tough questions, but more than a few were skeptical of his claim that the audio on tape after Favre was knocked out wasn't him saying "pay me my money" to McCray. There is some question though, as someone else linked to earlier, since Hargrove did not deliver the knockout hit.

On the audio/video on the sidelines, you can't see if Hargrove is talking when the words "pay me my money" are spoken. That's because Ayodele, with his back to the camera, is blocking the view of Hargrove. http://www.nfl.com/news/story/09000d5d829f582a/article/anthony-hargrove-not-my-voice-in-bounty-video?module=HP11_headline_stack Ayodele was involved in the hit on Favre, so it would make more sense that he would have uttered the words. I think Hargrove is probably telling the truth.

[KYPack]

There is NFW that Rozelle or Tagliabue would have proceeded with this case is this manner.

Goodell is over his head and has totally fucked things up.

This PR nightmare well may bring his ass down.

Justifiably, in my mind.

[Patler]

It is very clear that Hargrove starts to say something, but it is very muffled. Ayodele leans back, and the infamous words are louder and more clear. Hargrove did not move. Why would his voice suddenly be louder and clearer? I, too, suspect it was Ayodele's voice, or someone closer to the mic than Hargrove was.

Why would Hargrove ask for the money when he did not make the hit?
Why would his voice suddenly be clearer?

As for evidence of the existence of the bounty program, it doesn't matter who said it, the words are evidence that it exists. But if this is part of their justification for taking a half-year away from Hargrove, it's crap. There is a group of players, and not one player's lips are visible when the phrase is heard. To attribute it to any one player, especially to one that did not make the play in question, is a very amateurish legal approach, in my opinion.

I wonder what it would cost Hargrove to have voice analysis done on the recording, and if the results would be reliable?

[MadScientist]

On the audio/video on the sidelines, you can't see if Hargrove is talking when the words "pay me my money" are spoken. That's because Ayodele, with his back to the camera, is blocking the view of Hargrove. http://www.nfl.com/news/story/09000d5d829f582a/article/anthony-hargrove-not-my-voice-in-bounty-video?module=HP11_headline_stack Ayodele was involved in the hit on Favre, so it would make more sense that he would have uttered the words. I think Hargrove is probably telling the truth.
Maybe, but it sure sounds like the same voice that said "Bobby" said "pay me my money". It also doesn't make sence for Hargrove to call out for Bobby and then say nothing after that or not react when someone else cut in. Again not a certainty, but suspicious. Hargrove's story is tough to accept.

[pbmax]

As for evidence of the existence of the bounty program, it doesn't matter who said it, the words are evidence that it exists.

I would say evidence it was discussed. If no one actually cashed a check or took the money, then its hard to claim its a bounty OR payment system. Its all talk.

Now I have read some players did not kick the money back in, but most of the evidence is not clear on this point. I doubt the NFL has the power to look at bank records and if its cash, it wouldn't matter anyway.

But I think its telling the League did not introduce the "ledger" as part of the supporting evidence during the appeal. Given that they already doubt the handwritten notes, they must also doubt the ledger since its records did not correspond to actual game events. I doubt very much that McCray or Ayodele received a payment for the hit.

[sharpe1027]

It is very clear that Hargrove starts to say something, but it is very muffled. Ayodele leans back, and the infamous words are louder and more clear. Hargrove did not move. Why would his voice suddenly be louder and clearer? I, too, suspect it was Ayodele's voice, or someone closer to the mic than Hargrove was.

Why would Hargrove ask for the money when he did not make the hit?
Why would his voice suddenly be clearer?

As for evidence of the existence of the bounty program, it doesn't matter who said it, the words are evidence that it exists. But if this is part of their justification for taking a half-year away from Hargrove, it's crap. There is a group of players, and not one player's lips are visible when the phrase is heard. To attribute it to any one player, especially to one that did not make the play in question, is a very amateurish legal approach, in my opinion.

I wonder what it would cost Hargrove to have voice analysis done on the recording, and if the results would be reliable?

I guess it could be that Ayodele was between Hargrove and the microphone and when he moved there was a clear path between Hargrove and the microphone. That still doesn't answer your other question.

[pbmax]

Witness says voice is not Hargrove.

http://www.jsonline.com/blogs/sports/159795055.html?utm_medium=twitter&utm_source=twitterfeed#!page=1&pageSize=10&sort=newestfirst

Anyone else getting the sense that the NFL investigation was, shall we say, less than thorough? Its taken the press and social media less than two days to bring far more information to light. Of course, the subjects of the investigation have a bit more motivation now.

[Smeefers]

There's one thing you guys are forgetting. Greg Williams was suspended, basically, forever. I'm pretty sure he's been told that if he doesn't fully cooperate with the league, he'll never be allowed to coach in the NFL again. All he has to do is point a few fingers and all this goes out the window.

[pbmax]

There's one thing you guys are forgetting. Greg Williams was suspended, basically, forever. I'm pretty sure he's been told that if he doesn't fully cooperate with the league, he'll never be allowed to coach in the NFL again. All he has to do is point a few fingers and all this goes out the window.

Which makes his Goodell enforced silence problematic. And it makes him a poor witness in general. If he wishes to work, and he was trying to get his son into the profession, he needs to avoid ticking off the League office.

[pbmax]

Hasselback had a bounty on him according to PFT and the Tennessean. Apparently there is a list of bounties for the Saints playoff game versus Seattle. Unlike the Vikings game list, I haven't seen it. Has anyone?

[Guiness]

Hasselback had a bounty on him according to PFT and the Tennessean. Apparently there is a list of bounties for the Saints playoff game versus Seattle. Unlike the Vikings game list, I haven't seen it. Has anyone?

Don't know about Tennessee, but (related because of Hasselbeck) there sure wasn't a bounty on Lynch during that playoff game!

[Fritz]

I wouldn't have minded a bounty on Pete Carroll.

[pbmax]

This sums it up pretty well:


“I know exactly what [happened] and what didn’t,” Fujita said. ”The problem with this whole thing is that it’s just an unfortunate situation where you have a defensive coordinator [Gregg Williams] who I like a lot, but said a lot of really vulgar, inappropriate, outlandish things. You couple that with some guys who occasionally throw in some money for big plays — which I have admitted to doing — and it becomes a perfect storm, and also it comes at a time politically when I think the league was looking for something like this.

“So, it’s unfortunate. It’s unfortunate that a lot of players have been dragged into it when the reality is it’s just a kind of loose, joking around, performance-type system of motivation coupled with some really, really inappropriate language that I’m sensitive to, but again, it is just language.”

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2012/06/22/fujita-to-goodell-at-appeal-hearing-what-the-hell-are-you-doing-roger/

[woodbuck27]

On the audio/video on the sidelines, you can't see if Hargrove is talking when the words "pay me my money" are spoken. That's because Ayodele, with his back to the camera, is blocking the view of Hargrove. http://www.nfl.com/news/story/09000d5d829f582a/article/anthony-hargrove-not-my-voice-in-bounty-video?module=HP11_headline_stack Ayodele was involved in the hit on Favre, so it would make more sense that he would have uttered the words. I think Hargrove is probably telling the truth.

Why would A. Hargrove lie now? He 'only' has something to gain from 'the TRUTH'.

This story is developing into a nightmare for 'the NFL'. It appears as if the NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell and his evidence gatherers have set themselves up and the players allowed them to fall in the trap.

Stay tuned.

[pbmax]

Possible out for Hargrove:

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2012/06/24/league-ties-give-me-my-money-video-to-claim-that-hargrove-lied/

If the League cannot convince a Court that he spoke the "pay me my money" utterance in the video, then it has no evidence Hargrove lied. But the players have to get it into a Court first and the entire structure of the CBA is designed to prevent it. Which is the main reason the NFL may come to regret publicly making this a pay to injure scheme and punishment and not solely a pay for performance issue.

[Joemailman]

NFL is now saying Hargrove was suspended for lying in 2010 about the existence of a bounty program. In other words, he's being suspended for doing what his coaches told him to do. Way to go after the heart of the problem.

[pbmax]

NFL is now saying Hargrove was suspended for lying in 2010 about the existence of a bounty program. In other words, he's being suspended for doing what his coaches told him to do. Way to go after the heart of the problem.

But his declaration about that testimony is not enough to prove he lied. Or even played dumb. A player who did not participate in, contribute to or demonstrate knowledge of the scheme wouldn't be lying to say it didn't exist or he knew nothing about it.

The declaration only says his coaches encouraged him to offer nothing but denials. Absent other proof of Hargrove's knowledge, he could walk if it gets to court.

The open question would be how accurate was the League's source who told them Hargrove admitted there was a price on Favre. That material wasn't turned over to the players during the appeal.

[pbmax]

OK. So the League (or at least the Commish) no longer holds that Hargrove said "Show me my money".

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2012/07/05/league-backs-off-view-that-hargrove-said-give-me-my-money/

That means you have his declaration that he was instructed to play dumb, possible comments to Viking Jimmy Kennedy (who was not mentioned in coverage of Goodell's upholding of Hargrove's suspension) and the fact that Hargrove should have heard whoever said "show me my money".

Is that enough to suspend him for eight games? If Hargrove didn't contribute money, collect money and never saw anyone actually deposit the cash, can't he claim that he was unaware of an actual bounty program? That he thought it was all show and motivational ploy?

On the other side of the coin, whoever headed up this investigation should be immediately fired for making the League look this dumb and clueless. Not two weeks after presenting supporting evidence to players and media, the League then disavows one of of its 16 articles of contention. Vilma and Fulita have all but said it was a routine pay for performance that the League

Vilma and Fulita have all but said it was a routine pay for performance that the League mischaracterized as pay to injure. But the League has scant evidence of former as well.

[Smidgeon]

When this first came out, I was okay with the suspensions of the coaches because of their responsibility as leaders of the team. But when the suspensions of the players came out, and all this information is coming available, I've become quite convinced that the NFL screwed up. Maybe the coaches still deserve to be suspended, I don't know, but they screwed up in the evaluation of the players. Badly.

[pbmax]

The hand written notes (that we have never seen, only transcribed versions have been made public) that list amounts pledged for various acts against the Vikings has been called into question by 2 witnesses. Vitt says he never pledged $5,000 to hurt Favre (indeed, would he be coaching this year if the League believed he did?). And Mike Ornstein says he did NOT confirm for the League that Vilma pledged $10,000 for Favre to be knocked out of the game.

The League says it has three substantiating witnesses for the Vilma money; Gregg Williams, Mike Ornstein and an unknown person. Ornstein has denied it, seemingly against his own self interest, Williams won't talk and the 3rd witness would most obviously be the author of the notes, disgruntled ex-coach Mike Cerullo.

Sound like a credible piece of evidence to you?

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2012/07/06/goodell-disregarded-vitt-ornstein-post-june-18-comments/