Hargrove penalty: NFL now discredits video

Jul 7, 2012 Full story: ESPN 2,178

Green Bay Packers defensive end Anthony Hargrove has insisted on multiple occasion s that a key piece of evidence against him in the New Orleans Saints bounty issue is a case of mistaken identity.

Full Story

“DA BEARS FAN!”

Since: Dec 11

Location hidden

#162 Jul 10, 2012
40for60 wrote:
<quoted text>
Just a whiney biatch, too bad Hargrove did't have time to infect the puckers too. How many boxes of Kleenex have absorbed your infantile tears?
WwAaaaaa, how can they(NFL) do this to us? WwAaaaaaaaaaaa
nicely put!

“DA BEARS FAN!”

Since: Dec 11

Location hidden

#163 Jul 10, 2012
Bleeds Purple wrote:
<quoted text>Obviously you can twist a story around anyway you want.Payton,Vitt and Benson all admitted there was a program in place.Hargrove admitted he was instructed to deny any bounty.That alone proves it existed.I heard the tape from the 49ers game.When you kill the head the body dies...Thats not pay for performance.I saw the game..Theres no doubt to me that it happened and existed and that Hargrove was part of it.Hes a repeat offender and one of the main players thats why they went after him,same as Rothlisberger,same as Pacman Jones,same as Tank Johnson.Even if it was pay for performance which I dont believe it still violates the CBA and warrants the suspensions.Im sure Goodell has better things to do than pick on Hargrove.They investigated it for three years and thats good enough for me.
They twist a lot of things here, it's almost funny.Believe me if hargrove wasn't a packer it would be a different story. The bounty system existed and even a 5 yr old could figure that out. Reading all this goofy stuff that they don't believe it did exist just shows you how stupid packer fans are." It was a pay for performance system not a Bounty system" OMG these fans are so stupid! Well, it all makes sense...they buy the stupid fake stock! LOL!

“DA BEARS FAN!”

Since: Dec 11

Location hidden

#164 Jul 10, 2012
GBPmies wrote:
<quoted text>
I do not think you read the link I gave you. It's cool its a free country
If it is good enough for you then fine, I don’t NEED to change your mind on the subject. I do not need to twist anything either and I am certainly not trying to so. I just wanted to give a link that states the facts so far, read it and come back to me how any of that is not true and bring an argument to the table. I think a lot of what you wrote above and previously sounds just like the fabricated PR bs the NFL has given to the media, which simply has not been true and they have taken some of it back as well.
I think you will just agree with the NFL’s half assed evidence they spewed to the media and that is that, after 3 years they should be able to prove something beyond any doubts.
If am not sticking up for the players, maybe they did do it maybe not but where is hard evidence the NFL said they had? Like I said before I do not care if Hargrove plays for the Packers or not, he is certainly not a major factor to the defense and we do not even know if he will make the team. So there is no reason for me to try and spin this in anyone’s favor, I just want proven facts, credible, reliable, damning evidence like the NFL said they have, I have not seen it. read the link it only takes a few minutes
You are so stupid, if you don't get it, you are an idiot. you can't be that stupid but I guess you are. You probably think OJ was not guilty too.

“HHhhhoooowwwlll”

Since: Feb 08

Craigville

#166 Jul 10, 2012
GBPfan wrote:
<quoted text>
How clever! You accuse me of behaving as you behave. What is that called? Preemptory douchebaggery?
I know you Viking fans are still butt hurt from the whooping the saints put on your team years ago. I don't expect any of you to ever let it go. If it wasn't for whining and crying like a baby, you Viking fans wouldn't have a reason to live anymore. However, facts are facts and where are none there simply are none.
As for Hargrove, and every player suspended by Goodell now and in the future, I would like to see some consistency and fairness. Bleeds Purple has already agreed with me that Goodell hasn't always done that. When I pointed out the arbitrary and excessive punishment given by Goodell in the Starcaps case, he didn't defend THAT decision. Yet some people seem very quick to defend the suspensions against 4 Saints players despite the lack of EVIDENCE of the specific participation of these 4 players. Everybody resorts to the accusations and rumors which we continually find out are wrong. I have no problem with Hargove and/or any of the other Saints players receiving fair punishment when, and if, we find out what they did. In the mean time I don't give the benefit of the doubt to a Commissioner that hands out many unfair suspensions, such as those in the Starcaps case.
Help me out here gbpfan, when is the last time you even read where I mentioned the Saints game?
It's been a looooooong time, so it isn't me that can't get over the Saints game, go look in the mirror.

Since: Jun 10

Location hidden

#167 Jul 10, 2012
packluv1 wrote:
<quoted text>They twist a lot of things here, it's almost funny.Believe me if hargrove wasn't a packer it would be a different story. The bounty system existed and even a 5 yr old could figure that out. Reading all this goofy stuff that they don't believe it did exist just shows you how stupid packer fans are." It was a pay for performance system not a Bounty system" OMG these fans are so stupid! Well, it all makes sense...they buy the stupid fake stock! LOL!
LMAO
ezg357

Madera, CA

#168 Jul 10, 2012
These two Packers fans say they are going on facts, the thing is the Saints players hasnt showed any facts that their not involved. All they Saints players showed up to this point is it wasnt the person voice that it was said to be on the recording. But the Voice does talk about the players having a bounty. Does it really matter who said it? The facts is it's on the recording. Roger Goodell has also said there is more proof of the Saints bounty program. But cant show it to the pending cases are over. I wouldnt think Goodell is lying He doesnt have anything to gain by lying. This is ridiclous to even think these guys wasnt involved. These Saint players are trying to delay this to next season by taking it to court. The thing is even if they do stall to next season they still will be suspended for the given times next season. "They cant win" so why not get it over with now. their names have already been dragged through the mud. I think if they hadn't fought this by draging it through court & keeping it in the public eye us fans would have long forgot about what players was involved.
GBPfan

Colorado Springs, CO

#169 Jul 10, 2012
Bleeds Purple wrote:
<quoted text>If they were innocent why didnt they just bring their evidence to the appeals hearing.?
Your question reveals your "guilty until proven innocent" attitude. I've already acknowledged that you think that way, and I've explained that I think just the opposite. In every civil and criminal case in this county the burden of proof is on the accuser. There is a reason for that. The reason the accuser has the burden of proof is that the law logically and rightfully recognizes that it is morally the obligation of the one pointing a finger to provide the proof. In additionthe law recognizes that it is often impossible for someone to prove that they didn't do something. You can support Roger Goodell making players have to prove their innocence if that is what you believe. I'm sure that Adrian Peterson doesn't want to have to prove that he is innocent, but considering how Goodell makes these punishment decisions he may have to. No matter what you think I will always believe the burden should be on the accuser.
GBPfan

Colorado Springs, CO

#170 Jul 10, 2012
40for60 wrote:
<quoted text>
Help me out here gbpfan, when is the last time you even read where I mentioned the Saints game?
It's been a looooooong time, so it isn't me that can't get over the Saints game, go look in the mirror.
I can tell you are over it. LOL Look in the mirror? Why? Do you think that I'm not over that game? It's true that I was rooting for the Vikings, but it took about a minute or two for me to reach the realization that the better team that day had won the game. Then I was over it.
GBPmies

Finland

#171 Jul 11, 2012
ezg357 wrote:
These two Packers fans say they are going on facts, the thing is the Saints players hasnt showed any facts that their not involved.
Fair point ezg to an extent; if you were one of the accused players just what type of evidence would you submit to prove you were not involved in this? How do they prove they didn’t do something? I think the accused have to dispute the evidence being used against them and so far I have not seen the concrete evidence, all of it seems to have major holes in it IMO.

Maybe the NFL should ask them for some concrete things they can produce to prove they didn’t take part in bounty gate. I am not sure what they could do to prove they didn’t do it. It isn’t like they need an alibi or anything. Maybe bank statements? Maybe a lie detector? What else do you think they should produce as evidence that might clear them, I am interested to hear?
GBPmies

Finland

#172 Jul 11, 2012
packluv1 wrote:
<quoted text>They twist a lot of things here, it's almost funny.Believe me if hargrove wasn't a packer it would be a different story. The bounty system existed and even a 5 yr old could figure that out. Reading all this goofy stuff that they don't believe it did exist just shows you how stupid packer fans are." It was a pay for performance system not a Bounty system" OMG these fans are so stupid! Well, it all makes sense...they buy the stupid fake stock! LOL!
Feel free to give me that list of concrete evidence you say there is anytime and I will certainly be agreeable to your side of the argument. This isn’t personal to me I am just looking at it objectively.

I said it before I don't give a rats ass if Hargrove goes down for this, it is not like he has ever played for the Packers or has even made the team yet. This isn't like the star caps where the Williams wall would be missing games that had much stronger implications IMO.
GBPmies

Finland

#173 Jul 11, 2012
packluv1 wrote:
<quoted text>You are so stupid, if you don't get it, you are an idiot. you can't be that stupid but I guess you are. You probably think OJ was not guilty too.
Do you think the NFLPA is stupid too, are they idiots because they don't get it? If the glove don’t fit...

I know you don't care, you have already formulated your opinion and you won't go back on it but at least I can provide you some information which you still have not given me any list of concrete evidence and I don’t expect you too in the future because you do not have any neither does the NFL.

__________

NFL Provides Exhibits, But Not Much Evidence

http://www.proplayerinsiders.com/nfl-provides...

NFL provided 16 exhibits, totaling less than 200 pages of documents, to the NFLPA of “evidence” that would be used against the four players punished. Today, Roger Goodell heard the appeals of Jonathan Vilma, Scott Fujita, Anthony Hargrove and Will Smith at a hearing in New York City. Goodell informed the players that the league will not offer any witness at the hearing who created the documents.

The long-awaited release of evidential information relevant to the case follows months of the union requesting—and the league repeatedly rejecting—information gathered during the league’s investigation, which the league said consisted of “over 18,000 documents,” into the Saints’ alleged bounty program. Per the CBA, the NFL was forced to provide documents three days before Monday’s hearing.

An NFLPA memo titled:“Information from NFLPA regarding NFL’s ‘evidence’” lists what the players union was able to discover over the weekend. This is an excerpt of that memo:

“The following is what the Players Union was able to discover during the course of Father’s Day weekend:

1. Despite the length of the Commissioner’s investigation and the experience of those involved, the fact is that the slides provided by the NFL, and relied upon as a basis for discipline, were never shown to any Saints coaches for explanation by NFL Investigators.

2. Based upon the Players Union’s limited investigation and interviews of relevant personnel (including current and former Saints players, coaches and individuals who attended all defensive meetings), we have been able to provide these individuals’ explanations of several of the relevant slides upon which the Commissioner admittedly based his discipline on the players and presumably the coaches.

3. The interviews of the individuals who were actually present at the defensive meetings when

Coach Williams used the inflammatory words (the words that the League has made the focus of its public campaign) have enabled the Players Union to determine that Coach Williams’ words were motivational, not literal.

4. The Players Union has learned that Mike Ornstein told the NFL and the Commissioner personally that:

a. He never sent the email directly to Coach Sean Payton (as reported by the media and leaked by the NFL);

b. He never intended the email to be a “bounty” on any NFL Player; and

c. He advised the Commissioner of a message from Gregg Williams indicating that the Saints never took the email as a “bounty” on any player.


5. The NFL has never informed the players of any of this exculpatory or mitigating evidence.”

Read more about the “evidence” that the NFL provided to the NFLPA for yourself (PDF link is below), and make your own determination about the exhibits.
‘Evidence’ From NFL (PDF from link above)

*I know you don't care you have already formulated your opinion and you won't go back on it but at least I can provide you some information which you still have not given me any list of concrete evidence.
GBPmies

Finland

#174 Jul 11, 2012
packluv1 wrote:
<quoted text>They twist a lot of things here, it's almost funny.Believe me if hargrove wasn't a packer it would be a different story. The bounty system existed and even a 5 yr old could figure that out
Is the NFLPA twisting things too?

So in your opinion the NFLPA is a bunch of stupid 4 year olds, is that correct?

If a ‘5 year old’ could figure all this out like you said packluv why does the NFLPA executive director DeMaurice Smith want the NFL to embark on a completely new investigation? Is he only a four year old or are you? I can prove he isn’t a four year old but I can’t prove you aren’t.

Here's what the NFLPA wrote:
"As you know, prior to the hearing on June 18, 2012, on behalf of Scott Fujita, Anthony Hargrove and Will Smith, we wrote to you on several occasions requesting disclosure of all evidence, including all potentially exculpatory information regarding the players' alleged involvement in the behavior for which they were purportedly disciplined,” the letter states. "Additionally, we asked that the NFL compel the appearance of witnesses, several of whom supposedly possess first-hand knowledge of the alleged events and over whom the NFL has control, including Gregg Williams and Joe Vitt. The League refused to do so.
"We made those requests to avoid the exact circumstance that the NFL has now created, namely, an “investigation” that has come under question for being unprofessional, unsubstantiated and incomplete. In the days since the June 18 hearing, first-hand witnesses to the Saints defensive team meetings who the League actually interviewed, have clearly and publicly stated that the NFL grossly mischaracterized the information they provided to NFL investigators and knowingly misrepresented the facts surrounding this investigation …
"This investigation unfairly painted players with a very broad, disparaging brush and has thrown the integrity of the process under the CBA into question. As a fellow steward of this game, and wholly apart from the union's and the players' legal objections, in light of these retractions and contradictions that have come to your recent attention, I ask that you order that the investigation of this matter be redone thoroughly and transparently, and if the full and complete information shows that none of the accused players participated in a “pay to injure” scheme, the NFL publicly issue such written findings."
Smith also told PFT he plans to talk to Goodell and tell him about the faults of the NFL's investigation.
“Frankly, I believe that the investigators let the commissioner down,” Smith said.“Our hope, and certainly it will be a message from me to the league soon, is that given all of the recantations and all of the contradictions and, as exemplified by the (Hargrove) video, all of the things that are clearly not clear, shouldn't we be taking another hard look about where this investigation failed the commissioner?”
GBPmies

Finland

#175 Jul 11, 2012
Look packluv another stupid 4 year old I guess? What would this guy know right, I bet it isn't even his JOB to follow this story thoroughly right?
Grading all of the Saints bounty evidence
By Mike Freeman | CBS Sports National NFL Insider
It's time to take a close look at all of the evidence in the Saints bounty case. An extremely close look.
I took all of the exhibits turned over to the union – 16 in all – and gave them grades, Pete Prisco style.
My belief has long been that the league has the goods on players but is keeping the best stuff under wraps to protect the identities of informants. I still believe this.
And remember: the league got a great deal of its information from Gregg Williams and Williams has yet to refute anything the NFL has said about him.
But I also cannot argue with the Saints who believe the league hasn't just failed to make its case, it exaggerated it.
The grades are based solely on proof of a bounty system in which Saints players were paid to injure with ‘A' being explicit proof and ‘F' being no proof at all.
There were no A's.
There were lots of F's.
Exhibit 1: These are the transcribed handwritten notes. The NFL won't say the source. They are dollar amounts assigning, for example,$2,000 to Jonathan Vilma and $5,000 to Mike Ornstein. The total is $11,500.
The problem is: we don't know the source of this information. And since we don't know the true source, the information is extremely questionable.
Grade: F
Exhibit 2: This is the Mike Ornstein e-mail to Williams. It reads:“D—khead I gave you 1500 last week, I will give you another 1500 the next 4 game, and the final 2000 the last 4.”
The NFL says this e-mail corroborates other evidence that proves a bounty system was in place. Despite Ornstein now saying the e-mail was a joke, which is a joke in itself, this e-mail is actually somewhat compelling.
Ornstein wrote this e-mail believing no one would ever see it. And what exactly is that money for? Groceries.
Grade: B
Exhibit 3: Almost all of this exhibit is absolutely worthless. The NFL says one piece of it, a listing of dollar amounts, is proof of a bounty system, and is corroborated. But it really proves nothing.
Grade: F
Exhibit 4: More of the same.
Grade: F
Exhibit 5: This lists the various Saints players and money amounts they earned and had deducted for various hits, plays and errors and contains language like “whacks.” This evidence is actually compelling because it contains this:“Harper =cart-off 1000.”
Harper would be safety Roman Harper. The union says cart-off doesn't actually mean what it sounds like it means. They say it means hard hit but that's peeing on my head and telling me it's raining. Cart-off means freaking cart-off.
But the rest of the exhibit proves nothing so it's a highly mixed bag.
Grade: C
Exhibit 6: Almost identical to five. The NFL says these exhibits are proof of dues paid into a bounty system. They say coaches told them this, among others. But this exhibit doesn't prove that and doesn't contain the vital cart-off language that would demonstrate the Saints were trying to injure.
Grade: F
-----
read the rest from here, to long to post the whole thing (i know you wont read it but oh well)
http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/blog/mike-freema...
-----

So, in total, the 16 exhibits of the NFL's bounty evidence turned over to the union gets grades of F, B, F, F, C, F, F, F, B+, F, incomplete, F, F, incomplete, F, D.
In all, the NFL's evidence turned over to the union won't be making the honor roll.

Hey packluv that is 0,52 GPA, that sounds about right in your range, do you work for Rodger? LMFAO!

“HHhhhoooowwwlll”

Since: Feb 08

Craigville

#176 Jul 11, 2012
GBPfan wrote:
<quoted text>
I can tell you are over it. LOL Look in the mirror? Why? Do you think that I'm not over that game? It's true that I was rooting for the Vikings, but it took about a minute or two for me to reach the realization that the better team that day had won the game. Then I was over it.
Hargrove is your problem, to go along with all the other problems you seem to be afflicted with.
The reality problem you now suffer from has been a constant ever since you happened across Topix, and the rest of us have suffered ever since.

Since: Dec 06

Davenport, FL

#177 Jul 11, 2012
GBPmies wrote:
Look packluv another stupid 4 year old I guess? What would this guy know right, I bet it isn't even his JOB to follow this story thoroughly right?
Grading all of the Saints bounty evidence
By Mike Freeman | CBS Sports National NFL Insider
It's time to take a close look at all of the evidence in the Saints bounty case. An extremely close look.
I took all of the exhibits turned over to the union – 16 in all – and gave them grades, Pete Prisco style.
My belief has long been that the league has the goods on players but is keeping the best stuff under wraps to protect the identities of informants. I still believe this.
And remember: the league got a great deal of its information from Gregg Williams and Williams has yet to refute anything the NFL has said about him.
But I also cannot argue with the Saints who believe the league hasn't just failed to make its case, it exaggerated it.
The grades are based solely on proof of a bounty system in which Saints players were paid to injure with ‘A' being explicit proof and ‘F' being no proof at all.
There were no A's.
There were lots of F's.
Exhibit 1: These are the transcribed handwritten notes. The NFL won't say the source. They are dollar amounts assigning, for example,$2,000 to Jonathan Vilma and $5,000 to Mike Ornstein. The total is $11,500.
The problem is: we don't know the source of this information. And since we don't know the true source, the information is extremely questionable.
Grade: F
Exhibit 2: This is the Mike Ornstein e-mail to Williams. It reads:“D—khead I gave you 1500 last week, I will give you another 1500 the next 4 game, and the final 2000 the last 4.”
The NFL says this e-mail corroborates other evidence that proves a bounty system was in place. Despite Ornstein now saying the e-mail was a joke, which is a joke in itself, this e-mail is actually somewhat compelling.
Ornstein wrote this e-mail believing no one would ever see it. And what exactly is that money for? Groceries.
Grade: B
Exhibit 3: Almost all of this exhibit is absolutely worthless. The NFL says one piece of it, a listing of dollar amounts, is proof of a bounty system, and is corroborated. But it really proves nothing.
Grade: F
Exhibit 4: More of the same.
Grade: F
Exhibit 5: This lists the various Saints players and money amounts they earned and had deducted for various hits, plays and errors and contains language like “whacks.” This evidence is actually compelling because it contains this:“Harper =cart-off 1000.”
Harper would be safety Roman Harper. The union says cart-off doesn't actually mean what it sounds like it means. They say it means hard hit but that's peeing on my head and telling me it's raining. Cart-off means freaking cart-off.
But the rest of the exhibit proves nothing so it's a highly mixed bag.
Grade: C
Exhibit 6: Almost identical to five. The NFL says these exhibits are proof of dues paid into a bounty system. They say coaches told them this, among others. But this exhibit doesn't prove that and doesn't contain the vital cart-off language that would demonstrate the Saints were trying to injure.
Grade: F
-----
read the rest from here, to long to post the whole thing (i know you wont read it but oh well)
http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/blog/mike-freema...
-----
So, in total, the 16 exhibits of the NFL's bounty evidence turned over to the union gets grades of F, B, F, F, C, F, F, F, B+, F, incomplete, F, F, incomplete, F, D.
In all, the NFL's evidence turned over to the union won't be making the honor roll.
Hey packluv that is 0,52 GPA, that sounds about right in your range, do you work for Rodger? LMFAO!
I give Jimmy more grade F's than this.
GBPfan

Colorado Springs, CO

#178 Jul 11, 2012
40for60 wrote:
<quoted text>
Hargrove is your problem, to go along with all the other problems you seem to be afflicted with.
The reality problem you now suffer from has been a constant ever since you happened across Topix, and the rest of us have suffered ever since.
Hargrove isn't a problem at all, certainly not for me and not even for the Packers. For the Packers he's merely one of many players competing for the honor of playing for the team. If he plays well enough, he will get a chance to help the Packers win their 14th world championship. I consider Hargrove to be a very fortunate man.

BTW don't blame me for the Viking's history of failure. You Viking fans whine and cry like little girls due to the 50 years of failure related frustration. Then you lash out at Packer fans because of our team's history of success. It's pathetically childish behavior. Grow up.
GBPmies

Finland

#179 Jul 11, 2012
Childress wrote:
<quoted text>I give Jimmy more grade F's than this.
and rightfully so!
ezg357

Madera, CA

#180 Jul 11, 2012
GBPmies wrote:
<quoted text>
Fair point ezg to an extent; if you were one of the accused players just what type of evidence would you submit to prove you were not involved in this? How do they prove they didn’t do something? I think the accused have to dispute the evidence being used against them and so far I have not seen the concrete evidence, all of it seems to have major holes in it IMO.
Maybe the NFL should ask them for some concrete things they can produce to prove they didn’t take part in bounty gate. I am not sure what they could do to prove they didn’t do it. It isn’t like they need an alibi or anything. Maybe bank statements? Maybe a lie detector? What else do you think they should produce as evidence that might clear them, I am interested to hear?
They could show there bank aaccounts to start with. Show there deposits & prove where they come from. That should be easy enough to do right
ezg357

Madera, CA

#181 Jul 11, 2012
Why are you Packers fans defending these Saitns players when they also had a bounty on Aaron? The NFL sent a confidential and detailed memo to all 32 teams detailing its findings. It revealed that the Saints had not only targeted Warner and Favre during the 2009 playoffs, but had also targeted Green Bay Packers quarterback Aaron Rodgers and Carolina Panthers quarterback Cam Newton during the 2011 regular season
GBPmies

Finland

#182 Jul 11, 2012
ezg357 wrote:
<quoted text>They could show there bank aaccounts to start with. Show there deposits & prove where they come from. That should be easy enough to do right
I would think so ezg, that ’might help’ as I already mentioned above.

I think they should provide them, maybe not directly to the NFL because of privacy issues but impartial 3rd party to review them. However if the NFL was given NO evidence from those bank statements they might say,“well they just paid cash and it cannot be traced”. And the NFL does NOT want to admit they have NO paper trail of money changing hands for any bounty gate activity, that would not help them in any way.

So my guess is they have NOT asked for any proof from the accused. So we are back to the same question, how do you prove you did NOT do something? Any other ideas other than lie detector tests which Vitt said he would take, maybe the others should as well….

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

NFL Football Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
's Bengals Week Three Most Valuable Player 37 min Life is a fartway 5
With the First Pick in the Draft should the Oak... 46 min Zild0405 3
Kawakami: Jon Gruden still Raiders' dream candi... 47 min Raider Village 4
Geno Smith's Slower Trigger 51 min Tetarded 17
Dallas Cowboys' DeMarco Murray Joins Elite Comp... 1 hr Cowboyfan 4
Ready Or Not, It's Teddy Time In Minnesota 9 hr X Wingfarts 52
Rodgers throws for 4 TDs, Packers beat Bears 38-17 11 hr Packher 11

NFL Football People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE