Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
Vilma Suing Goodell for Defamation (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter Herb
- Start date
Sabertooth
Footballguy
Seems like something a scorned woman would do to be honest. Just take your medicine like a big boy Vilma.
If he didn't do it , why should he take his medicine?
Herb
Footballguy
If I understand this correctly, Vilma has to prove that Goodell willingly lied about Vilma's role in the bounty program.
How many players/ coaches are going to be dragged in for testimony here? How does this not become a massive distraction for the Taints this year?
How many players/ coaches are going to be dragged in for testimony here? How does this not become a massive distraction for the Taints this year?
Last edited by a moderator:
Shutout
Footballguy
I'm kinda wondering if this will force (and is the driving motivation behind this) for lots of information to come out that the NFL didn't want out.
Something makes me feel that the NFL was right but they may have found out that it was more wide-spread and perverse than they would like the image of the NFL be known.
Something makes me feel that the NFL was right but they may have found out that it was more wide-spread and perverse than they would like the image of the NFL be known.
Herb
Footballguy
If this is the case then Vilma has just become public enemy No. 1, if he wasn't already. my opinion of this guy, who I used to respect as a player, is lower than a snake's taint.
Gatorman
Supreme Elite Maximum Tier
Exactly! The NFL wants this to be framed as "one bad team did this" and have it go away quietly rahter than what it really is: Most teams do this, and the NFL does not want that getting out.Good move by Vilma as Goodell will have to cut a deal to keep this whole thing from blowing up.
Carter_Can_Fly
Footballguy
I'm guessing Goodell and company have thought all the options through, and they probably felt this may have come into play as well.
This is going to do nothing but hurt Vilma even more. It's not as if he is innocent.
This is going to do nothing but hurt Vilma even more. It's not as if he is innocent.
Carter_Can_Fly
Footballguy
Elaborate please.
Kenny Powers
Footballguy
I sure hope so, if for anything just the entertainment, but also as something that brings Goodell closer to no longer being el commisho
sho nuff
Footballguy
Kenny Powers
Footballguy
Uhh, pretty sure Goodell isnt going to suspend Vilma for another year because he is taking this to court. Maybe in the opinion of some fans this hurts him, but I highly doubt that is the case with other players
Carter_Can_Fly
Footballguy
I was referring to how fans view him.I happen to trust what Goodell is doing. He is not perfect, but he is at least taking steps in the right direction to improve the game and the safety going forward. Goodell gets a bad reputation from a lot of people but he has done a great job in his tenure. I don't know what fans expect?! They assume Goodell is this evil being that is trying to fine players for fun. The NFL market and fan base is at an all time high. The one concerning factor for long term NFL success is health of players and Goodell has taken steps to address this. It seems as though some people just complain for the sake of complaining.
So you believe that Vilma should just accept a year suspension and loss of pay for doing(allegedly) something that happens(allegedly) in every locker room.
I'm sure that Vilma's high priced, successful lawyer, who has already beaten the NFL in court(I think) is just throwing crap against the wall here. It's possible that a lot of people are about to find out Santa isn't real. Goodell made an example out of people, and they don't like it. This could get very ugly.
Herb
Footballguy
Every locker room does not participate in bounties for injury, and every locker room does not sweep it under the rug and lie to the commish about it for 3 years. I have no problem with Vilma and the players union wanting some solid proof, but it seems as if Vilma's whole argument is built on semantics. Vilma says "I did not intend to pay, nor did I pay" but never says he didn't offer to pay. WTF?
RUSF18
Footballguy
Yes.
Doug B
Footballguy
The short answer is that it now looks possible that Goodell does not actually have the goods on Vilma. There's tons of info on the main "homer" board (Saintsreport.com), though much of it is speculative and preliminary (not to say patently false).One of the big arguments is that the while the Saints freely admit to having had a defensive "pay for performance" scheme, there never was a "pay to injure" scheme. Additionally, the Saints (esp. Joe Vitt) admit to "crimes of the spoken word" -- IOW, that they went over the line IN SPEECHES, but that this did not carry on to the field (e.g. no one went after Crabtree's knees or Alex Smith's chin in the recent NO-at-SF playoff game despite G. Williams' speech).
Another tack taken against the league will likely be to reject mere assertions that evidence exists -- such evidence must be laid on the table (and not to league-paid counsel) before being accepted.
There are many spins on all of this, lots of sub-plots, and not all Saints fans buy all parts of the counterarguments. I guess another version of a short answer to Carter's question is that: "Everything's not as pat and airtight as the league makes it seem, and -- incredible as it may seem now -- it will mostly come out in the wash."
RUSF18
Footballguy
Why would that happen? Vilma needs to prove that Goodell is lying. He didn't say "Vilma is the only player who offered a bounty". Why would information about other teams come out?
Leeroy Jenkins
Footballguy
I'd be interested in seeing which allegations are listed as defamatory. Does he deny everything or just intent to injure?
Doug B
Footballguy
FWIW, one version of this that Vilma's attorney trotted out earlier on was that the $10,000-on-the-table thing was basically a pep-rally-style skit.Easy to say "Yeah right" ... but without a means to prove a post-game payment took place, what has the NFL got there? Remember, it's not necessarily about absolute truth or falsehood at this stage. It's now about what can be proven to a third party.
Doug B
Footballguy
Not necessarily. The goal of the suit may not be to outright win -- it might be to get difficult-to-get information out in the public record.
RUSF18
Footballguy
He's not being charged with a crime..."yeah right" is all you need.
Doug B
Footballguy
Yes, for the court of public opinion. But the judge could well rule that the league was negligent in ruining a player's name based on insufficient evidence. That wouldn't be crime on the league's part, but the league could be civilly liable.
Herb
Footballguy
I understand why Vilma would do this, but with the testimonies of other involved parties being required (I assume) isn't it possible that this blows up into something much more than just Vilma v Goodell? And isn't that a probable negative for the NFL and an assured negative for a Saints team that already has their collective backs against a very tall, hard wall?
Doug B
Footballguy
It's an ends-vs-means thing. Most everyone agrees with the ends -- a safer game for all players, improved post-career health, and so forth. But certainly the means to accomplish improved player safety can be argued legitimately.
sho nuff
Footballguy
Does anyone really believe "it was just a skit"? Or that it would hold up in court as far as defamation?Come on man...
If Vilma is indeed lying then his suspension will get upheld and nothing will come of it. If the NFL does not have proof/evidence that Vilma participated in a bounty program, yet suspended him anyway, how can you blame Vilma for suing? I'm not a lawyer, and I don't pretend to know anything, but the possibility is out there that Goodell ****** up big time. Just because he says the Saints ran a bounty program doesn't make it so.
A very successful lawyer with experience against the NFL in court does.
Doug B
Footballguy
Blow up in what way? Other suits being filed against the league and/or Goodell? Or do you mean it could actually turn out that the league really does have the good on Vilma after all?If it's the latter, Vilma loses nothing.
I don't think the lawsuit affects the Saints on the field at all. Not sure it will be going on during the season, anyway ... that would be a breakneck legal pace to get something in court that fast.A probable negative for the NFL?
Worst case scenario would be that Goodell would resign, but then the NFL will name a successor, pledge to do better, and carry forward. The league will be fine.
GregR
Footballguy
Text of the lawsuit. Snippet below of the points Vilma contends are the truth contrary to Goodell's statements.
Last edited by a moderator:
Herb
Footballguy
I'm pretty sure this isn't all a result of Roger's whims. He didn't just wake up one morning and say to himself "I think I'm really gonna screw the Saints and besmirch the game of football today."
Doug B
Footballguy
But it doesn't matter what "anyone believes". And it may not hold up in court if the league has something in its back pocket to corroborate. But then again, Vilma's story might hold up. I think establishing the exchange of money is important. Of course there won't be a cancelled check or anything. But can we get someone sworn in, have them take the stand, and testify to having received the $10,000? What corroborating information is out there to discover?
Herb
Footballguy
I would think that if depositions and testimonies are required under oath from some of Vilma's teammates then this could be a serious problem in that locker room going forward. Especially with all the other things already going on in that locker room.
golfguy
Footballguy
More then just the Saints participate in pay for incentive style bonuses. I would bet that the number is closer to the fact that most teams do have programs along these lines, even if it's just quietly among players. The saints are being used a scape goat or as an example by goddell as a warning to the other teams. when the news broke that goddell was going after a defensive coach for a bounty program, 31 other defensive coordinators breathed a sigh of relief when they realized it wasn't them.
not saying they didn't play hard or take shots at players, but man watch some film of the NFL from the 70s and 80s for crying out loud. the steelers may not have won a super bowl in the 70s with the pampering toward offensive players now.
Doug B
Footballguy
... hmmmm, if they're still going with the "it was a skit" defense, they must've been using play money.Or else a Clintonesque: "He didn't 'place' the money, Your Honor. He slammed it down."
GregR
Footballguy
It could affect the Saints negatively if, say, a player still on the roster had told the league about Vilma's role, and his name comes out.It could affect Vilma negatively if the suit brings enough evidence against him to light, that a prosecutor decides to prosecute him for something like conspiracy to commit assault.Blow up in what way? Other suits being filed against the league and/or Goodell? Or do you mean it could actually turn out that the league really does have the good on Vilma after all?If it's the latter, Vilma loses nothing.I don't think the lawsuit affects the Saints on the field at all. Not sure it will be going on during the season, anyway ... that would be a breakneck legal pace to get something in court that fast.A probable negative for the NFL?
Just an attempt to get his suspension reduced. This guy has a pretty checkered past dating back to when he went to Miami. I'm having a hard time believing they will somehow convince the jurors that he's the good guy here and the NFL should fork over millions for the damage it did to his "rep"
Doug B
Footballguy
There's nothing "already going on in that locker room", I don't believe. The team is a united front on this matter.Connect the dots for me: you're thinking that some current players may be under pressure to lie for Vilma, or something like that? And that there could be some resentment about it? That all depends on what the unknowable truth really is. If Vilma's version of events is known and accepted by the entirety of the team, then the depositions/testimony shouldn't be an issue. If it turns out that Vilma is full of it, and is manufacturing a version of the truth that current teammates know to be false, but will be expected to begrudgingly uphold, that would be a different story.
Carter_Can_Fly
Footballguy
Some of you think Goodell is really just using the Saints and Vilma to send a message to the league?
There is obviously more to it than that and regardless I happen to think the rulings are justified.
If there are more bounty scandals like what the Saints seemed to be carrying on I would be all for finding them and punishing them just like it. I happen to think the Saints were once asked to stop and it continued on and caused this mess on themsleves.
There is obviously more to it than that and regardless I happen to think the rulings are justified.
If there are more bounty scandals like what the Saints seemed to be carrying on I would be all for finding them and punishing them just like it. I happen to think the Saints were once asked to stop and it continued on and caused this mess on themsleves.
GregR
Footballguy
Clinton as Vilma's lawyer: That depends on what the meaning of the word 'he' is.Prosecutor: "He" means Vilma.... hmmmm, if they're still going with the "it was a skit" defense, they must've been using play money.Or else a Clintonesque: "He didn't 'place' the money, Your Honor. He slammed it down."
Clinton: Oh, well by golly he'd be guilty then.
Doug B
Footballguy
I agree that there are lots of ways it could all play out.
Doug B
Footballguy
That's very good. Your opinion is formed.But part of Vilma's defense will be: What can the league prove? Not what do they assert they can prove -- what can they actually lay on the table?
Silver & Black
Footballguy
If I recall correctly, a former assistant attorney general was brought in and reviewed all the evidence in bountygate. She said the evidence was as solid as anything she has ever seen if I recall correctly.
Vilma taking the aggressive posture of suing is smoke and mirrors. The burden becomes his to prove that Gooell purposely lied about his role with the intent to defame him. From the little I have seen and heard, that isn't going to happen, whether the accusations are true or not.
Vilma taking the aggressive posture of suing is smoke and mirrors. The burden becomes his to prove that Gooell purposely lied about his role with the intent to defame him. From the little I have seen and heard, that isn't going to happen, whether the accusations are true or not.
Ministry of Pain
Footballguy
Good for Vilma, his career is close to over, will be hard for him to come back next year. Good for him, hope it makes some waves but I doubt it will have much impact.
Ministry of Pain
Footballguy
Nice post Shutout...I agree that the player's association lost the war but they are going to try and make sure the information is released for more folks to read it. Goodell can't do anything else to Vilma at this point excpet ban him for life.It's too bad that a lot of people just believed everything Goodell fed them and made a few players the scape goats for a lot of other people. All in the name of saving the NFL from so many law suits...oh the court trials we have to enjoy ahead...depressing really.
bostonfred
Footballguy
This one is more interesting, since vilma was never convicted of a crime. But isn't he also inviting criminal prosecution on himself?
bostonfred
Footballguy
Allegedly
