Today’s ruling means nothing to Payton, Vitt, Loomis, Williams

AP

Perhaps the most common question raised in the wake of today’s ruling from the internal appeals panel scuttling the bounty suspensions and sending the process back to Commissioner Roger Goodell (and square one) is whether it will affect the suspensions imposed on non-players, like Saints coach Sean Payton.

The quick answer?  No.

Payton, Saints interim coach Joe Vitt, Saints G.M. Mickey Loomis, and former Saints defensive coordinator Gregg Williams were not disciplined within the confines of the Collective Bargaining Agreement between the league and the players.  The player protections come from the fact that they have a union that has negotiated a comprehensive and detailed labor deal.  Non-players are protected only by the terms of their employment contracts — which simply don’t include the kind of provisions that helped the players in this specific case.

For non-players, every dispute on every issue goes back to the league office for resolution.  So while the CBA has given the players new life (for now), the non-players continue to be suspended, with no hope for any change in their status.

34 responses to “Today’s ruling means nothing to Payton, Vitt, Loomis, Williams

  1. Did the players/coaches participate? It’s a yes or no question. If they did, they deserve to be punished. If they didn’t, they deserve to play/coach.

    It really is that simple.

  2. None of those guys should get off, especially Sean Payton, who apologized and took responsibility for the bounties. Something happened or else he wouldn’t be trying to act so contrite because he got caught doing something illegal.

  3. Not sure why people think the coaches shouldn’t be suspended.

    Both Payton and Williams owned up to it, unless you think they’d purposely lie in order to get suspended for a year they’re getting what they themselves believe they deserve.

  4. Payton, Williams and Loomis have to fall on their swords because they don’t want the league to hold their dissent against them. The players have less to lose in fighting the the NFL.

  5. A little clarification is in order here.

    Payton has hardly appeared contrite or owned up to anything. He may have initially issued an apology, but many many times since then he has asserted that no pay-for-injury scheme existed.

    He took his punishment because his contract offered him no option.

  6. I think he should let the coaches coach. If they would appeal to him, so that he can save face then reduce the suspensions and say that the Saints losing their second round pick was discipline enough.(consistent with how he handled the Pats)

  7. turfdaddy says:
    Sep 7, 2012 4:41 PM
    Did the players/coaches participate? It’s a yes or no question. If they did, they deserve to be punished. If they didn’t, they deserve to play/coach.

    It really is that simple

    ___________________________________

    I agree

  8. Just because Goodell says the Saints ran a bounty program doesn’t mean the Saints ran a bounty program. Don’t believe everything you see on ESPN on read on the internet.

  9. My understanding is that the decision to lift the suspensions was based solely on Goodell not having the authority. In other words, the decision didn’t find the players not guilty, but rather Goodell didn’t have the right to suspend them.

  10. Yeah I would admit to doing it and lose $7.5 million in salary if I were innocent too. I mean c’mon what’s 7.5 mil these days… chump change right fellas?

  11. There is a difference between a bounty program and an incentives program. I believe the Saints did an incentives program, yes. a bounty program for trying to hurt someone? absolutely not. These are practices that go all the way down to pee wee football. You get a nice run, you get a snack, etc. Except these are grown men choosing to put their own money into the pot, rather than getting treats. As to people say that Williams and Payton “apologized” for their roles, you’re telling me you’ve never apologized for something even though you don’t think you were wrong for the better outcome in the long run?

  12. randygnyc says:
    Sep 7, 2012 5:15 PM
    My understanding is that the decision to lift the suspensions was based solely on Goodell not having the authority. In other words, the decision didn’t find the players not guilty, but rather Goodell didn’t have the right to suspend them.

    —————————————————————————————————–

    Exactly, Goodell did not have the right to suspend them. This is a salary cap violation, nothing more.

    In other words, there is NO on field evidence.

  13. Just to clarify, Sean Payton didn’t admit to anything, nor issue any sort of “apology”. His statement was more of “if it happened under my watch, I gess it is my responsibility”

    Anyone who follows the Saints know that Sean Payton can’t even spell defense. He’s never been involved in anything defense. His only sin was to be the HC of the team the commissioner decided to use as scapegoat to show his alleged care for player safety.

  14. Eventually, this will most certainly question the fairness of the coaches being suspended (except Williams). If there’s no valid evidence that the players did what Goodell publicly accused them of, then what are the coaches guilty of? Is it possible that some other source could file a restraining order on their behalf? Mike, what are the possibilities?

  15. What’s wrong with this whole Saints Bountygate story is that it has been totally lawyered up now. And just as we found out in other lawyered up stories ie-O.J., et.al., the truth and justice end up on the losing end.

  16. We acknowledge that the violations disclosed by the NFL during their investigation of our club happened under our watch. We take full responsibility.

    This has brought undue hardship on Mr. Benson, who had nothing to do with this activity. He has been nothing but supportive and for that we both apologize to him.

    These are serious violations and we understand the negative impact it has had on our game. Both of us have made it clear within our organization that this will never happen again, and make that same promise to the NFL and most importantly to all of our fans.

    Mickey Loomis & Sean Payton

    If the NFL and Goodell said they committed murder, this is the admission of it by Loomis and Payton……………..

  17. Exhibit A why labor unions are still needed in this world. It’s the only reasonable measure to protect powerless employees from being run roughshod over by power hungry corporations.

  18. This was a procedural ruling. Did the suspension by Goodell infringe on the Salary Cap Arbitrator’s exclusive rights because of pay-for-performnace implications?

    The Commissioner answers no, the miscreants sullied the good name of the NFL and again suspends them. Case closed and the ignorant who are trumpeting victory will ask “What happened?”

  19. As much as I hate the Saints, I’ll admit that my suspicion is Payton and Williams being told, “Admit that what we said happened happened, or else.”

  20. daveman8403 says:Sep 7, 2012 5:24 PM

    randygnyc says:
    Sep 7, 2012 5:15 PM
    My understanding is that the decision to lift the suspensions was based solely on Goodell not having the authority. In other words, the decision didn’t find the players not guilty, but rather Goodell didn’t have the right to suspend them.

    —————————————————————————————————–

    Exactly, Goodell did not have the right to suspend them. This is a salary cap violation, nothing more.

    In other words, there is NO on field evidence.
    ____________________

    Guess again. This was a procedural ruling. It went back to Goodell for clarification. Did the suspension by Goodell infringe on the Salary Cap Arbitrator’s exclusive rights because of pay-for-performance implications? If so, then he should not have suspended the players.

    So the Commissioner answers no, the miscreants sullied the good name of the NFL and that’s why they were suspended He then re-suspends them as is his right. Case closed and the ignorant who are trumpeting victory will ask “What happened?”

  21. F4phantom2977 – that proves nothing, in fact it hurts your argument to a degree. It’s more of a statement of “we should have been paying more attention”

    You may want to read Sean paytons interview with mike Triplett, especially the part where SP mentions that it’s upsetting to hear things being said about the team that aren’t true…

  22. I didn’t make my statement very clear……the so called “admission of guilt” by Sean and Mickey is in my opinion nothing more than a statement written by Goodell and shoved down their throats.

Leave a Reply