Skip to content

League outs Jimmy Kennedy as 2010 whistleblower, Kennedy denies it

Detroit Lions v Minnesota Vikings Getty Images

So much for protecting whistleblowers.

The lengthy memorandum issued by the NFL to all teams on Tuesday regarding the re-issued discipline in the Saints bounty scandal identifies former Vikings defensive lineman Jimmy Kennedy as the person who originally told former Vikings coach Brad Childress in early 2010 that the Saints had a bounty on former Vikings quarterback Brett Favre in the 2009 NFC title game.  (The memo says that Kennedy was interviewed, but it says nothing about whether Kennedy retracted his claim.  A prior memo issued by the league, back when protecting whistleblowers was a supposed priority, indicated that an unnamed Vikings player had come forward in early 2010, but that the player thereafter rescinded his contention.)

It’s not the first time Kennedy has been linked to the Saints bounty scandal.  The sworn declaration submitted by former Saints defensive end Anthony Hargrove explained that former Saints defensive coordinator Gregg Williams told Hargrove that Kennedy had said Hargrove told Kennedy about the bounty on Favre.  At the time, Kennedy vehemently denied the contention via Twitter.

Now, Kennedy has returned to Twitter to refute the NFL’s new allegations.

“It’s really starting to bother me,” Kennedy says.  “How can the NFL continue to say I told them about Bounty & they interviewed me?  THIS DID NOT HAPPEN!”

Kennedy specifically denies that he ever was interviewed by the league.  “This Sucks! I NEVER interviewed with anyone from #NFL, No NFL Security, Not Goodell, NO ONE!”

Regardless of whether there was an interview of Kennedy, there was no reason for the NFL to mention Kennedy’s name.  Unlike former Saints assistant Mike Cerullo, who blew the whistle in 2011 and then became a key source of specific information on which discipline has been based, Kennedy had no role in the case the NFL has made against Saints linebacker Jonathan Vilma, Saints defensive end Will Smith, Browns linebacker Scott Fujita, and Hargrove.  Coming on the heels of the league insisting that whistleblowers be protected at all costs, the pointing of a finger at Kennedy was, in our opinion, unfair, irresponsible, and possibly actionable.

As NFL owners prepare to gather in Chicago for their first full meeting since a string of embarrassments smacked against the shield like repeated pecan pies in the face, the gratuitous outing of a whistleblower who never became a witness can be added to the list of things for which the owners could be demanding a full and complete explanation.

Permalink 77 Comments Feed for comments Latest Stories in: Minnesota Vikings, New Orleans Saints, Rumor Mill, Top Stories
77 Responses to “League outs Jimmy Kennedy as 2010 whistleblower, Kennedy denies it”
  1. iced107 says: Oct 11, 2012 12:03 AM

    Remember the defamation lawsuit Vilma made? Yea, not quite sure how much of a chance he had with that.

    Kennedy? i’m thinking he’s got solid footing for a lawsuit if he chooses so.

  2. raider2124 says: Oct 11, 2012 12:04 AM

    Kennedy the rat, he will never be signed by a team again

  3. rhlangan says: Oct 11, 2012 12:04 AM

    Keep tightening that noose around your neck Roger. The floor will give in any day now…

  4. metalhead65 says: Oct 11, 2012 12:06 AM

    you guys at pft and the press need to make up your mind about this. first there was a uproar because the nfl did not release everything they had because they wanted to protect the people who told them or the whistle blowers. now that they were forced to due to the appeals and you guys screaming about a shoddy investigation the league is in the wrong for letting everyone in all the details? enough already and take your punishments like men and stop whining!

  5. crkreg says: Oct 11, 2012 12:07 AM

    Enough already. Nobody cares about any of this.

  6. Mr. Wright 212 says: Oct 11, 2012 12:10 AM

    This just looks bad. Period.

  7. ndnut says: Oct 11, 2012 12:10 AM

    I’m a Vikings fan so I’m butthurt about that game but how on earth could Jimmy Kennedy, a Vikings player, know about a bounty issued by the Saints? This is starting to smell of some bad pookey.

  8. passiveaggressivechiefsfan says: Oct 11, 2012 12:12 AM

    Geez. What happened in the front office of the NFL? They used to be the gold standard for how to protect a brand. The NFL shield has taken a lot of hits in the past two years and their integrity is failing.

  9. dannythebisforbeast says: Oct 11, 2012 12:15 AM

    A Penn State guy as a whistleblower.
    C’mon everyone knows we don’t rat.

    Hopefully that beats any trolls to the punch(line)

  10. expertop says: Oct 11, 2012 12:15 AM

    I can’t believe how often this happens: the NFL puts out some position – a statement, memo, findings, etc. – and it has some major indication of incompetence. I honestly wonder how Roger and Jeff Pash manage to keep their jobs. The owners have got to be getting tired of the league office seeming to be run by a bunch of 8th graders.

  11. thestrategyexpert says: Oct 11, 2012 12:15 AM

    Anybody else want to be a whistle-blower for the reward of a sucker punch memorandum?

  12. nomoreseasontix says: Oct 11, 2012 12:16 AM

    Somebody give Goodell a big red clown nose.
    The guy is making an absolute farce of anything related to the NFL.
    Is that really what the owners want?

  13. jimtron11 says: Oct 11, 2012 12:18 AM

    “The sworn declaration submitted by former Saints defensive end Anthony Hargrove explained that former Saints defensive coordinator Gregg Williams told Hargrove that Kennedy had said Hargrove told Kennedy about the bounty on Favre.”

    Well said…

  14. thestewman3 says: Oct 11, 2012 12:18 AM

    Why not start asking for Benson’s accountability in all this, since you seem to feel that the investigation has no merit. I mean if he is the owner of the Saint’s, why would he sit by and allow his franchise to be dragged thru the mud? Why would he throw is employees under the bus?? Why would he tarnish the Title the he has waited all these years to win? If I where a Saint’s fan I would be demanding for him to protest this suppose injustice.

  15. msheriff86 says: Oct 11, 2012 12:18 AM

    I don’t understand the entire process of the bounty allegations. I was onboard with the belief (early on) that the league did indeed have compelling evidence to indicate that there was a legitimate pay to injure scheme. All they have proved is a pay for performance scheme, which has been acknowledged. But bounties? I don’t think (other than the terrible Dog the Bounty Hunter image they brought forward) they have shown any significant evidence of this. Furthermore, Goodell stated that he had evidence Vilma put a bounty on Warner that was significant. Why not bring this to air? What’s he holding this back for?

    It feels entirely as though he made a snap decision and is backed into it and unable to cop to a mistake. If I’m wrong Roger, prove it to me. But it really looks as though you have nothing — and isn’t public perception a war you want to win if you’re outing your alleged whistleblowers?

    Let us see the evidence.

    Sincerely,

    — A Saints hater.

  16. Tylers's Sportsdebates says: Oct 11, 2012 12:19 AM

    At this point in time it’s hard to trust Roger Goodell

  17. 49ersgiants4life says: Oct 11, 2012 12:21 AM

    The more the NFL talks the less I believe that there ever was a bounty

  18. lucky5936 says: Oct 11, 2012 12:24 AM

    Is there no way Roger Goodell can be fired? This is absolutely rediculous!

  19. randallflagg52 says: Oct 11, 2012 12:28 AM

    “explained that former Saints defensive coordinator Gregg Williams told Hargrove that Kennedy had said Hargrove told Kennedy about the bounty on Favre.” What the what?

  20. commonsensedude says: Oct 11, 2012 12:29 AM

    “As NFL owners prepare to gather in Chicago for their first full meeting since a string of embarrassments smacked against the shield like repeated pecan pies in the face, the gratuitous outing of a whistleblower who never became a witness can be added to the list of things for which the owners could be demanding a full and complete explanation.”

    If the owners eventually wise up and can Roger Goodell, the Commish has a good career in front of him as a U.S. Senator (like his dad). Any guy who can turn this nation’s greatest sport into an irritating soap opera is a perfect fit for being a Washington politician.

  21. marcinhouston says: Oct 11, 2012 12:29 AM

    With the number of witnesses recounting their statements, the NFL league office might want to reconsider their decision to rely on waterboarding to collect intelligence.

  22. hay1111 says: Oct 11, 2012 12:30 AM

    The league has nothing and they’re throwing anything out there hoping it sticks

  23. rmavs says: Oct 11, 2012 12:30 AM

    Man, I will be happy when this garbage is in the garbage. Yo, there is another season of football going on right now! As a Vikings fan, I could care less. You’re hard pressed to to win a game when you turn the ball over as much as the Vikes did in that NFC champ game against the Saints. The bounty crap is a white, sun dried turd on the side of the road. Its worn out like the William’s Wall StarCaps crap prior. SKOL VIKES! May the midnight boat rides, weight loss supplements, and turnovers be in your rearview mirror…

  24. beecee71 says: Oct 11, 2012 12:30 AM

    What a joke this has become!

  25. greatminnesotasportsmind says: Oct 11, 2012 12:31 AM

    Remember when everyone thought it was Jeremy Shockey? Kinda funny now…

  26. thehatefulnerd says: Oct 11, 2012 12:32 AM

    You can NOT out whistleblowers. NOT COOL.

    I smell a lawsuit pending. (I wonder if the Players Union will back him up!!)

  27. vikesorgtfo says: Oct 11, 2012 12:47 AM

    Even if he did say it, he told his coach that he knew the opposing team was trying to deliberately hurt his quarterback. That isn’t snitching, that’s looking out for your team/family/friend.

  28. tigers182 says: Oct 11, 2012 12:48 AM

    Warren Sapp thinks its lame the league outted Kennedy like this.

  29. ialwayswantedtobeabanker says: Oct 11, 2012 12:51 AM

    If the League actually “outed” a whistleblower, regardless of whether it’s true or not — this will create a resounding chilling effect on any future whistleblowers.

    Who will ever want to spill the beans now that they know they’ll get back-stabbed by those who craved their cooperation?

    There is a doctor in Pakistan rotting in a jail for leading us to bin Laden.

    Wow.

  30. andyvictory says: Oct 11, 2012 12:51 AM

    Other than a select few, and one fan base, who actually cares. Their is an ENTIRE NFL SEASON going on right now, as we speak, before our very eyes……. I know, it’s hard to believe.

  31. quaddro21 says: Oct 11, 2012 12:52 AM

    Damn Jimmy, you should know, being from Yonkers, that snitches get stitches

  32. namelessfacelessfan says: Oct 11, 2012 12:59 AM

    WTF?!

    Why in the hell did the NFL ‘out’ Kennedy and, judging by his responses, I personally believe him when he claims they never even interviewed him.
    Why? Because this just yet another claim by the NFL about this case that has been discredited.

    If you look at the NFL’s two ‘star’ pieces of evidence in the Cerullo and Williams statements, they differ HUGELY in a VITAL piece of info.
    Cerullo claims he gave Vilma’s 10k to Williams, Williams claims he never saw any money.

    How can both these statements be considered truthful and used as evidence when there is such a large discrepency in regards to a key aspect of the whole case (the 10k)?

    Vilma has bank records to prove he never withdrew 10k anywhere around that time. Where is the proof the 10k even existed?
    I am having doubt when the NFL’s two star ‘witnesses’ can’t even agree.

  33. Slim Charles says: Oct 11, 2012 1:12 AM

    I’m more surprised that a guy who went to Penn State actually reported something.

  34. illogic87 says: Oct 11, 2012 1:14 AM

    good for him..someone has to do it!

  35. whodeyinpa says: Oct 11, 2012 1:15 AM

    What? I thought the media said it was Jeremy Shockey back when this whole thing first unraveled? This whole thing is starting to become an annoyance rather than news. I’m really hoping this whole bounty thing will blow over one day. I don’t even like the Saints but I really don’t like seeing 3 new articles every day on the same drawn out story. Just let the players appeal, serve whatever suspensions stand, and shut up about it.

  36. droyer85 says: Oct 11, 2012 1:18 AM

    Just more proof that the league does not have facts, this is a case full of he said, she saids, and for that reason it should be dropped. Roger Goodell is basically just saying that he believes only two particular people’s sworn statements, and everyone elses statements (sworn or not) are lies. It’s a joke.

  37. droyer85 says: Oct 11, 2012 1:20 AM

    I guess the NFL’s official statement to Mr. Kennedy would be “Well this guy said you did, and we believe him, and we believe you’re lying”

  38. ilovefoolsball says: Oct 11, 2012 1:25 AM

    I understand league profits are at an all time high but does anyone really believe that’s because of Goodell and not just a product of the NFL being a fantastic sport?
    Do the owners really think that all of his suspensions and fines are the reason the NFL is so successful?

    Do they really believe there is no one else capable of doing a better job than what he’s doing?

    If his job is to protect the shield he’s certainly doing a piss poor job in that respect.
    Goodell is making the other two sports leagues look like the better run organizations for the first time in more than a decade.
    Just because the NFL has a great marketing team and sponsorship does not mean that the organization itself is headed in the right direction.

  39. woodsvikes says: Oct 11, 2012 1:29 AM

    After reading the ” lengthy memorandum”, seems to me it’s pretty obvious that the ‘Suspendees’ are guilty. Although I do NOT agree with the listing of Kennedy as a source to be acceptable if it is true. Whistleblowers need to be protected or no one is going to do it in the future.

    Also, after reading the memorandum I don’t think the suspensions are enough. No, I do believe the league has done all that it needs to do. Now, I think the NFLPA should start doing something to protect those players who had ‘bountys’ put out on them and furthermore protect those who would have had ‘bountys’ placed on them, by summarily dismissing all those who are suspended by the league from the NFLPA. Take away ALL rights and protections from these players as they attacked their own brothers in this scandal.

    Sure, they can still play in the NFL at their own risks. IF and WHEN they do have another infraction, they can then hire their own lawyers to go into the league and try to get a ruling. And GOOD LUCK with that! The league would EAT THEM ALIVE without a CBA to protect them. IF you REALLY want to make sure this doesn’t happen again then NFLPA should make an example of these guys here and now.

    The IDEA that “cart offs” have any place in the NFL in these times with the knowledge of how cunccussions and how devastating these injuries can be is disgusting. I don’t care who you are or who you cheer for the fact that the Coach started this and veteran players accepted and even contributed to this is ridiculous.

    And to all those out there with your “saint” colored glasses on.. how would you like it Mr Brees would have had a bounty out on him in the 2009 NFC Championship and at least 3 calls for late hits and roughing the passer were called in said game. You’d be PO’d too.

    Only real difference is any other QB WOULD have been “carted off” but Favre wasn’t.

  40. treesloth16 says: Oct 11, 2012 1:33 AM

    Scott Fujita: “What the hell are you doing, Roger?

  41. woodsvikes says: Oct 11, 2012 1:41 AM

    As for the whole “Vilma’s bank records” comments..

    First of all, $10k to these guys is NOTHING. Most have them have that much “bling” in one ear. So the idea that they could be carrying $10k at any given moment is not an outrageous thought.

    Secondly the money may have never been paid out since Favre was never “knocked out of the game” or “Carted Off”. So his “legal” obligations to paiy said bounty is nil and void.

    Get over it! They have computer files and records that shows the program. They have the Coaches sworn statement of the program and Williams got what for that? Probably never, EVER being allowed to coach again in the league. So its not like he plead out here.

    BUSTED! Serve your time!

  42. droyer85 says: Oct 11, 2012 2:25 AM

    Later in Appeals:

    Player 2 Begs and pleads for Goodell to change his mind, and asks for any proof of this outrageous accusation of him being a murderer, any proof at all… a dead body perhaps. Goodell responds by handing Player 2, Player 1′s sworn statement.

    Goodell’s final ruling and statement:

    It is my belief that Player 2 is a murderer. Player 1 clearly stated that he was, and I believe him. I see no reason why Player 1 would make a false accusation about Player 2, they don’t even know eachother and Player 1 would have nothing to gain by doing so.

    Case Closed. Again.

  43. gbr437 says: Oct 11, 2012 2:32 AM

    This whole bounty scandal kinda reminds me of former president bush’s “weapons of mass destruction” claim. Goodell knows he has tarnished the nfl brand. This is his own little personal war to try and win back the people’s trust. That is why he will not back down from this fight. He knows that issuing apologies only admits defeat and his pride to great to admit defeat. Just a thought though.

  44. vegasvinnie says: Oct 11, 2012 2:34 AM

    All future NFL games should be sponsored by GM and the US Postal Service. All three seem to be run with equal stupidity.

  45. cylondetector says: Oct 11, 2012 2:54 AM

    Here is my take.

    The league, like most large corporations, certainly doesn’t want to encourage ‘whitleblowing’ when its related to a subject that can hurt the marketability of the product or subtract from the financial bottom line.

    Whistleblow all you like about someone stealing a few papreclips, but player health issues are, and will continue to be, a prickly subject for the NFL.

    The outing of Jimmy Kennedy was most definitely deliberate – its supposed to be a cautionary tale for any player who thinks about doing something similar in the future.

  46. dwatkins69 says: Oct 11, 2012 3:07 AM

    Fan to Fujita, ” Scott if you were this concerned with your game, you would be a good LB”

  47. thebiglabreeski says: Oct 11, 2012 3:13 AM

    Some one needs to land an interview with ole Chilly! I have the sneaking suspicion that he may have bluffed this whistleblower idea to goodell because he was pissed about not getting to party with the Lombardi!

    Pissed Chilly bounty frame-up….film at 11.

  48. cbo68 says: Oct 11, 2012 4:40 AM

    @woodsvikes

    For all of those that won’t comment for fear of looking like neanderthals or blood-thirsty heathens, I took great pleasure in watching your QB take a healthy beating in that NFCCG back in ’09. In fact, this last week, I enjoyed when QB09 from the NOS took a helmet to the chin and dripped a bit of blood. Being a former member of the military and retired after 20+ years, I like when men can come to a battlefield, bleed, throw a punch or two and then walk away. Some may not walk away. Some limp. Some come back. Some don’t.

    The real issue I have is when a Lord Tyrant oversees the battleground and issues penalties against the same people he sends to battle on any given day. It is, and remains, tantamount to lunacy that one can benefit from the carnage they oversee, yet penalize a figure that serves them profit from their own, personal destruction.

    This moral high-ground that many stand on stating that ‘cart-offs’ do not have a place on the field fail to understand what it takes to actually stand on that field. These folks on the field want the other side to be carted off because it makes it easier for them to win. WIN! That is the objective, you simple-minded, sheltered, weak-stomached fools seem to forget. Some people probably want to feel that this is a happy, go-lucky, we’re all friends, GAME, and we’ll all shake hands and go home friends and drink gatorade and trade muffin recipes. Nope. Not that way at all. Whomever lost that game wants nothing more than to kick that teams’ collective BUTTS the next time they meet and make it hurt. Whether that hurt ends up being a boo-boo or a cast, it doesn’t really matter.

    The entire schtick of RG and the 32 owners comes down to nothing but money. RG gets the ‘flames of hatred’ because he stands in front of the 32 owners and takes the arrows. But, the 32 owners don’t get one grenade tossed in their direction? Seems to me that the Mass Media types and the fans have a bit of misplaced anger when it comes to this topic. Don’t get me wrong…toss as many grenades in RG’s direction as you can and force his butt out of office! But, don’t forget the idjits that put him there in the first place! They found a good puppet and he’s done what they asked. Just make sure that the strings that get burned go both ways to ignite the true fire that needs to burn. Just sayin’.

  49. kingpel says: Oct 11, 2012 5:45 AM

    Snitches get stiches and wind up in ditches.

  50. atfinch1984 says: Oct 11, 2012 5:53 AM

    Know who was in charge of bounties? The guy in Star Wars. Mystery solved.

  51. myeaglescantwin says: Oct 11, 2012 6:24 AM

    so basically, Bounty-Gate was set on fire based on hearsay from a friend of a friend. . . . strictly off the record of course.

  52. 49erstim says: Oct 11, 2012 7:16 AM

    Wow. He denied it on Twitter? Must be true. Sheesh you guys. Just stop. They are guilty!

  53. macbull says: Oct 11, 2012 7:18 AM

    Say What ???…Roger Goodell just outed one of his alleged “whistleblowers”?

    But the NFL said they would protect whistleblowers…Jimmy Kennedy’s name appearing on a Bountygate memo to all 32 teams, had to be typo, right?

    Roger claimed the identity of whistleblowers would be protected at all cost…but Roger accidentally named Jimmy Kennedy as one of his alleged “whistleblowers” ?

    How could something like that happen?
    …anything special going on?
    …Oh, there is a meeting of all NFL owners next week and one of the main topics of discussion just happens to be…the NFL Bounty case.

    Nothing happens by accident, folks…the Goodell knew he was releasing the name one of his whistleblowers. Hey Jimmy (Kennedy), how does the bottom side of Roger’s bus look?

    So why would Roger release the name of one of his whistleblowers?…to try to justify his pursuit of this “clusterfudge”.

    Roger Goodell is attempting to set the table for the league meetings on Oct 16th, to be able to claim…he had no choice but to go after the Saints, claiming it was Kennedy who blew the whistle on the Saints/Greg Williams’ bounty scheme.

    Well surely Goodell interviewed his whistleblower, Jimmy Kennedy?…right?

    All the commissioner has to do is release the date and notes from the Jimmy Kennedy interview.

    If Kennedy was never interviewed by Roger Goodell, it proves “at best”, Roger pursued the Bounty case based on “heresay”…not evidence.

    I doubt these owners would ever admit it…but Roger Goodell is the worst commissioner the NFL has ever had and the owners need fire him.

  54. derakbrady says: Oct 11, 2012 7:43 AM

    Lmao. Now all the haters on the fan site: this is for you, Joe, Mike, and Will.

    Fans have had nothing but these guys coming over cramming their “proof” down fans throat.

    Well open wide!!!!!

  55. miles58a says: Oct 11, 2012 8:00 AM

    Goodell first reported that the Bounty case was a three year long investigation with 50,000 pages. In his new report he said they originally investigated it in 2010 but found nothing and the case was closed. Then late in the 2011 season (Last year’s playoffs) the case was re-opened due to new evidence. That doesn’t add up to a three year long investigation, but just a couple of months up to the time he suspended the coaches’

  56. miles58a says: Oct 11, 2012 8:04 AM

    The main evidence that Goodell is using is the Greg Williams statement. He didn’t get that statement till after the fact and thats even if Gregs statement is true

  57. melikefootball says: Oct 11, 2012 8:09 AM

    What do you really expect fom a whistle blower…yea I called them out!

  58. crubenst says: Oct 11, 2012 8:27 AM

    It seems to me Kennedy probably just told his coach Childress, maybe in an off-handed way and Childress probably brought it to the league’s attention.

  59. derakbrady says: Oct 11, 2012 8:50 AM

    One thing is for sure. That Viking coach is all mad he didn’t win the SB. As I recall they were wild card. And not that good that year. Plan and simple farve made mistakes. Gambles. And lost. They are still crying.

  60. SeenThisB4 says: Oct 11, 2012 8:55 AM

    So, why does the NFL have carts on every NFL field, if there is no place for cartoffs in the NFL?

  61. nispikers says: Oct 11, 2012 9:04 AM

    crubenst says:Oct 11, 2012 8:27 AM

    It seems to me Kennedy probably just told his coach Childress, maybe in an off-handed way and Childress probably brought it to the league’s attention.
    ———————————————————
    The league’s statement said they interviewed both Childress and Kennedy. That is what Kennedy is denying in the past and is denying again. Another lie from the NFL.

  62. stellarperformance says: Oct 11, 2012 10:00 AM

    Isn’t this guy currently suspended for PED’s? Oh yeah, we can be certain he’s not a liar. We can believe everything he says. He’s gold, Jerry, gold.

  63. dynast77 says: Oct 11, 2012 10:44 AM

    Jimmy Kennedy has never played for the New Orleans Saints! How could he possibly be the whistleblower?

  64. scoobyscraps says: Oct 11, 2012 10:57 AM

    Something about this just stinks. None of this is good for the league.
    Who’s ready for new NFL leadership!??

  65. wiley16350 says: Oct 11, 2012 11:21 AM

    Actually, the whistleblower was Brad Childress. Childress was the one that brought the matter to the attention of the league so that the Saints would be investigated. Kennedy was the one who told Childress, but probably not to get the Saints in trouble but just as a way to complain why they lost the game or something to that respect in a general conversation. So to say that the NFL outted Kennedy as the whistleblower would seem incorrect. Goodell was just explaining the process of how the story developed and came to the attention of the league. The people they were protecting were Childress (because he was the one that brought it to the league) and Cerullo (because he was the one that testified to the players involvement).

  66. justsayin973 says: Oct 11, 2012 11:33 AM

    Goodell has shown very poor judgement throughout his entire tenure as commissioner. Now by publicly naming someone as the whistleblower, he has opened himself & the NFL up to litigation under federal whistleblower protection laws.
    Trust me when I say I know everyone & I mean everyone is so tired of hearing about this bounty scandal. However, this bounty scandal may be a blessing in disguise as this might just be the straw that breaks the camel’s back & the owners might finally vote Goodell out. Remember, the owners had to vote FIVE times before Goodell had enough votes to become commissioner.

  67. asseenonokra says: Oct 11, 2012 11:48 AM

    derakbrady says:
    Oct 11, 2012 8:50 AM
    One thing is for sure. That Viking coach is all mad he didn’t win the SB. As I recall they were wild card. And not that good that year. Plan and simple farve made mistakes. Gambles. And lost. They are still crying.

    I hate the Vikings and their whiny whiny fans, but that was a very good Minnesota team. They were neck and neck with the Saints that entire season, and I fully believe that those two teams were feeding off each other’s success. The real Super Bowl that year was the NFC Championship Game.

  68. wiley16350 says: Oct 11, 2012 11:50 AM

    It’s obvious that many of you people didn’t actually read the statement because you would then realize how stupid your statements are. Hargrove said something to Kennedy who relayed it to Childress. Childress then reported it to the NFL who then investigated Childress, Hargrove, Kennedy and various Saints players and coaches. Everyone denied the existence of the bounty system so the NFL didn’t pursue it any farther. Then in 2011 the NFL received more information (probably from Cerullo) about the investigation. They then asked Mr. Benson permission to investigate in house. He allowed them to do so. They then found out a lot more information. They then went about questioning again and Greg Williams continued to deny existence of a bounty program until the NFL started providing evidence of it. After seeing the evidence Greg Williams then admitted the existence of the bounty program and began cooperating with the NFL in the investigation. Them Goodell handed out the punishments. That is how it all went down, there isn’t any inconsistency in how it all came about. There isn’t any reason or evidence that the NFL is after the Saints. There is no conspiracy. The Saints players and coaches did reward players for injuries that took oposing players out of the game. They did lie about the existence of the program in 2009. They continued to lie until the NFL showed the evidence. If they would have admitted it in 2009 the punishments would have not been so severe. The Saints have no one to blame but themselevs. I think Saints fans need to accept that. I understand they want to defend their superbowl title. i don’t blame them for that. I don’t think these bounties really had much affect on the field because they weren’t playing outside of the on-the field rules. If they were then refs would have the ability to inhibit that. So I think it’s just as crazy to deny the Saints their superbowl as it is to deny the existence of the pay for injury program.

  69. panamon says: Oct 11, 2012 12:06 PM

    This article is FALSE and cheap. Never ONCE does the league claim this person gave them significant information, MUCH LESS being a whistleblower like Florio claims with no information saying so whatsoever.

    He’s tangentially involved because he was supposedly told by Hargrove about the system, one day Florio complains about the evidence then the next day he types this article like the league isn’t allowed to release ANY.

  70. namelessfacelessfan says: Oct 11, 2012 12:09 PM

    wiley16350 says:
    Oct 11, 2012 11:50 AM

    It’s obvious that many of you people didn’t actually read the statement because you would then realize how stupid your statements are. Hargrove said something to Kennedy who relayed it to Childress. Childress then reported it to the NFL….

    ——————————————————-

    We know this. Yet, if you read that same portion of the NFL’s statement, they claim to have interviewed Kennedy.
    Kennedy has repeatedly denied he was ever interviewed by anyone with the NFL.

    If the NFL claims to have interviewed Kennedy, and Kennedy denies it, and the NFL can’t present proof of said interview, it raises troubling questions does it not?

  71. ghlatty says: Oct 11, 2012 12:26 PM

    I think that to be a “snitch” you would have to be a member of the Saints organization who ratted out a member(s) of the team. Can’t imagine a player on an opposing team getting blackballed for telling his coach that there may be a bounty on his quarterback.

  72. staugslugga says: Oct 11, 2012 12:35 PM

    wiley16350 says:
    Oct 11, 2012 11:50 AM
    It’s obvious that many of you people didn’t actually read the statement because you would then realize how stupid your statements are.

    Oh cool glad you were there to give us what the media has been force-feeding us. Some of us aren’t so gullible.

  73. wiley16350 says: Oct 11, 2012 12:37 PM

    We know this. Yet, if you read that same portion of the NFL’s statement, they claim to have interviewed Kennedy.
    Kennedy has repeatedly denied he was ever interviewed by anyone with the NFL.

    If the NFL claims to have interviewed Kennedy, and Kennedy denies it, and the NFL can’t present proof of said interview, it raises troubling questions does it not?
    ___________________________________
    Not really. I just ask myself in this case who has reason to lie. Kennedy has reason to lie to protect his image. The NFL has no reason to lie. Kennedy wasn’t the only person interviewed and he isn’t even considered a key witness or a person who presented key facts. He is non-essential to the case. So the NFL has no reason to bring up his name if he wasn’t involved. By the NFL’s account, Kennedy denied the existence of the program when questioned in 2009. So he is not an essential part, so why make up the story if he doesn’t really matter.

  74. davelogdotcom says: Oct 11, 2012 12:53 PM

    You won’t see Goodell fired until the concussion lawsuits hit home.

    Goodell threw the Saints under the bus in an attempt to stave off the lawsuits and appear strong on player safety. They’re his sacrificial lamb.

    The owners will throw Goodell under the bus in an attempt to stave off the judgement. He’s THEIR sacrificial lamb.

  75. nispikers says: Oct 11, 2012 4:17 PM

    wiley16350 says:Oct 11, 2012 11:21 AM

    Actually, the whistleblower was Brad Childress. Childress was the one that brought the matter to the attention of the league so that the Saints would be investigated. Kennedy was the one who told Childress, but probably not to get the Saints in trouble but just as a way to complain why they lost the game or something to that respect in a general conversation. So to say that the NFL outted Kennedy as the whistleblower would seem incorrect. Goodell was just explaining the process of how the story developed and came to the attention of the league. The people they were protecting were Childress (because he was the one that brought it to the league) and Cerullo (because he was the one that testified to the players involvement).
    __________________________________
    In the league’s statement, it says that Kennedy was interviewed by the NFL. Kennedy says he was not ever interviewed by the NFL, the investigators, etc. and never talked to Childress about knowing about a bounty. Anthony Hargrove has denied telling Kennedy anything about a bounty on Farve, which is what the NFL is claiming. The NFL told Williams about this and the jist of this portion of Williams statement is the part about Goodell says Kennedy told Childress, Childress told the NFL, etc. Then Williams told Hargrove that Kennedy says this, and then that one says this, etc.
    Kennedy says he never talked to Goodell, the NFL, or the NFL investigators.

  76. acetw says: Oct 12, 2012 11:44 AM

    So now that the nfl* has outed their ‘whistleblower’ (along with a complete denial by said whistleblower) there should be nothing holding them back from releasing everything they’ve got, correct? After all, the reason they kept throwing out for not releasing the info was that they had to protect this same person they’ve now willingly handed over to the public.

  77. jacktumlinson says: Oct 12, 2012 6:52 PM

    I was outside a local conveince store where I overheard two crackheads talking that one of them saw a crack dealer and pimp talking the other night. The pimp said that his next door neighbor overheard two hookers( not his women) saying that a customer of theirs last month found a piece of paper laying in the street with a phone number on it. He called the number and somehow the lines got crossed and he was able to listen in to another conversation. He swore he heard two more guys saying they heard their next door’s neighbors sisters mother uncle ex wife(twice removed) latest boyfriends’ ex girlfriends neighbor that lived two streets over from Williams swore that he said that. Just saying. A bit freaking confusing right? About like all this ‘bounty gate” crap.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Not a member? Register now!