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.

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.

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.

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

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?

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.

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.

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.

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

Well open wide!!!!!

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.

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’.