Does this change anyone's thoughts or opinions on Anthony Hargrove? I suppose the thing I'm asking myself right now is, didn't the NFL confirm that was Anthony Hargrove and if so, how or by whom?

---

o_O
http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2012/06/20/video-doesnt-prove-that-hargrove-said-give-me-my-money/ 

---

Sigh. More evidence that Florio and other lawyers should stick to courtrooms governed by rules of procedure and evidence.

*All* circumstantial evidence *and* *all* eyewitness evidence has potential problems. Court findings are very rarely as cut and dried as movies and talking heads make them out to be. That's why the law erects all those rules about hearsay, expert testimony, pleading, motions, objections, and the like. To ensure that judgment is well-reasoned and not merely a consequence of who speaks loudest or most often or most in command of the English language.

If the NFL, Hargrove, et al have reached the point that they have to resort to this pseudo-legalistic detailed nitpicking to resolve their dispute, then they should either take the dispute to court (if there is in fact a legal cause of action here somewhere) or shut the fuck up.

I used to love PFT -- Florio took a passion for the details of NFL life and offered us NFL junkies a new drug (the internet rumor mill) to satisfy our need for a constant fix. I admire him for that.

But now he's just another effing half-assed talking head of which we had far too many before he started his rumor mill. And on top of it all, now he's a talking head talking like a lawyer. And we don't need lawyers talking like lawyers outside of their courtrooms and their law offices.

---

here's my stance if I was commish...


Give me a fucking name or I will suspend you anyway for impeding NFL investtigation (again, in the case of Hargrove).

---

Over the last couple of days I have decided I will not believe a fucking thing the NFL says about the bounties until they provide the evidence they found solid enough to give out these suspensions. So far everything they have provided has been a joke. None of it proves any actual bounties ever existed. They've done a damn good job proving they has an illegal pay for performance system, however.

My opinion, worth exactly what people are paying for it:

Unless there is specific language in the contract taking power away from the commissioner, it's almost irrelevant what kind of evidence Goodell has. If their employees don't like the way Goodell and the NFL run their shop, then they should find a new job or shut the fuck up. If the rest of the world doesn't like the way Goodell and the NFL run their shop, they should stop buying their products and shut the fuck up.

The due process clause is (or should be) like the rest of the Bill of Rights -- it's a right against state power. It shouldn't be as a workplace guarantee of "employee rights." Any rights a worker have are rights incident to his particular contract.

If Hargrove, et al, thinks his contract prohibits a particular dumb/nasty action by Goodell, he's got three choices. Get another job in the Arena League or writing mortgages or digging ditches or whatever. Sue. Or shut the fuck up.

In my opinion, Goodell is an asshole who can't decide whether he worries more about the concerns of PR men or the concerns of lawyers. I wouldn't want to work for the guy either. Life sucks sometimes.

---

I have no doubt in my mind that Hargrove and the rest of the Stains are guilty of this bounty and I wish they would all just take their medicine - and Drew Brees STFU.

On Hargrove being a Packer - I really hope Worthy and Neal make it impossible for Hargrove to even make the 53 man roster.

---

This is not a criminal case. There is no innocent until proven guilty, there is no beyond a reasonable doubt. Goodell doesn't need to prove anything to anybody to decide that actions were detrimental to the league. That is his job and he doesn't have to prove anything except to his employers that he is doing a good job or he gets fired.

If the Players think that Goodell breached their contract, they can sue in civil court. Then the burden of proof is on them. They have to prove that Goodell punished them outside of the guidelines set up by the agreement.

IF the players challenge him in court, then they have to take the stand and swear not to lie. If they get caught lying, they can go to jail. IF they just stand in front of a mic at a press conference, they can lie their asses off with no consequences. So I don't believe a word they say until the courts say Goodell punished them unfairly.

Handing down the punishment, the NFL has to get it right enough to win a lawsuit. The players are not bound by the same thing. They can make spurious accusations and have no consequences. Until they get into court and have to take that oath.

---

I'm usually on the side that says 'shut up, serve your time and move on'. I was on this one too, until I realized what an awful precedent this is setting. Suspending players without concrete evidence just seems wrong to me. Then again, I think it's wrong that the commissioner has all the power he does.

---

Yet you serve as overlord to us. [grin1]

And we're thankful for it. Thank you sir may I have another.

http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&frm=1&source=web&cd=1&ved=0CFYQtwIwAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.youtube.com%2Fwatch%3Fv%3DqdFLPn30dvQ&ei=S5njT___L4ie8QTwtN2GCA&usg=AFQjCNFb1VFxCm8yrQ9C_e5bVXtH7TiygA&sig2=-ZWJKqV50bCOh7KzhV3AUA

---