Sean Payton suspended for 2012, Tebow a Jet

[HedleyLamarr]

Further on Wiregate, comments from Cortez Kennedy on si.com:

===

"I've been with Mickey on game days since 2002,'' Kennedy said. "For a while I was an intern, learning the business, and I would be in the Saints' coaching booth for a while, but most of the time I was with him, in his booth, where he watched the games. I was watching how Mickey and [director of college scouting] Rick Reiprish [who began sitting in the box in 2004] do their jobs during the games, taking notes and keeping track of penalties and how far downfield passes go, things like that. Sometimes he'd be listening to the game through an earpiece. I knew that because at halftime or when he'd go to the bathroom, I'd pick up the earpiece and listen, and it'd be the game broadcast.

"Never once did I hear him talk about what was going on in the coaching booth with the other team. Never did I hear any evidence that we knew what was being said there. To me, the real outrage is, what advantage would it be for Mickey to hear it? He wouldn't have the time to get that information to our sidelines in time for it to have anything to do with the play on the field.

"I have been in that box for years, and I just couldn't believe it when I heard it. Shocking. No way it's true.''

===

The advantage is gaining information and filing it away for future reference.....not to help with play-calling during the game in progress.

Moved emphasis to the relevant part. Loomis has said publicly that the earpiece was for listening to the game broadcast on WWL in New Orleans and Kennedy's statement backs that up. Of course the conspiracy theorists will say he's just part of it but whatever.

But you have a point so let's see what they did vs. the division in those 3 seasons:

2002 - 0-2 vs Atl, 1-1 vs Car, 2-0 vs TB (1-2 at home)

2003 - 2-0 vs Atl, 0-2 vs Car, 1-1 vs TB (1-2 at home)

2004 - 1-1 vs all three division opponents (1-2 at home)

Hardly an advantage.

Two points:

1. Cortez Kennedy and Bill Polian are close friends with Mickey Loomis. Their statements have the feel of "sticking up for my friend" more than anything else. Surely they aren't so close-minded as to all the advantages one gains by listening in on the other team's play-calling. There's a reason why these two only mentioned that Loomis wasn't using these wire-tappings for the games in progress.

2. Mickey Loomis isn't exactly oozing with credibility right now. To a man, how much would YOU trust anything this guy says right now?

[Gothamite]

Good point.

We've established that Loomis is a liar. Why does he get the benefit of the doubt now?

[BlueSky]

Further on Wiregate, comments from Cortez Kennedy on si.com:

===

"I've been with Mickey on game days since 2002,'' Kennedy said. "For a while I was an intern, learning the business, and I would be in the Saints' coaching booth for a while, but most of the time I was with him, in his booth, where he watched the games. I was watching how Mickey and [director of college scouting] Rick Reiprish [who began sitting in the box in 2004] do their jobs during the games, taking notes and keeping track of penalties and how far downfield passes go, things like that. Sometimes he'd be listening to the game through an earpiece. I knew that because at halftime or when he'd go to the bathroom, I'd pick up the earpiece and listen, and it'd be the game broadcast.

"Never once did I hear him talk about what was going on in the coaching booth with the other team. Never did I hear any evidence that we knew what was being said there. To me, the real outrage is, what advantage would it be for Mickey to hear it? He wouldn't have the time to get that information to our sidelines in time for it to have anything to do with the play on the field.

"I have been in that box for years, and I just couldn't believe it when I heard it. Shocking. No way it's true.''

===

The advantage is gaining information and filing it away for future reference.....not to help with play-calling during the game in progress.

Moved emphasis to the relevant part. Loomis has said publicly that the earpiece was for listening to the game broadcast on WWL in New Orleans and Kennedy's statement backs that up. Of course the conspiracy theorists will say he's just part of it but whatever.

But you have a point so let's see what they did vs. the division in those 3 seasons:

2002 - 0-2 vs Atl, 1-1 vs Car, 2-0 vs TB (1-2 at home)

2003 - 2-0 vs Atl, 0-2 vs Car, 1-1 vs TB (1-2 at home)

2004 - 1-1 vs all three division opponents (1-2 at home)

Hardly an advantage.

To me, it doesn't matter. It's against the rules–and possibly the law–regardless of any advantage gained. I don't understand how your team sucking rationalizes alleged cheating.

You're right, my wording was off. What I meant was, "That's hardly evidence of the Saints having an advantage," point being their performance during the period in question doesn't support allegations of cheating. Or perhaps it would be better to say the claim would be more credible if they'd been dominant in those games. Their record can't prove anything either way.

Further on Wiregate, comments from Cortez Kennedy on si.com:

===

"I've been with Mickey on game days since 2002,'' Kennedy said. "For a while I was an intern, learning the business, and I would be in the Saints' coaching booth for a while, but most of the time I was with him, in his booth, where he watched the games. I was watching how Mickey and [director of college scouting] Rick Reiprish [who began sitting in the box in 2004] do their jobs during the games, taking notes and keeping track of penalties and how far downfield passes go, things like that. Sometimes he'd be listening to the game through an earpiece. I knew that because at halftime or when he'd go to the bathroom, I'd pick up the earpiece and listen, and it'd be the game broadcast.

"Never once did I hear him talk about what was going on in the coaching booth with the other team. Never did I hear any evidence that we knew what was being said there. To me, the real outrage is, what advantage would it be for Mickey to hear it? He wouldn't have the time to get that information to our sidelines in time for it to have anything to do with the play on the field.

"I have been in that box for years, and I just couldn't believe it when I heard it. Shocking. No way it's true.''

===

The advantage is gaining information and filing it away for future reference.....not to help with play-calling during the game in progress.

Moved emphasis to the relevant part. Loomis has said publicly that the earpiece was for listening to the game broadcast on WWL in New Orleans and Kennedy's statement backs that up. Of course the conspiracy theorists will say he's just part of it but whatever.

But you have a point so let's see what they did vs. the division in those 3 seasons:

2002 - 0-2 vs Atl, 1-1 vs Car, 2-0 vs TB (1-2 at home)

2003 - 2-0 vs Atl, 0-2 vs Car, 1-1 vs TB (1-2 at home)

2004 - 1-1 vs all three division opponents (1-2 at home)

Hardly an advantage.

Two points:

1. Cortez Kennedy and Bill Polian are close friends with Mickey Loomis. Their statements have the feel of "sticking up for my friend" more than anything else. Surely they aren't so close-minded as to all the advantages one gains by listening in on the other team's play-calling. There's a reason why these two only mentioned that Loomis wasn't using these wire-tappings for the games in progress.

2. Mickey Loomis isn't exactly oozing with credibility right now. To a man, how much would YOU trust anything this guy says right now?

1. If you want to call Cortez Kennedy a liar, be my guest. I'd buy a ticket to watch you do it to his face. Seriously, friends or not, would you flat out lie - publicly - for a friend? I wouldn't.

2. True, but it doesn't automatically mean he's lying.

I'm not trying to justify anything done by Loomis or anyone else. As I said earlier, if it's proven true, he has to be fired immediately afterwards. I have to admit though to being baffled over how people seemed less upset over Spygate, where there was proof of cheating that was never made public and conveniently destroyed by the commissioner. Did the public know everything, or was that just the tip of an iceberg so ugly Goodell felt he had to burn the evidence? Not trying to toss in a red herring, I just find peoples' reactions to different things interesting.

All I'm saying is it's always better to reserve judgment until the facts come out.

[BBTV]

People were (and still are) plenty pissed about spygate. You still here about it whenever people sing the praises of the Patriots. It was a big deal. We realize how huge the Saints are in your world, but don't allow that to make you believe that this is bigger than Spygate was. That was a huge deal to everyone who wasn't 100% focused on the goings-on of one team. I don't watch sports center much, but from what I recall, spygate was everywhere, even if you weren't in to sports. At least at its early stages, it received a lot of attention - more than this, IMO.

[pcgd]

As someone that follows neither team and lives in the midwest and really only watches national news, Spygate was a bigger story than this here.

What I don't get about Kennedy is, why would he pick up someone else's headphones? Have you ever done that in your life? Someone goes to the bathroom and you pick up their headphones and start listening to whatever they were listening to? I've never done that...or even considered it. In fact if someone did that in front of me I'd think it was weird.

[HedleyLamarr]

1. If you want to call Cortez Kennedy a liar, be my guest. I'd buy a ticket to watch you do it to his face. Seriously, friends or not, would you flat out lie - publicly - for a friend? I wouldn't.

2. True, but it doesn't automatically mean he's lying.

I'm not trying to justify anything done by Loomis or anyone else. As I said earlier, if it's proven true, he has to be fired immediately afterwards. I have to admit though to being baffled over how people seemed less upset over Spygate, where there was proof of cheating that was never made public and conveniently destroyed by the commissioner. Did the public know everything, or was that just the tip of an iceberg so ugly Goodell felt he had to burn the evidence? Not trying to toss in a red herring, I just find peoples' reactions to different things interesting.

All I'm saying is it's always better to reserve judgment until the facts come out.

I never said Kennedy or Polian were lying. I just said that they're not mentioning all of the advantages one gains by having the ability to listen in on the other team's play-calling. It may very well be factual that they weren't used for in-game strategy. However, when you see three teams annually, 12 other conference teams within three years....not to mention coaching carousels and free agency....one clearly can see that you would wire-tap for future reference when playing certain teams, and not during the game in progress.

Pulling up their in-division records between 2002-04 is irrelevant. Pulling up their records and schemes in the years after 2002-04....in a time period where the Saints suddenly got dominant offensively and defensively coherent and started to win consistently....is what you should pay attention to.

Besides.....why would ESPN lie about the Saints wiretapping the other team's play-calling?

[BlueSky]

1. If you want to call Cortez Kennedy a liar, be my guest. I'd buy a ticket to watch you do it to his face. Seriously, friends or not, would you flat out lie - publicly - for a friend? I wouldn't.

2. True, but it doesn't automatically mean he's lying.

I'm not trying to justify anything done by Loomis or anyone else. As I said earlier, if it's proven true, he has to be fired immediately afterwards. I have to admit though to being baffled over how people seemed less upset over Spygate, where there was proof of cheating that was never made public and conveniently destroyed by the commissioner. Did the public know everything, or was that just the tip of an iceberg so ugly Goodell felt he had to burn the evidence? Not trying to toss in a red herring, I just find peoples' reactions to different things interesting.

All I'm saying is it's always better to reserve judgment until the facts come out.

I never said Kennedy or Polian were lying. I just said that they're not mentioning all of the advantages one gains by having the ability to listen in on the other team's play-calling. It may very well be factual that they weren't used for in-game strategy. However, when you see three teams annually, 12 other conference teams within three years....not to mention coaching carousels and free agency....one clearly can see that you would wire-tap for future reference when playing certain teams, and not during the game in progress.

Pulling up their in-division records between 2002-04 is irrelevant. Pulling up their records and schemes in the years after 2002-04....in a time period where the Saints suddenly got dominant offensively and defensively coherent and started to win consistently....is what you should pay attention to.

Besides.....why would ESPN lie about the Saints wiretapping the other team's play-calling?

1. That's ridiculous. Could, just maybe, Sean Payton and Drew Brees had anything to do with their success? Just a guess. And btw, they've been anything but coherent on defense. That's perpaps the biggest irony of Bountygate...with the exception of 2009's high turnovers, their defense has been average at best.

2. You're not that naive. It's called ratings. After all, the first word in their name is entertainment.

[BBTV]

I'd like to see the numbers that show that the nation is really hanging on the goings on with the Saints organization. Again, we know that they're the biggest thing in your life, but nationally, are they really a huge ratings draw? If ESPN was going to manufacture a story or blow something out of proportion (which we all agree that they can and occasionally do) would they target the Saints, or the Jets? Or Cowboys? Or some other major-market team? If I'm wrong then I'm wrong (wouldn't be the first time), but I just don't think that the world cares enough about the Saints to make it worth while to make something up. Kind of like the Vikings sex boat.

[BlueSky]

I'd like to see the numbers that show that the nation is really hanging on the goings on with the Saints organization. Again, we know that they're the biggest thing in your life, but nationally, are they really a huge ratings draw? If ESPN was going to manufacture a story or blow something out of proportion (which we all agree that they can and occasionally do) would they target the Saints, or the Jets? Or Cowboys? Or some other major-market team? If I'm wrong then I'm wrong (wouldn't be the first time), but I just don't think that the world cares enough about the Saints to make it worth while to make something up. Kind of like the Vikings sex boat.

Feeling snarky today, are we?

They're in the top 25 but nowhere near #1.

[Gothamite]

His point stands, though. I don't think the Saints are a big enough target for ESPN to gin up a phony scandal without basis.

[OnWis97]

His point stands, though. I don't think the Saints are a big enough target for ESPN to gin up a phony scandal without basis.

Probably not, but any NFL team is a big enough target for ESPN to jump in and go TMZ (a growing problem there) before getting the facts. I don't think ESPN made it up out of the blue, but it does not mean they did their due diligence.

I don't know that ESPN did that, but it's something I am more alert for than I used to be.

[Gothamite]

Me too, but when the FBI gets involved, it means there's at least the appearance of wrongdoing. We'll see what they find.

[IceCap]

Yeah, the Federal Government doesn't waste time with crap ESPN makes up.

[pmoehrin]

I can't see the FBI finding out much of anything.

Nobody in the Saints organization that knows anything is going to talk willingly and the incidents in question at least from what the ESPN report says are nearly a decade old which would mean the statue of limitations would have expired.

If there's nothing more then that, then there's nothing to really go on in terms of what the FBI can or will do. I think the NFL would like to know if he had them installed and if there was any chance that he did use them. If that's proven to be true, I would expect the NFL to come down even harder on Mickey Loomis then they did Gregg Williams or Sean Payton.

My own guess at what happened is that he had the thing installed, somebody then probably told him it was illegal to do and not just by NFL standards, so rather then pay to have it removed he just decided he wasn't going to use it either ever or anymore.

[Gothamite]

Nobody in the Saints organization that knows anything is going to talk willingly

"Willingly"? The Saints have their own omerta?

They'll talk when they're looking at a badge.

My own guess at what happened is that he had the thing installed, somebody then probably told him it was illegal to do and not just by NFL standards, so rather then pay to have it removed he just decided he wasn't going to use it either ever or anymore.

That would be contrary to his public statements, proving him a liar again, and if your guess is true, then my guess would be that he never cashes another NFL paycheck.

[mania]

Uh... damn.

The NFL suspended four players for their roles in the New Orleans Saints' bounty system, including linebacker Jonathan Vilma for the entire 2012 season.

In addition to Vilma, defensive tackle Anthony Hargrove (now with the Green Bay Packers) was suspended eight games, defensive Will Smith four games and linebacker Scott Fujita (now with the Cleveland Browns) three games.

[NJTank]

The NFL nuked the Saints in 2012.

[Gothamite]

The NFL nuked the Saints in 2012.

The Saints nuked themselves.

[Mings]

The NFL nuked the Saints in 2012.

The Saints nuked themselves.

Pretty much. If no one lied about it and stopped the program when they were told to do so, the most anyone would have received was a game or two.

[Burmy]