Wilson speaks out (Pats)

by BoNeZ on Sep 14, 2007 2:15 PM CDT Comment 16 comments

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=3019472

Basically says what most on here are saying about there being a double standard with anything regarding the Patriots. Looks like Wilson is going to try and appeal the suspension.

The punishment doesn't seem to fit the crime and kind of reminds me of when the NBA suspended Dj Mbenga for I think 6 games for going into the stands to help calm a situation down if I remember correctly (he was also in street clothes and the suspension occurred during the playoffs) and earlier in that same season Antonio Davis rushed to the stands (while he was in the game) and only got 5 games.....doesn't seem quite right...

Another user-created commentary provided by a BTB reader.

0 recs | Comment 16 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Goodell

stepped in it with this one. Listening to sports radio and reading almost anything not written in Bahston says that no one thought the punishment was right, and almost every one of them brings up Wade Wilson's case.

by dunkman on Sep 14, 2007 3:15 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

Thanks for Reminding Me

To write Goodell. I shot him an email a few minutes ago, and copied a few of his directors. I doubt I'll receive a response, but at least he'll know how disgusted I was, and that a loyal fan of 38 years is has lost confidence in the league.

by kindablue on Sep 14, 2007 3:30 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

I'm sure you weren't the only one.

I bet their servers crash from the amount of email disgusted fans sent.

by APerfectStar on Sep 14, 2007 3:47 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Excellent

There's a saying in the Army "mass has a quality all its own". So even if they don't read word, the message is received.

by dunkman on Sep 14, 2007 5:37 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Wilson

Obviously I don't know the details but Wilson is asserting that the league found that he was innocent of distributing, which very well might be what they told him. However, like most punishments, it could be one of those things where its that they really think he was dealing but don't have any proof, but that's not going to stop them from imposing a penalty that they think is at least halfway fitting of the crime of distributing HGH.

People on this board seemed to readily accept the idea that Wilson was using HGH because of the ED/diabetes thing but that just seemed like a clever cover up to me. Its a separate topic so I won't go into it, but I get the feeling Wilson should keep his mouth shut on this one.

Story: I was with a kid at a bar who was 19 with a terrible fake ID. The bartender gave him 2 beers and then cut him off because he said the kid looked too drunk. He clearly wasn't, but nobody really argued withe bartender.

by ab03 on Sep 14, 2007 4:20 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

But Wilson Complied Fully

With the league's investigation, unlike the defensive, surly and secretive behavior of Belichick. Reference a quote from the ESPN article above:

Wilson did so [take HGH] while working as an assistant coach for the Chicago Bears and turned over phone records and credit card receipts in a seemingly successful attempt to convince the league he was taking them for his own personal benefit and not distributing them to players.

I hope you're not suggesting Wilson be punished merely on suspicion of wrongdoing. Serious judgements like these need to be based on verified available evidence. The league did not rule Wilson was distributing HGHs, only that he used them. If you were to insist on making judgements based on suspicion, then imagine the penalty for the Patriots, where four teams and several players have voiced concerns about their past behavior. That's enough suspicion to shut down their franchise. I don't believe you'd want to step on that slippery slope.

by kindablue on Sep 14, 2007 5:00 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

I'm saying

the reason Wilson's penalty is higher is probably because they don't fully believe his story. Now, whether the league legitimately thinks so or not is a different question. I don't have all of the evidence in front of me but receipts that say he bought small amounts from one distributor wouldn't necessarily alleviate all of my concerns in the commissioner's office.

by ab03 on Sep 14, 2007 6:19 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

And I Don't Understand

The distinction you're making. If the league don't fully believe Wilson's story, but have no evidence to support anything to the contrary, it's just suspicion.

So if the league can hand down a penalty on Wilson based purely on suspicion as you're implying, why can't they do it in Belichick's case?

Either way you look at it, there's a double standard.

by kindablue on Sep 14, 2007 6:31 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

and "defensive, surly, secretive?"

i'm not sure how you are interjecting that. Once they got caught, i'm not sure belicheck put up any resistance.

by ab03 on Sep 14, 2007 6:20 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Belichcik

Early on refused comment on the subject, other than it was about "a videotaping procedure during last Sunday's game and my interpretation of the rules". Yeah, right.

His statement after the investigation was complete:

As the Commissioner acknowledged, our use of sideline video had no impact on the outcome of last week's game. We have never used sideline video to obtain a competitive advantage while the game was in progress.
Part of my job as head coach is to ensure that our football operations are conducted in compliance of the league rules and all accepted interpretations of them. My interpretation of a rule in the Constitution and Bylaws was incorrect.
With tonight's resolution, I will not be offering any further comments on this matter. We are moving on with our preparations for Sunday's game.

His refusal to discuss his violation of league rules, in contrast to Wilson, is absolutely secretive and defensive. His conduct during his press conferences this week, when reporters were trying to get an explanation, was surly. Using euphemisms to explain away unethical behavior is defensive, as is claiming he was gaining no competitive advantage by doing so. As is characterizing explicitly prohibited behavior by the league as an "incorrect" "interpretation".

by kindablue on Sep 14, 2007 6:51 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Wilson's record

at the Florida suppliers showed that the amounts were only enough to be for one person and in small doses, so it would be about impossible to make a case for distributing.

by dunkman on Sep 14, 2007 5:39 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Let's not forget

What Wade did was when he was with Chicago, but his punishment effect him AND the Cowboys...not right to have the Cowboys pay a price for something that didn't even envolve them.

Compare that with the punishment in which Belichick received.

I love me some T.O....I ain't skeerd!!!!!

by airtyme on Sep 14, 2007 7:52 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

I rarely call out another poster

but the exception here comes from a Diabetic of 20 years who understands Wade Wilson's attempt to use alternative medicine to restore a bodily function. The main-stream medical community remains 5 to 10 years behind on alternative treatments. I have used both (but not HGH) whenever I could. I no longer have 60% of the function of each of my feet and 60% and 70% loss of function in my hands, all from Diabetes. My liver and kidneys do not allow me to take any pain medications. I use alternative medicine (acupuncture) 4 hours per week to survive. So whether it passes your smell test is your business. But to me Wade Wilson got suspended for being a Diabetic and that sucks.

by lee3022 on Sep 14, 2007 10:42 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs