Also, from Peter King's column this morning (remember, King was the guy who beat the drum the loudest in favor of the NFL):
I'll be interested in seeing if Tagliabue finds significant evidence of a bounty system. When the league showed several reporters the evidence in June, there was a load of pay-for-performance exhibits but few that purportedly provide intent to injure, or to entice players to injure. I hear the league has some evidence in that regard it hasn't shown -- and if that's the case, Tagliabue will have the ability to review and use such data in his decision-making process.
Read more: LINK
My question to King and the other media members is this:
If there was scant evidence in June, why didn't you say so back then? Why, when you published your cover story in MARCH, did you not DEMAND evidence from the league? The league made an extraordinary claim, and extraordinary claims demand extraordinary evidence. The burden of proof is on the league, yet the media has and continues to give them a pass on that.
Out of all of the shite that came from the "bounty" scandal, THIS is what pisses me off the most.