He began tapping his foot and Brees attempted to answer the question before Faulk was finished, responding curtly with,
Yeah, well listen, yeah, here’s the thing. That’s a whole ‘nother issue..now you’re talking about jurisdiction and who’s decision is it. The fact of the matter is are the allegations true or not? Are there facts and proof in evidence to back that up? Besides just supposed corroborated evidence between disgruntled employees.
He said the “disgruntled employees” comment with a grin and a shrug in a nod to reports that the NFL is weighing heavily on testimony from former Saints defensive assistant Michael Cerullo in it’s investigation.
Cerullo was said to have been fired by the Saints after the Super Bowl season because he had lied about his whereabouts during several absences from the team during the season. It’s also alleged that Cerullo’s Super Bowl ring he got from the team contained cubic zirconia diamonds instead of real ones.
The theory is that Cerullo felt slighted by the Saints and in order to get a form of revenge or payback, he was aware of the investigation during his time with the Saints and fanned the flames with alleged evidence that he reportedly tried to recant later but wasn’t allowed to by the NFL.
Brees’ contention, along with the suspended players, is that if the evidence isn’t solid then the NFL has nothing and should re-evaluate the case as well as the punishments handed out. However, neither Goodell or the NFL are willing to admit any such thing.