[closed]Roger Goodell and CBA

[clearwater cadet]

Sorry if this has been already discussed, but if the owners and player agreed on a CBA that Roger Goodell has complete and final say on player conduct issues and punishment, why is it possible that all these players can run to the court room to try to avoid punishment. Fair or not they agreedto the current CBA. So what gives then the right not to honor it?

 

For example, I don't like paying taxes, but our elected officals agree on tax cut or raise and we have to abiding by the laws and rulings if we like it or not.

[NoSaint]

Sorry if this has been already discussed, but if the owners and player agreed on a CBA that Roger Goodell has complete and final say on player conduct issues and punishment, why is it possible that all these players can run to the court room to try to avoid punishment. Fair or not they agreedto the current CBA. So what gives then the right not to honor it?

 

For example, I don't like paying taxes, but our elected officals agree on tax cut or raise and we have to abiding by the laws and rulings if we like it or not.

Buuuuut if your elected official shows up and demands $20 or the keys to your car as a newly created tax he made up, you might could challenge that. Giving him broad leeway doesn't mean he can literally do anything he wants.

[clearwater cadet]

Buuuuut if your elected official shows up and demands $20 or the keys to your car as a newly created tax he made up, you might could challenge that. Giving him broad leeway doesn't mean he can literally do anything he wants.

True, but we dont give all the power to one person. There more then one elected offical which allows for varies checks and balances to protect us from being treated unfairly.

Buuuuut if your elected official shows up and demands $20 or the keys to your car as a newly created tax he made up, you might could challenge that. Giving him broad leeway doesn't mean he can literally do anything he wants.

True, but we dont give all the power to one person. There are more then one elected offical which allows for varies checks and balances to protect us from being treated unfairly. The players unions and owner collectly bargained to give it to one persons. They could of chosen to give it to a multiple person panel, etc. Buuuuut if enough of the elected offical got together and decided we need to give them 20 dollars or the keys to the car we would have to. Edited August 29, 2015 by clearwater cadet

[NoSaint]

True, but we dont give all the power to one person. There more then one elected offical which allows for varies checks and balances to protect us from being treated unfairly.

True, but we dont give all the power to one person. There are more then one elected offical which allows for varies checks and balances to protect us from being treated unfairly. The players unions and owner collectly bargained to give it to one persons. They could of chosen to give it to a multiple person panel, etc. Buuuuut if enough of the elected offical got together and decided we need to give them 20 dollars or the keys to the car we would have to.

Not if their decision was in violation of a higher legal standard. To make another example- goodell couldn't force the players to partake in illegal activities, even if they name him emperor of the league with unlimited power in the next CBA. The CBA works within the law, not the other way around.

 

That and the players didn't literally give him 100% unchecked power to do whatever he wants.

[Mr. WEO]

I'm not sure that this is being discussed elsewhere....

[Ed_Formerly_of_Roch]

Because they did agree to all this in the CBA is also is the reason why there's a good chance the Brady thing doesn't get over turned. Unless the NFLPA can prove he did things beyond the scope of the CBA, everything I've read and heard states federal judges rarely will over turn collectively bargained agreements for the reasons you state.

[The Dean]

I'm not sure that this is being discussed elsewhere....

 

 

It is. But that thread is a giant clusterfu#!.

 

I have to agree a bit with the OP and NoSaint. Any judicial review in this case should be limited to:

 

1. Is the CBA legal (not unconstitutional or illegal in some other way)?

 

2. Does Goodell have the right to make the decision under the CBA?

And maybe 3. Just some general assurance that the process was handled in a way consistent with spirit of the CBA

 

 

I don't believe the court should be involved in the details of violation or the NFL's investigation, except to assure the accusation, and findings weren't completely fabricated and pulled out of thin air. Whole thing should take about an hour. But the judge wants them to settle it themselves and they like to get their names mentioned in national media.

 

Maybe the NFLPA will assure they have an arbitration process next time.

Edited August 29, 2015 by The Dean

[HamSandwhich]

Not if their decision was in violation of a higher legal standard. To make another example- goodell couldn't force the players to partake in illegal activities, even if they name him emperor of the league with unlimited power in the next CBA. The CBA works within the law, not the other way around.

 

That and the players didn't literally give him 100% unchecked power to do whatever he wants.

You're using very extreme examples. No laws were broken here. I assume you are arguing his post on the face and not directly related to Brady's case?

[Mr. WEO]

 

 

It is. But that thread is a giant clusterfu#!.

 

I have to agree a bit with the OP and NoSaint. Any judicial review in this case should be limited to:

 

1. Is the CBA legal (not unconstitutional or illegal in some other way)?

 

2. Does Goodell have the right to make the decision under the CBA?

And maybe 3. Just some general assurance that the process was handled in a way consistent with spirit of the CBA

 

 

I don't believe the court should be involved in the details of violation or the NFL's investigation, except to assure the accusation, and findings weren't completely fabricated and pulled out of thin air. Whole thing should take about an hour. But the judge wants them to settle it themselves and they like to get their names mentioned in national media.

 

Maybe the NFLPA will assure they have an arbitration process next time.

 

 

1 and 2 are not what is being challenged or decided by the court/judge.

 

The decisions by the commissioner, as he makes them based on the power granted to him byt the NFLPA in the CBA, have to to be fiar and unbiased.

 

Many here are still confused as to why the NFLPA and Brady are in court right now. It has nothing to do with the CBA as it is written.

[NoSaint]

You're using very extreme examples. No laws were broken here. I assume you are arguing his post on the face and not directly related to Brady's case?

I wasn't directing it at Brady and addressing "why do the players think they can take a commissioners decision to court?"

 

I used the more extreme end to illustrate that in a quick/dirty way instead of getting bogged down arguing the finer points right around the fringe.

[Punching Bag]

Sorry if this has been already discussed, but if the owners and player agreed on a CBA that Roger Goodell has complete and final say on player conduct issues and punishment, why is it possible that all these players can run to the court room to try to avoid punishment. Fair or not they agreedto the current CBA. So what gives then the right not to honor it?

 

For example, I don't like paying taxes, but our elected officals agree on tax cut or raise and we have to abiding by the laws and rulings if we like it or not.

Because there are judges who will vacate agreements when they do not agree with them like the NFLPA ball sucker in Minnesota.

[The Dean]

 

 

1 and 2 are not what is being challenged or decided by the court/judge.

 

The decisions by the commissioner, as he makes them based on the power granted to him byt the NFLPA in the CBA, have to to be fiar and unbiased.

 

Many here are still confused as to why the NFLPA and Brady are in court right now. It has nothing to do with the CBA as it is written.

 

 

But it's the only thing that court should be looking at, which is my point. There is a CBA in place and it gives Goodell this power. Pretty much end of story, unless they find there is something wrong with the CBA or that Goodell has somehow violated the spirit of the agreement (which is the fair and unbiased portion). But no detailed analysis is really needed. Broad strokes can tell you if this was, or wasn't, a case of the NFL being out to get Brady, and/or targeting him unfairly.

 

And I also understand that more is being examined here, which is preposterous, IMO. And end run around the CBA and a judge basking in the glory. I can only hope when it's all said and done (if there is no settlement) the judge does the right thing and tells the NFLPA to pound sand.

[Kelly the Dog]

Because there are judges who will vacate agreements when they do not agree with them like the NFLPA ball sucker in Minnesota.

The judge was right to vacate in that case. The NFL did something they shouldn't be allowed to do. The made new rules after the infraction and then punished the player under the new rules and not the rules in place when the infraction occurred. You can't do that. It's clearly not fair.

[Beerball]

[This is an automated response]<br /><br />This subject matter is being currently being discussed or has already been discussed in a previous thread. <br /><br />Please consider using the "search" function before starting new topics. <br /><br />Thank you.