plenzmd1 Posted May 21, 2016 Share Posted May 21, 2016 again, this was prolly discussed last summer...but under this CBA can Goodell suspend anyone, for any reason, if he decides the reason is detrimental to the league? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iinii Posted May 21, 2016 Share Posted May 21, 2016 the side show has turned into a full blown circus.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnC Posted May 21, 2016 Share Posted May 21, 2016 and by ratifying the deal the players agreed to it Yes, the players agreed to the CBA. But that doesn't mean that all of Roger's decisions have fallen within the confines of the CBA. Almost every ruling that has been challenged by the union has been successful. His inflategate ruling was challenged and the union won its case before an appeal's judge. The league then challenged that ruling and won its case in a 2-1 ruling. My point is that Goodell's judgments have been far from infallible. This issue has been debated to the point of exhaustion. This case is going to be reviewed by a full body of appellate judges. It is near the finish line. Many people believed this issue was a simple black and white issue. It is not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
machine gun kelly Posted May 21, 2016 Share Posted May 21, 2016 I,really liked Goodell's interview at the draft where he said a bunch of positive things about Brady and the Pats, but that no player is above the rules and all need to be treated the same. Everything else is minutia. Let him serve it, and if you don't like the CBA, negotiate a new one in 2020. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Punching Bag Posted May 21, 2016 Share Posted May 21, 2016 Yes, the players agreed to the CBA. But that doesn't mean that all of Roger's decisions have fallen within the confines of the CBA. Almost every ruling that has been challenged by the union has been successful. His inflategate ruling was challenged and the union won its case before an appeal's judge. The league then challenged that ruling and won its case in a 2-1 ruling. My point is that Goodell's judgments have been far from infallible. This issue has been debated to the point of exhaustion. This case is going to be reviewed by a full body of appellate judges. It is near the finish line. Many people believed this issue was a simple black and white issue. It is not. Neither are judges' opinions infallible especially when the judge is later seen socializing with plaintiff. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnC Posted May 21, 2016 Share Posted May 21, 2016 Neither are judges' opinions infallible especially when the judge is later seen socializing with plaintiff. There was a chance encounter after the case was concluded If you want to believe in zany conspiracies then that is your prerogative. http://boston.cbslocal.com/2015/09/07/patriots-robert-kraft-deflategate-judge-richard-berman-have-chance-encounter-at-party-over-weekend/ Judges are certainly not infallible but in this case they will have the last say. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beerball Posted May 21, 2016 Share Posted May 21, 2016 Yes, the players agreed to the CBA. But that doesn't mean that all of Roger's decisions have fallen within the confines of the CBA. Almost every ruling that has been challenged by the union has been successful. His inflategate ruling was challenged and the union won its case before an appeal's judge. The league then challenged that ruling and won its case in a 2-1 ruling. My point is that Goodell's judgments have been far from infallible. This issue has been debated to the point of exhaustion. This case is going to be reviewed by a full body of appellate judges. It is near the finish line. Many people believed this issue was a simple black and white issue. It is not. Didn't say they did (or didn't). I was responding to comments about the players being pissed and Smith for brokering the current deal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnC Posted May 21, 2016 Share Posted May 21, 2016 (edited) Didn't say they did (or didn't). I was responding to comments about the players being pissed and Smith for brokering the current deal. Even for the players who went along with the deal (almost all of them) they couldn't have imagined how erratic and inconsistent Roger could be in his rulings. I'm sure that in the next CBA the players and the union are not going to allow the commissioner to have so much authority with issues related to player discipline. As I stated in a prior post even in the current system where Roger has almost unlimited authority many of his rulings that have been challenged have been overturned. What does that say about his judgment? Edited May 21, 2016 by JohnC Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tuco Posted May 21, 2016 Share Posted May 21, 2016 Even for the players who went along with the deal (almost all of them) they couldn't have imagined how erratic and inconsistent Roger could be in his rulings. I'm sure that in the next CBA the players and the union are not going to allow the commissioner to have so much authority with issues related to player discipline. As I stated in a prior post even in the current system where Roger has almost unlimited authority many of his rulings that have been challenged have been overturned. What does that say about his judgment? I wouldn't be so sure. The issue has always been hugely important to the league, and they will press vary hard to keep commissioner authority just like they always have. That means it's up to the players to push back. And while the Brady's of the league will be upset, the fact is the NFLPA is made up of about 1,800 players. About 900 of those players make a little over $500,000 per year, and many of those know they may only play a couple years at most, quite possibly even less. When push comes to shove, the union will complain about the commissioner authority just like they always do. They may even talk it up right to the bitter end. But in the end the majority of the players (by far) who don't have a problem with the commissioner's authority every year will far outnumber the very few players who do. Threatening a work stoppage or getting locked out (missing games) is not something the majority of fringe, lucky to be in the league for a short time players, is interested in doing just to protect the Tom Brady's of the world. Winning this battle in court would be great for the NFLPA. Losing it will make it even harder for them to convince the league or the majority of their own members to fight tooth and nail. Not when there's over $5 billion to be shared among them if they play nice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wayne Cubed Posted May 21, 2016 Share Posted May 21, 2016 Even for the players who went along with the deal (almost all of them) they couldn't have imagined how erratic and inconsistent Roger could be in his rulings. I'm sure that in the next CBA the players and the union are not going to allow the commissioner to have so much authority with issues related to player discipline. As I stated in a prior post even in the current system where Roger has almost unlimited authority many of his rulings that have been challenged have been overturned. What does that say about his judgment? Do you really think, of the 1,800 players who are part of the NFLPA, the vast majority care enough about Goodells control over punishment? There were 19 suspensions last year. There have been 59 since the newest CBA was ratified. That includes ones that were later reduced to none. In a league where the average player last 3 years would it be wise for the NFLPA , when the next CBA is determined, to argue about Goodells control when it only effects less than 1% of players? Would you risk a strike and missed paychecks, if you are one of those players that possibly won't last long? I think they could argue about the process a bit and maybe get that hashed out more but I don't think the owners, the majority of owners, think Goodell is doing a bad job. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnC Posted May 21, 2016 Share Posted May 21, 2016 Do you really think, of the 1,800 players who are part of the NFLPA, the vast majority care enough about Goodells control over punishment? There were 19 suspensions last year. There have been 59 since the newest CBA was ratified. That includes ones that were later reduced to none. In a league where the average player last 3 years would it be wise for the NFLPA , when the next CBA is determined, to argue about Goodells control when it only effects less than 1% of players? Would you risk a strike and missed paychecks, if you are one of those players that possibly won't last long? I think they could argue about the process a bit and maybe get that hashed out more but I don't think the owners, the majority of owners, think Goodell is doing a bad job. The highlight has been the focus of my attention on this topic. There has to be a more inclusive process where there is more consistency and proportionality in the disciplinary rulings. Repeating what I have stated before almost all the rulings that get challenged by the union gets overturned. That is not a demonstration of good judgment on the part of the disciplinarian as it is a demonstration of incompetency and unfairness in administering his authority. The issue for me has never been about one's authority. It is about how that authority is administered. Being in a position of authority doesn't give one the right to act in an arbitrary and capricious manner. You might believe that to be so but I don't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PromoTheRobot Posted May 21, 2016 Share Posted May 21, 2016 Anyone catch Sal @ 1pm? Had a lawyer discussing what Brady is trying to do and the long shot it is. That said Brady put together an all star legal team that might dazzle a few judges. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beerball Posted May 21, 2016 Share Posted May 21, 2016 Even for the players who went along with the deal (almost all of them) they couldn't have imagined how erratic and inconsistent Roger could be in his rulings. I'm sure that in the next CBA the players and the union are not going to allow the commissioner to have so much authority with issues related to player discipline. As I stated in a prior post even in the current system where Roger has almost unlimited authority many of his rulings that have been challenged have been overturned. What does that say about his judgment? Shortly after he was appointed he came out as the "get tough" commissioner. Many cheered because those players needed to stay in line and remember who they work for. Over the years his inconsistent rulings have proved that he is in over his head. OTOH the association is just as bad. I wonder how the next bargaining session is going to go? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnC Posted May 21, 2016 Share Posted May 21, 2016 Shortly after he was appointed he came out as the "get tough" commissioner. Many cheered because those players needed to stay in line and remember who they work for. Over the years his inconsistent rulings have proved that he is in over his head. OTOH the association is just as bad. I wonder how the next bargaining session is going to go? With the highlighted comment you succinctly and with great clarity state my position. At times you can be astute and perspicacious. OTOH the association is just as bad. I wonder how the next bargaining session is going to go? There are plenty of good models of disciplinary offices in all the professional sports that could be used to come up with a reasonable approach that would satisfy all sides. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ALF Posted May 23, 2016 Share Posted May 23, 2016 (edited) Brady's side will reportedly file an "en banc" hearing that will allow all 13 of the active Second Circuit judges to decide whether an appeal should be heard. http://www.wgr550.com/Report-Brady-will-appeal-suspension-ruling/22752026 Ian Rapoport (@RapSheet) 5/23/2016 28 mins ago - View on Twitter Tom Brady official appeal petition will come at 3 pm today. 1 argument: Goodell ignored the schedule of penalties & there is no basis for it Edited May 23, 2016 by ALF Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. WEO Posted May 23, 2016 Share Posted May 23, 2016 Brady's side will reportedly file an "en banc" hearing that will allow all 13 of the active Second Circuit judges to decide whether an appeal should be heard. http://www.wgr550.com/Report-Brady-will-appeal-suspension-ruling/22752026 That's some "exclusive"! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BaaadThingsMan Posted May 23, 2016 Share Posted May 23, 2016 What a waste of time and money. If he's found guilty again lifetime ban for *marsha and the *cheats !@#$ it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PromoTheRobot Posted May 23, 2016 Share Posted May 23, 2016 I would say he has about a 1-2% chance. Marsha has learned much from the Zen MASTER Bill Belichick. You don't go into a fight without a few extra weapons up your sleeve. I'm sure the reason he waited until now to file his appeal was he needed to time to rig the process. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gugny Posted May 23, 2016 Share Posted May 23, 2016 What a waste of time and money. If he's found guilty again lifetime ban for *marsha and the *cheats !@#$ it Lifetime ban over 2 psi? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BaaadThingsMan Posted May 23, 2016 Share Posted May 23, 2016 Lifetime ban over 2 psi?i'm tired of his smug ass thinkin he can cheat and get away with it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts