Jump to content

BREAKING: NFL, Kap, and Reid settle Grievance Case about Collusion


Alphadawg7

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, formerlyofCtown said:

There was a chance the NFL would lose based on current politics.  You notice they used the term collusion?  Where do we recognise that term from?  If you dont think that was intentional you would be mistaken.  You see lawyers consider those things when they file suit and settle a suit.  Those are the very things that lawyers discuss when trying to reach a settlement and I gaurantee Kaps Lawyers braught that up.  

Also If they absolutely did it then why would Kap settle.  

Have you ever considered that Kap was just a flash in the pan and not that good of a QB.  Do you really think if this was Mahomes he would be unsigned Lol.  

This is kind of moronic. Antitrust and collusion laws are probably 100 years old. It has nothing to do with politics. If they could win the NFL would have taken it to court. It's just most of Trump's followers keep hearing "Collusion is not a crime" and it's wrong. Collusion is a crime. You won't get jail time in most collusion cases so conservatives in the media know Trump would never be charged with a crime that is impeachable for collusion. Collusion is usually financial crimes and conservatives in the media know this so it doesn't matter if they lie a little.

 

What they have to get Trump on is conspiracy. Collusion that lead to a high crime, like hacking.

Edited by CuddyDark
  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, H2o said:

Then wouldn't he be considered a "sell-out"?

 

Yes. He is a Laywer in training.

2 hours ago, B-Man said:

After all the hoopla...Kaepernick took the money, and a confidentiality agreement.

 

It was NEVER about "Principle & Conviction".

 

It was ALWAYS about the Benjamins.

 

Agreement should have been signed on President's Day so we would know it was about the Presidents (on the bills).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, stony said:

I wouldn't put it past the owners to have a chain email entitled "We all agree to never sign Kaepernick, right?" and then all reply in the affirmative.  A lot of them seem that stupid.   

Right.  Billions are typically morons, barely smart enough to breath actually.  Good call cletus.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, OldTimeAFLGuy said:

 

...here's my problem with the kid 'Dawg and I don't give a rat's azz about his politic......he hit the scene and dazzled.....but it just seemed to me (probably DEAD wrong as usual) that "tats 'n poses" became his focus, forgetting that being an NFL QB is one helluva job that needs TOTAL focus....and it didn't take long for opposing DC's to figure him out.....he flashed like RG III did without RG's "meddling Daddy baggage".......the premature limelight blinded his focus IMO......

 

All good man, and not saying your opinion has no merit.  

 

However, that comes with the territory.  Players with success have a lot of demand outside football, and thats part of their brand.  He didnt do anything anyone else wasn't doing that had the same opportunity.  He was a hot new player, a good looking guy with unique hair, and an exciting play style.  So that created other opportunities for him, but that was always off season stuff.  Not like he was missing practice over it or letting himself go physically during that time.  

 

The thing is, Kap spent a ton of time working with kids in his local community donating both a lot of money and his time.  He was one of the most active players in this regard.  Yet he gets this bad rep because some magazines wanted to put him on their cover because he was young, highly paid, unique, exciting, etc.  But that was not a fair representation of who he is as a person.  All kind of athletes have a ton of tattoos, so not sure where the tattoo comment comes in. 

 

Now he is still out there fighting for causes, charity, etc and giving lots of his money and time to them.  But people still want to use magazine pictures o their opinion of him as a QB to now decide his character, yet he literally has never done a single thing to suggest a bad character.  He has always been a pillar of his community and never been in any kind of trouble. 

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, buffaloboyinATL said:

Somewhere out there Ray Rice is contacting a lawyer. Collusion is collusion regardless of the reason. This is a dangerous precedent for the NFL.

No it's different for Rice. Rice violated the collective bargaining agreement.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, CuddyDark said:

No it's different for Rice. Rice violated the collective bargaining agreement.

So did MANY other players who were ultimately given a second chance after serving their suspension. Rice could easily argue he was not given that same opportunity because of collusion between the owners.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, buffaloboyinATL said:

Somewhere out there Ray Rice is contacting a lawyer. Collusion is collusion regardless of the reason. This is a dangerous precedent for the NFL.

 

Rice won't have a case...he didnt get a job because his career was done.  And no one was going to add a player who was on video knocking a woman out in an elevator that also couldn't help their team.  So NFL didn't need to "collude" against him, his diminishing skills and atrocious tape was enough for teams just flat out not want to sign him on their own without having to band together.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, buffaloboyinATL said:

So did MANY other players who were ultimately given a second chance after serving their suspension. Rice could easily argue he was not given that same opportunity because of collusion between the owners.

And he would lose. It would be a waste of money to his lawyers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Bray Wyatt said:

I said this in the other thread but will say here, if the decision was coming in less than a month (final decision from an arbitrator per the article), and he had the league by the balls, why settle? 


I dont think it was as clear cut as many think

 

I agree. The league knows this settlement looks like an admission of guilt so they wouldn't have agreed to it unless there was something in evidence that gave Kaepernick a strong case. At the same time, Kaepernick would have pushed for a public trial and maximum compensation if said evidence were rock solid. He probably gave up some money and public vindication, and the league probably gave up some money and lost some face. Seems like a pretty even compromise, which leads me to believe the evidence was damaging to the NFL but not bad enough to be a slam dunk, at least legally speaking.

 

Of course, if the actual settlement ever becomes public knowledge, all of my assumptions could be proven wrong one way or the other.

  • Like (+1) 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, buffaloboyinATL said:

Somewhere out there Ray Rice is contacting a lawyer. Collusion is collusion regardless of the reason. This is a dangerous precedent for the NFL.

 

Ray Rice wouldn’t have a leg to stand on.

 

The NFL could very easily argue, and win, that having him involved in the league could hurt the bottom line by alienating women.

 

The NFL is still a business.

 

Edited by Binghamton Beast
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Binghamton Beast said:

 

Ray Rice wouldn’t have a leg to stand on.

 

The NFL could very easily argue, and win, that having him involved in the league could hurt the bottom line by alienating women.

 

The NFL is still a business.

 

I know the cases are different but can’t the argument also be made that hiring Kaepernick could also impact the bottom line? (I honestly thought this is why the NFL would win this case)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, Alphadawg7 said:

 

All good man, and not saying your opinion has no merit.  

 

However, that comes with the territory.  Players with success have a lot of demand outside football, and thats part of their brand.  He didnt do anything anyone else wasn't doing that had the same opportunity.  He was a hot new player, a good looking guy with unique hair, and an exciting play style.  So that created other opportunities for him, but that was always off season stuff.  Not like he was missing practice over it or letting himself go physically during that time.  

 

The thing is, Kap spent a ton of time working with kids in his local community donating both a lot of money and his time.  He was one of the most active players in this regard.  Yet he gets this bad rep because some magazines wanted to put him on their cover because he was young, highly paid, unique, exciting, etc.  But that was not a fair representation of who he is as a person.  All kind of athletes have a ton of tattoos, so not sure where the tattoo comment comes in. 

 

Now he is still out there fighting for causes, charity, etc and giving lots of his money and time to them.  But people still want to use magazine pictures o their opinion of him as a QB to now decide his character, yet he literally has never done a single thing to suggest a bad character.  He has always been a pillar of his community and never been in any kind of trouble. 

...nicely and fairly done my friend...nice.....:thumbsup:

21 minutes ago, klos63 said:

I'll bet you they aren't.

 

...ok...

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, buffaloboyinATL said:

I know the cases are different but can’t the argument also be made that hiring Kaepernick could also impact the bottom line? (I honestly thought this is why the NFL would win this case)

The NFL has successfully defended the CBA in court many times. They would have to fight Rice to the supreme court because a loss to him would make the CBA invalid and college sophomores would be able to enter the draft and a bunch of other things they have won in court would fall.

 

He would lose anyway but they'd have to fight with whatever it took to win.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, CuddyDark said:

The NFL has successfully defended the CBA in court many times. They would have to fight Rice to the supreme court because a loss to him would make the CBA invalid and college sophomores would be able to enter the draft and a bunch of other things they have won in court would fall.

 

He would lose anyway but they'd have to fight with whatever it took to win.

For the record, I have no issue with the NFL not bringing Rice back. I am just using him as an example to say I am surprised they caved on the Kaepernick lawsuit because it is a bad precedent that could open a can of worms.

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...