HurlyBurly51 Posted March 5, 2009 Share Posted March 5, 2009 As for sending a clear message, yeah, he sure sent one to Marshall last year. And he was just arrested for disorderly conduct, but charges were dropped. How long of a suspension should Goodell give him, now that Marshall "has a file?" With his file, 8 games, at least. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VOR Posted March 5, 2009 Share Posted March 5, 2009 With his file, 8 games, at least. For disorderly conduct charges that were later dropped? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HurlyBurly51 Posted March 5, 2009 Share Posted March 5, 2009 For disorderly conduct charges that were later dropped? Not quite an isolated incident for him, now was it? The entirety of his transgressions will be taken into consideration, and Goodell will punish those who don't learn from their mistakes and clean up their act, conviction or not. Playing in the in NFL is a privilege, not a right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2020 Our Year For Sure Posted March 5, 2009 Share Posted March 5, 2009 UPDATE: Lynch gets three years probation and 80 hours of community service. http://www.buffalonews.com/452/story/598207.html I'd say that's pretty harsh because if he screws up again he's done. Sort of three strikes and you're out deal. Well there go any thoughts of trading one of these guys. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HurlyBurly51 Posted March 5, 2009 Share Posted March 5, 2009 For disorderly conduct charges that were later dropped? Brandon Marshall's latest arrest could reportedly "cloud his long-term future in Denver." Marshall is in the final year of his rookie contract, and the Broncos were believed to be hesitant to lock him up long-term because of his lengthy rap sheet. Players of Marshall's caliber are not easy to find, but the team can't go into every season not knowing when or if he will be available. The Denver Post believes he could still be facing as much as an eight-game suspension despite the latest charges being dropped.Source: Denver Post Brandon Marshall-WR - Broncos Mar. 2 - 3:04 pm et The NFL reportedly reduced Brandon Marshall's three-game suspension to one game in 2008 with the "warning" that any more run-ins with the law could lead to a "lengthy" ban. Charges were dropped in Marshall's latest incident but he was arrested, which is still grounds for discipline. He probably wouldn't be facing another suspension if he hadn't been arrested three times as a pro before this. Source: NFL.com Brandon Marshall-WR - Broncos Mar. 2 - 11:42 am et ProFootballTalk reports that the NFL "will look into" Brandon Marshall's latest arrest even though the charges have been dismissed. The fact remains that Marshall did get arrested, which means he won't escape the NFL's Personal Conduct Policy. Marshall continues to use poor judgment in putting himself in "the wrong position," which is a point of emphasis for Commissioner Goodell. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lets_go_bills Posted March 5, 2009 Author Share Posted March 5, 2009 Lynch is one more bad incident away from becomming the next Pacman Jones. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VOR Posted March 5, 2009 Share Posted March 5, 2009 Brandon Marshall's latest arrest could reportedly "cloud his long-term future in Denver."Marshall is in the final year of his rookie contract, and the Broncos were believed to be hesitant to lock him up long-term because of his lengthy rap sheet. Players of Marshall's caliber are not easy to find, but the team can't go into every season not knowing when or if he will be available. The Denver Post believes he could still be facing as much as an eight-game suspension despite the latest charges being dropped.Source: Denver Post Brandon Marshall-WR - Broncos Mar. 2 - 3:04 pm et The NFL reportedly reduced Brandon Marshall's three-game suspension to one game in 2008 with the "warning" that any more run-ins with the law could lead to a "lengthy" ban. Charges were dropped in Marshall's latest incident but he was arrested, which is still grounds for discipline. He probably wouldn't be facing another suspension if he hadn't been arrested three times as a pro before this. Source: NFL.com Brandon Marshall-WR - Broncos Mar. 2 - 11:42 am et ProFootballTalk reports that the NFL "will look into" Brandon Marshall's latest arrest even though the charges have been dismissed. The fact remains that Marshall did get arrested, which means he won't escape the NFL's Personal Conduct Policy. Marshall continues to use poor judgment in putting himself in "the wrong position," which is a point of emphasis for Commissioner Goodell. Oh, I think he'll get suspended. But I think he'll ultimately serve 4 games after the NFLPA gets involved. And as per the info you provided, Marshall was arrested twice before his previous arrest, that got him ultimately suspended for 1 game. This is Lynch's first arrest, and even if you consider last year's incident as an "arrest," it still falls short of the "3 strike and you're out" like what happened in Marshall's case. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Erik Posted March 5, 2009 Share Posted March 5, 2009 Brandon Marshall's latest arrest could reportedly "cloud his long-term future in Denver."Marshall is in the final year of his rookie contract, and the Broncos were believed to be hesitant to lock him up long-term because of his lengthy rap sheet. Players of Marshall's caliber are not easy to find, but the team can't go into every season not knowing when or if he will be available. The Denver Post believes he could still be facing as much as an eight-game suspension despite the latest charges being dropped.Source: Denver Post Brandon Marshall-WR - Broncos Mar. 2 - 3:04 pm et The NFL reportedly reduced Brandon Marshall's three-game suspension to one game in 2008 with the "warning" that any more run-ins with the law could lead to a "lengthy" ban. Charges were dropped in Marshall's latest incident but he was arrested, which is still grounds for discipline. He probably wouldn't be facing another suspension if he hadn't been arrested three times as a pro before this. Source: NFL.com Brandon Marshall-WR - Broncos Mar. 2 - 11:42 am et ProFootballTalk reports that the NFL "will look into" Brandon Marshall's latest arrest even though the charges have been dismissed. The fact remains that Marshall did get arrested, which means he won't escape the NFL's Personal Conduct Policy. Marshall continues to use poor judgment in putting himself in "the wrong position," which is a point of emphasis for Commissioner Goodell. The only problem is Lynch right now is where Marshall was last year when he got suspended for one game...actually he still hasn't matched Marshall in arrests up to that point and that doesn't even include the domestic abuse calls to his house. The point is you can't compare Marshall now to Lynch now because Lynch hasn't even been suspended at all yet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HurlyBurly51 Posted March 5, 2009 Share Posted March 5, 2009 Oh, I think he'll get suspended. But I think he'll ultimately serve 4 games after the NFLPA gets involved. And as per the info you provided, Marshall was arrested twice before his previous arrest, that got him ultimately suspended for 1 game. This is Lynch's first arrest, and even if you consider last year's incident as an "arrest," it still falls short of the "3 strike and you're out" like what happened in Marshall's case. Lynch is getting suspended. And the FO knows it. Why do you think the Bills are bringing in all these veteran RB's when the Lynch/Jackson duo worked pretty well last year? They have no other roster holes to focus on? Thanks ML. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CaliforniaCheez Posted March 6, 2009 Share Posted March 6, 2009 This is completely unjust. His 2nd Amendment Rights were violated. How can such an unConstitutional law exist?!!!! We must stop giving up our rights to the government totalitarians!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Senator Posted March 6, 2009 Share Posted March 6, 2009 He said he's really sorry. No suspension at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ramius Posted March 6, 2009 Share Posted March 6, 2009 He said he's really sorry. No suspension at all. Worked for wilfork. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HurlyBurly51 Posted March 6, 2009 Share Posted March 6, 2009 The only problem is Lynch right now is where Marshall was last year when he got suspended for one game...actually he still hasn't matched Marshall in arrests up to that point and that doesn't even include the domestic abuse calls to his house. The point is you can't compare Marshall now to Lynch now because Lynch hasn't even been suspended at all yet. Ummm...I wasn't. It was a side conversation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Conch Posted March 6, 2009 Share Posted March 6, 2009 it is time the team got some balls and suspended this punk. commish or no commish suspension, teams should start taking responsibility and policing their own idiots. he is a punk and nothing more. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lori Posted March 6, 2009 Share Posted March 6, 2009 A lot of you people are forgetting about a little thing called the union. Even if Goodell decides to drop the hammer down to, as many of you say, teach Lynch a lesson, the union will not let him receive any harsher of a penalty than anybody else with like convictions. The union won't "let" him? Really? Lynch can appeal, and the NFLPA can be involved in the hearing. But who RUNS the hearing and decides whether the appeal has any merit? The commissioner. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thurman#1 Posted March 6, 2009 Share Posted March 6, 2009 this is the translated version from his lawyer What makes you think it's not a statement written completely by his PR guy (not his lawyer)? Assuming that he had anything to do with that statement is wishful thinking - possible, but no evidence of it whatsoever. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thurman#1 Posted March 6, 2009 Share Posted March 6, 2009 This will be lynch's first criminal offense. Last year he got off with a traffic violation, so while that may raise the eyebrows, it really doesn't count. Unless goodell wants to set the precedent that traffic violations will get you suspended. Goodell may have given him a talking to, but i dont think that was "strike one." This is strike one on marshawn, and Goodell usually doesn't hand out suspensions on strike one. He pleaded guilty to a hit and run. I don't know how you can say that "doesn't really count," and in fact, neither do you, because Goodell is in no way bound to let court decisions, legal penalties or charges agreed to in plea bargain situations affect his decisions on sanctions. Marshawn has now pleaded guilty twice. Twice, not once. And the first plea was for a hit and run incident. Strike two. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drinkTHEkoolaid Posted March 6, 2009 Share Posted March 6, 2009 marshawn just register your weapons. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Erik Posted March 6, 2009 Share Posted March 6, 2009 The union won't "let" him? Really? Lynch can appeal, and the NFLPA can be involved in the hearing. But who RUNS the hearing and decides whether the appeal has any merit? The commissioner. Well, ok, we'll see...I still haven't seen a valid reason why Marshawn Lynch should get any harsher suspension than anyone else. Again, I am condoning absolutely nothing that he did and feel that he should be punished but to the extent that it puts our team at a disadvantage that other teams would not be put at? No way. Again the closest case is Brandon Marshall and Marshawn hasn't come close to his rap sheet...Marshall got one game. Too lenient? Yes, but that's the standard that Goodell set and it will be the standard that the union holds him too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VOR Posted March 6, 2009 Share Posted March 6, 2009 He pleaded guilty to a hit and run. I don't know how you can say that "doesn't really count," and in fact, neither do you, because Goodell is in no way bound to let court decisions, legal penalties or charges agreed to in plea bargain situations affect his decisions on sanctions. Marshawn has now pleaded guilty twice. Twice, not once. And the first plea was for a hit and run incident. Strike two. Lynch pleaded guilty to hit and run? Um, no. He pleaded guilty to failing to avoid hitting a pedestrian. A "crime" the equilvalent of a traffic ticket. Because there was no evidence he knew he hit her and thus knowingly ran. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VOR Posted March 6, 2009 Share Posted March 6, 2009 Well, ok, we'll see...I still haven't seen a valid reason why Marshawn Lynch should get any harsher suspension than anyone else. Again, I am condoning absolutely nothing that he did and feel that he should be punished but to the extent that it puts our team at a disadvantage that other teams would not be put at? No way. Again the closest case is Brandon Marshall and Marshawn hasn't come close to his rap sheet...Marshall got one game. Too lenient? Yes, but that's the standard that Goodell set and it will be the standard that the union holds him too. I agree. Marshall's case was one of repeated violent actions. Lynch was found with an illegal gun in his car. Not even close to the same situations. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heels20X6 Posted March 6, 2009 Share Posted March 6, 2009 Lynch is one more bad incident away from becomming the next Pacman Jones. Over-exaggerate much? Last I checked Marshawn got busted for a gun in his trunk...not for "making it rain" on strippers and then shooting up bouncers.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ramius Posted March 6, 2009 Share Posted March 6, 2009 Well, ok, we'll see...I still haven't seen a valid reason why Marshawn Lynch should get any harsher suspension than anyone else. Again, I am condoning absolutely nothing that he did and feel that he should be punished but to the extent that it puts our team at a disadvantage that other teams would not be put at? No way. Again the closest case is Brandon Marshall and Marshawn hasn't come close to his rap sheet...Marshall got one game. Too lenient? Yes, but that's the standard that Goodell set and it will be the standard that the union holds him too. Dead on post. I don't condone anything Lynch did, but given the past precedent set by the NFL and Goodell, there's no reason for Lynch to end up with anything longer than 1 game. And even Marshall had 3 arrests prior to the single game suspension. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HurlyBurly51 Posted April 9, 2009 Share Posted April 9, 2009 Good call! When its all said and done after appeals and such, i'll be shocked if he's suspended for more than 1 game. I'm betting on no suspension. I'm with Ramius on this one...I think he skates! He didn't let Lynch slide last year. This will be lynch's first criminal offense. Last year he got off with a traffic violation, so while that may raise the eyebrows, it really doesn't count. Unless goodell wants to set the precedent that traffic violations will get you suspended. Goodell may have given him a talking to, but i dont think that was "strike one." This is strike one on marshawn, and Goodell usually doesn't hand out suspensions on strike one. A lot of you people are forgetting about a little thing called the union. Even if Goodell decides to drop the hammer down to, as many of you say, teach Lynch a lesson, the union will not let him receive any harsher of a penalty than anybody else with like convictions. Well, ok, we'll see...I still haven't seen a valid reason why Marshawn Lynch should get any harsher suspension than anyone else. Again, I am condoning absolutely nothing that he did and feel that he should be punished but to the extent that it puts our team at a disadvantage that other teams would not be put at? No way. Again the closest case is Brandon Marshall and Marshawn hasn't come close to his rap sheet...Marshall got one game. Too lenient? Yes, but that's the standard that Goodell set and it will be the standard that the union holds him too. This is proof once again why John Clayton is one of the best in the business! I said he'll get 1 game max, and i still doubt he'll get suspended. Clayton isn't exactly a beacon of truth. Anything more than 2 games would be complete bull sh--, given the previous precedent set by Goodell. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ramius Posted April 9, 2009 Share Posted April 9, 2009 Good call! I'm still standing by everything i said. He'll appeal, and it'll get knocked down some. Or did the appeal already occur this morning and lynch got denied? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HurlyBurly51 Posted April 9, 2009 Share Posted April 9, 2009 I'm still standing by everything i said. He'll appeal, and it'll get knocked down some. Or did the appeal already occur this morning and lynch got denied? Well, you said no suspension, and were wrong on that one. Since you hedged your call, we'll see if it gets reduced to one game - but since Goodell hears the appeal, I find that doubtful. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VOR Posted April 10, 2009 Share Posted April 10, 2009 Well, you said no suspension, and were wrong on that one. Since you hedged your call, we'll see if it gets reduced to one game - but since Goodell hears the appeal, I find that doubtful. Who heard Marshall's appeal, that got his original 3-game suspension reduced to 1 game? Someone other than Goodell? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HurlyBurly51 Posted April 10, 2009 Share Posted April 10, 2009 Who heard Marshall's appeal, that got his original 3-game suspension reduced to 1 game? Someone other than Goodell? Which doesn't change the fact he got suspended to begin with, contrary to some prognostications around here which are now being hedged. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VOR Posted April 10, 2009 Share Posted April 10, 2009 Which doesn't change the fact he got suspended to begin with, contrary to some prognostications around here which are now being hedged. Yeah, like your "with his file, 8 games at least." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HurlyBurly51 Posted April 10, 2009 Share Posted April 10, 2009 Yeah, like your "with his file, 8 games at least." Do you have a learning disability? You don't seem to be able to comprehend what is being written about, and intertwine 2 different subjects into one. For clarification, my reply was talking about Lynch, to which you replied that Goodell also heard Marshall's appeal. I in turn brought it back to the point, which is that you among others predicted there would be no suspenssion at all (now keep up - for Lynch), which you were obviously wrong about. Then you reply with another Marshall reference? Huh? On that subject, yes I believe Marshall could be in line for an 8 game suspension, but what has that got to do with the fact you were wrong in believing Lynch would receive no suspension? Also, BTW, we live in the real world where circumstances and dynamics change from time to time, so you can't necessarily draw such a linear equation that since Marhsall did this, then Lynch should get that. Goodell reserves the right to adjust as circumstances dictate, and if the league wants to make a emphasis on gun issues, then your simplistic logic may not work so well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VOR Posted April 11, 2009 Share Posted April 11, 2009 Do you have a learning disability? You don't seem to be able to comprehend what is being written about, and intertwine 2 different subjects into one. For clarification, my reply was talking about Lynch, to which you replied that Goodell also heard Marshall's appeal. I in turn brought it back to the point, which is that you among others predicted there would be no suspenssion at all (now keep up - for Lynch), which you were obviously wrong about. Then you reply with another Marshall reference? Huh? On that subject, yes I believe Marshall could be in line for an 8 game suspension, but what has that got to do with the fact you were wrong in believing Lynch would receive no suspension? Also, BTW, we live in the real world where circumstances and dynamics change from time to time, so you can't necessarily draw such a linear equation that since Marhsall did this, then Lynch should get that. Goodell reserves the right to adjust as circumstances dictate, and if the league wants to make a emphasis on gun issues, then your simplistic logic may not work so well. My bad on the 8 games thing. But apparently you have a learning disability as well because I've consistently said that based on what Marshall ultimately got, Lynch would ultimately at-most serve (which means what he'll actually miss, not what suspension was initially be handed-down) a one-game suspension, and that there was an outside chance at no suspension, after appeal. I never said he would definitely not get suspended. And yes, I know about the real world, dynamics changing, yada, yada, yada. I presume that what you're getting at is that since Burress shot himself in the leg, Lynch shouldn't get his suspension reduced like Marshall did, because his latest run-in with the law involved a gun. Well I guess that means that now that Stallworth killed a man while DUI, henceforth any player caught DUI will now get an automatic suspension, right? You know, changing dynamics and all. Do you think that has a realistic chance of happening? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thebug Posted April 11, 2009 Share Posted April 11, 2009 If Marshawn was a member of the Pats*, he would be the biggest thug the world has ever seen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Dean Posted April 11, 2009 Share Posted April 11, 2009 If Marshawn was a member of the Pats*, he would be the biggest thug the world has ever seen. ...or he might not be suspended, at all... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thebug Posted April 11, 2009 Share Posted April 11, 2009 ...or he might not be suspended, at all... I see your point, but I meant on this board. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Dean Posted April 11, 2009 Share Posted April 11, 2009 I see your point, but I meant on this board. Me, too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts