Mr. WEO

I think the NFL's confidence (or "claim", as you put it) that the court's reach is almost nil is based on its own precedent precedent. And since those decisions were handed down, a new CBA has been agreed upon that has made the suspension process more deliberative than it was when those cases were in Federal court. Adding now a jointly agreed upon finder of fact/decider of punishment (Robinson), I really don't know how the NFLPA tells the court that the NFL's own policy and procedure were not followed rationally. Dropping Kraft's name doesn't seem to get them in that door. But I guess if a case is filed in court, it has to be heard. NFL's response will be "Ok, whatever".

A better QB (a franchise pick) ended TTs job. The brief drop of his lung was the conveyance. Had he sprained his ankle, say, slipping on a mat in warmups, the result would have been the same. A mediocre journey man QB at the end of his career. As you said , he made a good career out of his limited skill. I applaud him.

Not really. A needle near the lung for any reason/indication has a risk of pneumothorax. It is recovered from very quickly in most cases. The reason Tyrod was listed as out "indefinitely" after that game where the injury became known immediately prior to kickoff is because Herbert came in as a rookie and threw for 300 yards. That was it for TT.....

Has anyone seen a picture of a shirtless Josh Allen? Anyway, they call him "Playoff Lenny", not "July Lenny"....

The NFL and Florio haven't ousted the courts, so far the courts have ousted themselves and said you people have system to adjudicate this. In the Brady case, the second highest court in the land overturned a District Court ruling in favor of overturning his 4 game suspension. As it was reported at the time: "Writing for the panel, Circuit Judge Barrington D. Parker says that labor law means that a federal court has to be "highly deferential" to the decisions made during arbitration. What's more, the collective bargaining agreement between the League and the players gives Goodell broad authority, the court writes. So, while the court agreed that, indeed, Goodell didn't allow Brady to confront the case against him, that right was not guaranteed by the collective bargaining agreement. "Had the parties wished to allow for more expansive discovery, they could have bargained for that right," the court wrote. "They did not, and there is simply no fundamental unfairness in affording the parties precisely what they agreed on." What will the NFLPA serve up "irrational" application of its policy? Kraft? Obviously the NFL will counter with the fact that Kraft alway maintained his innocence (he claims he got the tug without asking---and in fact that they called him later that evening offering him the "early bird special"--$15 off--the next day) and charges were dropped by the local DA. Did he commit a crime? He says he didn't;t and the DA didn't prosecute (his own bungling prevented this). The NFL could also point out that, in their latest CBA, the have decided to not disallow (by testing and suspension) marijuana use by the players, even though purchase and possession of marijuana is a federal crime. Snyder? I don't think the NFL is done with him and his problems yet.

He brought that sandwich to Whitney in the tub.....

I think there would be little if any chance such a threat is credible to the NFL legal team--their "business" would not be discoverable for the purposes of settling a labor dispute that was recently (2020) been re-bargained for. The courts have been loathe to settle these things--the Brady case is evidence of this. The NFL has not collectively bargained with itself (the owners) to arrive at some sort of punishment schedule for bad owner behavior. And what is meaningful "suspension" of an owner anyway?

The court may not hear it. If they do, why would they get in the way of arbitrated collectively bargained labor disputes? Brady won in Federal court, then lost in Circuit court.

Brady-Belichick had 3 rings in their first 4 seasons together... Most odds makers have Bills as the SB favorites by about 13:2.

lol Anyway, you keep putting arguments in my posts that aren't there. I said they got better despite the pick, not that the pick "caused them to improve". If you can only make straw man arguments, then just hoist the white flag or allow me to enjoy myself reading your responses!

mentoring gone wrong..

Some unnamed rookie player could have, at that very moment, stepped in and made a game winning play----and I'm making things up?? lol. Anyway, yes--in that moment, all it took was one play. But the wrong play was chosen. Game over.

Neither am I. Where did I change the premise? I have repeatedly said that the Love pick did NOT prevent them from going to a SB--as the team got better despite the pick and they were on the cusp of making the SB both years. You're stuck arguing that some OTHER rookie that they could have taken at 30 or 26 would have, in that NFCC game, made a difference that would have gotten them past the Bucs in the 4th Q. Who is it?

wait, they don't talk about the ladies???

Actually I didn't try to claim that. lol... Look, the Packers were rolling over their competition, scoring more points than any team in the league. Tee Higgins wouldn't have made them higher than #1. Also, Winfield and Diggs weren't on anyone's 1st round board, both going in the second---before the Packers pick. By your logic, the Bills should have not traded for Diggs and kept the pick for Jefferson--who has averaged 1500 yards right off the bus...with Cousins as his QB...while splitting targets with Thielen (none of which Diggs could do) and had him on a rookie contract---maybe got them to a SB or 2! Since the Packers drafted Love, Rodgers has won back to back MVPs and they have gone to the NFCC game also back to back. In that game against the Bucs, the MVP threw for 346 yards, 3 TDs.....and then, on the cusp of tying the game late in the 4th, he made a bad decision. To claim that was the direct or indirect result of a bad draft decision before the season started is jus..."absurd".

yeah---that's the part that's not worth pointing out, as I said.... They were selected for this trait.

Most, if not all? I missed that specific claim. link? You think Pegula is going to lay out for that? That's slightly less likely than public financing for such.

Yes, YES! It prevented the Packers from back to back appearances AND kept him from winning his first MVP in 7 years. Oh wait---none of that happened! But we will always be left to imagine how a rookie at some position would have made the #1 Offense so much even better that the MVP wouldn't choke away the game at the very end.

And....? Are they currently protected from the elements? Being "anti-dome" implies that such people already understand that most seats in an open stadium are "uncovered".

Huh? He announced he had cancer 21 years after he ran for President. He died 5 months later, age 73.

I did.

Frazier wasn't the only Defensive Coordinator on the Bills sidelines making those decisions at the end of the game..........

win it?? they didn't even play in it---the MVP choked. lol. Name any 2 draft picks in your head and he still throws that TD pass into the dirt instead of running, Josh-like, into the EZ. you keep dying on this hill and Rodgers only laughs....

“amazing sightlines” and the potential for intimidating Bills’ opponents" lol

There's no new order at all. Players ask for the most money they can get, owners say yes or no. It will always be so.