MTBill Posted July 20, 2018 Share Posted July 20, 2018 3 hours ago, Uncle Joe said: Seems like they are waffling on whether they think he was involved...or not. What is potentially problematic for her is - if these suspicions aren't proven, she may get sued later for baseless accusations - which is exactly what they are so far. If her account is accurate - it would be a logical conclusion for a person to draw up. But - so far this is all her word. No other evidence corroborates her story. (she could have set this whole thing up - as crazy as it sounds). Just now, JinxedBill1 said: Regardless of outcome, I think its Ridiculous that someone can lose money/employment before being found guilty of an action/crime. What happened to innocent before found guilty? Public opinion does not offer such protections. People make judgements. If/When it goes to court, that's when you have this protection. But people can and will believe what they want to believe - or by first impression/bias. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted July 20, 2018 Share Posted July 20, 2018 1 hour ago, Doc said: So in your mind, anyone can accuse a player of something and boom, the Commish can suspend him without anything needing to be proven? Yeah, that's so not retarded. In his mind...and in the CBA. The unholy stupidity of the NFLPA is such that, in their chase for more money, they gave the Commissioner's office complete authority over player discipline in the CBA, with no restrictions. Goodell would be stupid to abuse that power...but then, he is stupid, as he has already abused that power. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lurker Posted July 20, 2018 Share Posted July 20, 2018 Just now, BringBackOrton said: Says who? The Commissioner has to say he believes Shady may have violated the policy. Boom. Shady suspended. Shady appeals, says Goodell is being arbitrary and unfair. Goodell hears the appeal. Says no. Boom. Shady suspended. You are demonstrably incorrect. McCoy would have nothing to loose by bringing a defamation suit against the NFL, regardless of the CBA. His career would be over, so go ahead and knock over the china. His attorney could get Goodell on the stand trying to explain why he thought McCoy was guilty (absent proof that specific conduct occurred) and the NFL would want nothing to do with that, IMO... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BringBackOrton Posted July 20, 2018 Share Posted July 20, 2018 Just now, Lurker said: McCoy would have nothing to loose by bringing a defamation suit against the NFL, regardless of the CBA. His career would be over, so go ahead and knock over the china. His attorney could get Goodell on the stand trying to explain why he thought McCoy was guilty (absent proof that specific conduct occurred) and the NFL would want nothing to do with that, IMO... I agree. But that doesn't mean they can't. It just makes it a bad idea. Also, the NFL would win that defamation suit. 3 minutes ago, DC Tom said: In his mind...and in the CBA. The unholy stupidity of the NFLPA is such that, in their chase for more money, they gave the Commissioner's office complete authority over player discipline in the CBA, with no restrictions. Goodell would be stupid to abuse that power...but then, he is stupid, as he has already abused that power. Doc hasn't read the CBA. He thinks the NFLPA and Commissioner have a separation of powers/checks and balances thing going on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted July 20, 2018 Share Posted July 20, 2018 6 minutes ago, DC Tom said: In his mind...and in the CBA. The unholy stupidity of the NFLPA is such that, in their chase for more money, they gave the Commissioner's office complete authority over player discipline in the CBA, with no restrictions. Goodell would be stupid to abuse that power...but then, he is stupid, as he has already abused that power. I don't think Goodell is out to suspend every player for the slightest infraction. The league requires players to play and he's an employee of the owners, who don't want to see their players, especially stars, get suspended. And players have been suspended for a game, only to have that suspension lifted on appeal, so there's some type of remediation at work. 3 minutes ago, BringBackOrton said: I agree. But that doesn't mean they can't. It just makes it a bad idea. Also, the NFL would win that defamation suit. Doc hasn't read the CBA. He thinks the NFLPA and Commissioner have a separation of powers/checks and balances thing going on. Why would it be a bad idea? Goodell can suspend anyone he wants at any time for any reason (and apparently no reason) at all. No the reason it would be a bad idea is because he'd lose on appeal. If he were to suspend Shady based on the facts that we know right now, it would never stand up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BringBackOrton Posted July 20, 2018 Share Posted July 20, 2018 (edited) 1 minute ago, Doc said: I don't think Goodell is out to suspend every player for the slightest infraction. The league requires players to play and he's an employee of the owners, who don't want to see their players, especially stars, get suspended. And players have been suspended for a game, only to have that suspension lifted on appeal, so there's some type of remediation at work. Why would it be a bad idea? Goodell can suspend anyone he wants at any time for any reason (and apparently no reason) at all. No the reason it would be a bad idea is because he'd lose on appeal. If he were to suspend Shady based on the facts that we know right now, it would never stand up. STAND UP TO WHO? WHAT PROCESS OF OVERSIGHT ARE YOU REFERRING TO? Edited July 20, 2018 by BringBackOrton Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted July 20, 2018 Share Posted July 20, 2018 3 minutes ago, BringBackOrton said: I agree. But that doesn't mean they can't. It just makes it a bad idea. Also, the NFL would win that defamation suit. Doc hasn't read the CBA. He thinks the NFLPA and Commissioner have a separation of powers/checks and balances thing going on. It truly amazes me how much the NFLPA gave away in pursuit of cash. For everyone's edification, here's what the CBA says about it: From Article 46: Quote Section 1. League Discipline: Notwithstanding anything stated in Article 43: (a) All disputes involving a fine or suspension imposed upon a player for conduct on the playing field (other than as described in Subsection (b) below) or involving action taken against a player by the Commissioner for conduct detrimental to the integrity of, or public confidence in, the game of professional football, will be processed exclusively as follows: the Commissioner will promptly send written notice of his action to the player, with a copy to the NFLPA. Within three (3) business days following such written notification, the player affected thereby, or the NFLPA with the player’s approval, may appeal in writing to the Commissioner. Article 43, referenced, concerns injury grievances, and isn't applicable to this discussion. Subsection (b), referenced, refers to exclusively on-field conduct, and is likewise not applicable From Appendix A, the player contract Quote 15. INTEGRITY OF GAME. Player recognizes the detriment to the League and professional football that would result from impairment of public confidence in the honest and orderly conduct of NFL games or the integrity and good character of NFL players. Player therefore acknowledges his awareness that if he accepts a bribe or agrees to throw or fix an NFL game; fails to promptly report a bribe offer or an attempt to throw or fix an NFL game; bets on an NFL game; knowingly associates with gamblers or gambling activity; uses or provides other players with stimulants or other drugs for the purpose of attempting to enhance on-field performance; or is guilty of any other form of conduct reasonably judged by the League Commissioner to be detrimental to the League or professional football, the Commissioner will have the right, but only after giving Player the opportunity for a hearing at which he may be represented by counsel of his choice, to fine Player in a reasonable amount; to suspend Player for a period certain or indefinitely; and/or to terminate this contract. That is everything the CBA says about the Commissioner disciplining off-field conduct. No schedule of fines or suspension, no other guidance. The Commissioner is the judge of what is "detrimental to the integrity the game of professional football" or "detrimental to the League," and only constrained by a requirement for a hearing, a requirement for written notice to be provided to the player, and a right of the player to appeal, which the Commissioner hears. The NFLPA has already announced that they'll strike to get this changed when it's renegotiated (in 2021). And I don't blame them one bit. But for now...they negotiated this piece of ****, they can suck it. 8 minutes ago, Doc said: No the reason it would be a bad idea is because he'd lose on appeal. If he were to suspend Shady based on the facts that we know right now, it would never stand up. Who hears the appeal, though? Goodell. Under the CBA, he decides on the appeals of his own decisions. THAT'S how ridiculous the disciplinary system is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted July 20, 2018 Share Posted July 20, 2018 7 minutes ago, BringBackOrton said: STAND UP TO WHO? WHAT PROCESS OF OVERSIGHT ARE YOU REFERRING TO? Like I said above, players have been suspended and had their suspensions lifted on appeal. How/why do you think that happens? And just to clarify, do you think that Shady can, much less will, be suspended based on what we know so far? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Luxy312 Posted July 20, 2018 Share Posted July 20, 2018 1 hour ago, BringBackOrton said: Read the CBA. Maintain an educated position on the matter. I'll help. "Under Article XI of the NFL’s CBA, “action taken against a player by the Commissioner for conduct detrimental to the integrity of, or public confidence in, the game of professional football” may only be appealed to the commissioner." "The lack of a just cause provision also implicates where the burden of proof lies in appeals of League discipline. Without a just cause standard, the burden of proof lies upon the party challenging the discipline. See In re Logan-Hocking (Ohio) Local School District Bd. of Educ., 122 Lab. Arb. 550, 557-58 (2006). That is to say, the disciplined employee, which in most instances operates through his certified collective bargaining representative, here, the NFLPA, has the burden of showing that the discipline was arbitrary or capricious." "Players convicted of a crime or subject to a disposition of a criminal proceeding (as defined in this Policy) are subject to discipline." "Leave with Pay–A player may be placed on paid administrative leave pursuant to the Commissioner Exempt List under either of the following circumstances: ... Second,when an investigation leads the Commissioner to believe that a player may have violated this Policy by committing any of the conduct identified above , he may act where the circumstances and evidence warrant doing so AKA Goodell can suspend you. FOR ANYTHING. And the burden of proof is on the player, or the PA, to fight it. And you can only appeal, to, you guessed it, the Commissioner. Does that sound retarded? Of course. Did the NFLPA agree to it? You betcha. Better luck next time. Do your homework. What is the conduct that he would be suspended for? Thus far there is NO CONDUCT. The NFL would get crushed in a lawsuit. You trying to create facts when none exist is idiotic. There has and never will be an NFL suspension without actual conduct that can be deemed harmful to the NFL. In every case, there is conduct / action by a player that drives the suspension. It may not be criminal, but it's still something. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BringBackOrton Posted July 20, 2018 Share Posted July 20, 2018 2 minutes ago, Doc said: Like I said above, players have been suspended and had their suspensions lifted on appeal. How/why do you think that happens? And just to clarify, do you think that Shady can, much less will, be suspended based on what we know so far? Why don't you tell me how appeals work in the NFL disciplinary process? And tell me who players appeal to? Yes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lurker Posted July 20, 2018 Share Posted July 20, 2018 (edited) 7 minutes ago, DC Tom said: It truly amazes me how much the NFLPA gave away in pursuit of cash. For everyone's edification, here's what the CBA says about it: From Article 46: Article 43, referenced, concerns injury grievances, and isn't applicable to this discussion. Subsection (b), referenced, refers to exclusively on-field conduct, and is likewise not applicable From Appendix A, the player contract That is everything the CBA says about the Commissioner disciplining off-field conduct. No schedule of fines or suspension, no other guidance. The Commissioner is the judge of what is "detrimental to the integrity the game of professional football" or "detrimental to the League," and only constrained by a requirement for a hearing, a requirement for written notice to be provided to the player, and a right of the player to appeal, which the Commissioner hears. The NFLPA has already announced that they'll strike to get this changed when it's renegotiated (in 2021). And I don't blame them one bit. But for now...they negotiated this piece of ****, they can suck it. The word "conduct" still sticks in my craw. All of the players that have been suspended to date were physically present or linked (Carruth) to the conduct they were suspended for. If Shady's involvement with the events in Atlanta can't be proven, how would there be conduct to suspend him over? Edited July 20, 2018 by Lurker 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted July 20, 2018 Share Posted July 20, 2018 (edited) 3 minutes ago, BringBackOrton said: Why don't you tell me how appeals work in the NFL disciplinary process? And tell me who players appeal to? Yes. They appeal to Goodell. And yet some still get their suspensions reduced. And no, Goodell cannot do a thing to Shady based on what we know so far. Maybe you want it to happen so bad that it's clouding your judgment, I don't know. Edited July 20, 2018 by Doc Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roger Goodell Posted July 20, 2018 Share Posted July 20, 2018 Just now, Doc said: They appeal to Goodell. And yet some still get their suspensions reduced. And no, Goodell cannot do a thing to Shady based on what we know so far. Maybe you want it to happen so bad that it's clouding your judgment, I don't know. The league and the players assoication has worked hard to establish a partnership that balances and respects the concerns of all sides with respect to handling issues around player discipline. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BringBackOrton Posted July 20, 2018 Share Posted July 20, 2018 Just now, Doc said: They appeal to Goodell. And yet some still get their suspensions reduced. And no, Goodell cannot do a thing to Shady based on what we know so far. Well, you've just been linked to 3 pages to the contrary, but believe what you want. Some get their suspensions reduced, yes. Goodell changes his mind or walks back his punishment. What is your point? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted July 20, 2018 Share Posted July 20, 2018 2 minutes ago, BringBackOrton said: Well, you've just been linked to 3 pages to the contrary, but believe what you want. Some get their suspensions reduced, yes. Goodell changes his mind or walks back his punishment. What is your point? It means he won't just suspend people for no good reason, and even when he does suspend people, he has to admit he erred. If he were judge, jury, and executioner, his suspensions would stand. And not sure what you're saying, but Cordon believing Shady was involved is absolutely no grounds for a suspension. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BringBackOrton Posted July 20, 2018 Share Posted July 20, 2018 (edited) 5 minutes ago, Doc said: It means he won't just suspend people for no good reason, and even when he does suspend people, he has to admit he erred. If he were judge, jury, and executioner, his suspensions would stand. And not sure what you're saying, but Cordon believing Shady was involved is absolutely no grounds for a suspension. Why isn't it him changing his mind? So how does that work Doc? If Goodell hands out the suspensions, and hears the appeals, why don't his suspensions stand? Who tells him to change his suspensions? Why do some suspensions get reduced and some don't? Who is granting this oversight in the disciplinary process? Edited July 20, 2018 by BringBackOrton Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted July 20, 2018 Share Posted July 20, 2018 Just now, BringBackOrton said: Why isn't it him changing his mind? So how does that work Doc? If Goodell hands out the suspensions, and hears the appeals, why don't his suspensions stand? Who tells him to change his suspensions? No one knows because we're not there to witness it. It could be him changing his mind (which means he made a mistake in the first place) or more likely the player's/NFLPA's legal team presents their case and/or threatens legal action. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BringBackOrton Posted July 20, 2018 Share Posted July 20, 2018 (edited) 4 minutes ago, Doc said: No one knows because we're not there to witness it. It could be him changing his mind (which means he made a mistake in the first place) or more likely the player's/NFLPA's legal team presents their case and/or threatens legal action. What legal action? Changes his mind does not imply Goodell made a mistake. At all. He may have made the right decision and changed it to a bad one. And neither means that he isn't judge, jury and executioner. Because if he does what he wants in both cases. Edited July 20, 2018 by BringBackOrton Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Augie Posted July 20, 2018 Share Posted July 20, 2018 1 minute ago, BringBackOrton said: What legal action? Changes his mind does not imply Goodell made a mistake. At all. He may have made the right decision and changed it to a bad one. And neither means that he isn't judge, jury and executioner. Because if he does what he wants in both cases. ....or......they know an appeal is coming so they build in some room to negotiate. Just like buying a house - throw out your opening offer, and go from there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BringBackOrton Posted July 20, 2018 Share Posted July 20, 2018 (edited) 1 minute ago, Augie said: ....or......they know an appeal is coming so they build in some room to negotiate. Just like buying a house - throw out your opening offer, and go from there. Possible. But the appeal is a dog and pony show for the NFLPA and fans. Goodell's word is law. Edited July 20, 2018 by BringBackOrton Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts