I've actually changed my stance from this AM. At first I was ticked over the arrogance, but then when kid pointed out the strategy, well, now I'm impressed. Well played and certainly not "foul" either (technically speaking).
Huge overstep by Goodell
- Thread starter pehawk
- Start date
kidhawk
Well-known member
Scottemojo":1mp787q6 said:
I can't say for certain what happens behind closed doors, but I was under the impression that the commissioner's exempt list was created to give teams the ability to sit players without holding a roster spot. Not that Goodell made them put the players on it.
If anything the players in question are getting a paid vacation to work through the legal system before any financial punishment occurs. It allows teams to not have to deal with the PR nightmare of having to either cut a player before he's found guilty or holding onto them and feeling the wrath of the public ire, including losing substantial partners such as what was happening to Minnesota when the Peterson news first broke. It gave time for the process to play out without Peterson losing a dime of his pay.
pehawk":3uqmv7hy said:
I see the point Kid is making...
...but its basically a complicated way to get where they should go all along.
IE...the decision should never be in Goodells hands to begin with. Him making a decision that forced the NFLPA to do something so that it HAS to go to arbitration is ridiculous.
kidhawk
Well-known member
Marvin49":uym2zfmk said:
Goodell's job is to look out for the good of the league. The player's union is to look out for the players. This scenario has both of them doing their job, and the league does no more damage to it's already tarnished reputation in this department.
kidhawk
Well-known member
Marvin49":26itoww2 said:
As I said above, Goodell is a brilliant man.
The way you change the system is through the CBA. If you want to make a change both sides have to agree. Goodell will ask for something in return from the Players Association in return for giving up the ability to decide these cases. I don't know what he'll ask, but he'll want something and therein lies the rub
chris98251
Well-known member
Goodell is playing politics and making a arbitrator the bad guy now, he's sly as a Fox and wants to scurry out the back door of being accountable, what I thnk is missing is how this years handling of all these situations is going to explode in the next contract or if they vote to bust this one, I remember reading that there is a an option to do that at some point.
The fact that one person promised that time served was going to be good enough is also a big sticking point in this, I see the argeument of the league that his timed served was with pay, he now needs time without pay, that being the case he was wrongfully discharged from the team then earlier if there was just a case and no decision made.
The fact that one person promised that time served was going to be good enough is also a big sticking point in this, I see the argeument of the league that his timed served was with pay, he now needs time without pay, that being the case he was wrongfully discharged from the team then earlier if there was just a case and no decision made.
ivotuk
Well-known member
This is on the NFLPA as much as it is on Goodell. They agreed to this and should have set guidelilns, just more evidence of incompetence by DeMaurice Smith.
Where was he when players were on the front page for domestic violence? Why wasn't he out front of it all telling the viewiing public that 99% of the players are great people who work in charities instead of letting the story be all about NFL players are brutal people who beat their wives and their kids?
All he could be bothered to do was complain about Roger, typical politician, don't offer a solution, just point the finger at the other guy, that's easiest.
And don't think Roger Goodell is "arbitrarily" suspending AP for the rest of the season. It's a bargaining tool and he would be a fool not to use it. His job is to make things easier for the owners, while DeMauice Smith's job is supposed to be making things easier for the players.
Just because you disagree with what someone is doing doesn't make them wrong. Roger is doing his job, if he didn't. he would get fired. DeMaurice Smith needs to be fired, because he let the players get screwed on the disciplinary stuff in the CBA. He is fortunate that the Ray RIce incident happened because now it gives him leverage to do something that he should have done years ago.
And just to respond to those that say "it's a violation of the CBA!" No, it's not.
Where was he when players were on the front page for domestic violence? Why wasn't he out front of it all telling the viewiing public that 99% of the players are great people who work in charities instead of letting the story be all about NFL players are brutal people who beat their wives and their kids?
All he could be bothered to do was complain about Roger, typical politician, don't offer a solution, just point the finger at the other guy, that's easiest.
And don't think Roger Goodell is "arbitrarily" suspending AP for the rest of the season. It's a bargaining tool and he would be a fool not to use it. His job is to make things easier for the owners, while DeMauice Smith's job is supposed to be making things easier for the players.
Just because you disagree with what someone is doing doesn't make them wrong. Roger is doing his job, if he didn't. he would get fired. DeMaurice Smith needs to be fired, because he let the players get screwed on the disciplinary stuff in the CBA. He is fortunate that the Ray RIce incident happened because now it gives him leverage to do something that he should have done years ago.
And just to respond to those that say "it's a violation of the CBA!" No, it's not.
mikeak
Well-known member
frosted21":3lwegpyp said:
Not correct
Several arbitration cases were reduced prior to Rice. It is why Goodell went with 2 games for Rice instead of max 4
kidhawk
Well-known member
frosted21":8a9exd2z said:
Not necessarily. Rice's case was through a neutral arbitrator and the NFLPA already requested one for this case
The reason the NFL granted a neutral party for Rice was because of the conflict of interest involved with Roger. According to Florio at PFT, Goodell will be the one handling the appeal. They can demand a neutral arbitrator but the NFL doesn't have to provide one.
mikeak
Well-known member
Already arbitrator involved
http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/spor ... long-time/
Arbitrator lowered the penalty on Reed and upheld it on Gordon
Arbitrator will be used. Goodel had never been and cannot be an arbitrator as he is one party to the verdict.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/spor ... long-time/
Arbitrator lowered the penalty on Reed and upheld it on Gordon
Arbitrator will be used. Goodel had never been and cannot be an arbitrator as he is one party to the verdict.
mikeak":3ml0oe7w said:
I think you're confused. That has nothing to do with his suspension appeal - the grievance the arbitrator ruled on was a separate issue, regarding his being on the commissioner's exempt list. I'm not talking about that, I'm talking about the appeal of his suspension.
His appeal regarding the suspension hasn't even been filed yet ...
http://mmqb.si.com/2014/11/18/adrian-peterson-suspension-appeal-roger-goodell/
The NFL Players Association announced it would appeal the verdict, and went further, saying it would also demand a neutral third-party arbitrator to hear the appeal—not commissioner Roger Goodell. The 2011 Collective Bargaining Agreement between players and owners gives Goodell the right to hear such appeals, and though the league is considering a new Personal Conduct Policy that could remove Goodell as the everyday disciplinarian on cases such as this, it’s not believed that Goodell would cede his authority before the new policy is in place.
The NFL Players Association announced it would appeal the verdict, and went further, saying it would also demand a neutral third-party arbitrator to hear the appeal—not commissioner Roger Goodell. The 2011 Collective Bargaining Agreement between players and owners gives Goodell the right to hear such appeals, and though the league is considering a new Personal Conduct Policy that could remove Goodell as the everyday disciplinarian on cases such as this, it’s not believed that Goodell would cede his authority before the new policy is in place.
kidhawk
Well-known member
frosted21":24ztwu20 said:
Nobody is saying they have to provide one, but that doesn't mean they won't do it. The NFL is in damage control mode right now, and letting the arbitrator handle the appeal is absolutely the best way to spin this in the NFL's favor. Roger is smart enough to know that.
Sgt. Largent
Well-known member
- Joined
- Oct 1, 2012
- Messages
- 25,560
- Reaction score
- 7,612
frosted21":nmzo06ni said:
LOL, why bother?
We're going to appeal to the guy who already handed down the punishment! That'll show em!
Similar threads
Welshers
