Zeke and NFL have discussed settlement

[LocimusPrime]

FYP

That's for fixing it

 

[Mr Cowboy]

the NFLPA has little choice but to proceed and win. This could be the one thing that breaks the CBA open for them, or at least help the get rid of article . That's according to an sports/labor attorney I heard on the radio.

 

[Reality]

It comes down to this .. The wording included in the TRO ruling by the Judge has made it clear to the NFL that their assumption that the Brady ruling clearly defined their absolute power over player discipline without question was incorrect and more limited in scope than they expected.

The NFL now knows there is a chance that they not only lose this battle, more importantly, they also know they now risk having their Brady ruling limited all because they chose to fight a case that they grossly mishandled. If this had been a case they were more fair in their investigation and ruling procedures, they would not be as worried. However, because of the "unfair" aspect of their process, it has created a potential hole in the Brady ruling.

What this means is that the Brady ruling is strong and in most cases would hold up against anything a player or the NFLPA could throw at it. However, because judges are recognizing the NFL's process in this case was not handled fairly, it puts the Brady ruling at risk because this case could end up with a judge further defining and thereby limiting the scope of the Brady ruling against future cases, even ones where the NFL would have not had an issue beforehand. To be clear, this could happen even if the courts ultimately rule in the NFL's favor against Elliott.

Think of it like this. Let's say your boss tells you that you are in charge of a project. If you don't ask your boss to define what "in charge" means, you can arbitrarily make decisions without hesitation and if questioned later, you can say, "You told me I was in charge!" However, if you ask your boss whether or not you can do something as part of being in charge and your boss says, "no", you have now limited your authority over the project.

This is obvious because the NFL immediately suspended Elliott after the Texas court filing was negated by the Appeals court, and now, after the new TRO ruling was announced along with the "unfair" process wording by the judge, suddenly the NFL is open to a settlement.

The smart move for the NFL is to offer to drop the 6-game suspension for domestic violence and and instead suspend him for 1 game for one of the other non-DV incidents such as the shirt-pulling incident. That way, the NFL gets their suspension and Elliott gets cleared of the DV both publicly and on his NFL record.

The smart move for Elliott would be to accept that deal because there is still a good chance he loses this case. Yes, it's not fair and yes, I know the case against Elliott for the other incidents is weak, but he knows he hasn't been perfect and has admitted as much, so accepting a 1-game suspension for something else other than DV would help put this whole ordeal behind him and get him closer to getting endorsements again at some point in the future.

That said, the smart move for the NFLPA is to encourage Elliott to decline any settlement offers by the NFL and fight this all the way through the courts. That reason is exactly why the NFL is likely concerned right now as the NFLPA has a chance to get the Brady ruling defined and tightly limited in scope, which would help restrict the absolute power the NFL has under the current CBA and help damage a key point of leverage the NFL has during the next CBA negotiations.

 

[blindzebra]

Should be zero games, but if a deal is made it should be:
1 game for his repeated poor judgement.
Completely cleared of DV charge and have that next time banned for life removed.
NFL admits to an unfair investigation process.
Lisa Friel gets fired.

 

[rocknrobcowboy]

https://www.cbssports.com/nfl/news/report-ezekiel-elliott-nfl-discussed-possible-settlement/

 

[Yakuza Rich]

Zeke has the leverage. Exert as much pressure as you can on this.

If this is true, you're dead on.

If true, the NFL is showing their hand that they don't think they can win the case and they really don't want to have Goodell or Friel to have to take the stand.

EE not only owes it to himself and his family, but he owes it to the players union to stand up to this. They are footing his legal bills in this battle and (if true), it shows that the NFL is desperate knowing that this would put a major hole in how they handle future discipline issues.

Again, if true, it's quite a study into the mind of somebody like Goodell. That was the one big thing he pressed on when he first became commissioner...to be the judge, jury and jailer when it came to player discipline and how he wanted to be so much tougher than Paul Tagliabue was. But he has bungled this every step of the way, from SpyGate to Star Caps to BountyGate to DeflateGate (and I agree with him on DeflateGate, but it was bungled nonetheless) to Ray Rice to Greg Hardy and now to EE.

One would think he would just be happy collecting his $30+ million a year and allow some independent team to handle this. At least he could deflect the blame and the hatred to somebody else. Instead, he's so hellbent on maintaining that power that now looks like he's willing to settle in hopes of not losing in court and having to treat future discipline cases with 'fairness' even though he would STILL have a ton of power.

This is a power hungry maniac mentality that I could only imagine that Genghis Khan and Kim Jong Un would have.






YR

 

[LocimusPrime]

It comes down to this .. The wording included in the TRO ruling by the Judge has made it clear to the NFL that their assumption that the Brady ruling clearly defined their absolute power over player discipline without question was incorrect and more limited in scope than they expected.

The NFL now knows there is a chance that they not only lose this battle, more importantly, they also know they now risk having their Brady ruling limited all because they chose to fight a case that they grossly mishandled. If this had been a case they were more fair in their investigation and ruling procedures, they would not be as worried. However, because of the "unfair" aspect of their process, it has created a potential hole in the Brady ruling.

What this means is that the Brady ruling is strong, and in most cases, would hold up against anything a player or the NFLPA could throw at it. However, because judges are recognizing the NFL's process in this case was not handled fairly, it puts the Brady ruling at risk because this case could end up with a judge further defining and thereby limiting the scope of the Brady ruling against future cases, even ones where the NFL would have not had an issue beforehand. To be clear, this could happen even if the courts ultimately rule in the NFL's favor.

Think of it like this. Let's say your boss tells you that you are in charge of a project. If you don't ask your boss to define what "in charge" means, you can arbitrarily make decisions without hesitation and if questioned later, you can say, "You told me I was in charge!" However, if you ask your boss whether or not you can do something as part of being in charge and your boss says, "no", you have now limited your authority over the project.

This is obvious because the NFL immediately suspended Elliott after the Texas court filing was negated by the Appeals court, and now, after the new TRO ruling was announced along with the "unfair" process wording by the judge, suddenly the NFL is open to a settlement.

The smart move for the NFL is to offer to drop the 6-game suspension for domestic violence and and instead suspend him for 1 game for one of the other non-DV incidents such as the shirt-pulling incident. That way, the NFL gets their suspension and Elliott gets cleared of the DV both publicly and on his NFL record.

The smart move for Elliott would be to accept that deal because there is still a good chance he loses this case. Yes, it's not fair and yes, I know the case against Elliott for the other incidents is weak, but he knows he hasn't been perfect and has admitted as much, so accepting a 1-game suspension for something else other than DV would help put this whole ordeal behind him and get him closer to getting endorsements again at some point in the future.

That said, the smart move for the NFLPA is to encourage Elliott to decline any settlement offers by the NFL and fight this all the way through the courts. The reason is exactly why the NFL is likely concerned right now and that is they need to get that Brady ruling defined and tightly limited in scope, to help restrict the absolute power the NFL has and to help damage a key point of leverage the NFL has during the next CBA negotiations.

Excellent post Reality

 

[Yakuza Rich]

Should be zero games, but if a deal is made it should be:
1 game for his repeated poor judgement.
Completely cleared of DV charge and have that next time banned for life removed.
NFL admits to an unfair investigation process.
Lisa Friel gets fired.

You bargain too softly.

If you go into this with a scorched earth mentality prior to taking it to the courts then the only reason to stop is if you will spare the enemy, but get everything you want.

As I mentioned about Goodell, he made a terrible mistake in that he backed his advisary into a corner. Always give your foe an out and see if they take it. If you back them into a corner then you're not likely to be able to handle what they are going to throw at you.

The same goes for EE. Don't back Goodell into a corner. Give him an out. But the out is that he doesn't have to take the stand and he can still be in the position to give punishment to other players.

So he should not have to serve a single second of a suspension.

Goodell should have to issue a public apology for the way this investigation was conducted.

In that apology Goodell should have to state that they no longer believe that EE abused TT nor did he violate the conduct policy towards females that a player has an intimate relationship with. This would include this issue and the St. Paddy's Day issue being wiped clean off his record and could not be used against him if there are any future violations.

Lisa Friel will be dismissed from her job.

The panel of Peter Harvey, Ken Houston, etc. will no longer be used by the NFL

A payment of each game check this season that EE was under the cloud of this crap will be awarded to EE (roughly 6 games).

And I'm being kind.







YR

 

[SlammedZero]

Keep dreaming. NFL has 90% chance of winning in long run.

When somebody has a 90% chance of winning in a court of law they don't start flirting with settlements.

(if these rumors about a settlement are true)

 

[MRV52]

Keep dreaming. NFL has 90% chance of winning in long run.

Nope. Zeke will win this if it goes all the way. What most of you are assuming is that is like the Brady investigation and it is not. NFL is squirming now because it is going from bad to worse as each day passes by.

 

[Shinaoi]

I stopped being optimistic about this a while back, this is dragging me back though.

 

[Yakuza Rich]

It comes down to this .. The wording included in the TRO ruling by the Judge has made it clear to the NFL that their assumption that the Brady ruling clearly defined their absolute power over player discipline without question was incorrect and more limited in scope than they expected.

The NFL now knows there is a chance that they not only lose this battle, more importantly, they also know they now risk having their Brady ruling limited all because they chose to fight a case that they grossly mishandled. If this had been a case they were more fair in their investigation and ruling procedures, they would not be as worried. However, because of the "unfair" aspect of their process, it has created a potential hole in the Brady ruling.

What this means is that the Brady ruling is strong, and in most cases, would hold up against anything a player or the NFLPA could throw at it. However, because judges are recognizing the NFL's process in this case was not handled fairly, it puts the Brady ruling at risk because this case could end up with a judge further defining and thereby limiting the scope of the Brady ruling against future cases, even ones where the NFL would have not had an issue beforehand. To be clear, this could happen even if the courts ultimately rule in the NFL's favor.

Think of it like this. Let's say your boss tells you that you are in charge of a project. If you don't ask your boss to define what "in charge" means, you can arbitrarily make decisions without hesitation and if questioned later, you can say, "You told me I was in charge!" However, if you ask your boss whether or not you can do something as part of being in charge and your boss says, "no", you have now limited your authority over the project.

This is obvious because the NFL immediately suspended Elliott after the Texas court filing was negated by the Appeals court, and now, after the new TRO ruling was announced along with the "unfair" process wording by the judge, suddenly the NFL is open to a settlement.

The smart move for the NFL is to offer to drop the 6-game suspension for domestic violence and and instead suspend him for 1 game for one of the other non-DV incidents such as the shirt-pulling incident. That way, the NFL gets their suspension and Elliott gets cleared of the DV both publicly and on his NFL record.

The smart move for Elliott would be to accept that deal because there is still a good chance he loses this case. Yes, it's not fair and yes, I know the case against Elliott for the other incidents is weak, but he knows he hasn't been perfect and has admitted as much, so accepting a 1-game suspension for something else other than DV would help put this whole ordeal behind him and get him closer to getting endorsements again at some point in the future.

That said, the smart move for the NFLPA is to encourage Elliott to decline any settlement offers by the NFL and fight this all the way through the courts. The reason is exactly why the NFL is likely concerned right now and that is they need to get that Brady ruling defined and tightly limited in scope, to help restrict the absolute power the NFL has and to help damage a key point of leverage the NFL has during the next CBA negotiations.

The only issue with the settlement I see is:

1. The NFL stated that all of the other incidents have nothing to do with this suspension. He was cleared by the NFL of the St. Paddy's Day case. They basically gave him a warning, but admitted that they talked to the woman in the St. Paddy's Day case and she was okay with it. The bar incident he was cleared of as well. I don't know how you can clear somebody of a punishment and then settle where they will be punished for those things you already cleared them of.


2. There's no way that EE will be cleared publicly with domestic violence. He's going to always be labeled as a DV abuser by a lot of people. Taking a 1-game suspension would mean admitting that. Dez is still considered as an abuser of his mother. Greg Hardy didn't even get a fair shot. People will literally refuse to hear anything that shows what happpened to Greg Hardy and Nicole Holder and how Holder attacked Hardy with her high heel shoe. At least by not serving the suspension EE gets a chance to turn some peoples minds. That's gone if he settles.


I'm sure EE wants this to be over with. But he will find that his name means a lot more in the long run over the short term stress and nonsense he's had to go thru. Be vigilant young man.






YR

 

[waving monkey]

I would take the deal if it were this:

Two game suspension for conduct detrimental.

NFL MUST drop any mention of domestic violence. No counseling, or future possibilities of being banned for life.

My question is .does a deal effect his future promotional possibilities

 

[TwoDeep3]

Keep dreaming. NFL has 90% chance of winning in long run.

Please cite your source on 90%.

 

[goshan]

You bargain too softly.

If you go into this with a scorched earth mentality prior to taking it to the courts then the only reason to stop is if you will spare the enemy, but get everything you want.

As I mentioned about Goodell, he made a terrible mistake in that he backed his advisary into a corner. Always give your foe an out and see if they take it. If you back them into a corner then you're not likely to be able to handle what they are going to throw at you.

The same goes for EE. Don't back Goodell into a corner. Give him an out. But the out is that he doesn't have to take the stand and he can still be in the position to give punishment to other players.

So he should not have to serve a single second of a suspension.

Goodell should have to issue a public apology for the way this investigation was conducted.

In that apology Goodell should have to state that they no longer believe that EE abused TT nor did he violate the conduct policy towards females that a player has an intimate relationship with. This would include this issue and the St. Paddy's Day issue being wiped clean off his record and could not be used against him if there are any future violations.

Lisa Friel will be dismissed from her job.

The panel of Peter Harvey, Ken Houston, etc. will no longer be used by the NFL

A payment of each game check this season that EE was under the cloud of this crap will be awarded to EE (roughly 6 games).

And I'm being kind.







YR

Surprised you continue to show lack of understanding of employment law. Zeke will almost certainly lose long run - 90% chance. No way NFL agrees to this stuff. They may agree to a walk away 2-game suspension at best with a redefined definition of suspension. They aren't firing anyone, apologizing, or agreeing to a different panel. That is throw a way emotional s**it that never gets through any legal process based upon logic (I have been there). Nobody agrees to that kind of stuff in a corporate negotiation.

 

[goshan]

Please cite your source on 90%.

My assessment based upon my experience. Book it.

 

[MRV52]

When somebody has a 90% chance of winning in a court of law they don't start flirting with settlements.

(if these rumors about a settlement are true)

 

[goshan]

Nope. Zeke will win this if it goes all the way. What most of you are assuming is that is like the Brady investigation and it is not. NFL is squirming now because it is going from bad to worse as each day passes by.

I wish but not happening.

 

[goshan]

Keep thinking more, because you are wrong. Winning in court isn't the only objective. NFL needs good news right now. This isn't helping them.

 

[Verdict]

His leverage is to get the NFL to work hard to put this behind them. Neither side will come out of this smelling like a rose. But the NFL has the greater leverage. I just don't think it neutralizes the bit Zeke has.

Actually the NFL has more to lose than Zeke. I think the NFL is realizing that they could not only lose this case, but a federal court ruling could seriously curtail the commissioners power in future cases and eliminate the current kangaroo court Goodall has it his disposal.

This case is unique in that it is such a witch hunt and so fundamentally unfair to Zeke that the NFL has really left their *** hanging out on this one.

Having said that Zeke still runs the risk of having a DV label put on him if the suspension holds. Both sides have incentive to settle. And the NFL can settle for whatever terms it wants.