AirTran does not renew Vick deal

[GlitzCowboy]

I think they would've been better off with Quincy. And sadly enough, Vick would have been better off with us. Crazy how it turned out the other way around. In Atlanta, they just wouldn't have cared about the marijuana use of Quincy's- heck, probably would have endorsed it if he brought the "right" image to their table and filled the seats. And here in Dallas, Jerry probably would have gotten "dog fighting" portrayed in the local papers as some crazy humanitarian act. I mean, think about it, look what he did with Irvin's neverending line of hookers and coke (HOOKERS AND COCAINE AND MORE!)- Jerry could have taken care of dog fighting in his sleep. He took care of the infamous "White House" and it was years after before most of us even heard about it for the first time. Vick's problems wouldn't have concerned him until he was retired and trying to get into the HOF if he was a Dallas Cowboy.

Vick's still a scumbag and I'd never want him on this team, I'm just saying..

 

[DallasEast]

well it was proper that it is going to get him sued for breahc of contract. it really doesnt matter what fans think mang its about what authority he is actually granted by the CBA. to me its very obvious that he stepped outside that authority given the parameters of the old CBA.

i can understand wanting to see jones' punished. the guy is a punk. i just dont like the fact that Goodell who has zero legal expertise thinks he is more able to judge guilt than a court of law.

you do realize that all of jones court cases that are pending with the exception of the nevada stuff is to be resolved next month?

Yep, but I'm not centering on Adam Jones alone. Hopefully, Goodell can take action sooner than later to not only establish his authority over the players making news now, but those tempted to get in trouble in the future--regardless of "breaches of contract" hanging over his head. JMO.

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Yep, but I'm not centering on Adam Jones alone. Hopefully, Goodell can take action sooner than later to not only establish his authority over the players making news now, but those tempted to get in trouble in the future--regardless of "breaches of contract" hanging over his head. JMO.

its the offseason and he could have nailed Johnson to the wall because he had already been convicted and in jail. that would have sent a message loud and clear and he could have waited a month and nailed Jones to the wall too.

quite frankly goodell looks very clueless in the way he has handled all of this.

 

[DallasEast]

its the offseason and he could have nailed Johnson to the wall because he had already been convicted and in jail. that would have sent a message loud and clear and he could have waited a month and nailed Jones to the wall too.

quite frankly goodell looks very clueless in the way he has handled all of this.

Goodell can look as clueless as Alicia Silverstone for the next 15-20 years as long as he can positively decrease or greatly minimize the number of negative incidents involving players during his tenure.

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Goodell can look as clueless as Alicia Silverstone for the next 15-20 years as long as he can positively decrease or greatly minimize the number of negative incidents involving players during his tenure.

but see that is the problem. if you think about it he is not. if he has to backtrack on his previous ruling it is going to make him look weak which just encourages bad behaviour.

now if he continues along the lines of his previous arrogance and refuses to back down which is what i think hell do then he is going to get sued. now if he gets sued and loses and from what ive seen of jones' lawyers position he will then he not only looks weak but makes the NFL look very very bad.

your only interest and 'some people on this boards' interests are to clean up the league but say you are Robert Kraft or Jerry Jones and you see your league getting sued and it was easily avoidable what are you going to think?

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Oh and another thing were you saying this same thing when Lewis, Pittman and Carruth were doing there thing?

Pittman and Carruth make Jones and Henry look like choir boys.

 

[DallasEast]

but see that is the problem. if you think about it he is not. if he has to backtrack on his previous ruling it is going to make him look weak which just encourages bad behaviour.

now if he continues along the lines of his previous arrogance and refuses to back down which is what i think hell do then he is going to get sued. now if he gets sued and loses and from what ive seen of jones' lawyers position he will then he not only looks weak but makes the NFL look very very bad.

your only interest and 'some people on this boards' interests are to clean up the league but say you are Robert Kraft or Jerry Jones and you see your league getting sued and it was easily avoidable what are you going to think?

It will be interesting to see the reactions of some of us should Goodell not have to backtrack on his previous ruling. Also, being sued doesn't necessary automatically determine that the party being sued will lose. Additionally, the league has been sued numerous times in its history, winnning some suits and losing others. Knowing that, if I'm Robert Kraft or Jerry Jones, I would worry less about losing future revenue over lawsuits; and worry more about lost revenue via merchandising and marketing due to negative press generated by uncontrollable athletes. JMO.

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

It will be interesting to see the reactions of some of us should Goodell not have to backtrack on his previous ruling. Also, being sued doesn't necessary automatically determine that the party being sued will lose. Additionally, the league has been sued numerous times in its history, winnning some suits and losing others. Knowing that, if I'm Robert Kraft or Jerry Jones, I would worry less about losing future revenue over lawsuits; and worry more about lost revenue via merchandising and marketing due to negative press generated by uncontrollable athletes. JMO.

You keep talking about losing revenues due to publicity due to the arrests but that is sheer BS. Like i said before Carruth nad Pittman were doing far worse that Jones and Henry yet the NFL has seen revenues rising undeterred.

Like i said beofer i dont think that Goodell will go back on his decision but i do think that he will get sued. I would just laugh myself to death at the meltdown people would have if a judge ordered the league to allow Jones to play.

 

[DallasEast]

Oh and another thing were you saying this same thing when Lewis, Pittman and Carruth were doing there thing?

Pittman and Carruth make Jones and Henry look like choir boys.

The vast majority of players do not get into the trouble which Lewis, Pittman, Carruth, Jones and Henry have gotten into (or even Irvin, for the pro-Owens fans). As far as differentiating how 'bad' someone is, my only concern is the level of punishment is enforced--not who is the badder badass.

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

The vast majority of players do not get into the trouble which Lewis, Pittman, Carruth, Jones and Henry have gotten into (or even Irvin, for the pro-Owens fans). As far as differentiating how 'bad' someone is, my only concern is the level of punishment is enforced--not who is the badder badass.

Thats not what i asked. Did you think that the situation was critical 5+ years ago?

and what henry did pales in compariso to the rest of them.

 

[DallasEast]

You keep talking about losing revenues due to publicity due to the arrests but that is sheer BS. Like i said before Carruth nad Pittman were doing far worse that Jones and Henry yet the NFL has seen revenues rising undeterred.

Like i said beofer i dont think that Goodell will go back on his decision but i do think that he will get sued. I would just laugh myself to death at the meltdown people would have if a judge ordered the league to allow Jones to play.

If you consider the revenue aspect as BS, one question: do you believe that monetary awards via lawsuits are going to be more detrimental? If so, what dollar figure would you place upon it which will make the National Football League even blink after seeing it?

For me, I'm concerned more about how much time and pay ANY athlete generating negative press will eventually lose that'll have any real discernable affect on his peers. In the case of Adam Jones, for example, if his suspension is reduced to half or a quarter of its original length, that's cool. He will still have been punished for his nonsense. If he is allowed to play without being suspended at all, that will be a totally different thing all together.

 

[DallasEast]

Thats not what i asked. Did you think that the situation was critical 5+ years ago?

and what henry did pales in compariso to the rest of them.

The answers are 'yep' and 'I disagree with you in regards to the level of punishment enforced'.

 

[WoodysGirl]

It will be interesting to see the reactions of some of us should Goodell not have to backtrack on his previous ruling.

I don't know that he's thinking of backtracking. According to Schefter, he's considering revising the decision based on the legal outcomes, but I think the one year suspension will remain.

Ultimately, the league could decide to write a decision that would have different outcomes based on what happens with Jones' pending legal cases in Georgia and Las Vegas. If Jones could be proven innocent in those cases, it's possible his suspension could be reduced. If not, then it could continue to stand at 16 games.

This thread also discusses when/what decisions are expected about Jones and Johnson. Also suggests that Goodell is expected to call Joey Porter to NY for a meeting.

http://cowboyszone.com/forums/showthread.php?t=88632

 

[DallasEast]

I don't know that he's thinking of backtracking. According to Schefter, he's considering revising the decision based on the legal outcomes, but I think the one year suspension will remain.

Sorry, my choice of words. : FuzzyLumpkins influence me. Bad Fuzzy!

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

The answers are 'yep' and 'I disagree with you in regards to the level of punishment enforced'.

my point was that Henry was involved in two alcohol related incidents. DUI and giving alcohol to minors. No violence or anything of that nature.

He wasnt murdering people or associating with those that do or ramming a car with children in it at high speeds on purpsoe.

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

If you consider the revenue aspect as BS, one question: do you believe that monetary awards via lawsuits are going to be more detrimental? If so, what dollar figure would you place upon it which will make the National Football League even blink after seeing it?

For me, I'm concerned more about how much time and pay ANY athlete generating negative press will eventually lose that'll have any real discernable affect on his peers. In the case of Adam Jones, for example, if his suspension is reduced to half or a quarter of its original length, that's cool. He will still have been punished for his nonsense. If he is allowed to play without being suspended at all, that will be a totally different thing all together.

my point is that there is no evidence saying that these arrests are actually causing people to not pay for the NFL.

i see where youre coming from you just want jones and any other criminals to pay and you dont care about any of the other stuff.

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Sorry, my choice of words. : FuzzyLumpkins influence me. Bad Fuzzy!

sorry for the record i dont think he will backtrack either. i imagine the argument is going to come down to whether or not he can apply the new policy retroactively.

 

[DallasEast]

my point is that there is no evidence saying that these arrests are actually causing people to not pay for the NFL.

i see where youre coming from you just want jones and any other criminals to pay and you dont care about any of the other stuff.

They don't have to necessarily be convicted, but that's the general idea. Thank you!

:dance3: :dance2: :beatit: :spidey: :mchammer:

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

They don't have to necessarily be convicted, but that's the general idea. Thank you!

:dance3: :dance2: :beatit: :spidey: :mchammer:

so it wouldnt bother you if a player is suspended on a charge where the courts later exonerate him?

 

[DallasEast]

so it wouldnt bother you if a player is suspended on a charge where the courts later exonerate him?

Nope. The vast majority of players do not even get to that point.

If the situation you described were to happen, the commissioner and the NFL could try to compensate the player for his 'pain and suffering'. I don't want to speculate as to the how because, quite frankly, I don't care. My concern centers on the reduction of melodrama created by a minority of so-called 'professional' athletes.