Big combine changes, players barred

[tyke1doe]

Nope, if you start doing that then it will mean court cases and lawyers trying to get paid. This is pretty clear that as of today
you better stay out of violent or potential violent crimes no matter how petty if you desire to ply your wares in the NFL.

And that is the ultimate message. Hey, young boys. If you want to someday play in the NFL, not only do you have to get bigger, stronger, faster and study the game, you need to keep your hands off women and off other people too.

It's interesting how some of us can go through life without hitting women, raping women or getting into unnecessary fights and others can't.

 

[pancakeman]

Yeah, but those laws aren't legal. State laws are what matter.

http://litigation.findlaw.com/legal-system/the-supremacy-clause-and-the-doctrine-of-preemption.html
http://law.marquette.edu/facultyblo...ctually-preempt-relaxed-state-marijuana-laws/

 

[Kevinicus]

http://litigation.findlaw.com/legal-system/the-supremacy-clause-and-the-doctrine-of-preemption.html
http://law.marquette.edu/facultyblo...ctually-preempt-relaxed-state-marijuana-laws/

That's all well and good for laws that the federal government actually has the authority to make. But as the constitution makes it clear that the powers not enumerated to the federal government are in fact relegated to the states, then they do not have the authority to make such laws. For laws that they do constitutionally have the authority to make, yes federal does trump state. I realize the SC may have tried to say the federal government does have that right, but I've long given up on their ability to actually apply the constitution, so I go by the constitution (which is very clear on this), not their nonsense.

 

[LittleD]

That's all well and good for laws that the federal government actually has the authority to make. But as the constitution makes it clear that the powers not enumerated to the federal government are in fact relegated to the states, then they do not have the authority to make such laws. For laws that they do constitutionally have the authority to make, yes federal does trump state. I realize the SC may have tried to say the federal government does have that right, but I've long given up on their ability to actually apply the constitution, so I go by the constitution (which is very clear on this), not their nonsense.

You are jousting at windmills my friend. The Federal Government has laws on the books concerning drugs and marijuana. Federal law on drugs trumps state laws in Oregon, California or Colorado. Even in Colorado, you can be fired from your job for testing positive for marijuana.
It's true that state laws control gun violence charges and assault charges. The NFL is just going to ban those who have been
convicted of those kinds of charges.

 

[Kevinicus]

You are jousting at windmills my friend. The Federal Government has laws on the books concerning drugs and marijuana. Federal law on drugs trumps state laws in Oregon, California or Colorado. Even in Colorado, you can be fired from your job for testing positive for marijuana.
It's true that state laws control gun violence charges and assault charges. The NFL is just going to ban those who have been
convicted of those kinds of charges.

I know the federal government has laws on the books. And I contend they are unconstitutional (despite the ridiculous arguments the SC has used to justify them) and thus can't trump constitutional state laws.

I'm not arguing that the NFL doesn't have the right to take this action, just that I'd hope they aren't too overzealous about it with regards to the gun laws because some states have ridiculous (and probably unconstitutional in some cases) laws. I don't know exactly what kind of "weapons charges" the NFL is targeting though.

 

[LittleD]

I know the federal government has laws on the books. And I contend they are unconstitutional (despite the ridiculous arguments the SC has used to justify them) and thus can't trump constitutional state laws.

I'm not arguing that the NFL doesn't have the right to take this action, just that I'd hope they aren't too overzealous about it with regards to the gun laws because some states have ridiculous (and probably unconstitutional in some cases) laws. I don't know exactly what kind of "weapons charges" the NFL is targeting though.

Well, we just differ on this issue so I'll let others debate with you. I believe if you have to carry around a gun or beat on women, you give
up the possible opportunity of a lucrative job in the NFL and the NFL is letting every college football player know about it so that
if you have half a brain, you will stay clear of issues that might ruin your dreams.

 

[lostar2009]

Can't attend the combine but can be drafted? Lol. So what if a player had one of these misconducts years before the combine and they clean up. Now they can't enter the combine and hurt their stock? Come on man.

 

[tyke1doe]

Can't attend the combine but can be drafted? Lol. So what if a player had one of these misconducts years before the combine and they clean up. Now they can't enter the combine and hurt their stock? Come on man.

Laws such as this usually have grandfather clauses. It makes more sense to me to grandfather all college football athletes in the state that they're in. Simply put, if you are a college player with a past conviction (especially if you've not shown any more incidents since your conviction), this policy wouldn't apply to you.

However, for youth coming into college, the policy should apply. And if a grandfathered athlete with a past conviction should get a new conviction, then that new conviction should be subject to the new policy.

 

[LittleD]

Laws such as this usually have grandfather clauses. It makes more sense to me to grandfather all college football athletes in the state that they're in. Simply put, if you are a college player with a past conviction (especially if you've not shown any more incidents since your conviction), this policy wouldn't apply to you.

However, for youth coming into college, the policy should apply. And if a grandfathered athlete with a past conviction should get a new conviction, then that new conviction should be subject to the new policy.

This is not really a law as such. The NFL has notified teams and current college players that if they have convictions in these
certain categories or refuse to submit to background checks, they will not be invited to the combine or the draft. The NFL can really use any criteria they want since this is about employment as long as they don't violate Federal Law. No business in America has to hire a convicted felon for a job in this country unless they choose to. Most employers do background checks and if they find certain criminal convictions, even
misdemeanors in some cases, they are routinely shuffled out the door. That is just the world we live in so if you want a job
in the NFL, they better start acting like civil citizens. The NFL can really do what they want with prospective college players.
They could even penalize teams that eventually sign these players during or after the draft.

 

[CanadianCowboysFan]

How is this political correctness?

I think he means because it only applies to sexual assault and domestic violence?

 

[CanadianCowboysFan]

Can't attend the combine but can be drafted? Lol. So what if a player had one of these misconducts years before the combine and they clean up. Now they can't enter the combine and hurt their stock? Come on man.

It is paying lipservice. They do little to those already in the NFL because for once the house union is standing up to Goodell. However, they can screw the college boys big time because no one stands up for them. It is a silly rule that has no impact on anything.

 

[tyke1doe]

This is not really a law as such. The NFL has notified teams and current college players that if they have convictions in these
certain categories or refuse to submit to background checks, they will not be invited to the combine or the draft. The NFL can really use any criteria they want since this is about employment as long as they don't violate Federal Law. No business in America has to hire a convicted felon for a job in this country unless they choose to. Most employers do background checks and if they find certain criminal convictions, even
misdemeanors in some cases, they are routinely shuffled out the door. That is just the world we live in so if you want a job
in the NFL, they better start acting like civil citizens. The NFL can really do what they want with prospective college players.
They could even penalize teams that eventually sign these players during or after the draft.

Thanks. "Law" was a bad word use on my part. I was trying to address the concept of the "grandfather" clause, which isn't used just in federal, state or municipal matters.

But you are correct. The NFL has the right to enact such a policy. I just think there should be some leeway, but that's totally up to the NFL.

 

[tyke1doe]

I think he means because it only applies to sexual assault and domestic violence?

That's not necessarily being politically correct, though.
But thanks for trying to interpret his point for me. I don't want to go back down that road because we had a lengthy argument, and I deserve a break.

 

[coult44]

lol, you think the players run the league?

I say this is good for the league. Weapons and domestic violence have no place in the league. **** them.

Oh and if you have a weapons or domestic violence charge, you should be ban from CBZ.

There is nothing wrong with weapons. It's the illegal use of then that is the issue!!!