Dan Patrick, Chris Mortenson & T.O.

[Danny White]

My responses in bold above.

I'm not going to get into a fight with you over this. The subject (TO) is not worth it.

Any anger in my post was not directed at you or any group of posters, but at bsheeern in particular who I felt got too personal and condecending in his post. I apologize if I used vague language and inadvertantly painted with too broad of a brush.

One friendly followup I will make to your post, however, is regarding the Douglas/Owens brouhaha. I have no idea who is at fault, but I'd bet Owens' team tries to pin it on the Eagles via their surrogate Douglas. One key point you raise, though, is if Owens can "prove" anything?

It will be interesting to see who the burden of proof falls upon in this hearing. Will Owens have to "prove" he's not in violation of his contract... or will the Eagles have to "prove" that he is? This will be key. My hunch is that the Eagles will have to prove that he is and thus the burden of proof will fall upon them.

Respectfully,
DW

 

[Charles]

If he's released he'd have to clear wavers. There is absolutly no way the Commanders or Giants will let him go if there is a chance that he'd land in the division..........

 

[JackMagist]

I'm not going to get into a fight with you over this. The subject (TO) is not worth it.

Any anger in my post was not directed at you or any group of posters, but at bsheeern in particular who I felt got too personal and condecending in his post. I apologize if I used vague language and inadvertantly painted with too broad of a brush.

One friendly followup I will make to your post, however, is regarding the Douglas/Owens brouhaha. I have no idea who is at fault, but I'd bet Owens' team tries to pin it on the Eagles via their surrogate Douglas. One key point you raise, though, is if Owens can "prove" anything?

It will be interesting to see who the burden of proof falls upon in this hearing. Will Owens have to "prove" he's not in violation of his contract... or will the Eagles have to "prove" that he is? This will be key. My hunch is that the Eagles will have to prove that he is and thus the burden of proof will fall upon them.

Respectfully,
DW

Thank you for the explanation DW. Perhaps I took things a bit too personally myself.

At any rate you are correct about the “burden of proof" issue. Since this is not an actual court of law the rules of the debate could be different than those of a courtroom. And in a Civil case such as this the burden is proof is fluid even in a court room; especially when a jury is involved.

 

[TheSkaven]

If the arbitrator rules against the Eagles, they still have the option of deactivating him for the remainder of the season. They will not release him, as that is what TO wants them to do.

Not true. That would mean the Eagles' won the case. Keyshawn didn't go to an arbitrator. The issue at hand is, is deactivating a player a reasonable form of punishment? TO has incentives that he won't be able to hit now, for example.

The player's union is of the opinion that 4 games is the maximum suspension, after that time elapses you either play him or cut him.

I still say I'd like to see the Eagles activate him and play him on special teams like the 'Skins did to Arrington.

 

[Danny White]

I know you're a fan, but this is completely inappropriate - even if slight humor were intended.

It was hyperbole.

It's like saying "I'd sell my soul for a chocolate donut." You see, I wouldn't really sell my soul for a donut, I'm a very religious person, I believe in life everlasting, and I value my eternal soul far too much to sell for even a dozen chocolate donuts... I'm just using hyperbole to express how much I want a chocolate donut. But if I used that phrase, I would hope that people would recognize the hyperbole and that I wouldn't get messages warning me about the dire theological implications of my words.

But just to clarify, if at all possible, I WOULD swerve to miss TO in traffic... there's no way I would risk going to jail over that guy.

 

[Reality]

Okay, let's pretend for 1 minute that TO wins through the arbitrator, what will happen?

This is easy the Eagles will de-activate him. NFL rosters consist of 53 players. Not all of them suit up. Each week there are players listed as inactive.

That is what will happen to Terrell Owens.

He's not going to play for anyone else the rest of the year. The Eagles will pay him to stay away.

They're planning to do it for 5 games already, they'll simply add the other 3 games if the arbitrator rules against them.

He's an Eagle for 2005, but he won't play the rest of this year.

He will not be released in 2005. The NFLPA can't tell the Eagles who to activate and who not to.

He's done for the year.

Simple cap economics. They're not going to give him to someone during this season or take the cap hit. He'll be released after the season sometime before March 1st.

I say wait until the off-season then trade him to Houston

 

[Doomsday101]

Not true. That would mean the Eagles' won the case. Keyshawn didn't go to an arbitrator. The issue at hand is, is deactivating a player a reasonable form of punishment? TO has incentives that he won't be able to hit now, for example.

The player's union is of the opinion that 4 games is the maximum suspension, after that time elapses you either play him or cut him.

I still say I'd like to see the Eagles activate him and play him on special teams like the 'Skins did to Arrington.

Even if TO wins the NFLPA can't force the eagle to make him active.

 

[Hostile]

Even if TO wins the NFLPA can't force the eagle to make him active.

That's what I keep saying.

It doesn't register.

They can't force them to release him either.

 

[Natedawg44]

In addition to parking in Andy Reid's parking space. The real reason TO was suspended was that he was having a problem with his TPS reports.

 

[Danny White]

In addition to parking in Andy Reid's parking space. The real reason TO was suspended was that he was having a problem with his TPS reports.

"So TO, I see you'll be missing the re-match with Roy Williams and the Cowboys."

"Well Bob, I wouldn't exactly say I'll be 'missing' the rematch."

 

[AtlCB]

I say wait until the off-season then trade him to Houston

 

[AtlCB]

paper or plastic

I seriously hope it's plastic if it has horse dung in it!

 

[Yeagermeister]

Even if TO wins the NFLPA can't force the eagle to make him active.

Stop using facts

 

[Doomsday101]

Stop using facts

I know they just get in the way. LOL

 

[HTownCowboysFan]

They have the right to keep him inactive for the remainder of the season if they chose to do so. But, in doing this - he gets paid every week for being on the roster.

The issue is they want to suspend him for 4 games w/out pay and then keep in inactive w/out pay for the remaining games.

That's what the are challenging. The fact he has already been punished with the 4 game w/out pay - any additional games he is put on the inactive list is "extra" punishment and he could be released and playing for someone else. Getting paid not the issue.

 

[Yeagermeister]

That's what the are challenging. The fact he has already been punished with the 4 game w/out pay - any additional games he is put on the inactive list is "extra" punishment and he could be released and playing for someone else. Getting paid not the issue.

Then it's simple.....he has an ankle injury....put him on IR

 

[Kangaroo]

Let him onsite and give him access ot the facilities. It won't be long before he does something stupid giving the Eagles reason for another suspension.

They can limit when he is allowed on the premises they can set a time that he is only allowed on the premises between 3am - 6am if he shows up any other time he is trespassing and can be arrested bing Eagles win again.

The arbitrator can not do anything about that; or the player assocation the Eagles have the upper hand.

Eagles win again :iggles:

 

[Yeagermeister]

In addition to parking in Andy Reid's parking space. The real reason TO was suspended was that he was having a problem with his TPS reports.

Nice touch on bringing back the Lynn Scott avatar

 

[Kangaroo]

That's what the are challenging. The fact he has already been punished with the 4 game w/out pay - any additional games he is put on the inactive list is "extra" punishment and he could be released and playing for someone else. Getting paid not the issue.

Well we have people on the inactive list every week they have no leverage. They do not have to release him and they can make him in inactive all they want NFLPA has no power and can not do a dam thing about it. They can deactivate him for any reason we need extra linemen; he does not know the playbook well enough bahaha they have 500 excuse to use

 

[Jimz31]

The arbitrator can't make them do a thing as far as releasing him....they can't FORCE a team to eat up some of their own money.

IF this Commander season-ticket holder arbitrator does rule against the Eagles...the Eagles could just say "Fine, he's now deactivated....Good day to you...". "Buh-bye!".