Did Henderson help Zeke?

[Cowboys22]

How did they not know? I mean, when it was discussed on this board, we knew that the agreement basically gave the Commissioner virtually unlimited power, in terms of judgements etc. I find it very difficult to believe that the players didn't know this. But, for the sake of discussion, lets say that they didn't know. Isn't that the fault of the NFLPA? I mean, that's the only reason the NFLPA is there, to explain what legalities mean for the players and to advise and protect them from poor decisions. Either way, I see no way you can fault the NFL here. They paid dearly for this power.

Because they could not foresee the Ray Rice fiasco, the beating that Goodell took form outside groups, or his over reaction that has now occurred. Why would anyone think Goodell would turn against the players to this extent?

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

Zeke's reputation is on the line, and it doesn't sound like the NFL handled the investigation properly, so yes, the bitterness is justified.

Yeah, I don't agree with this. Zekes reputation has been on the line with these kinds of accusations since he was at OSU.

Not buying it.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

I think it simply boils down to the more dedicated fan, the entire board here, hates that the NFL is trying to be a judicial entity.

That's probably true but again, the players sold out for money, in exchange for the power to do this. Who signs a deal and believes that the other side won't use all the power you give them? Who does that?

 

[Doomsday101]

You have Kia Roberts the only person the NFL had to personally interview Thompson and her recommendation of no punishment was throw out the window? No one else with the league office ever spend 1 second with Thompson except for Roberts.

 

[LandryFan]

The expectation was the the NFL would review these cases under good faith and a comprehensive evaluation of the facts.

Zeke was not charged and certainly not convicted of anything. The evidence is lacking and the accuser is a liar. But the NFL still found him guilty.

What is to prevent the NFL from suspending anyone for anything at this point? Say someone is pulled over for speeding. They have been drinking but are not legally intoxicated. The NFL could easily suspend the player x number of games simply because they want to. The rule of law should prevail. If that was the understanding of the NFLPA at the time the agreement was signed, then they have a right to be upset.

Thats why this needs to be stopped and stopped now. Yes, the process was not fair. But the ruling was not fair either. If a person is not found guilty in a court of law for any criminal offense, they should not be subject to suspension by the league. Period.

Now there could still be discretionary suspensions handed out for detrimental conduct. Zeke pulling down the girls top could certainly fall into that category. I would have had no problem with them suspending him a game for that. But they also have to be consistent with all players and all similar conduct. I don't care if she thought it was ok or not. Its not something that looks good for the league and not a message they want to endorse.

You got it right. The NFLPA expected (and rightfully so) that the league would apply decency and at least fundamental fairness in dealing with player punishment/appeals. As I read elsewhere here earlier this morning, parties (on both sides) cannot reasonably negotiate every possible situation that might arise in future cases during CBA negotiation sessions, so they move forward with the expectation that fairness and good faith will be applied to whatever situation arises. The argument now (and a very valid argument, IMO) is that the league is not applying good faith and fairness in the punishment/appeals process.

 

[visionary]

I guess I just have a really difficult time understanding the bitterness towards the NFL. I mean, the process is one sided to be sure. However, the players knew all of this when they voted for the new CBA. The NFLPA allowed them to do this so it's really the fault of the players and the NFLPA IMO. I remember discussing this when the CBA was signed. Now the NFL is the problem and the Commissioner is the problem. Well, this is the deal they signed up for. How do you fault the NFL for using the power the players voted to give them and the power they, basically, bought and paid for? If it were me, I would take advantage of every benefit any given contract provided for me. I think that most people would. sucks for the players but honestly, they were just interested in the money.

I don't understand why fans don't have more outrage over the Players or the NFLPA.

I guess I don't understand you POV at all

Just because I have agreed to allow you to make decisions I'm still expecting a fair process by which you reach that decision

If I agree to being judged by a jury of my peers is it not pertinent to be upset if I find that some of those jurors had a personal vendetta against me?

I don't think it is that difficult to follow

 

[ABQcowboyJR]

That's probably true but again, the players sold out for money, in exchange for the power to do this. Who signs a deal and believes that the other side won't use all the power you give them? Who does that?

I don't think you are wrong here. I think most people on the board would have done the same thing the players and PA did in the last CBA. Who wants to lose money over the 1% of players who will find themselves in this situation.

The only thing the NFLPA needs to renegotiate is for appeals to be heard by a true 3rd party.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

The expectation was the the NFL would review these cases under good faith and a comprehensive evaluation of the facts.

Zeke was not charged and certainly not convicted of anything. The evidence is lacking and the accuser is a liar. But the NFL still found him guilty.

What is to prevent the NFL from suspending anyone for anything at this point? Say someone is pulled over for speeding. They have been drinking but are not legally intoxicated. The NFL could easily suspend the player x number of games simply because they want to. The rule of law should prevail. If that was the understanding of the NFLPA at the time the agreement was signed, then they have a right to be upset.

Thats why this needs to be stopped and stopped now. Yes, the process was not fair. But the ruling was not fair either. If a person is not found guilty in a court of law for any criminal offense, they should not be subject to suspension by the league. Period.

Now there could still be discretionary suspensions handed out for detrimental conduct. Zeke pulling down the girls top could certainly fall into that category. I would have had no problem with them suspending him a game for that. But they also have to be consistent with all players and all similar conduct. I don't care if she thought it was ok or not. Its not something that looks good for the league and not a message they want to endorse.

All of this may, or may not be true but, again, the language that was agreed to clearly gave the Commissioner that power. Either the Players or the NFLPA should have know this. I don't understand how anybody comes to the conclusion that the "Expectation" would not be that the NFL would use every bit of power they were granted. When has that ever been the case, that somebody doesn't use the power they were given?

As to stopping this now, well, a little late. This should have been stopped long ago. Our fan base should have reacted this way, on behalf of Hardy or some other team's player but we didn't. It's too late for stopping anything now, IMO. That ship has sailed, gone round the world and has come safely back home to port. I just don't think anybody is really very big on overturning this thing. I think most football fans like it.

 

[Miller]

You got it right. The NFLPA expected (and rightfully so) that the league would apply decency and at least basic fairness in dealing with player punishment/appeals. As I read elsewhere here earlier this morning, parties (on both sides) cannot reasonably negotiate every possible situation that might arise in future cases during CBA negotiation sessions, so they move forward with the expectation that fairness and good faith will be applied to whatever situation arises. The argument now (and a very valid argument, IMO) is that the league is not applying good faith and fairness in the punishment/appeals process.

Right and I think this is what really is the crux. No matter the legal negotiations between the NFL and the NFLPA, both sides negotiate and concede points with the expectations that future situations will be done with decency and fairness. There is this very wrong assumption here that just because they gave RG a certain power that he can just abuse it to the nth degree. In the legal system..no. And at some point, hopefully soon, all the underhandedness becomes his undoing. He has the power to make decisions and can find ways to put it under an umbrella with wide discretion but overall he can't skip fundamental rights and procedure.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

I guess I don't understand you POV at all

Just because I have agreed to allow you to make decisions I'm still expecting a fair process by which you reach that decision

If I agree to being judged by a jury of my peers is it not pertinent to be upset if I find that some of those jurors had a personal vendetta against me?

I don't think it is that difficult to follow

Legally, it doesn't matter what your expectations are. Legally, it only matters what you agree to. What they agreed to was not a jury of their peers so that really isn't even valid. I don't understand why you don't understand. What am I missing?

 

[erod]

This is impossible to believe.

There's no way anybody still uses a Blackberry.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

I don't think you are wrong here. I think most people on the board would have done the same thing the players and PA did in the last CBA. Who wants to lose money over the 1% of players who will find themselves in this situation.

The only thing the NFLPA needs to renegotiate is for appeals to be heard by a true 3rd party.

I agree with this but if they had tried to negotiate this, which I believe is fair BTW, the Owners would never have given them the money they got. The Owners paid a lot for this power. It's silly to believe that they wouldn't use it, IMO.

 

[erod]

Legally, it doesn't matter what your expectations are. Legally, it only matters what you agree to. What they agreed to was not a jury of their peers so that really isn't even valid. I don't understand why you don't understand. What am I missing?

A. There's still a fairness requirement.

B. The DV suspension policy was never collectively bargained.

 

[visionary]

Legally, it doesn't matter what your expectations are. Legally, it only matters what you agree to. What they agreed to was not a jury of their peers so that really isn't even valid. I don't understand why you don't understand. What am I missing?

In that case if I know the process was tainted I can take you to court

Also I have to believe there is language in the cba about the process being fair

Basically you are saying stuff that defies common sense

 

[ABQcowboyJR]

I agree with this but if they had tried to negotiate this, which I believe is fair BTW, the Owners would never have given them the money they got. The Owners paid a lot for this power. It's silly to believe that they wouldn't use it, IMO.

It is, but like I said earlier most of the players don't care if Goodell were to abuse this power. Many player and the NFLPA saw that this abuse of power was going to occur, but it wasn't going to apply to the majority of players.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

A. There's still a fairness requirement.

B. The DV suspension policy was never collectively bargained.

No. There is a process requirement. There is no fairness requirement that I am aware of.

The power granted the Commissioner, with regards to policy and things like DV, were bargained and signed off on. While DV might not have been specifically discussed, the power afforded the office was and that covers things like DV.

 

[LandryFan]

Right and I think this is what really is the crux. No matter the legal negotiations between the NFL and the NFLPA, both sides negotiate and concede points with the expectations that future situations will be done with decency and fairness. There is this very wrong assumption here that just because they gave JG a certain power that he can just abuse it to the nth degree. In the legal system..no. And at some point, hopefully soon, all the underhandedness becomes his undoing

That is the hook that the NFLPA is hanging their hat on. They think that the courts will side with them that the NFL abandoned their obligation to apply fundamental fairness here, and I agree. To go further, it not only seems as though the league abandoned the application of fairness, they went to the extreme of trying to railroad Zeke by intentionally omitting/hiding evidence that was in his favor. The NFL has made a true stinker of a mess of this and now they're trying any and all means to save face.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

In that case if I know the process was tainted I can take you to court

Also I have to believe there is language in the cba about the process being fair

Basically you are saying stuff that defies common sense

Anybody can take anybody to court but so what? You have to prove that the NFL mishandled the case, according to the rules outlined in the CBA. Can the NFLPA prove this?

I am saying that the players went for the money and sold their collective souls. I mean, I have no issue with your take on the common sense part but that doesn't mean it didn't happen. That's pretty much exactly what they did, if I understand it correctly.

 

[visionary]

Anybody can take anybody to court but so what? You have to prove that the NFL mishandled the case, according to the rules outlined in the CBA. Can the NFLPA prove this?

I am saying that the players went for the money and sold their collective souls. I mean, I have no issue with your take on the common sense part but that doesn't mean it didn't happen. That's pretty much exactly what they did, if I understand it correctly.

Of course they went for money but fair play is part of the equation . You are asking why the nflpa agreed to this, the answer is that you are expecting a fair and reasonable process to get to a just decision

In this case it is quite apparent that was not the case

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

It is, but like I said earlier most of the players don't care if Goodell were to abuse this power. Many player and the NFLPA saw that this abuse of power was going to occur, but it wasn't going to apply to the majority of players.

I get that and I pretty much agree but our fan base, seems to think that there might be wide support for overturning the NFL's decision here. The question of legalities is a different matter and that will eventually play out but the idea that there is a ground swell of support for Zeke is, IMO, inaccurate. That's just my opinion.