News: It is official! Zeke suspended 6 games **merged**

[beacamdim]

Here's a question.

A big issue here will be the likely court case. In the Brady case, it was the NFL who actually filed suit first, largely because they wanted to control the jurisdiction - they wanted the case in NY and not have the case end up in say MN under Judge Doty.

Florio suggested that the NFL has a leg up here in that after they hear Elliott's appeal, when they know the outcome of the ruling they can quickly run and file in NY before Elliott would then have a chance to file somewhere else, in a more favorable court.

What's stopping Elliott and his people from filing a suit right now? Does the CBA dictate he has to go to an appeal and possibly arbitration before filing a suit?

A federal court will not hear any case until all extra-judicial avenues are exhausted. So no case will lie until the appeal is done.

It also will not matter who files first, IMO. As I stated in another thread, I don't think it will matter legally whether they file in MN or NY. The basis of the Brady opinion was not unique to the Second Circuit, and relied heavily upon Supreme Court precedent which is binding nationwide. And even though it is in a different circuit, I believe a MN court would find the Second Circuit decision highly persuasive,

Bottom line, the legal case really won't hinge on the factual disagreements -- it will turn on whether Goodell under Article 46 had the right to make the factual conclusions and impose the discipline he determined. The Brady court was very clear that:

"Here, the parties contracted in the CBA to specifically allow the Commissioner to sit as the arbitrator in all disputes brought pursuant to Article 46, Section 1(a). They did so knowing full well that the Commissioner had the sole power of determining what constitutes “conduct detrimental,” and thus knowing that the Commissioner would have a stake both in the underlying discipline and in every arbitration brought pursuant to Section 1(a). Had the parties wished to restrict the Commissioner’s authority, they could have fashioned a different agreement.”

So IMO Zeke's only hope is for the suspension to be shortened on appeal. I think whatever is decided there will almost certainly be upheld in federal court.

BTW, anyone who is interested can read the Brady ruling here: https://static.nfl.com/static/content/public/photo/2016/04/25/0ap3000000655650.pdf

 

[beacamdim]

Oh I imagine they will show a whole slew of criminal cases where the league did nothing after the player was cleared.

They can also point to where the league ignored all of the evidence he had to defend himself. They ignored the text messages and the affidavits.

This is not the Brady case where Brady destroyed evidence and did not have much in the way of mitigation.

See my recent post. The facts will not be the basis of any litigation. Only process.

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Not if there's no malice. That being said, your scenario would almost certainly include malice.

That text exchange is pretty damning.

 

[MichaelWinicki]

His agents knew how he rolls. They should have (and likely have been) warning him that any more smoke and this could happen, and that there would be contractual consequences.

Just another example in my opinion of Zeke's hubris/arrogance/stupidity.

And if you were a national sponsor, why would you touch toxic Zeke now, especially when Dak is around?

Dumb. dumb, dumb, Mr. Elliott. Dumb.

Agreed.

But some think Zeke is just being a "kid".

 

[Lodeus]

So I just got home and haven't really read up on this but from my understanding this is strike one and the next time he could face being banned from the league. Is that correct?

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

A federal court will not hear any case until all extra-judicial avenues are exhausted. So no case will lie until the appeal is done.

It also will not matter who files first, IMO. As I stated in another thread, I don't think it will matter legally whether they file in MN or NY. The basis of the Brady opinion was not unique to the Second Circuit, and relied heavily upon Supreme Court precedent which is binding nationwide. And even though it is in a different circuit, I believe a MN court would find the Second Circuit decision highly persuasive,

Bottom line, the legal case really won't hinge on the factual disagreements -- it will turn on whether Goodell under Article 46 had the right to make the facial conclusions and impose the discipline he determined. The Brady court was very clear that:

"Here, the parties contracted in the CBA to specifically allow the Commissioner to sit as the arbitrator in all disputes brought pursuant to Article 46, Section 1(a). They did so knowing full well that the Commissioner had the sole power of determining what constitutes “conduct detrimental,” and thus knowing that the Commissioner would have a stake both in the underlying discipline and in every arbitration brought pursuant to Section 1(a). Had the parties wished to restrict the Commissioner’s authority, they could have fashioned a different agreement.”

So IMO Zeke's only hope is for the suspension to be shortened on appeal. I think whatever is decided there will almost certainly be upheld in federal court.

BTW, anyone who is interested can read the Brady ruling here: https://static.nfl.com/static/content/public/photo/2016/04/25/0ap3000000655650.pdf

You should spend less time regurgitating old headlines and more time reading the ruling. The salient portion is the following:

We hold that the commissioner properly exercised his broad discretion under the collective bargaining agreement and that his procedural rulings were properly grounded in that agreement and did not deprive Brady of fundamental fairness. Accordingly, we reverse the judgement of the district court and remand with instructions to confirm the award.

It puts limits on Goodell's power specifically on the issue of fairness. Potential arguments in that direction are both myriad and obvious.

Brady's issue had to do with the integrity of the game and the court has repeatedly given the NFL carte blanche in that respect going back 50 years. When it comes to criminal discipline it is not the same boat at all.

 

[beacamdim]

So anybody can accuse a public person of doing something and there is nothing that can be done?

While that is not how a court would articulate it, a lot of celebrities would say that in their experience that is exactly the case.

Remember Trump's threatening to change the libel laws? It is precisely because of his frustrations in this regard.

 

[CWR]

Welp some of us have to get up at 345am for work. Really disappointed you guys couldnt break a hundred on this thread by now. Shows a lack of effort and passion fellas. For petes sake have it done before I wake. Dont worry about me, Ill be dreaming of DMC and Alf going for 3.8 yds a carry all day long.

 

[beacamdim]

You should spend less time regurgitating old headlines and more time reading the ruling. The salient portion is the following:



It puts limits on Goodell's power specifically on the issue of fairness. Potential arguments in that direction are both myriad and obvious.

Brady's issue had to do with the integrity of the game and the court has repeatedly given the NFL carte blanche in that respect going back 50 years. When it comes to criminal discipline it is not the same boat at all.

No, the court found that merely by exercising his extremely broad powers under the CBA -- which the players agreed to -- Goodell by definition did not act unfairly. Same here with Zeke, in all likelihood.

The players agreed to a system where Goodell is judge, jury AND arbitrator. So in the eyes of the judicial system he is doing nothing unfair by exercising the authority that the players voluntarily gave him.

That is what that language means.

 

[Fizziksman]

Does anyone not hate the media these days? They are up there with politicians in my book. Smh

it's the problem with Sport Journalism. They are too tied to the associations to actually do any real investigative journalism. Like a company like ESPN would never investigate the NFL on would be corrupt practices because say goodbye to Monday Night Football. So it's just *** kissing NBA/NFL/NHL/MLB etc.

 

[CowboyStar88]

I was for a short bit helping the wifes aunt in hospice. We left Houston in June.

Sorry to hear brother

 

[DeaconBlues]

Beer won't do it today W...need some Fireball to ease the pain of this stupid suspension.!!

Fireball??? Hell, it's just bad news; no need to go all suicidal on this . . .

 

[cowfan]

How can you suspend a player for 6 games and last year you suspended a player for one game because of domestic violence?

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

No, the court found that by exercising his extremely broad powers under the CBA -- which the players agreed to -- Brady by definition could not argue that he was treated unfairly. And neither could Zeke.

The players agreed to a system where Goodell is judge, jury AND arbitrator. So on the eyes of the judicial system he is doing nothing unfair by exercising the authority that the players voluntarily gave him.

That is what that language means.

You're regurgitating old headlines again.

There is no reason to believe that the court was saying the one led to the other. In my experience when that is the case then they are quite explicit in their language.

Frankly if what you claim is what they meant then they would have said that. Frankly the language is obviously distinguishing between Brady's punishment being within the CBA and the issue of fundamental fairness.

 

[Plankton]

Atta boy Zekes PR team lol. Seriously though what else can u say.

How about I didn't do what I was accused of?

Didn't see that in the statement.

 

[beacamdim]

You're regurgitating old headlines again.

There is no reason to believe that the court was saying the one led to the other. In my experience when that is the case then they are quite explicit in their language.

Frankly if what you claim is what they meant then they would have said that.

You may disagree, but IMO that IS in fact what the court is saying. I have to apply legal rulings every day in my litigation practice. Doesn't mean I'm always right, but my batting average is pretty good.

And I hate to be snide, but don't you realize that the ENTIRE legal system is based on "regurgitating old headlines"? That's what legal precedent is -- following "old headlines" like Roe v. Wade, Brown v. Board, etc.

The relevant "old headline" here is the Brady case.

And it does not bode well for Zeke when the dust settles for good, IMO.

We shall see, I'm sure . . .

Peace.

 

[mattjames2010]

How about I didn't do what I was accused of?

Didn't see that in the statement.

He said he strongly disagrees with the conclusion, and his agent already took care of saying he's innocent earlier.

 

[FuzzyLumpkins]

You may disagree, but IMO that IS in fact what the court is saying. I have to apply legal rulings every day in my litigation practice. Doesn't mean I'm always right, but my batting average is pretty good.

And while I hate to be snide, but don't you realize that the ENTIRE legal system is based on "regurgitating old headlines"? That's what legal precedent is -- following "old headlines" like Roe v. Wade, Brown v. Board, etc.

The "old headline" here is the Brady case.

And it does not bode well for Zeke when the dust settles for good, IMO.

We shall seem, I'm sure . . .

I think you mistake case law and news headlines. It's becoming more and more clear you have no idea what you are talking about. I'm the one actually looking at what the ruling says and you are regurgitating news headlines.

But this should be fun: please show me where the federal court stated Goodell was "judge, jury, and executioner."

 

[mattjames2010]

You may disagree, but IMO that IS in fact what the court is saying. I have to apply legal rulings every day in my litigation practice. Doesn't mean I'm always right, but my batting average is pretty good.

And I hate to be snide, but don't you realize that the ENTIRE legal system is based on "regurgitating old headlines"? That's what legal precedent is -- following "old headlines" like Roe v. Wade, Brown v. Board, etc.

The relevant "old headline" here is the Brady case.

And it does not bode well for Zeke when the dust settles for good, IMO.

We shall see, I'm sure . . .

Peace.

He already pointed out to you why the Brady debacle isn't comparable here.

 

[PA Cowboy Fan]

How about I didn't do what I was accused of?

Didn't see that in the statement.

Yea I did noticed that.