Michael Irvin returns to NFL Network

[Beaker42]

The NFLN overstepped their bounds too, IMO, though that's par for the course with the NFL.

Happy for Irvin, hope his settlement with Marriott was huge and the accuser gets a triple dose of karma.

Exactly. Whatever happened to innocent until proven guilty?? He should’ve sued NFLN for wrongful termination too.

 

[Diehardblues]

thats why people that think like you get thrown out during jury selections.... already made up your imnd regardless of the facts

This was never a criminal case. It was HR and PR issue. Last time I checked employers are able to take disciplinary action without illegal behavior.

 

[Diehardblues]

It was you I was discussing this with, right?
You said that NFLN has “already decided”? As you had. I’m happy to see his professional life wasn’t ruined.

If it wasn’t you then my bad.

The NFL and any employer has the right to take disciplinary action on accusations . It’s typical for HR.

Im not sure the NFLN has stated they regret making the decision they did at the time based on the information they had.

The fact they have reinstated doesn’t mean they don’t believe their action was warranted at the time nor that he didn’t make inappropriate sexual innuendos .

 

[Diehardblues]

Michael was never really interested in denying he made those ethnic sexual innuendos . Shoot, he said he didn’t even remember everything he said. He only wanted his job back.

His conduct was never considered illegal only inappropriate which drew action from the hotels Human Resources for their employee

And the NFLN took action to avoid potential public perception pushbacks if Irvin’s action were illegal. It was all typical company precaution especially with a personality with Irvin’s history.

His reinstatement doesn’t prove he didn’t deserve to be benched or that the NFLN wasn’t within their rights to take action.

 

[Silverstar]

 

[Reid1boys]

The NFL and any employer has the right to take disciplinary action on accusations . It’s typical for HR.

Im not sure the NFLN has stated they regret making the decision they did at the time based on the information they had.

The fact they have reinstated doesn’t mean they don’t believe their action was warranted at the time nor that he didn’t make inappropriate sexual innuendos .

Sure ir is standard HR procedures, but are you kidding> The nfl is gonna state they regret the decision??? jesus man, what world do you live in?
The fact they reinstated him absolutely means they believe it was garbage, because in their bsuiness perception is everything. Even though you want to slant everything to mean he did it and looks bad.

Fact is he is back on air, and that says all you need to know.

 

[MarcusRock]

When was all said and done Marriott came out the loser.

Did they? Like I said, it wouldn't surprise me that the NFL passed through any "settlement" IF it was of the financial variety.

 

[MarcusRock]

I absolutely thought he had a case if Marriott could not prove their employee’s accusation. Mike was thrown out of his hotel room in the middle of the night. Then from these accusations his employer removed him from participating in his job. Banished, embarrassed and public humiliation is absolutely a defamation lawsuit.

Well if you listen to Marriott tell the story, it was not them who did the throwing out, nor was it "middle of the night" like Irvin stated. They say the event happened on a Sunday and Irvin was there all day Monday while Marriott conducted their investigation including sharing it with the NFL. It was the NFL that showed up Monday night saying Irvin needed to move. So again, not seeing where Marriott was culpable of anything if they never officially kicked him out. It wasn't them that went out in public broadcasting what happened. None of us knew anything until Irvin broke the story himself. This was one of the things Irvin's lawyer lied about saying no one had spoken about things publicly when it was his own client that did.

 

[FVSTONE]

NFL Channel owes Michael a huge raise!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[MarcusRock]

While true a defemation of character suit can certainly swing the burden of proof right back to the defendant once its proved the accusation was made and acted on.
Defamation of character is defined as a false statement of fact that causes the victim some type of harm.
once there was proof they called his employer and accused him and the employer did soemthing they needed to prove the statment of fact was true or they would lose that case.

You'd have to show the part that shows their statement of what was said was false. Where have you seen that it was indeed false?

The only false statement(s) I'm aware of in this whole thing is what at least one of the witnesses stated. The video showed neither of them saw the first encounter like they claimed, and one claimed he heard the woman greet Irvin like she knew him when Mike's own statement said she didn't even know what he did which is why he was telling her about his ESPN show. If Marriott wanted to be petty they could go after that witness in court for defamation and would probably win because it's proven that he lied.

 

[KJJ]

Did they? Like I said, it wouldn't surprise me that the NFL passed through any "settlement" IF it was of the financial variety.

According to what was posted they settled with Irvin. They’re out a lot of money and he’s back on NFL Network.

 

[DogFace]

The NFL and any employer has the right to take disciplinary action on accusations . It’s typical for HR.

Im not sure the NFLN has stated they regret making the decision they did at the time based on the information they had.

The fact they have reinstated doesn’t mean they don’t believe their action was warranted at the time nor that he didn’t make inappropriate sexual innuendos .

A key part of your argument was that the NFLN made (you insisted a decision had been made) a judgement based on their investigation about his employment and that said a lot.

I guess you still feel the same.

 

[Reid1boys]

According to what was posted they settled with Irvin. They’re out a lot of money and he’s back on NFL Network.

the settlement could have been for 5 bucks.... we have no idea what was in the settlement.

 

[KJJ]

the settlement could have been for 5 bucks.... we have no idea what was in the settlement.

He wouldn’t have settled if it wasn’t for a lot of money. Lol You can bet he came away with millions. It was a $100 million suit.

 

[MarcusRock]

Add Marcus Rock as well. I had to ignore most of them. They clearly didn't like Irvin and nothing else mattered.

Only the weak use ignore. Why didn't you just debate the facts that were known back then with me? You were mad that even with your "law background" you couldn't pull the wool over folks' eyes that the information that was known at the time didn't favor Irvin as evidenced by you ignoring those tidbits back then. Then you disappear until a settlement is reached that again says nothing about "guilt" or not yet trying to claim a victory lap on things no one was even hoping for. Always the lawyers, lol.

 

[MarcusRock]

He wouldn’t have settled if it wasn’t for a lot of money. Lol It was a $100 million suit.

You think that's how these things work? With the football season starting, the one with the urgency here was Irvin as he was about to start a regular season without work. Given that, don't you think it was more probable that Irvin's side made the major concessions to end this? What does Marriott care about the regular season starting? Folks traveling for games are going to use their hotels no matter what. Logic, not emotion. And there's LOTS of emotion going 'round.

 

[CCBoy]

He looked good, too.

 

[Hagman]

How dare that some of you questioned the actions of this saintly man.

 

[Reid1boys]

He wouldn’t have settled if it wasn’t for a lot of money. Lol You can bet he came away with millions. It was a $100 million suit.

no, you are very incorrect. He wanted his job back.... the money didnt matter to him.

 

[Reid1boys]

You think that's how these things work? With the football season starting, the one with the urgency here was Irvin as he was about to start a regular season without work. Given that, don't you think it was more probable that Irvin's side made the major concessions to end this? What does Marriott care about the regular season starting? Folks traveling for games are going to use their hotels no matter what. Logic, not emotion. And there's LOTS of emotion going 'round.

what concessions you think Irvin made? All he wanted was jis job back. He got EXACTLY what he wanted. A complete victory for him.