Mortensen: Elliott Suspension Upheld **merged**

Is there actually a DV policy?

I know with Ray Rice they tried to go by policy and people begged Goodell to scrap policy and make an arbitrary decision. That kind of set this whole thing in motion, and I don't know that they've negotiated the CBA since, so how could they even have a DV policy?

Man, there's so much crap to wade through here and I have no idea if I should be prepping for a long fight or if the league is just going to waive the "You told us we could do whatever you want" clause and tie the judges' hands.

I saw it posted earlier today that the policy was, in fact, never collectively bargained for or negotiated by the players union.
 
Is there actually a DV policy?

I know with Ray Rice they tried to go by policy and people begged Goodell to scrap policy and make an arbitrary decision. That kind of set this whole thing in motion, and I don't know that they've negotiated the CBA since, so how could they even have a DV policy?

Man, there's so much crap to wade through here and I have no idea if I should be prepping for a long fight or if the league is just going to waive the "You told us we could do whatever you want" clause and tie the judges' hands.

And his decision was vacated in court.

Anywho http://static.nfl.com/static/content/public/photo/2014/12/10/0ap3000000441637.pdf that was the 2014 additional policy.
 
the appeal went 2-1. The justice here clearly distinguishes this case from Brady. The Brady trumps all ship has sailed. It never floated in the first place.
Yes, this judge here. Just like the 1st judge in the Brady case ruled on Brady's favor. Its Brady case all over again. Lol it's the nflpa complaining about fairness just like they did in Brady case. This will go in Zekes favor just like Brady and then the nfl will appeal just like they did in Brady case. Trust me, Its floating lol
 
Most don't care. You think Sean Lee or Tyron Smith are worried about getting in this kind of trouble? No.

Players care about money and working conditions. The guys that behave themselves, which includes most of them, aren't concerned about the rules in place for the troublemakers.


Jarvis Landry and his girlfriend were having an argument in a hotel. Police were called...no charges filed and both Landry and the girlfriend are denying any wrong doing.

The NFL is "investigating".

They are also "investigating" Michae Irvin.

This can happen to anyone.
 
That's huge if the judge actually stated this case is not like Brady's. I'd love to hear more from him on that.
I have been saying that all along. I did not know that wording was there but Goodell cannot just suspend on a whim due to article 46. He has to be able t o show conduct detrimental. There has to be some proof. Pictures of bruises are not proof of domestic violence and that is all they have.
 
Is that really cause to celebrate though? Maybe he's suspended 6 games in November, December and January? I guess it has to start some where, but I don't think we should be popping champagne yet.
If he gets the TRO then he's playing entire season most likely. If not, suspension starts week 2. The odds are definitely in his favor having TRO activated.
 
I saw it posted earlier today that the policy was, in fact, never collectively bargained for or negotiated by the players union.

The six game minimum wasn't, but one could argue that clause 46 gives him the authority to do that
 
HH did not collude with Goodell because he is a puppet. Goodell played puppet master and pulled HH's strings.
 
If she doesn't show, why not? Why not come to court and sing it for the world?

If she DOES show, Kessler is going to eat her breakfast, lunch, and dinner money on the stand.

The NFL is so ****ed lol.

Who back out?
 
If he gets the TRO then he's playing entire season most likely. If not, suspension starts week 2. The odds are definitely in his favor having TRO activated.

So we kick the can down the road for a year. I'm not suggesting Zeke rollover and just take it, but I'm pretty sure the end result will be him missing 6 games
 
Uh WTH?!

Part of HH's decision:

I find it unnecessary to reexamine all the evidence presented in this record because my careful and diligent review of everything the Commissioner reviewed and relied on draws me to the conclusion that the record contains sufficient credible evidence to support whatever determinations he made. He is entitled to deference on those judgments absent irregularities not present here. While the record contains inconsistencies in statements, an adjudicator makes informed judgments on the credibility of witnesses and evidence.
Dear gawd so why waste everyone's time with this foolish appeal then if you find it unnecessary to reexamine all the evidence?
 

Forum statistics

Threads
464,054
Messages
13,786,182
Members
23,771
Latest member
LandryHat
Back
Top