NFLPA filed a motion to hold NFL/Goodell in contempt of court

[Rogah]

Your perfectly free to look up trust and monopoly law. You have been educated to this point before.

And you're perfectly free to look up anti-trust exemption and collective bargaining as it relates to sports leagues and specifically the NFL.

You've been educated to this point before.

 

[Nightman]

The Ben Roethlisberger case could be presented as a precedent and that suspension was for more than 2 games.

The Roethlisberger case fell under the Personal Conduct Policy and was about embarrassing the League and it's integrity. Ben was found to be responsible for providing underage college kids with alcohol. The sexual assault charge was not officially cited but it was compounded with Civil case from Lake Tahoe to paint Ben as out of control.

The Commish has wide discretion under that policy and didn't need a conviction. But according to "shop law" DV cases have been met with a 2 game max for convictions and no suspensions without one. By changing the policy in Sept he is bound by the old policy in Hardy's case. He is attempting to say he is punishing Hardy under the Personal Conduct policy, but no one is falling for that. He is also intentionally misrepresenting the Hardy incident as 4 separate offenses and trying to tie the legal guns into the punishment.

We will see how it turns out, but the NFLPA and the Courts seem tired of Goodell's act.

 

[WPBCowboysFan]

A judge can force one party to pay money to another party, but I don't know of any law that says a judge can force a team (or league) to play a guy.

Don't get me wrong; a federal judge can overturn a suspension.... but if the Vikings themselves don't want to play the guy, but they still pay him, then I can't see a judge interfering with that under the current NFL CBA.

Well, Well, Well, look who came out of hiding . . . . .

 

[Rogah]

The Roethlisberger case fell under the Personal Conduct Policy and was about embarrassing the League and it's integrity. Ben was found to be responsible for providing underage college kids with alcohol. The sexual assault charge was not officially cited but it was compounded with Civil case from Lake Tahoe to paint Ben as out of control.

The Commish has wide discretion under that policy and didn't need a conviction. But according to "shop law" DV cases have been met with a 2 game max for convictions and no suspensions without one. By changing the policy in Sept he is bound by the old policy in Hardy's case. He is attempting to say he is punishing Hardy under the Personal Conduct policy, but no one is falling for that. He is also intentionally misrepresenting the Hardy incident as 4 separate offenses and trying to tie the legal guns into the punishment.

We will see how it turns out, but the NFLPA and the Courts seem tired of Goodell's act.

He is doing to Hardy what he should have done to Rice all along: Throwing the book at him and making the Players' Association defend the guy who seems to enjoy hitting women.

The ultimate irony is that all Goodell's trouble in the Ray Rice situation came as a result of being too lenient. It's a mistake he won't be making again. He knows he will probably lose on appeal but that's perfectly fine by him. There's no bad P.R. in punishing a guy too hard for domestic violence.

 

[Nightman]

He is doing to Hardy what he should have done to Rice all along: Throwing the book at him and making the Players' Association defend the guy who seems to enjoy hitting women.

The ultimate irony is that all Goodell's trouble in the Ray Rice situation came as a result of being too lenient. It's a mistake he won't be making again. He knows he will probably lose on appeal but that's perfectly fine by him. There's no bad P.R. in punishing a guy too hard for domestic violence.

The thing is he was going by the book on the Rice suspension. It had been adjudicated and Rice got the "likely" max of 2 games. The second video shouldn't have taken them by surprise and the second punishment made them look weak. PR nightmares always blow over. America has the attention span of a teenager.

 

[Rogah]

The thing is he was going by the book on the Rice suspension. It had been adjudicated and Rice got the "likely" max of 2 games.

Heck, he was stricter with Rice than he had been with previous incidents. Very few players even got the 2 games Rice got.

PR nightmares always blow over. America has the attention span of a teenager.

Yes they do. They do indeed.

 

[irishline]

And you're perfectly free to look up anti-trust exemption and collective bargaining as it relates to sports leagues and specifically the NFL.

You've been educated to this point before.

American Needle Inc. vs. NFL 2010. The US Supreme Court stated in it's unanimous opinion:

"Respondent National Football League (NFL) is an unincorporated association of 32 separately owned professional football teams..."

http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/09pdf/08-661.pdf

From an article covering the verdict:

"Despite the coordination needed to run the sports league, the NFL isn't a single entity but rather a consortium of 32 separately owned teams that compete with one another, Justice John Paul Stevens wrote for a unanimous court. The ruling reverses an appeals-court decision and sends the case back to lower courts to be reconsidered. The ruling deals a blow not only to the NFL, which has longed for the antitrust exemption baseball has enjoyed since 1922, but also other joint ventures that have been accused of restraining competition, such as credit-card giants MasterCard Inc. and Visa Inc., which originated as consortiums of member banks."

http://www.oyez.org/cases/2000-2009/2009/2009_08_661

http://blogs.wsj.com/law/2010/05/24/american-needle-high-court-delivers-9-0-shutout-against-nfl/

They have been unsuccessfully fighting it ever since. Lost another challenge to it last fall.

I think we can all agree that's likely the case. (the part about him earning more in the NFL than anywhere else)

But the NFL is essentially treated as 1 entity, not 32 separate ones...

Not so much.

 

[Hoofbite]

It just states that he chose that "option". I'm curious as to what his other option(s) was/were. It might have been suspension or being cut...would be nice to know the alternative he had.

Probably a team suspension for the longest they can possibly do so followed by being deactivated every week.

So, lose "x" number of games in pay and then not play, or lose no pay and not play.

 

[Rogah]

American Needle Inc. vs. NFL 2010. The US Supreme Court stated in it's unanimous opinion:

"Respondent National Football League (NFL) is an unincorporated association of 32 separately owned professional football teams..."

http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/09pdf/08-661.pdf

From an article covering the verdict:

"Despite the coordination needed to run the sports league, the NFL isn't a single entity but rather a consortium of 32 separately owned teams that compete with one another, Justice John Paul Stevens wrote for a unanimous court. The ruling reverses an appeals-court decision and sends the case back to lower courts to be reconsidered. The ruling deals a blow not only to the NFL, which has longed for the antitrust exemption baseball has enjoyed since 1922, but also other joint ventures that have been accused of restraining competition, such as credit-card giants MasterCard Inc. and Visa Inc., which originated as consortiums of member banks."

http://www.oyez.org/cases/2000-2009/2009/2009_08_661

http://blogs.wsj.com/law/2010/05/24/american-needle-high-court-delivers-9-0-shutout-against-nfl/

They have been unsuccessfully fighting it ever since. Lost another challenge to it last fall.



Not so much.

I thought it was clear that the subject of this thread was players and the Collective Bargaining Agreement, not merchandising and licensing rights.

As far as rookies and players under contract are concerned, the NFL is basically 1 entity and they have to play where they are drafted or where they are under contract or they don't get to play (obviously some players have the clout to force a trade or something like that but even then, all they can really do is refuse to play; they can't just go wherever they want). Like every NFL player, they can work in another industry if they want, but if they want to play in the NFL, they have to play for the teams that drafted them until they become free agents, and the teams they are contractually tied to until those contracts end or they are cut, or they don't get to play.

The whole concept of a draft and holding a player bound to 1 single team is collusion and would be illegal in most any industry, so then why can sports leagues get away with it? Primarily because that is part of the CBA negotiated between owners and the union, and courts give a lot of leeway to things collectively bargained by labor parties.

 

[LandryFan]

Probably a team suspension for the longest they can possibly do so followed by being deactivated every week.

So, lose "x" number of games in pay and then not play, or lose no pay and not play.

I strongly suspected it could be something along those lines. Some have made it sound as if the players could have kept playing, but opted to go onto the exempt list, instead.

 

[LittleBoyBlue]

I don't know...

me wrong.

QFT

 

[Rogah]

As usual I have no clue what I am talking about

That is very big of you to admit it.

 

[Nightman]

Probably a team suspension for the longest they can possibly do so followed by being deactivated every week.

So, lose "x" number of games in pay and then not play, or lose no pay and not play.

I don't know if that is allowed. That borders on double punishment. Teams may be able to release a player if they make it sound it was for football reasons, but they can't cut players for violations covered by the CBA.(article 46)

Ray Rice settled his 3.5m grievance against the Ravens after accusing them of illegally withholding his pay when they released.

 

[LittleBoyBlue]

That is very big of you to admit it.

Very unoriginal.

No imagination.

Charlie was right (italian Job movie)

Lmao

 

[WPBCowboysFan]

Very unoriginal.

No imagination.

Charlie was right (italian Job movie)

Lmao

He left, but just could not stay away

The abuse he took was pretty mild compared to what he should have received for his 4 months of posting nonsense. Once again, Cowboys fans show they're the classiest fans in all of sports, as he got a slap on the wrist dosage of abuse here from Cowboys fans.

 

[LittleBoyBlue]

He left, but just could not stay away

The abuse he took was pretty mild compared to what he should have received for his 4 months of posting nonsense. Once again, Cowboys fans show they're the classiest fans in all of sports, as he got a slap on the wrist dosage of abuse here from Cowboys fans.

Lol

25k is verrrrrry close to 1 million. What's wrong with you?

 

[Nightman]

Lol

25k is verrrrrry close to 1 million. What's wrong with you?

Brady got 4 months in jail for a speeding ticket

and everyone does it!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[WPBCowboysFan]

That is very big of you to admit it.

You could always follow his example and do the same!

 

[Hoofbite]

I don't know if that is allowed. That borders on double punishment. Teams may be able to release a player if they make it sound it was for football reasons, but they can't cut players for violations covered by the CBA.(article 46)

Ray Rice settled his 3.5m grievance against the Ravens after accusing them of illegally withholding his pay when they released.

Well the team can suspend him and he could appeal. Although I think team imposed suspensions are limited in number. There's absolutely nothing that says the team has to play him.

 

[LittleBoyBlue]

Brady got 4 months in jail for a speeding ticket

and everyone does it!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Chi chi... Get the yayo!