Predictions on TO arbritation hearing

[Trip]

I know, another TO thread.

But I'm interested as to how people believe this case will turn out on Friday.

TO has many bashers on this board nowadays, and everywhere for that matter, but do you think the Eagles decision to suspend him for 4 games, then pay him but not let him play for the rest of the season will be upheld?

I think the arbritrator will try to find a medium ground. The suspension will be upheld, and then the Eagles will be given a specified time period, like two weeks, to let him play, release him or trade him.

The Eagles will end up dealing him somewhere for like a 5th rounder.

I don't think it's out of the question that the suspension could even be reduced to two weeks, and the Eagles will be given an additional two weeks while they pay him to trade or release.

The Eagles will be the ones that lose out, because the remainder of TO's signing bonus will count against their cap next season, and some team will get a fired up, cheap TO. Whether he straightens up his act is another matter.

 

[Billy Bullocks]

I think TO loses the case. Philly can't be forced to pay him. All they have to do is make him inactive on game day. No one can force you to put a player on the active game day roster

 

[Reality]

No one, not even an arbitrator, can force a team to play a player. The only thing the arbitrator can make a decision on is whether or not a player is paid or not which also includes pay back of any pro-rated signing bonus.

So, the only thing that will happen Friday is the arbitrator will decide how many games TO is to be paid for during the suspension. The only way TO steps on the field again this year is if the Eagles organization itself decides to let him either by letting him play for the Eagles or releasing him.

 

[koolaid]

how would they be able to trade him?? its past the trade deadline. my guess is his suspension will be ended and he will be activated, though not played or suited up for any more games. He will be paid. For some reason i get the feeling the eagles are trying to hold onto him until the end of the season for either a trade or maybe just so another team cannot sign him.

 

[Trip]

how would they be able to trade him?? its past the trade deadline. my guess is his suspension will be ended and he will be activated, though not played or suited up for any more games. He will be paid. For some reason i get the feeling the eagles are trying to hold onto him until the end of the season for either a trade or maybe just so another team cannot sign him.

True. That complicates it. Release him or let him play. I don't see how the arbritrator can say forcing him to sit out the rest of the season is justified. Likewise, it's tough to decide the Eagles will not be allowed to try and recupe a pick for him. I say he decides release or let him return to the team.

 

[LaTunaNostra]

I predict TO 'loses' his appeal and does what Key did when he was deactivated in 03...takes a media job for the remainder of the year.

ESPN would make a nice bully pulpit to bash the Philly organization with.

(of course, it's highly unlikely ESPN is that cutting edge)

 

[Trip]

No one, not even an arbitrator, can force a team to play a player. The only thing the arbitrator can make a decision on is whether or not a player is paid or not which also includes pay back of any pro-rated signing bonus.

So, the only thing that will happen Friday is the arbitrator will decide how many games TO is to be paid for during the suspension. The only way TO steps on the field again this year is if the Eagles organization itself decides to let him either by letting him play for the Eagles or releasing him.

He can't force the team to play him, but he can force the team to allow him to return and sit on the bench. It's a grievance union vs. league.

The Eagles won't allow him to return under any circumstances. They'll release him first.

 

[Cbz40]

I think Philly loses the case....they will have bring him back after the 4 game suspension.......They cannot be forced to play him but he remains on the team until after the season.

 

[KoRn_BoYz_5]

it will be a death sentence......wait, we are talkin about Tom O'somename right?

 

[Trip]

TO's argument will be he was told by the team it would be a 1-game suspension if he didn't apologize and he wouldn't be allowed to return to the team until he did and there's some evidence to support his claim.

Andy Reid said publicly he would wait until after the Commanders game and talk to TO. Then Reid said the day after the Commanders game that Owens would be suspended for four games. Reid must have told him the consequences if he chose not to apologize, and he couldn't have possibly told him a 4-game suspension without pay because it hadn't been decided yet.

TO plays again in 2005 and I'll be very surprised if he doesn't.

Arbritrator: Andy Reid, did you tell TO what would happen if he chose not to apologize to the team?

Reid: Of course I did.

Arbritrator: Well what did you tell him?

Reid: Ummm... I told him it would be a 4 game suspension.

Arbritrator: Well why did you publicly say then that you would talk to TO following the Commanders game? If he was suspended for 4 games, what did you have to talk about?

Reid: Maybe I said he would be suspended until he apologized. I can't remember.

 

[Reality]

He can't force the team to play him, but he can force the team to allow him to return and sit on the bench. It's a grievance union vs. league.

Actually, no he can't. A team has a right to sit any player or lock out any player they want to. As long as the player is being paid the money owed to him in his contract, the team has the final say on whether or not a player is even allowed at the stadium, at least in team restricted areas.

An arbitrator's job is to rule on grievances regarding money and contracts. Unless TO's contract specifically said that Philly is not allowed to keep him out of games or ban him from team restricted areas, the arbitrator cannot force the Eagles to play him, allow him at team facilities or even on the sidelines during games.

The only question here is how many games the Eagles are allowed to not pay TO.

 

[Trip]

Actually, no he can't. A team has a right to sit any player or lock out any player they want to. As long as the player is being paid the money owed to him in his contract, the team has the final say on whether or not a player is even allowed at the stadium, at least in team restricted areas.

An arbitrator's job is to rule on grievances regarding money and contracts. Unless TO's contract specifically said that Philly is not allowed to keep him out of games or ban him from team restricted areas, the arbitrator cannot force the Eagles to play him, allow him at team facilities or even on the sidelines during games.

The only question here is how many games the Eagles are allowed to not pay TO.

I think he can. A union can grieve any decision and if the grievance is denied or an unsatisfactory result achieved they can ask for an independant arbritrator.

I could be wrong, but I believe that's the case.

 

[SkinsandTerps]

I think TO loses the case. Philly can't be forced to pay him. All they have to do is make him inactive on game day. No one can force you to put a player on the active game day roster

Then obviously they would be forced to pay him.

TO wants to play because he needs to.

Eagles want to sit him because the dont want him.

The Eagles are willing to pay him. They simply tried to pay him less if possible.

Maybe you meant "forced to play him".

 

[SkinsandTerps]

I think he can. A union can grieve any decision and if the grievance is denied or an unsatisfactory result achieved they can ask for an independant arbritrator.

I could be wrong, but I believe that's the case.

If the Eagles dont want him to play there is nothing an arbitrator can do.

 

[BigDFan5]

He can't force the team to play him, but he can force the team to allow him to return and sit on the bench. It's a grievance union vs. league.

The Eagles won't allow him to return under any circumstances. They'll release him first.

He wont be on the bench either he will be inactive meaning he wont be at the games

 

[Catch-22]

I think he'll get a few game checks back, but I highly doubt philly would release him

 

[Hostile]

I think he'll get a few game checks back, but I highly doubt philly would release him

I think it will either be this or Philly will be allowed to do exactly as they plan.

They cannot force the Eagles to activate or release him. I think they have enough to justify the 4 games without pay.

 

[playit12]

Wow people are way off on what options the Team and arbiter have in this matter...

First a suspension is not the same thing as being deactivated. He is not paid during the suspension, and I don't believe he has to be listed on the 53 man roster (opening another spot for a player). Adam feel free to correct me on this issue if I'm wrong. Max time is 4 games.

If he is to be deactivated he will simply be on the 53 man roster but not on the game day roster. He will recieve full pay. (I'd be really curious what the tax ramifications of this are. Hard to tax a player income tax in a state where he is not located during the supposed period of pay - players pay state income tax in both the state they live and the state the game is played in. They pay a higher rate as well).

There is no precedent for "locking" a player out of the practice facilities. I not at all sure the team can do this without waiving a player. If I was TO I'd go to every practice and try to force the team to lock me out.

If TO wins he will get some or all of his pay check money back for the games he was suspended. The team will keep him on the roster and next year they will waive him. TO will likely file a seperate grievance because of missed incentive bonusses (which he will lose) and the team will not try to reclaim bonus money (because they would lose).

Most parties seem to think the suspension will be reduced due to a lack of progression in the teams punitive dealings with TO.

 

[playit12]

Actually, no he can't. A team has a right to sit any player or lock out any player they want to. As long as the player is being paid the money owed to him in his contract, the team has the final say on whether or not a player is even allowed at the stadium, at least in team restricted areas.

An arbitrator's job is to rule on grievances regarding money and contracts. Unless TO's contract specifically said that Philly is not allowed to keep him out of games or ban him from team restricted areas, the arbitrator cannot force the Eagles to play him, allow him at team facilities or even on the sidelines during games.

The only question here is how many games the Eagles are allowed to not pay TO.

This I'm not so sure about. I'm not sure it's been tested. To the best of my knoledge no team has ever had to lock out a player that was not being suspended. Don't forget that included in the facilities are the training rooms. To lock out TO would be to prevent him from receiving training for his injuries and continued physical therapy. Those are services that I'm guessing an employer is obligated to provide in this instance. But then who knows without reading the contracts and the CBA.

 

[thewivil]

He wont be on the bench either he will be inactive meaning he wont be at the games

But he will have access to all training and medical facilities.