The next Deflategate? With Ezekiel Elliott, NFL stands to lose more than it wins

[zekecowboy]

A federal judge Friday mercilessly trashed the NFL’s investigative process in granting Ezekiel Elliott a preliminary injunction in his fight to overturn his suspension. Terms like “unique and egregious” and “breach of the CBA” are signals that the NFL overstepped its bounds and abused its power in the eyes of the court. Elliott, it was ruled, did not get a “fundamentally fair hearing.’’ Again, punches were not pulled.

The courts eventually rule that the collective bargaining agreement gives Goodell the right to do exactly what the union agreed he could do back in 2011. Right on schedule, the NFL hinted at that in its reaction to Friday’s injunction: “We will review the decision in greater detail and discuss next steps with counsel, both in the district court and federal court of appeals.”

Peterson ended up suspended. So did Brady. Rice won in arbitration, but he never played another game.

Some day, if precedent holds, Elliott will have to serve his time. No one knows when it will happen. Just no time soon.

But along the way, the shield gets coated with a fresh coat of tarnish. The NFL celebrates a win, then wonders why everyone except them looks at it like a loss.




http://www.msn.com/en-us/sports/nfl...-than-it-wins/ar-AArwRgO?li=BBnbfcL&ocid=iehp



Statement from NFLPA:

 

[DogFace]

Not this time. The judge in the other cases didn't use the language this judge used.

Phrases like "circumstamces in this case are the worst this court has ever seen" aren't flippantly thrown around by judges.

The NFL has finally overstepped its bounds by trying to railroad a man.

 

[jazzcat22]

Not this time. The judge in the other cases didn't use the language this judge used.

Phrases like "circumstamces in this case are the worst this court has ever seen" aren't flippantly thrown around by judges.

The NFL has finally overstepped its bounds by trying to railroad a man.

6 Stars for the games Zeke will not be suspended !!!

 

[zekecowboy]

Not this time. The judge in the other cases didn't use the language this judge used. .

This will be a long drawn out battle for over a year. The NFL argument will be the CBA agreement allows us to do this.

The question is will the courts overrule the CBA agreement in place by the NFLPA.

Phrases like "circumstances in this case are the worst this court has ever seen" aren't flippantly thrown around by judges. I hope the judges rule in Zeke's favor. He has a very strong case. However, its possible he could still lose and end up serving a suspension

 

[links18]

The question is will the courts overrule the CBA agreement in place by the NFLPA.

The CBA may or may not give Goodell the power he claims, but the CBA itself is not entirely sacrosanct. It, in and of itself, has to meet some minimum standard of fairness in the context of labor discipline regimes. The fact that the NFLPA may or may not have signed off on giving the Commissioner such power does not exhaust the issue entirely. But first, it has to be determined just what the CBA allows and doesn't allow--as the judge in this case seems to have found a violation.

 

[HeavyBarrel]

I do NOT accept the premise that he will eventually have to serve the 6 game suspension, I don't believe that thought should even be entertained when an obvious miscarriage of justice has occurred. No suspension is acceptable under these circumstances

 

[zekecowboy]

I do NOT accept the premise that he will eventually have to serve the 6 game suspension, I don't believe that thought should even be entertained when an obvious miscarriage of justice has occurred. No suspension is acceptable under these circumstances

 

[JD_KaPow]

Not this time. The judge in the other cases didn't use the language this judge used.

Phrases like "circumstamces in this case are the worst this court has ever seen" aren't flippantly thrown around by judges.

The NFL has finally overstepped its bounds by trying to railroad a man.

He didn't use that phrase. He said, "The circumstances of this case are unmatched by any case this Court has seen," which isn't quite the same: he's arguing that other cases (like Brady) don't set compelling precedents. (I think.)

 

[DogFace]

He didn't use that phrase. He said, "The circumstances of this case are unmatched by any case this Court has seen," which isn't quite the same: he's arguing that other cases (like Brady) don't set compelling precedents. (I think.)

That seems "worse" for the league