Zeke and NFL have discussed settlement

[LandryFan]

Probably like any situation where someone innocent or thinks they have the law on their side takes a settlement. It's simply management of risk.

You're correct, but on Zeke's side, he also has to manage the risk of his reputation being damaged, losing future endorsement deals, etc...it's not just about games missed or pay forfeited.

 

[Stash]

Not sure they know they will lose but rather they are realizing they might lose. Two weeks ago, they probably were in the "no shot" to lose category.

If they settle, they will take a huge PR hit. So for them to entertain the idea of settling, it's telling. I think they are afraid of the ramifications long term if they lose.

Or maybe they know something about the girl that's about to come out that will totally sink whatever thin case they had. Unlikely, but I guess possible.

If you google what "the victim" has been up to, it would reinforce your beliefs.

I won't post any links for the sake of this site, but people can check for themselves.

This is who Roger Goodell has decided to side with.

 

[Future]

I think that's something that needs to happen. If Elliott were to be punished like this, under these circumstances, it sets an awful precedent for every player in the league.

It basically turns on a neon sign that says "Open For Business" for every money-grubbing opportunist out there. You don't have to "prove" anything, the NFL will take your side strictly for the sake of PR, and the perception that they care about domestic violence.

Players would be "guilty" without any benefit of a trial. Of course the gold diggers would be paid off. There is no "he said/ she said", it's simply "she said" and the league believes it. Even when it comes from an obvious piece of trash with the worst name and reputation.

I hope the league isn't being inundated with this one's most recent pictures.

"Nice going Roger! This is what you've chosen to side with!"

The precedent that the league is trying to set here needs to be obliterated. Not simply for Zeke Elliott, but for every other player in the league. Because if this one stands, they're all in danger of being next.

This hasn't been discussed nearly enough in all of the rhetoric surrounding the Zeke case.

Gooddell has attempted to set precedent that just ACCUSATIONS can result in massive suspensions and millions of dollars AND that the league can pick and choose who it decides to take accusations for. It's basically trying to give them carte blanch to assert greater control over players and exploit them. All athletes should be absolutely terrified that this suspension gets upheld, not just football players, and I'm having a hard time determining how this wouldn't even set a precedent for other businesses outside of sports.

This case has been fundamentally unfair since day 1. If the court does not overturn the suspension, they are saying that private businesses have the same ability to operate completely outside the law - giving them the opportunity to fire people for anything...race, gender, sexual orientation, etc. There's no way the courts can be blind enough to allow that. If they do, they're either completely in the pocket of the NFL, and corporate interests in general, or entirely ineffective.

 

[Sydla]

You're correct, but on Zeke's side, he also has to manage the risk of his reputation being damaged, losing future endorsement deals, etc...it's not just about games missed or pay forfeited.

Of course but I suspect a huge sticking point with Elliott and his camp, if they are working on a settlement, would be a complete walk back of the charge the NFL made of him as a woman beater.

 

[Nova]

They got a lot of positive feedback from women's groups, and many in the media over their firm stance on Elliott.

If they cut a deal now and walk back his suspension, those same groups and many in the media are going to skewer them. And they know it. So for them to even entertain a settlement, they are most likely weighing negative PR of settling versus a significant blow to their power under the CBA if they lose this case.

That seems like a likely motivator.

Although with that said, I've failed to find any statements on behalf of women's rights groups heaping praise on the NFL for Elliott suspension.

Do you have any links?

 

[Philmonroe]

I would take the deal if it were this:

One game suspension for conduct detrimental.

NFL MUST drop any mention of domestic violence. No counseling, or future possibilities of being banned for life.

Fixed that for you. If they say one game for St Pattys day incident and say they shouldn't labeled me an abuser in the first place I'd take that deal. I don't even agree with the one game but I can see how some are all super moralist about it. That I'd do anything else see me in court. Even though no matter what happens now some will always think of him as an abuser but flip them people though.

 

[Alexander]

This would've never happened if they had just suspended him for misconduct, instead the NFL is always trying to retroactively punish players.

They made a huge mistake by going after him for the DV exclusively. They left themselves little to no avenue to drum it down to conduct detrimental to the league.

That tells me they were more interested in making a big public spectacle since they fumbled the Ray Rice situation so badly.

 

[LandryFan]

Of course but I suspect a huge sticking point with Elliott and his camp, if they are working on a settlement, would be a complete walk back of the charge the NFL made of him as a woman beater.

I agree. All that said, I'll be very surprised if any settlement is reached. If one side thinks a settlement is in their best interest, the other side would likely think they can prevail completely and a settlement would not be in their best interest. Guess well find out in the coming weeks.

 

[Ranching]

Zeke shouldn’t settle. I’m not him so if he does it settlement should include Friel being banned from Giants games. For life. And forced to wear an Emmitt Smith jersey to work for 5 years.

...and Zeke's jock strap!!

 

[jazzcat22]

Keep dreaming. NFL has 90% chance of winning in long run.

both sides are equally hurt. Zeke does not have leverage. He will lose in court. they should both do it. 2 games (no way NFL agrees to 1). Drop DV, just say conduct.

And you know this how? Explain this to us.

 

[jazzcat22]

I'd rather have a like than all those claps.

So you are saying save the claps for Jason?

 

[TheCount]

I would take the deal if it were this:

Two game suspension for conduct detrimental.

NFL MUST drop any mention of domestic violence. No counseling, or future possibilities of being banned for life.

That's a loss for Zeke on all fronts.

 

[Verdict]

I'm not sure why the NFL wants to take such a hard line stance on DV just because someone was accused. I doubt that many people want someone punished just on a mere accusation with good hard proof that the accuser has no credibility.

I don't think this case is about DV. I think it is about ego and preference/bias. Goodells Ego and anti Cowboy/Pro Giants bias.

 

[Philmonroe]

And I think they're finally starting to realize that all of this off the field crap is having a huge negative impact on their overall product. The true money-paying fans are getting sick of it.

Sports is an escape for the masses from the sometimes ugliness of everyday life. And now, with a mess like this and others, football isn't now causing more stress, angst, and hostility rather than being a way to get away from it.

True money paying fans lol. How would know you talked to all the true money paying fans? Since the answer is NO what are you blabbing about true money fans for like those on the other hand can't be true money paying fans also? I also wish people would stop with the tired sports is a getaway line. If someones life is that bad they need to work on improving it instead of doing like a user and just escaping from reality to return back to the same place they started at.

 

[Verdict]

They made a huge mistake by going after him for the DV exclusively. They left themselves little to no avenue to drum it down to conduct detrimental to the league.

That tells me they were more interested in making a big public spectacle since they fumbled the Ray Rice situation so badly.

They can do pretty much anything they want to do in a settlement. Elliott could enter a settlent that he littered or spit on a sidewalk instead of DV if him and the league agree to it.

 

[Gaede]

I think that's something that needs to happen. If Elliott were to be punished like this, under these circumstances, it sets an awful precedent for every player in the league.

It basically turns on a neon sign that says "Open For Business" for every money-grubbing opportunist out there. You don't have to "prove" anything, the NFL will take your side strictly for the sake of PR, and the perception that they care about domestic violence.

Players would be "guilty" without any benefit of a trial. Of course the gold diggers would be paid off. There is no "he said/ she said", it's simply "she said" and the league believes it. Even when it comes from an obvious piece of trash with the worst name and reputation.

I hope the league isn't being inundated with this one's most recent pictures.

"Nice going Roger! This is what you've chosen to side with!"

The precedent that the league is trying to set here needs to be obliterated. Not simply for Zeke Elliott, but for every other player in the league. Because if this one stands, they're all in danger of being next.

Agreed. Good post

 

[bsbellomy]

My assessment based upon my experience. Book it.

If you think the NFL has a 90% chance of winning you've have completely ignored the wording of two separate rulings from judge Mazzant and judge Crotty. I could see dismissing Mazzant as a Texas judge but Crotty echoed the same sentiment.

 

[_sturt_]

Keep dreaming. NFL has 90% chance of winning in long run.

I'm fairly sure it's already been said somewhere in the 8 pages, but in case it hasn't, the sports attorney who spoke on The Break yesterday threw out a number of 75% that Zeke plays the rest of the season given this newest turn, and then he says it's pretty much a toss-up regarding the end-result, depending on what judge(s) actually end up deciding the case.

So, assuming his opinion is conventional wisdom (you never really know), it's no surprise that the two sides might enter into this discussion if they, too, perceive it's a coin-flip situation.



Can they go back now and tell the NFL "you didn't give him a fair hearing," and instruct them to, now, give him a fair hearing?... ie, compel them to have to either have Thompson go on the record or have the investigator who spoke with Thompson (and did not find her credible) go on the record?

I don't know the answer to that, but maybe there's someone here who can (?).

 

[Idgit]

A settlement makes a lot of sense for both parties. For the NFL, it saves them a lot of embarrassment. For Elliott, it cuts his loss and keeps him from having to endure a "fair" hearing ending in a six game suspension on the same topic down the road if and when he wins the current case.

 

[mahoneybill]

I agree. All that said, I'll be very surprised if any settlement is reached. If one side thinks a settlement is in their best interest, the other side would likely think they can prevail completely and a settlement would not be in their best interest. Guess well find out in the coming weeks.

Sometimes " settlement offers/discussions" are just fishing expeditions to see where the other side is really willing to go....