Jump to content

NFL 2017: And Now It Begins!


Mr. Chatywin et al.

Recommended Posts

9 minutes ago, Manhole Eunuchsbane said:

I don't see how any of that matters. You had legal reasoning behind the first judges decision to dismiss Brady's suspension. The CBA hasn't changed. If Goodell wants to levy the suspension, he gets to levy the suspension.

You may very well be right. But former lawyer Mike Florio breaks this all down and it sounds like there's a feeling that Goodell might not get another bite at the apple. http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2017/09/08/the-reasons-for-ezekiel-elliotts-victory/

 

Quote

 

Finally, Judge Mazzant explains that it was the one thing Henderson required the league to do — produce Kia Roberts to testify — that set the stage for Elliott’s ability to prove his case. Here’s the key text from the opinion: “Consistent with its previous actions to suppress Roberts’s dissenting opinions, the NFL kept this sequence of events from the NFLPA and Elliott until the arbitration hearing. In fact, had the NFL succeeded in its overall goal, this sequence of events would still be concealed from Elliott and the NFLPA. The NFLPA filed a motion to compel the testimony of Roberts, and the NFL argued in response that her testimony was unnecessary, consistent with Friel’s testimony, and cumulative. . . . Luckily, the NFLPA found the fairness needle in the unfairness haystack and Henderson ordered Roberts to testify. The arbitration record shows that Roberts’s testimony was everything but unnecessary, consistent, and cumulative.”

These factors all led to a very strong conclusion from Judge Mazzant regarding Elliott’s likelihood of winning the case when a final ruling is issued: “The circumstances of this case are unmatched by any case this Court has seen. . . . Fundamental unfairness infected this case from the beginning, eventually killing any possibility that justice would be served.”

It is, without question, a home run for Elliott and the NFLPA. A federal judge has concluded, as Elliott alleged and many agreed, that the process lacks basic fairness to the player. While many like to claim that the NFLPA agreed to these procedures, the union did not agree to the implementation of these procedures in an unfair way. That’s why the availability of the court system becomes critical to the ultimate effort to secure for the players a degree of fairness that the league is clearly not committed to providing.


 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Trebla said:

You may very well be right. But former lawyer Mike Florio breaks this all down and it sounds like there's a feeling that Goodell might not get another bite at the apple. http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2017/09/08/the-reasons-for-ezekiel-elliotts-victory/

 I hope they are right. This does seem unfair, but I'm not sure any of that really matters at the end of the day.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Manhole Eunuchsbane said:

Not sure if there's any advantage for him to serve those 6 games next season as opposed to this one.

There's definitely a huge advantage to my Westeros fantasy football teams.  Drafted him in both.  

I think the Cowboys were caught a little off guard with the 6 game suspension.  Although they knew it was a possiblity, they really didn't think Elliot was going to get suspended based on the evidence that was available.  At worst, delaying the 6 game suspension to next year will allow them to better prepare for Elliot's absence.  And I think there's a chance that Elliot wins the appeal and doesn't receive any suspension at all.  It's worth a shot anyway.  I'm not sure what will happen if Elliot wins on appeal, but I don't think there's any point to sending it back to Goodell for a second kangaroo court.

After reading some of the evidence about the case, it seemed to me that the accusations against Elliot were probably false.  The accuser has some huge credibility problems that the NFL claimed to have considered but chose to believe her anyway.  It's possible that she lied to police about Elliott physically manhandling her, considered blackmailing Elliot, and desired to ruin Elliot's career (which were all accepted as fact by the NFL), but also was abused by Elliott.  I just think that's unlikely.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...