Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

Saints* suspensions upheld


Mr. Scot

Recommended Posts

http://nfllabor.file...atter-2-doc.pdf

Although you claimed to have been ‘wrongfully accused with insufficient evidence,’ your lawyers elected not to ask a single question of the principal investigators, both of whom were present at the hearing (as your lawyers had requested); you elected not to testify or to make any substantive statement, written or oral, in support of your appeal; you elected not to call a single witness to support your appeal; and you elected not to introduce a single exhibit addressing the merits of your appeal. Instead, your lawyers raised a series of jurisdictional and procedural objections that generally ignore the CBA, in particular its provisions governing ‘conduct detrimental’ determinations…”

Beat me to it Mr Scot...

Looking for the delete button...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Michael David Smith thinks Goodell may be willing to reduce suspensions if players give him a reason to do so (link)

In the league’s announcement about Goodell upholding the suspensions of Saints* linebacker Jonathan Vilma, Packers defensive end Anthony Hargrove, Saints* defensive end Will Smith and Browns linebacker Scott Fujita, a portion of the letter from Goodell to the players indicates that the commissioner still wants to hear from the players and is committed to listening to what they have to say.

“While this decision constitutes my final and binding determination under the CBA, I of course retain the inherent authority to reduce a suspension should facts be brought to my attention warranting the exercise of that discretion,” Goodell wrote to the players. “The record confirms that each of you was given multiple chances to meet with me to present your side of the story. You are each still welcome to do so.”

How much would you like to bet that one of the conditions for such reduction would be public confession?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

one odd statement: "you elected not to call a single witness to support your appeal"

not sure if this makes sense, but how could you call a witness to something that supposedly didnt happen? If it didn't exist, how could there be any witnesses?

They could have called witnesses to say "that stuff didn't happen".

The problem, of course, being that it did.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

one odd statement: "you elected not to call a single witness to support your appeal"

not sure if this makes sense, but how could you call a witness to something that supposedly didnt happen? If it didn't exist, how could there be any witnesses?

A witness would be another teammate (not accused) willing to to state what did or didnt occur....on the record.

And with Greg admitting he ran a bounty program....no player is going to lie to Goodell and be brought into it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

omg goodell nuking the Saints** with that statement

can't wait to read the latest SR thread determining whether or not gordell can go to jail for this

I know they were hoping one of their senators would call him before congress and some such craziness that would have led to him being arrested.

The level of raw stupidity over there is at once amusing and depressing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • This is a good story--I LOVED his dad as a person and player--I talked to him at an OTA (he was back for his second stint) and he was talking about Moore (the WR from Wake Forest) being so young.  I was with my teenage son and told him, "This is Taylor.  He and I attended the OTAs when you were in Rock Hill as a rookie."  He jokes, "Was he in diapers then?" and laughed.  I imagine Moose III was in diapers when we chatted that day.  So I really would love for this to work out.  However, his stats do not suggest he was anything special in college.
    • I guess there are signs. The combination of the turf toe, hamstring, and knee issues led to questions about his long-term health and affected his draft stock, causing him to fall to the second round.  Here is what I know about a knee injury.  It changes nearly every aspect of your lower body movement.  So the turf toe and hamstring could be related.  It makes him seem injury prone.  I guess the knee was not the most recent injury, so the others could have been a result of favoring the knee. Johnson did not run the 40 at the combine or pro day.  That suggests there is something he feels might drop his value.  So if you downplay the severity of the injury, have a history of possibly related injuries, and refuse to demonstrate (when given multiple opportunities) that you are fully recovered, don't get mad when your stock drops. 
    • I saw numerous reports leading up to the draft that he'd been injury red flagged by numerous teams due to cartilage damage and wear issues that they think could shorten his career.
×
×
  • Create New...