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!

     

Goodell recuses himself from Saints bounty Case.


Big A

Recommended Posts

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2012/10/19/goodell-recuses-himself-from-bounty-appeal/

Reuters

In a move that will make the ultimate discipline applied to the players involved in the Saints bounty case even stronger, Commissioner Roger Goodell has recused himself from Tuesday’s appeal hearing.

The announcement came from NFLPA executive director DeMaurice Smith on Twitter.

Per Smith, Goodell will hand the baton to former Commissioner Paul Tagliabue.

It’s a power the Commissioner possess under the Collective Bargaining Agreement. And Smith got advance notice because the CBA requires Goodell to consult with the NFLPA.

It’s a smart move. Goodell was and is too close to the case. It would have been virtually impossible for him to be truly objective and impartial. And by picking Tagliabue, Goodell is keeping the decision in the hands of a Commissioner-level arbitrator — with Goodell hoping Tagliabue will reach the same decision that Goodell reached. And if Tagliabue ultimately upholds Goodell’s decision, it will be harder for the players to obtain a reversal of the decision.

Then again, the players may welcome the move. After all, Tagliabue was the Commissioner in 1996, when the league allegedly condoned the “Smash for Cash” program.

And who was the Executive V.P. of League and Football Development at the time, the precursor to the current “Football Operations” department? Roger Goodell.

Tag liable was commissioner when smash for cash was publically know and had no issue with it and NFL rules are same as back then.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • lol, that second part is quite literally one of the dumbest things ever. Having or not having guaranteed contracts has absolutely nothing to do with how much these billionaires have to pay.  Because there is a hard cap and a minimum cap spend requirement, and teams either use their cap or roll it over to use it all the next year, so the owners have to pay the same amount of money in the end no matter what. Having fully guaranteed contracts in the NFL would only hurt salary cap management, and thus would end up screwing over the team and its fan base when teams kiss on signings as they take up cap room that is needed to improve the roster. Look at the Browns with Watson, they gave him the fully guaranteed deal and all it’s doing is sucking up massive cap space now.  If they hadn’t done that, the owner would still be paying the same amount of money each year as that cap space would still be used elsewhere. If you want to argue for fully guaranteed contracts because the players deserve it, that’s an entirely different argument and a fair one to discuss.  But anyone against fully guaranteed deals isn’t doing it to argue for the billionaire owners.
    • Start posting in threads in the other forums instead of just creating threads. No one comes over here so you aren't starting conversations.  Get your ass up to 100 posts. It's not that hard. Don't create 100 posts. Contribute to conversations. 
    • Ryabkin could be the steal of the draft, he was a Top 10 pick heading into last season and had a rough year.  Lots of GMs passed on him because of that and his workouts. Pick has really high upside and Svech should be able to translate Rod tearing his arse a new one for making dumb plays since Svech has had several years of it.  🤣😂
×
×
  • Create New...