- Joined
- Feb 10, 2005
- Messages
- 33,092
- Reaction score
- 22,705
Can't wait to read lester munson's spin on this filing.
"Brilliant move by my masters in the NYJFL front office"
Registered Members experience this forum ad and noise-free.
CLICK HERE to Register for a free account and login for a smoother ad-free experience. It's easy, and only takes a few moments.Can't wait to read lester munson's spin on this filing.
...and multiple parallel universes as well!If article 46 were as sweeping as the NFL claims, the NFL would literally rule the world.
NFL won this round by waiting until the deadline was up so the NFLPA cannot respond, and now none of those cases will be considered, and the NFL will win.Can't wait to read lester munson's spin on this filing.
"Nash," "Pash," what's the difference? A sleaze bag by any other name is still a sleaze bag!Dear Judge Berman
Please excuse the lateness of our reply.
We had to wait for Mr. Nash to finish editing it.
regards
The NFL
"The Ruggedly handsome Roger Goodell has filed a brilliantly worded, elegantly reasoned reply to the poopyhead NFLPA case. Everything about Goodell's submission down to the font explodes with homoerotic genius that will have Judge Berman straining to contain his premature ejaculation over Goodell's integrigasm and logic."Can't wait to read lester munson's spin on this filing.
Can't wait to read lester munson's spin on this filing.
When it comes right down to it. Isn't the NFL basically using the "unique nature of the CBA" in question, to say it puts them ABOVE any law, any courts and any legislature,. Isn't the the height of delusional egomania. But if Berman rules in their favor, that's essentially what he'd be saying.
I just don't see that happening. What I DO see this filing as saying to the Judge is, "We don't give a F##K what you think, just like we don't care about your deadlines. We don't care how your rule, but just know that if you rule against us, we will merely take it to appeal where your ruling WILL be overturned. And you know you don't want THAT to happen."
In other words it was just an attempt to intimidate the Judge, because that's what egomaniac bullies do when someone tries to stand up to them.
BTW- this kind of bullying tactic should SCREAM to Brady that you must take this to a defamation suit. Otherwise the NFL league offices are going to keep coming after you, even IF Berman vacates the suspension. The Bully will keep on bullying UNTIL someone stands up and says NO MORE!
I assume he's fellating Goodell at this very moment, so any response from him will have to wait.
How? Goodell clearly lacks the necessary equipment.I assume he's fellating Goodell at this very moment, so any response from him will have to wait.
Can't wait to read lester munson's spin on this filing.
If Kraft had stood up to the bully in 2007 instead of capitulating like a wimp, we wouldn't be in this situation now.When it comes right down to it. Isn't the NFL basically using the "unique nature of the CBA" puts them ABOVE any law, any courts and any legislature,. Isn't that the height of delusional egomania?????? But if Berman rules in their favor, that's essentially what he'd be saying.
I just don't see that happening. What I DO see this filing as saying to the Judge is, "We don't give a F##K what you think, just like we don't care about your deadlines. We don't care how your rule, but just know that if you rule against us, we will merely take it to appeal where your ruling WILL be overturned. And you know you don't want THAT to happen."
In other words it was just an attempt to intimidate the Judge, because that's what egomaniac bullies do when someone tries to stand up to them.
BTW- this kind of bullying tactic should SCREAM to Brady that you must take this to a defamation suit. Otherwise the NFL league offices are going to keep coming after you, even IF Berman vacates the suspension. The Bully will keep on bullying UNTIL someone stands up and says NO MORE!
Let me try to be Devil's Advocate.
The NFL is saying that the parties have already agreed to how disputes will be handled.
The Commissioner will decide punishment.
If the NFLPA disagrees with that punishment they can appeal.
They have agreed that the best person to decide an appeal is the commissioner.
Therefore the NFLPA has agreed that their legal recourse is best served by allowing the above reapproach, unbiased and wise as Solomon commissioner to settle all disputes with binding arbitration.
This means the NFLPA has said that commissioner is by definition unbiased, and will rule fairly for them.
When a case comes along that has bias inherent in it, has the arbitrator ruling that without debate the commissioner (yes him) made all the correct decisions and therefore you cannot contest the arbitrators rulings that the commissioner (ie himself) was right.
If you disagree with the commissioner, you can go to the commissioner (as arbitrator) and argue with him that the guy who made the decision is wrong.
So, this is exactly the same as an employer and union having a disagreement about the correct legal action to be taken in a situation that is not covered explicitly in the CBA, so the recourse the union has to appeal. Their appeal is to the employer. When they argue that their case revolves around why the employer interpreted the CBA that way, then the same individual will judge whether the interpretation was correct.
It is ludicrous to think that in any way the union believed that the commissioner would serve as both discipliner and arbitrator on the same issue. Him having both roles was never intended to overlap. No other commissioner ever considered that they could do that.
It helps that Brady explicitly requested baddell recuse himself as arbitrator.It is ludicrous to think that in any way the union believed that the commissioner would serve as both discipliner and arbitrator on the same issue. Him having both roles was never intended to overlap. No other commissioner ever considered that they could do that.
Do they have any defense other than "CBA told us we could do whatever so..."? It's just so redundant every time they say something...
The only thing missing from that, is the part where the NFLPA asked both unofficially, and then formally, for Goodell to recuse himself, so he could be a witness, and he refused.
That's the other thing about Article 46. Just because Goodell CAN hear the appeal, doesn't mean he SHOULD.