How the hell did Josh Brown only get 1 game for domestic violence?

[Brady_to_Moss]

Love your theory but honestly... My hatred for the Fraudger cannot increase ... Its like the concept of absolute zero temperature-wise. It has reached its actual and theoretical limit.

Like a black hole..nothing..not even light..air..nothing aka that tool bag

 

[Brewskies]

And?

And what?

 

[PatsWickedPissah]

so wait...the NFL says no one would co-operate with them. So, why even a 1 game game suspension then? If they had NO CONCRETE ATTESTED TO evidence, why a 1 game suspension? They making it all up as they go along?(rhetorical)

The answer: Of course they are. Mara TOLD Goodell what a good sanction would be and Goodell did what he was told...again. We are trapped in a continuous loop of overt deception as it pertains to the NY Giants and Pittsburgh Steelers franchises. Our enemy has been the Rooneys and the Maras all along.

Joker,
Please stop making these posts that make complete sense. When I tell my children that I agree with Joker, they talk about having me committed.
Thanks!

 

[Froob]

I didn't read this entire thread but he wasn't charged with anything

I agree that they shouldn't punish anybody who isn't charged with anything but, that isn't the precedent the NFL has set.

 

[Ring 6]

I didn't read this entire thread but he wasn't charged with anything

Since when does that matter to the NFL?

 

[Ring 6]

I don't believe in the league suspending players for things they do off the field. As long as their cleared with law enforcement/criminal justice system it's ok.

Now if individual team owners and GM's want to suspend or cut guys because they feel whatever act they did isn't tolerable for their particular organization that is a different thing

But the league had a personal conduct policy that was collectively bargained. Why they have it is up for debate but when you have a set of rules and policies that are agreed to by the teams, players and union in a competitive sport not following them creates competitive disparity.

For example if your policies say domestic violence requires a 6 game suspension and you suspend for one game while at the same time your policy says actually tampering with a football is a fine yet two teams actually caught do it get a warning and one team who was accused but there was no actual proof loses 2 draft picks, a million bucks and the goat is suspended for 4 games then you are enforcing the rules and policies arbitrarily and tipping the competitive balance.

Either what the league found supported that domestic violence occurred and brown should be suspended 6 games because that is the rule or it didn't support it and he should not be suspended at all.

Giving him one game just isn't something that should be an option. It's like saying whether once incident of dv isn't so bad or that an acusation with no proof at all requires something so give him a game. Either is very wrong

 

[PatsFanInVa]

Taking one step back from the obvious "gotta be kiddin me" fodder here... I mean, the #integrity bullcrap buffet is too rich, my heart doesn't need another helping right now... here's my question...

When did the NFL* turn into an investigative agency? Reading that letter, the "holy crap how many holes is in THIS report" Wells report, the statements of the League* about various no-nos and infractions... they look like they think they do this for a living, and happen to have a popular sport that they sell tickets to as a side business.

The #integrity of it all has overshadowed all play on the field.

And yes, you should get kicked out for beating your wife, fine. But "having reviewed blah blah blah pursuant to blah blah blah" statements are bad enough coming from refs explaining the instant replay call reversal.

When did football become an off-the-field sport?

Side note: They need a one-strike-you're-out policy specific to kickers, because, damn. Classic setup of a guy who would get his butt kicked by every other guy he knows... so he takes it out on a woman.

 

[raduray]

The NFL has a 6 game suspension policy for domestic abuse. Brown either gets the 6 games, or if there is no evidence or cooperation from the victim he should get no suspension. So what are the grounds for a 1 game suspension? I suppose it's because Roger said so.

 

[Joker]

Like I said, he's that little ginger fat kid in the sandbox making all those weird war noises explosions and rolling around with snots all over his face while Mommy and Daddy NFL Owner breathlessly exclaim "oh my, isn't our little Roger just so cute and cunnin?"....just a matter of time before he gets his bluffing hand folded but good...and you know, sometimes karma is like that. You THINK it's all in the past and you reach the point where you're out of the business of screwing with peoples lives. You think you've escaped all that bad karma with your boatloads of ill gotten cash when *BANG!*...you get diagnosed with ass cancer...and on top of it, as you leave the proctologist's with your ginger headed face all droopy, some street punks roll up on you and beat the shyt out of you, robbing your wallet and leaving you there on the street...knocked out cold. A wino rolls up, takes your Bruno Magli shoes, looks at you there with your $5000 Armani suit on, and proceeds to take a long, skunky smelling pi$$ on your face and in your big ****in' mouth. When you come to, you got a busted jaw, ,missing teeth, smell like the Grand Central urinal and you're flat broke.
THIS is just the beginning of the bad karma movie you are now starring in the rest of your pathetic, miserable life.
Enjoy it, Rog...hey, I got it...call the ****in' Maine State Police and demand the witness protection program. You're gonna need it, azzole.

 

[bbobbo]

For those of you who will get this:

 

[ivanvamp]

But the league had a personal conduct policy that was collectively bargained. Why they have it is up for debate but when you have a set of rules and policies that are agreed to by the teams, players and union in a competitive sport not following them creates competitive disparity.

For example if your policies say domestic violence requires a 6 game suspension and you suspend for one game while at the same time your policy says actually tampering with a football is a fine yet two teams actually caught do it get a warning and one team who was accused but there was no actual proof loses 2 draft picks, a million bucks and the goat is suspended for 4 games then you are enforcing the rules and policies arbitrarily and tipping the competitive balance.

Either what the league found supported that domestic violence occurred and brown should be suspended 6 games because that is the rule or it didn't support it and he should not be suspended at all.

Giving him one game just isn't something that should be an option. It's like saying whether once incident of dv isn't so bad or that an acusation with no proof at all requires something so give him a game. Either is very wrong

I agree totally, Andy. The problem is that the two court cases won by the NFL (Brady, Peterson) have made the various policies completely moot. Goodell has total discretion now to do anything he wants.

It really is dumbfounding that those two courts of appeals allowed this. Because even if the NFLPA and the NFL agreed on something in plain black and white, like, say, if a player does X, he gets Y punishment, Goodell can ALWAYS cite article 46 and do whatever the hell he wants, regardless of the collectively-bargained-for policy.

Kommissar Goodell literally has carte blanche. Thanks to the United States Courts of Appeals.

 

[XLIX]

Love your theory but honestly... My hatred for the Fraudger cannot increase ... Its like the concept of absolute zero temperature-wise. It has reached its actual and theoretical limit.

My hatred for Goodell is like the universe: Infinite in size, but nevertheless still expanding.

 

[The Brandon Five]

So the NFL couldn't just take the testimony she gave to the police into account? They need to second-guess law enforcement in order to make a judgment? Seems legit.

 

[XLIX]

The NFL has a 6 game suspension policy for domestic abuse. Brown either gets the 6 games, or if there is no evidence or cooperation from the victim he should get no suspension. So what are the grounds for a 1 game suspension? I suppose it's because Roger said so.

Agreed, and this is the part that makes no sense (of course, we are all used to the NFL making no sense).

Setting aside whether or not he did anything (it's clear he did, but let's set that aside for the moment): the NFL has to conclude he either did do something or didn't. If they say he did something, it is 6 games. If they conclude he didn't, it's 0. What the hell is the rationale for just 1 game? However, this is a situation where the NFLPA won't be complaining about the league's inconsistency because in this case, the inconsistency benefits them.

I do have to admit that I am enjoying seeing the new Giants coach exposed as a hypocrite before his very first game. All that talk from 6 months ago about how he won't tolerate domestic violence is pretty much out the window, huh?

 

[TB_Helmet]

The NFL has a 6 game suspension policy for domestic abuse. Brown either gets the 6 games, or if there is no evidence or cooperation from the victim he should get no suspension. So what are the grounds for a 1 game suspension? I suppose it's because Roger said so.

Yeah I just read about this story for the first time. 1 game?? How is that possible? I mean, I know how it's possible, because there is no such thing as precedent, and two people who do the exact same thing (Brown and Rice/Hardy/many others) get completely different penalties.

Of course, Brady (4 games) got a different penalty than the Panthers (uhh...nothing I think) for trying to change the air pressure of the footballs (ignoring the fact that physics, not Brady, was the one that caused the pressure change). So I'm not surprised.

But this whole story about Brown is just another example about how precedent means nothing, all punishments are completely arbitrary, and if an owner supports you then you will probably give him a reduced punishment, except when that owner is Bob Kraft. Sorry if this post isn't cohesive, I'm a couple martinis in and the Josh Brown thing set me off. Idiot Kicker 2.0.

 

[TheFlyingWedge]

This makes absolutely no sense any way you look at it. Goodell is such an incompetent buffoon.

 

[Koma]

Michael Hurley has a decent summary of the reactions from the Giants:
Jason Pierre-Paul On Josh Brown's Alleged Domestic Violence: 'It Doesn't Matter'

I'm not worked up about Pierre-Paul's comments, but find Manning, McAdoo, and Herzlich's prior remarks more damning. In a nutshell, all of them said in the past that they have zero tolerance for anyone involved in domestic violence. Then, the a member of the Giants is involved in a DV case and none of them has anything to say. All that "No More" talk was just empty blather.

Manning also had this to say in 2014: "We've got to make sure that's not happening. We can't accept that as players, can't accept that from our teammates around the league."

Not surprisingly, the "tough" NY media isn't taking the Giants to task. Bart Hubbuch, who had the torches and pitchforks out for Brady, hasn't written one article about a situation in his own city.

Edit to add: Some in the media took Brady to task for not speaking out against DV like Eli Manning. Those same people loved that Eli made those comments. Where are those critics now?

 

[Wheelman]

On top of the obvious, the domestic violence Ray Rice fiasco almost cost Goodell his job for going light on Rice initially.

But he goes light on another domestic violence case.

Seriously, there should be an uproar just like with the Rice case.

No footage, so society doesn't care, sadly.

 

[Jackson 2]

One word, 2-syllable answer: Mara.

 

[RecoveringCowboy]

No footage, so society doesn't care, sadly.

In other words, if they don't see blood, a threat, or something in their face - no worries.

That explains a multitude of issues.