- Joined
- Apr 3, 2006
- Messages
- 26,126
- Reaction score
- 52,125
@Ice_Ice_Brady to educate you even more about the CBA since you clearly do not understand it.
Under the 2006 CBA, what the Browns are doing now is technically illegal under the CBA. They cannot hold him out of practice without suspending him. They can suspend him without pay for conduct detrimental to the team for a maximum of four weeks which during that time OBJ could file a grievance to overturn it. After that, they have to keep him on the active roster and let him practice. What they can't do is tell him to go home without any action and at most they can do is for four weeks.
Right now they are getting away with deactivating him without suspension because it is a mutual agreement while they are negotiating his exit from the team. But if OBJ wanted to, he could either force them to let him practice or force them to suspend him under the CBA and that would only delay the fight again for four weeks with a suspension.
If they did suspend him, they would probably have to have more than his dad posting videos online showing that Baker Mayfield was to blame for his son's lack of production to win any grievance.
To back this up, from PFT:
They’re trying to carve out another approach, “excusing” him from team activities while figuring out what to do. Per multiple reports, he’s “excused” again on Thursday. Even if he wants to practice.
Basically, they’re suspending him with pay. Starting with the 2006 CBA, teams lost the ability to do this. If he fights it, he’ll win. They can’t keep him out of the facility, or off the practice field.
They could, in theory, suspend him without pay for four weeks for conduct detrimental to the team and force him to file a grievance. At the end of the day, Beckham would get his money after prevailing. In the interim, the Browns would delay his arrival with a new team.
Browns "excuse" Odell Beckham from practice again
The Browns are in checkmate.profootballtalk.nbcsports.com
You’re a clown.