Zeke Elliot suspended 6 games.

[Joker]

"In this life we are either kings or pawns, emperors or fools." - Napoleon Bonaparte

 

[Clonamery]

"In this life we are either kings or pawns, emperors or fools." - Napoleon Bonaparte

Do we get to choose our category or is it thrust upon us? I mean, could it have been a poor translation of Bonyparte from the French? Instead being, "either kings of pawns or emperors of fools." I'd feel a lot better about myself if those were my choices for my lot in life. But then again, I don't know French but I have seen the movie.

 

[XLIX]

Some owners have done it in the past, and some haven't. That's up to them. Just ask T.O., and that wasn't even over a criminal act.

Hell, in New England, there's a coach who benches players for returning late from their grandfather's funeral.

And some owners let their own players get away with things like domestic violence, rape and murder and don't do a damn thing about it.

 

[chasa]

Do we get to choose our category or is it thrust upon us? I mean, could it have been a poor translation of Bonyparte from the French? Instead being, "either kings of pawns or emperors of fools." I'd feel a lot better about myself if those were my choices for my lot in life. But then again, I don't know French but I have seen the movie.

we're supposed to be able to choose, thats why we broke off from the crown when we had the revolutionary war, however 200 years later and you are seeing corporations rise up almost like Lords in old england resulting in a huge lower class, a small middle class, and an even smaller ruling party.

 

[rochrist]

Some owners have done it in the past, and some haven't. That's up to them. Just ask T.O., and that wasn't even over a criminal act.

Hell, in New England, there's a coach who benches players for returning late from their grandfather's funeral.

I understand, but the problem lies in your first sentence. Some do it and some don't. The owners don't want a situation where they might suspend a great player and lose a game because of it, while a different owner takes advantage and doesn't discipline his great player.

 

[Deus Irae]

I understand, but the problem lies in your first sentence. Some do it and some don't. The owners don't want a situation where they might suspend a great player and lose a game because of it, while a different owner takes advantage and doesn't discipline his great player.

What you call a problem is nothing of the sort.

 

[jmt57]

If the Patriots went into a lull after the spygate penalties, no one would be saying they slap on the wrist.

They would, however, be citing that lull as 'proof' that the Patriots won solely because of the filming, and therefore the championships are tainted and should be taken away.

It was a no-win situation for the Patriots and their fans, regardless of what happened afterwards in both post-spygate as well as post-deflategate.

Keep winning and the other 31 and their fans are still upset that the Pats must not have been punished harshly enough.

Don't win as much and that same group has their 'proof' that the Pats cheated.

How many times from 2007 to 2014 did we all see or hear "haven't won anything since..."?

 

[Crazy Patriot Guy]

I understand, but the problem lies in your first sentence. Some do it and some don't. The owners don't want a situation where they might suspend a great player and lose a game because of it, while a different owner takes advantage and doesn't discipline his great player.

How is that different than some teams taking a player completely off their draft board because of off the field issues, while another team takes him high in the draft?

Assuming Joe Mixon plays up to his ability, he's going to help the Bengals win games. Meanwhile, some teams decided before the draft they didn't care if Mixon could help them win games, they weren't touching him.

Some teams wouldn't have dropped Christian Peters the way Bob Kraft did. Does that mean it was a bad decision to do so?

 

[rochrist]

How is that different than some teams taking a player completely off their draft board because of off the field issues, while another team takes him high in the draft?

Assuming Joe Mixon plays up to his ability, he's going to help the Bengals win games. Meanwhile, some teams decided before the draft they didn't care if Mixon could help them win games, they weren't touching him.

Some teams wouldn't have dropped Christian Peters the way Bob Kraft did. Does that mean it was a bad decision to do so?

Somehow I suspect that if the Patriots pulled Brady off the field for some unspecified offense and then later played (for example) Pittsburgh who declined to take Roethlisberger off the field for some OTHER unspecified offense and Pitts won and took the first seed because of it, there might be a change of tune.
Talking about draft picks is an entirely different thing. A large percentage are busts and part of the deal with taking a player who is a risk from a character standpoint is exactly because they might end up getting pulled off the field at an important point.

 

[Crazy Patriot Guy]

Somehow I suspect that if the Patriots pulled Brady off the field for some unspecified offense and then later played (for example) Pittsburgh who declined to take Roethlisberger off the field for some OTHER unspecified offense and Pitts won and took the first seed because of it, there might be a change of tune.
Talking about draft picks is an entirely different thing. A large percentage are busts and part of the deal with taking a player who is a risk from a character standpoint is exactly because they might end up getting pulled off the field at an important point.

Since the NFL hasn't suspended people for "unspecified offenses" (they're very often wrong to suspend someone but I can't remember a time they failed to mention what it was for) I don't envision a scenario where Brady and Roethlisberger both did something worthy of being suspended a game and we have no idea what it was.

So then the issue becomes what they did. If they are both guilty of an offense worthy of suspension, then Brady deserves to be suspended. I don't care if the Steelers decide to let Ben play.

It happens in college football all the time. Teams suspend players for rule violations. Not all teams have the same standards so some guys sit when they wouldn't have to if they played somewhere else. Some teams suspend a player immediately. I've seen some teams wait until they're playing against a FCS team to sit a guy down.

To bring up Joe Mixon again, a lot of fans thought Oklahoma went incredibly easy on him. His punishment was being forced to red shirt. Some people said he should have been kicked off the team. Now, if a stud player on the Texas Longhorns does the exact same thing the week before they play Oklahoma, should all human decency stop and the tune should change to "they let Joe Mixon play so it's ok?"

I want the Pats to win every game they ever play. But I also want to be proud of them as well. If Brady does something wrong, Kraft suspended him for it and we lose the #1 seed because of it, it's Brady's fault for us losing the #1 seed, not Kraft's.

 

[The Brandon Five]

They would, however, be citing that lull as 'proof' that the Patriots won solely because of the filming, and therefore the championships are tainted and should be taken away.

It was a no-win situation for the Patriots and their fans, regardless of what happened afterwards in both post-spygate as well as post-deflategate.

Keep winning and the other 31 and their fans are still upset that the Pats must not have been punished harshly enough.

Don't win as much and that same group has their 'proof' that the Pats cheated.

How many times from 2007 to 2014 did we all see or hear "haven't won anything since..."?

They went undefeated that same season. Are people saying that the helmet catch happened because they weren't taping? No matter how you slice it, it's just more illogical haterade.

 

[The Brandon Five]

It is pretty clear that the league should not be conducting their own "investigations" into criminal accusations. They are totally inept at "investigating" 8th grade science, let alone something significantly more complicated. So if they do punish bad behavior, it should be based upon facts as determined by our criminal justice system, not based on which way the clown in charge feels that the wind is blowing.

I agree with you in principle, but given how the U.S. justice system works currently I am not sure that it would be any better. They can throw 20 counts at you to get you to accept a plea. A jury is pretty unlikely to find for the defense on all 20 counts, so a plea deal is often the better option than rolling the dice with that. Especially given that the Feds win nearly all of the time (99.5%).

Source:

Supreme Court Runs Out Of Excuses for Collapse Of U.S. Criminal Justice - The New York Sun

Prosecutors win 99.5% of their cases, about 97% without a trial, and the country has six to 12 times as many incarcerated people per capita as comparably prosperous large democracies: Australia, Canada, France, Germany, Japan, and the United Kingdom.

 

[fourhour]

Is his suspension like TB12's? Barred from team practices, pre-season games and team communications? Too lazy to search for the answers.

 

[ivanvamp]

They went undefeated that same season. Are people saying that the helmet catch happened because they weren't taping? No matter how you slice it, it's just more illogical haterade.

Of course you're right, but that didn't stop them from saying it anyway.

"Yeah but how many titles since Spygate?? Hmmmmm???"

I mean, the helmet catch, Gronk being crippled in SB 46....come on. It's not like taping defensive signals (or not taping them) are the reasons for those things.

 

[XLIX]

Is his suspension like TB12's? Barred from team practices, pre-season games and team communications? Too lazy to search for the answers.

Brady's suspension did not have those terms. He was allowed to practice and play during the preseason.

 

[XLIX]

Of course you're right, but that didn't stop them from saying it anyway.

"Yeah but how many titles since Spygate?? Hmmmmm???"

I mean, the helmet catch, Gronk being crippled in SB 46....come on. It's not like taping defensive signals (or not taping them) are the reasons for those things.

Ivanvamp is absolutely right. Saying "zero titles since spygate" was always a moronic argument, but that didn't stop the haters from using it as much as they could anyway (yes I am looking at you Marshall Faulk).

 

[rochrist]

Is his suspension like TB12's? Barred from team practices, pre-season games and team communications? Too lazy to search for the answers.

That's true for any suspension.

 

[The Brandon Five]

That's true for any suspension.

...if the suspended player is a Patriot.

Josh Gordon reinstated by NFL, still has to serve 4-game suspension

Gordon's four-game suspension will begin just before Week 1 in September. The good news for Gordon is that Goodell will be cutting him a break during his suspension. Once the suspension begins, Gordon will be allowed to attend team meetings, according to NFL.com.

 

[BlacknGold77]

Brady's suspension did not have those terms. He was allowed to practice and play during the preseason.

right, because the suspension didnt take effect until week 1 of the regular season. once it did he was barred from all team facilities for the 4 weeks

 

[fourhour]

Brady's suspension did not have those terms. He was allowed to practice and play during the preseason.

Thanks for clearing that up.