I'm not starting a new thread, This isn't my neighborhood. But perhaps it's worthy.
NFL, Union Closer to Deal Stripping Roger Goodell of Discipline Power Wall St Journal - may require sub
NFL, NFLPA moving toward deal to strip Goodell of discipline authority
- Thread starter Monbo Jumbo
- Start date
I'm not starting a new thread, This isn't my neighborhood. But perhaps it's worthy.
NFL, Union Closer to Deal Stripping Roger Goodell of Discipline Power Wall St Journal - may require sub
That Sporting News piece is ludicrously weak:
The last sentence is literally true, but the author seems completely ignorant of the fact that Goodell was overruled by the arbitrator {former fed. judge Barbara S. Jones} who concluded Goodell lied about what Rice told him. She nullified the indefinite suspension of Rice, though no NFL team has signed him to date.
The article says it relates to his power for off-the-field discipline. Seems like it wouldn't have any effect on Brady.
Could "off the field" issues include "destroying" Brady's phone? It seems like a bit of a stretch but if so, could this represent a way out of the Deflategate with Kraft, BB, and Brady having the last laugh?
- Goodell is stripped of his disciplinary powers
- A new committee is formed & pending/current actions reviewed, including DG
- The committee vacates Brady's suspension, if not the monetary penalty
- The committee returns the 1st round pick, if not the 4th
Last edited:
You may want to hold off on ordering the truckload of oats. But the agreement would end all litigation, that includes the Brady case. So the four game penalty would go away, and as I've said from day 1, keeping Brady on the field is all that matters.
Even Vincent didn't suspend Brady for on the field stuff, the original suspension was for being generally aware of something going on elsewhere. Goodell suspended Brady for engaging in a conspiracy which by nature is "off the field". So it would seem to be part and parcel of this.
I'm not so sure. I'd trade 4 games of starting Jimmy G for a 1st and a 4th this year, and I'd wager so would a majority of BBTL. We'd still likely make the playoffs, having spared TB12 some hits along the way, and teams keep a first rounder for at least 4 years in almost all cases.
The key in my mind is how hugely valuable first round picks are, even late-first-rounders (particularly with their artificially-constrained rookie-deal salaries). If it were a 2nd and a 4th I'd have a much tougher time making the call. A 3rd and a 4th would be an easy vote for taking the Brady starts.
There was never chance of New England not losing draft picks. None. They were always gone. That left one thing, making sure that Brady didn't get a bullshit suspension so that the NFL could distract the public from the fact that someone working for the Artless Roger was stealing game gear from charities. (And I've been consistent on this point, somewhere near the beginning of Frankenstein's Thread I said that the Patriots were going to be docked draft choices despite the fact that nothing happened, and that all that mattered was not losing Brady in addition to the bullshit penalty.)
I mean I hope you're right, but the draft is in 44 days, and I have a hard time believing that all of this can happen in this timeframe.
Besides, the article says it's about off-the-field player discipline, and the lost picks are a team punishment (obviously in part due to Brady's alleged involvement but also because of the dorito dinks), so I am not sure the league would play ball here even if a settlement is reached regarding Goodell's disciplinary powers. I very much doubt the settlement would involve suddenly clearing everyone of any wrongdoing regarding DFG.
Last edited:
Unless I missed it, the WSJ story does not include the speculation that Goodell will resign as commissioner. Just that he will relinquish his disciplinary powers.
It seems pretty clear that the Brady case will be rolled up into any settlement. I see no basis for thinking that the team punishment will be changed.
It seems pretty clear that the Brady case will be rolled up into any settlement. I see no basis for thinking that the team punishment will be changed.
Both sides will save millions of dollars in legal fees if every disciplinary case doesn't end up in court.
I wonder if the Brady appeal is part of this as well that the NFL drops it, Goodell gives up power for the NFLPA gives up something in return.
I think it may be the league trying to put a wedge between Brady & the NFLPA. I don't buy for a second that the league is really considering taking disciplinary authority away from Goodell. This is another tactic to break the union.
Rumors of this have been circulating for 4-5 months. The union is going to give up something though. We might not know what it is for quite awhile.
If they give on that then the owners will have to give on a roster expansion.
I'm a bit confused at the confusion here.
Changing the disciplinary process is itself very good for the NFL. It may seem like the NFL is giving something up by having it positioned as Godell being "stripped" of his authority, but Goodell flexing his muscles has been a disaster for the NFL in terms of terrible publicity, endless litigation and creating the overwhelming appearance of massive incompetence within the Commissioner's office. Ending that nightmare while resolving all litigation (including the current NFL appeal about Brady's case) is a significant win for the NFL. It also takes off the table the possibility that the NFL will have to do this based on a loss in court rather than collaboratively with the NFLPA.
The NFL is welcome to ask, but the NFLPA doesn't have to "give" anything else to get this. What they give the NFL by agreeing to this kind of restructuring is relief from the constant stream of horrible press they have been faced with for the last two or three years. That has been hurting their product and the NFL clearly knows it.
Changing the disciplinary process is itself very good for the NFL. It may seem like the NFL is giving something up by having it positioned as Godell being "stripped" of his authority, but Goodell flexing his muscles has been a disaster for the NFL in terms of terrible publicity, endless litigation and creating the overwhelming appearance of massive incompetence within the Commissioner's office. Ending that nightmare while resolving all litigation (including the current NFL appeal about Brady's case) is a significant win for the NFL. It also takes off the table the possibility that the NFL will have to do this based on a loss in court rather than collaboratively with the NFLPA.
The NFL is welcome to ask, but the NFLPA doesn't have to "give" anything else to get this. What they give the NFL by agreeing to this kind of restructuring is relief from the constant stream of horrible press they have been faced with for the last two or three years. That has been hurting their product and the NFL clearly knows it.
Last edited:
Every assumption behind what you have written here is incorrect.
That Pats have no part in deciding the NFL's appeal of the Brady case. They can't "accept" his suspension. Only Brady/the NFLPA can. And they are not going to.
If the Brady litigation is ended as part of any settlement, it means that there will be no suspension.
Last edited:
This. Former Solicitor Generals don't work cheaply. I imagine that despite Goodell's assurances the owners are tired of the multimillion legal bills that result from his blunderbuss approach to disciplinary matters every year. A neutral arbitration panel would be pretty much impossible to successfully appeal to federal court.
Your assumption was that I was serious
I was playing the "BB is so smart that we're playing chess and Goodell is playing checkers. Or eating paste" card.
I'm inclined to agree with this because it is a rational and logical way for the league to move forward. However, in fairness to those speculating about the league wanting something very tangible in return, Goodell and the NFL exec teams have not exactly positioned themselves as rational and logical over the last several years.
Oops. Sorry.Your assumption was that I was serious
I was playing the "BB is so smart that we're playing chess and Goodell is playing checkers. Or eating paste" card.
That's absolutely fair and I have no doubt that the NFL will ask for something. I'll just be shocked if the NFLPA gives it to them, because there is no need.
Of course, this is the NFLPA, so perhaps I should re-think that.
I typed that note on my iPhone, and didn't notice that it autocorrected my custom word (apparently "learn spelling" doesn't work across devices). When I typed it was dunderbuss, for someone that just sprays the stupid indiscriminately across the landscape.
Then the NFLPA better hurry up and make this deal before the Appeals Court decides to reinstate the suspension.
Given all the NFL has put into go after Brady, and given that the March 3 hearing created an expectation of many that the COA is going to rule in the NFL's favor, I have some trouble believing that an overall deal would resolve all existing litigation. (I had a similar reaction to Peter King's suggestion that even if the NFL won in the Second Circuit, that RG would be amenable to reducing Tom's suspension in exchange for peace and having re-established his authority.)
I understand the arguments in favor of a truly global deal. It just seems so counter to Goodell's grain. And I could see other teams and fans wondering why the hell the NFL spent so much damned money on this crusade only to settle it out at the end when they seemingly were on the verge of victory. No doubt, very little in litigation is guaranteed, and the questioning Kessler faced might not mean that it's curtains for the NFLPA/Brady. But if I had the level of Brady fixation that RG appears to have, I would have a hard time letting it all go away now.
I hope I am wrong and this indeed all goes away.
I understand the arguments in favor of a truly global deal. It just seems so counter to Goodell's grain. And I could see other teams and fans wondering why the hell the NFL spent so much damned money on this crusade only to settle it out at the end when they seemingly were on the verge of victory. No doubt, very little in litigation is guaranteed, and the questioning Kessler faced might not mean that it's curtains for the NFLPA/Brady. But if I had the level of Brady fixation that RG appears to have, I would have a hard time letting it all go away now.
I hope I am wrong and this indeed all goes away.
I get that this seems to be a SoSH consensus, but after reading the transcripts, I don't expect it. And if there's any truth to the reports, it would appear that the NFL doesn't either.
I couldn't get beyond the paywall in the WSJ, but from other reporting, I'm not sure this is true. From what I read, these negotiations started in October, after the Berman decision. I agree that that NFL probably thought at that time that they had no chance to prevail on Brady. Engaging in negotiations was a reasonable reaction to concerns about the courts stripping powers away. But all that started well before the hearing in March, and I do think it's possible that the NFL's chances improved at that time.
I really don't think the fact that DeMaurice Smith is the one talking to the WSJ, while still absent a deal, is a good indicator of NFLPA success.
This isn't going to be Goodell's call. It's going to be the guys exhausted from paying all the legal bills. If Goodell had any say in the matter this story would never have appeared in the Wall Street Journal, and the NFLPA leadership isn't going to hang out to dry the guy that went to bat for them during the last work stoppage. There are two cases on appeal right now, and Smith was very precise about the NFL resolving the current cases.
My caveat was perhaps a bit abstract, but that was what I had in mind when I said "if there's any truth to the reports."
I still believe that we are placing too much emphasis on the reporting from the hearing last week in coming to a consensus that the NFL is going to prevail, but perhaps I'm the one who is refusing to see the truth here. We'll know soon enough, I guess.
Watching the NIT tonight on ESPN, there was a scrawl that said the league disputes that they are anywhere close to stripping the commissioner of his disciplinary powers and that those talks ended months ago.
That's like looking to Pravda for an accurate assessment of the inner-workings of the Kremlin circa 1984.
Jim Trotter @JimTrotter_NFL 29m29 minutes ago
Filed to ESPN: Negotiations b/n the NFL and NFLPA over revised player discipline policy have taken a "massive step backwards," per union.
shocker
Filed to ESPN: Negotiations b/n the NFL and NFLPA over revised player discipline policy have taken a "massive step backwards," per union.
shocker