Cowboys zeke elliot suspened 6 games

[cowboys5xsbs]

That would have been a public relations nightmare......

Yea because the NFL doesn't have that now? The pissed off the NFLPA and the general public thinks the NFL is full of shit. They did a great job of avoiding that PR nightmare.

 

[Manster7588]

Why is that relevant? Whether there is sufficient evidence to convict him of a crime is a totally separate question than whether there is sufficient evidence to suspend him. O.J. Simpson wasn't convicted of murder but it doesn't mean he didn't do it. Bill Cosby wasn't convicted of a crime but it doesn't mean he didn't do it. Cosby has had people pull endorsements or back out of working relationships because of the allegations against him. Were you beating the drum for Cosby based on insufficient evidence? O.J. Simpson hasn't gotten an acting gig since his ex-wife was murdered. Why didn't you fight for his right to be presumed innocent until proven guilty?

There are really only three options: (1) you're a biased Cowboys fans unable to see things objectively here; (2) you're a buffoon; or (3) you're both.

It's a question, a question you seem unwilling to answer.

 

[Manster7588]

And you are wrong. No one......not the NFL, Prosecutor on the case or a representative from any Ohio Law Enforcement agency made a statement that the accuser lied.

I don't need the prosecutor to tell me, I've read the the texts and sworn statements.
Maybe if you could read, you'll see it too.

 

[Manster7588]

The situation now has absolutly nothing to do with criminal law. It is about an employers right to discipline however they see fit.

I'll cede this argument, now in court would you convict on evidence known.

 

[Manster7588]

Fuck the Cowboys

And the truth comes out.

 

[molsaniceman]

So, with the evidence we know would you convict in a court of law?

doesnt matter this isnt a court of law its the NFL

 

[molsaniceman]

from the CBA

Standard of Conduct: While criminal activity is clearly outside the scope of permissible conduct, and persons who engage in criminal activity will be subject to discipline, the standard of conduct for persons employed in the NFL is considerably higher. It is not enough simply to avoid being found guilty of a crime. Instead, as an employee of the NFL or a member club, you are held to a higher standard and expected to conduct yourself in a way that is responsible, promotes the values upon which the League is based, and is lawful. Persons who fail to live up to this standard of conduct are guilty of conduct detrimental and subject to discipline, even where the conduct itself does not result in conviction of a crime. Discipline may be imposed in any of the following circumstances:

if u dont want to get suspended stay out of trouble

 

[Carnzo]

doesnt matter this isnt a court of law its the NFL

Yup this is it under the current CBA. And yes I'm still pissed

 

[Manster7588]

doesnt matter this isnt a court of law its the NFL

Understood, but I think this could be the case that the courts roll the NFL over their lack of Due Process.

 

[knowyourenemy]

It's a question, a question you seem unwilling to answer.

Kind of like how you didn't answer my question on why it's relevant?

 

[molsaniceman]

Understood, but I think this could be the case that the courts roll the NFL over their lack of Due Process.

courts cant do a damn thing about it the players signed a contract

 

[Manster7588]

Kind of like how you didn't answer my question on why it's relevant?

Again I asked a simple question that apparently those 100% calling for his suspension, refuse to answer.

 

[knowyourenemy]

Understood, but I think this could be the case that the courts roll the NFL over their lack of Due Process.

Why do you think that? There's less evidence to support that belief than there is to support the belief that Elliott beat up his girlfriend. But I guess I shouldn't expect you to be consistent about anything.

 

[PhillyGreen]

Again I asked a simple question that apparently those 100% calling for his suspension, refuse to answer.

Because it doesn't fucking matter.

"While criminal activity is clearly outside the scope of permissible conduct, and persons who engage in criminal activity will be subject to discipline, the standard of conduct for persons employed in the NFL is considerably higher. It is not enough simply to avoid being found guilty of a crime. Instead, as an employee of the NFL or a member club, you are held to a higher standard and expected to conduct yourself in a way that is responsible, promotes the values upon which the League is based, and is lawful. Persons who fail to live up to this standard of conduct are guilty of conduct detrimental and subject to discipline, even where the conduct itself does not result in conviction of a crime."

 

[Manster7588]

Why do you think that? There's less evidence to support that belief than there is to support the belief that Elliott beat up his girlfriend. But I guess I shouldn't expect you to be consistent about anything.

Let's let the appeal process play out, then the law suits that may follow.
You're obviously ready to convict a man on evidence, you've never seen.
That Dallas hatred will eat you up, let it go.

 

[Manster7588]

Because it doesn't fucking matter.

"While criminal activity is clearly outside the scope of permissible conduct, and persons who engage in criminal activity will be subject to discipline, the standard of conduct for persons employed in the NFL is considerably higher. It is not enough simply to avoid being found guilty of a crime. Instead, as an employee of the NFL or a member club, you are held to a higher standard and expected to conduct yourself in a way that is responsible, promotes the values upon which the League is based, and is lawful. Persons who fail to live up to this standard of conduct are guilty of conduct detrimental and subject to discipline, even where the conduct itself does not result in conviction of a crime."

Bullshit, it does matter.
Forget about the NFL for a minute, if you sat on a Jury for a case just like this, with this exact known evidence, would you convict?

If you can't answer or refuse to answer I'm done with you.

 

[PhillyGreen]

Bullshit, it does matter.
Forget about the NFL for a minute, if you sat on a Jury for a case just like this, with this exact known evidence, would you convict?

If you can't answer or refuse to answer I'm done with you.

I am not going to forget about the NFL for a moment because my entire argument was based on the NFL and the CBA. You are the one that keeps asking questions about if we would convict him criminally. I am not answering that because it does not fucking matter. I am not wasting my time on your stupid argument about if I would convict him of a crime or not. Unless you can submit to me every piece of information available to investigators the question is ridiculous.

 

[knowyourenemy]

Bullshit, it does matter.
Forget about the NFL for a minute, if you sat on a Jury for a case just like this, with this exact known evidence, would you convict?

If you can't answer or refuse to answer I'm done with you.

Good retort. I can see why this hypothetical scenario matters so much. Let me ask you this similarly important hypothetical: would you eat the moon if it were made of ribs?

 

[knowyourenemy]

Let's let the appeal process play out, then the law suits that may follow.
You're obviously ready to convict a man on evidence, you've never seen.
That Dallas hatred will eat you up, let it go.

The only thing I'm ready to do is point out the foolishness of Cowboys fans defending Elliott and complaining as if he's gotten a raw deal.

You have no reason to believe that the courts will "roll the NFL" other than the fact that you're a Cowboys fan that hopes that's what ultimately happens.

 

[ArlingtonCowboys100]

Zeke can make more than his current contract after he sues the NFL and wins. The NFL will regret this if they dont drastically reduce the suspension. Lol at the Cowboys haters on here