NFL in settlement talks with suspended Saints players

[ChrisPozz]

Hmmmm....

Chris Mortensen:

NFL in settlement talks with suspended Saints players. Story up shortly on ESPN.com

 

[imac_21]

He's reporting the NFL has offered to reduce Vilma's to 8 games.

 

[MHSL82]

He's reporting the NFL has offered to reduce Vilma's to 8 games.

No!!! Don't cave! I want either Goodell to lose because of what Vilma didn't do and Vilma there for the whole season or Vilma to lose and pay for what he has done! 8 games, pshaw.

Seriously though, I want his suspension to be at least 11 games. Not because I don't want to play Vilma for competitive reasons. I don't want anyone to be injured. Bounty or not, Vilma gives me bad feelings on injuries. I'd rather have a backup in there. I just think that he's someone who makes me feel my players are going to get hurt (just a feeling, I don't have any evidence of dirty play - like the NFL?).

 

[DoobieKeebler]

He's reporting the NFL has offered to reduce Vilma's to 8 games.

Probably best for the league, but you gotta think Goodell would kill to lay the legal slap down on Vilma for many reasons.


Also, will this effect the sentences of suspended coaches/FO personnel? I'd love to watch the entire team burn, but if Vilma/others get time reduced for crying and throwing tantrums, why not also reduce penalties to the non-players? (I know the answer, but I also wouldn't reduce shit for ANY of the people involved.)

 

[Kinzu]

Settle why? Where does Vilma have any leg to stand on in this whole thing? Goodell is empowered by the very man signing off on Vilma's checks to hand down these punishments. There is no legal system and innocent before proven guilty here. The only reason he even needs evidence is simply to justify his actions to the NFLPA.

Leave it to the NFL players to go this far over a suspension as opposed to losing their job >_>;

 

[MHSL82]

Settle why? Where does Vilma have any leg to stand on in this whole thing? Goodell is empowered by the very man signing off on Vilma's checks to hand down these punishments. There is no legal system and innocent before proven guilty here. The only reason he even needs evidence is simply to justify his actions to the NFLPA.

Leave it to the NFL players to go this far over a suspension as opposed to losing their job >_>;

I think it would set bad precedent to settle if Goodell has a good chance to win both the civil and any court ruling on appeals/biased adjudicator.

The only thing that came to mind was the injunction, but even then, that couldn't be longer than 8 games and if so, he'd be out for 16 games regardless (part of 2013-14). As far as looking bad for the league, I think we're passed that. Both Goodell and Vilma look bad for different reasons.

I agree with you, the power is with Goodell, the cases look to go the NFL's way, and they contracted for it. I don't see the reason to settle. Would the legal fees be that much greater, if at all, than the pay recouped from Vilma?

 

[mem49er]

Worst thing he could do is cave.

 

[grayghost668]

I say let it play out,I'm not a fan of Goddell and I am no fan of the Saints in the end one side or the other will lose big,I hope it's Goddell

 

[Bemular]

Worst thing he could do is cave.

I could not agree more.

 

[yehyeh]

Goodell does not want this thing to go to court. If the court rules that he does not have the power to arbitrarily suspend whomever he wants for however long he wants, then all of the suspensions he has made will come under scrutiny and will be challenged. Even if the it is written into the CBA, the courts could rule that having a authoritarian like powers for the commissioner violates one of the many labor acts and then he is toast. I think he knows he has a chance to lose this one due to lack of credible evidence and he doesn't want his policies put under a microscope in a court of law.

 

[threelittleturds]

This seems like a lose-lose for Goodell.

If he gives in, then the first thing I'd do if I were suspended was sue Goodell for punishing me.

If the courts rule in Vilma's favor, then the first thing I'd do if I were suspended was sue Goodell for punishing me.

 

[Bemular]

Goodell does not want this thing to go to court. If the court rules that he does not have the power to arbitrarily suspend whomever he wants for however long he wants, then all of the suspensions he has made will come under scrutiny and will be challenged. Even if the it is written into the CBA, the courts could rule that having a authoritarian like powers for the commissioner violates one of the many labor acts and then he is toast. I think he knows he has a chance to lose this one due to lack of credible evidence and he doesn't want his policies put under a microscope in a court of law.

This is an excellent point but it is a sword with two edges. If Vilma's lawyer is certain of this (the judge has already made her opinion known) then it would seem the NFLPA and Vilma's lawyer would advise him to reject any settlement offer.

If Goodell doesn't have either the evidence and/or authority to suspend for 16 games then he doesn't have either the evidence and/or authority to suspend for 8 games as well.

I understand this approach would turn this 'negotiation' into an unwanted game of chicken, but if knowing where the line is drawn or even if there should be a line would seem to influence a continued challenge by Vilma & Co.

If the lawyers for the players got the owners to agree to and sign an unenforceable contract then the players have effectively put the fox in charge of the hen house.

I think your observation is correct. I am just wondering out loud to what level is it correct.

 

[TheNinerMind]

The potential settlement has nothing to do with Goodell's power to suspend at will. It is to prevent the precedent of players being able to sue at all, which is currently barred per a clause in the cba. If Vilma prevails now then suddenly lawsuits will run rampant any time there is a dispute.

 

[ForkEmBucky]

The potential settlement has nothing to do with Goodell's power to suspend at will. It is to prevent the precedent of players being able to sue at all, which is currently barred per a clause in the cba. If Vilma prevails now then suddenly lawsuits will run rampant any time there is a dispute.

There has to be some kind of loophole if they're even sitting down with the guy. I think the New Orleans DA should step in and say, "Okay Jonathon, if you don't want the league to settle this, how about I press manslaughter charges?"

And then Brett Favre's lawyers should give him a call and start talking lawsuit.

Seriously Vilma, take your punishment and crawl back down into your cave, you fucking goblin.

 

[MHSL82]

To me scrutiny isn't all or nothing, so could the judge determine 8 games is reasonable and 16 went over the line? Or is it really all or nothing? Suppose the Court finds he does have authority, the full 16 is ok, then? It doesn't look like the court is focusing on the evidence, but rather authority. Authority can be limited, even if it's in the contract. But I don't know how a judge would determine what is reasonable. With other damages, like money, subject to statutory limits, juries decide some of those things (unless the parties agree to bench trial or subject matter or contract dictates it). Law either way is determined by the judge.

I'm a bit all over the place because I feel that there is a reason besides bad press and legal fees that the NFL is even talking settlement. There's no way they settle for 8 games if even 8 is too much. So it sounds like it is all or nothing. Or they are compromising between 4 games and 16 games and Goodell's in trouble, but not losing totally.

 

[FourBeeDen]

NFL Disputes Report of Settlement Offer

 

[Bemular]

To me scrutiny isn't all or nothing, so could the judge determine 8 games is reasonable and 16 went over the line? Or is it really all or nothing? Suppose the Court finds he does have authority, the full 16 is ok, then? It doesn't look like the court is focusing on the evidence, but rather authority. Authority can be limited, even if it's in the contract. But I don't know how a judge would determine what is reasonable. With other damages, like money, subject to statutory limits, juries decide some of those things (unless the parties agree to bench trial or subject matter or contract dictates it). Law either way is determined by the judge.

I'm a bit all over the place because I feel that there is a reason besides bad press and legal fees that the NFL is even talking settlement. There's no way they settle for 8 games if even 8 is too much. So it sounds like it is all or nothing. Or they are compromising between 4 games and 16 games and Goodell's in trouble, but not losing totally.

If Goodell compromises without compensation - he loses. So for him it is an all or nothing proposition unless they (Goodell, Vilma and the lawyers) can come to an "in lieu of" agreement which would give the appearance of a win/win outcome, i.e., a reduced suspension in lieu of type arrangement.

As for the judge's roll, any judge presiding over this case if it went to that point would not be there to negotiate the length of the punishment they would be there to determine the legality of the punishment.

 

[Hangman]

I hope Goodell didn't pussy out and offered a plea.

 

[NinerSickness]

I hope Goodell didn't pussy out and offered a plea.