It took 13 months for Elliott
CBA has been changed since then to include the former federal judge as agreed upon by NFLPA and the NFL.
Which has NOTHING to do with your question from my post, BUT here you are killing it again. Cover all bases spinner, it's far and away what you do best.
Nothing to do with it? Your answer with Elliot was what happened under a completely different CBA. are you just messing with me?
I mean, at least those you idolize offered opinions on the matter. would you like me to tell you what they are so you know what you should think?
Since we don't know that he has sued hard to say he did......since we don't know if he sues that he will win, hard to say he'll win.....since there is not even a verdict for Rog to overturn hard to say it was overturned.
Already did when I said that adhering to the CBA will mean there will be no legal ground for a suit. Any suit filed will be dismissed. That includes an appeal from the NFL to Goodell to increase the suspension. Maybe you could tell me what legal ground is there for the NFLPA to argue? They agreed and signed the CBA and it’s a legally binding agreement and it gives the NFL has the right to appeal and gives Goodell the right to adjust the punishment per the CBA. Please explain your could, maybe and if, on what legal ground.
NFLPA would make the argument there was no reason to throw out the ruling of the retired judge (who has more experience than he does in making such rulings) for his own selfish ruling. Kind of goes against the letter of the CBA to impose his own ruling. Why even bother hiring Robinson? That would be their case.......not that complicated.
That's not a valid legal reason. The CBA lays the ground work for how the process works, the NFL is following the CBA process and there is a reason for appealing, the punishment was lacking and to protect the NFL a harsher punishment is required. Course if Robinson say Watson is innocent then that's the end, if Robinson decides Watson should be suspended indefinitely the NFL won't appeal, if the NFLPA wants to appeal they can. However no viable legal reason for a law suit from the NFLPA just virtually signaling for their members.
I gave you their legal reasoning. Because it may be legal per the CBA to change the ruling it does not mean they could not find a reason to challenge the ruling. Hell, in the CBA in the personal conduct policy it says they will hold owners and executives to a higher standard and they could simply argue that has not happened.
Well frivolous lawsuits happen all the time. NFLPA has filed a boatload of them. That’s why the NFL has a slew of top notch lawyers employed and why the NFL wins them.
Not exactly frivolous if they argue the part of the CBA which states in personal conduct policy they will hold owners and execs to a higher standard.
It says they traditionally hold owners and club members to a higher standard, doesn’t guarantee they will. Also Watson case which involves dozens of women is unlike any other case in NFL history. I feel it would indeed be frivolous and doubt the NFL would be worried about it. More money down the drain for the NFLPA, they have a history of that.
doesn't the case with Snyder and the WFT involve a bunch of women, too? Cowboys and Jones, as well?
thanks as always for your detailed input kid. If I could give ya a pat on the head I would.
