Satori posted:The Ref fka Blair Kiel posted:Hey, I hope I'm rong and it's cloudy and in the low 80's----my sweaty ass will be in the stands.
Are you gonna take the Free Range Asshole with you ? He's looking for opportunities to wear his new Davante Adams jersey
I got a custom Ankles Adams jersey.
Wasn't he Rex Ryan's favorite photographer?
nice!
Doesn't it seem increasingly plausible that the demonization of Goodell and the continuance of his head-scratching decisions and the deterioration of his public perception is purposeful? All this talk about "Wait until the next CBA" kinda seems like exactly where the Owners want to go, doesn't it?
Create a pariah and the negotiations start there instead of where the owners fear (in lieu of the broadening perception that non-guaranteed deals for what these men do to themselves is untenable).
Looks like players have agreed to meet with the NFL
Good. Bring an NFLPA lawyer with you, too....just in case! Let's get this out of the way now! Then, if the commish wants to do something, keep it in the courts for a year like Brady I guess.
This seems carefully timed to be lost in all the excitement over tonight's preseason games. Perhaps the players union is pretty shrewd after all.
One guys that the player's should be grateful for right now is swimmer Ryan Lochte.
Heard the interview with Sitton on Wilde and Tauscher's show. Always wondered if that could happen, or could that occur with this brewing sh!t storm?
Ironic to me is the guy who was the lead then and active in the CBA discussions, Jeff Saturday, shrunk significantly after he stopped playing.
The guys will speak to NFL Aug 28, not sure what the Unions take is yet
— leroy butler (@leap36) August 18, 2016
These 3 are playing the game. And at this point, that's all they can do. With teams like the Bills in dire straits for LB help, a little surprising that Neal hasn't scheduled already.
Whatever boys, just 
and go through the motions.
Hungry5 posted:Heard the interview with Sitton on Wilde and Tauscher's show. Always wondered if that could happen, or could that occur with this brewing sh!t storm?
Ironic to me is the guy who was the lead then and active in the CBA discussions, Jeff Saturday, shrunk significantly after he stopped playing.
Yeah, Saturday always had issues keeping his weight up.
"never"
"not to my knowledge"
"I have no recollection of that"
"no"
"I can tell you but then I'd have to kill you"
and finally
"that's all you got?"
"Do you know where I can get some percocet?"
"Favre only got a $50k fine for not cooperating with the sexting deal."
Tdog posted:"never"
"not to my knowledge"
"I have no recollection of that"
"no"
"I can tell you but then I'd have to kill you"
and finally
"that's all you got?"
This topic has plenty of drama without adding politics.
Harrison spoke with Aditi Kinkhabwala of NFL Network Thursday afternoon when he arrived at Heinz Field for the Steelers’ preseason game vs. the Eagles, and in typical Harrison fashion he delivered a strong quote on the subject.
“They don’t have credible evidence,” he said. “Period. End of discussion.”
Harrison said he agreed to the interview because continuing to fight it and ultimately receiving a suspension “would definitely hurt the team.”
Earlier this summer, Harrison had invited NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell to his house for the interview. Harrison informed the NFL of his decision to submit to the interview by submitting a letter via the NFL Players Association.
Harrison’s letter said he will submit to an interview at the team’s facility Aug. 30. The NFL had originally set an Aug. 25 deadline for speaking to the players or they would face suspension.
GFYRSLF
No comment
You can't handle the truth
Get of my ****in lawn
Ask Peyton
SanDiegoPackFan posted:Good. Bring an NFLPA lawyer with you, too....just in case! Let's get this out of the way now! Then, if the commish wants to do something, keep it in the courts for a year like Brady I guess.
I would think the union has an obligation to have their lawyers there to represent the player's interest.
if the league determines no punishment will be meted, I think it will be forgotten sooner rather than later. If any suspensions are issued, I think the appeals would quickly follow. Fines, fair or not, may be paid just to put the matter to bed. JMHO.
Dr._Bob posted:This seems carefully timed to be lost in all the excitement over tonight's preseason games. Perhaps the players union is pretty shrewd after all.
You forgot this thingy:
Had me going for a second.
packerboi posted:These 3 are playing the game. And at this point, that's all they can do. With teams like the Bills in dire straits for LB help, a little surprising that Neal hasn't scheduled already.
Whatever boys, just
They finally got the right advice, or listened to it. They didn't have any choice.
This is their best shot. I'm hopeful.
Also Go Pack Go.
Pistol GB posted:Dr._Bob posted:This seems carefully timed to be lost in all the excitement over tonight's preseason games. Perhaps the players union is pretty shrewd after all.
You forgot this thingy:
Had me going for a second.
If I have to say it's a joke, then I've done it wrong. 
Try wise-ass schtick next time.
You're cute. As cute as a toad.
What are the chances?
James Harrison says he wouldn't mind having his interview over PED allegations being broadcast live https://t.co/zDrIj6fpiu
— Around The NFL (@AroundTheNFL) August 19, 2016
He should set that up as a pay-per-view event. Send the proceeds to charity. In fact, make it a one-hour show (like Lebron did when he left Cleveland for Miami). The profits from that one hour show then could go to charity. It's a win-win.
Timmy! posted:SanDiegoPackFan posted:Good. Bring an NFLPA lawyer with you, too....just in case! Let's get this out of the way now! Then, if the commish wants to do something, keep it in the courts for a year like Brady I guess.
I would think the union has an obligation to have their lawyers there to represent the player's interest.
They don't need a lawyer at the interview, they need one beforehand (which it sounds like they already have), and please NOT one of the guys who just almost walked them into an easy suspension for noncooperation, which would have been upheld on appeal. They probably have their agents on it. Just someone with a brain to get them ready.
If they're innocent, obviously nothing to worry about. Even if they are guilty, there's a pretty easy way to beat Goodell at his own game here, just follow the old formula: Don't deny what you know he can prove, and admit everything but what can kill you.
We already know from the last NFL press release that he caught Neal in a lie with his affidavit. So I'm guessing and betting Neal said something like, "I've never met Charlie Sly in my life," or something like that. Also if Sly really was in Green Bay for 6 weeks, there's going to be mountain of evidence of that. Don't deny that kind of thing.
Here's the important part: Goodell will never, ever be able to put the needle into their arms. He will however, be able to catch them in other lies and suspend them for that alone if he does (Neal is probably already suspended). So it is simple, really: You met with Sly but you changed your mind; you went to see him but decided not to risk it; you only got anti-inflammatories from him; anything like that; whatever, but you did not juice.
You do that and Goodell is stuck. He might suspect it is not true, but he's not going to want to be overturned on appeal, and he knows suspicion just isn't enough, especially not in this climate. No one likes being hated. It's human nature. And he wants this over, too. There has to be "sufficient credible evidence" of a violation and he simply will not have it.
Also, you know, in Manning, he took the extraordinary step of issuing a press release that said words to the effect of, "The NFL finds Peyton Manning did not use PED's." He didn't say, "There was insufficient evidence that Peyton Manning used PED's." (Those are odd words to use, like he has a crystal ball or is all-knowing or something.)
If they are ready for the interview and don't do anything stupid, I bet he stops short of that but lets our guys go.
an easy suspension for noncooperation, which would have been upheld on appeal
Nothing to support that a suspension would be upheld on appeal. Brady results do not apply, that is not a precedent in this, different situation completely.
No it isn't.
NFLFU
The "investigation" process is more like an interrogation. All Goodell is trying to do is play games and entrap these guys.
What comes around goes around Rog. Eventually this is going to catch up with the league and it will be fun to watch.
Hungry5 posted:The collectively bargained drug policy allows for the NFL to discipline players “found through sufficient credible documented evidence … to have used, possessed or distributed performance-enhancing substances,” even if they didn’t fail a test or run afoul of the law. A footnote says “sufficient credible evidence includes but is not limited to: criminal convictions or plea arrangements; admissions, declarations, affidavits, authenticated witness statements, corroborated law enforcement reports or testimony in legal proceedings; authenticated banking, telephone, medical or pharmacy records; or credible information obtained from Players who provide assistance pursuant to Section 10 of the Policy.”
This is the correct standard for a PED violation. Obviously, it entails and investigation. How else does the hearing officer get the evidence?
Now add Brady. The full Court of Appeals decision is linked in this thread on page 6. If you don't want to read the whole thing, go to Discipline for Noncooperation on page 23: In an investigation, the Commissioner has the authority to sanction a player for refusal to cooperate, as conduct detrimental to the league. Brady's 4 games for that were upheld.
Even if you don't think the Court of Appeal was talking about any investigation (which it was), the argument on appeal here would be:"Brady dealt with an investigation for cheating by deflating footballs, this case deals with an investigation for cheating by using PED's!"
That is just silly and would get laughed out of court.
No, this is dealing with recanted accusations and no actual evidence. The Brady case had statements and deflated balls. Completely different.
They've completely ruined the game.
I'm about as interested in this $#!T as I am watching an episode of Kardashians.
H5
You're not going to read it are you? The issue we are discussing is noncooperation during an investigation, not what the investigation is about or how much evidence there is of the underlying violation.
Yeah I know about the "non-cooperation" rule. The point is, when you're in the NFL, you have no rights.
If this matter was taken to a court, the prosecution has ZERO evidence & it would be thrown out. PERIOD!
The Brady case has little to no relevance to this situation.
Goodell is trying to extend his reach by using the discipline for non cooperation principle for just about everything and anything.
The problem here is the entire merits of this case are based on PED use - or alleged PED use. That follows or triggers the corrective action process under the D&A policy. At least it would in just about any other CBA in existence that I'm aware of.
One other thing - if the players want representatives with them they are protected under Section 7 of the NLRA. Goodell can't refuse them that right unless he wants to end up with a potential ULP.
What I find interesting is that it's open season on employers right now from the NLRB and why they haven't been more active I have no idea. I don't think the NFLPU is very saavy or informed - certainly not like the other major sports.
Rog just has to look like he's getting tough on "protecting the integrity of the game". He needs to look like he's cracking down on cheating and PEDs, specifically targeting big name players. If this was limited to JUST Mike Neal, would Rog make all these demands about interviews? Doubtful. It's a sham and nothing will come of it now that they have agreed to interviews. I like James Harrison's idea to have the interview on TV, and since the NFL is all about transparency with fans it shouldn't be an issue. Right?
