Man, Goodell and the NFL really botched this Bounty Scandal...

[wickedsolo]

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com...e-suspensions/


They didn't submit their evidence on time apparently and as a result, that evidence (which the entire case is based on) cannot be included as per the CBA.


Vilma & the gang may get their suspensions lifted after all.

As Article 46 of the Collective Bargaining Agreement goes, there aren’t many technicalities in the appeal process. Here’s one of them, from Article 46, Section (f)(ii): “In appeals under Section 1(a), the parties shall exchange copies of any exhibits upon which they intend to rely no later than three (3) calendar days prior to the hearing. Failure to timely provide any intended exhibit shall preclude its introduction at the hearing.”

Key language: Failure to timely provide any intended exhibit shall preclude its introduction at the hearing.


Commissioner Roger Goodell previously scheduled the hearing in the bounty case for 10:00 a.m. ET on Monday, June 18. The NFL delivered its packet of 16 exhibits to the NFLPA at roughly 1:30 p.m. ET on Friday, June 15.


So by failing to deliver the materials before 10:00 a.m. ET on Friday, June 15, the plain language of the CBA (i.e., “shall”) prevents the materials from being introduced at the hearing.

If this technicality gets those guys off the hook then Roger Goodell will be the laughing stock for quite some time.

[Terpsfan82]

Good. This amounted to nothing more than a witch hunt.

[Sirdowski]

Good. This amounted to nothing more than a witch hunt.

LOL.

Care to elaborate?

[darb72]

The hearing was moved to 1:45 for that very reason.

http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/fo...icle-1.1097754

"Scheduled for 10 a.m., it was moved to 1:45 p.m. after players took issue with the fact that they’d received the league’s evidence for review in the afternoon on June 15, instead of that morning."

I'd love to take credit for knowing this, but someone mentioned it in the comments on the link Wicked provided. I just looked it up.

[wickedsolo]

The hearing was moved to 1:45 for that very reason.

http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/fo...icle-1.1097754

"Scheduled for 10 a.m., it was moved to 1:45 p.m. after players took issue with the fact that they’d received the league’s evidence for review in the afternoon on June 15, instead of that morning."

I'd love to take credit for knowing this, but someone mentioned it in the comments on the link Wicked provided. I just looked it up.

Interesting.

[HoustonRaven]

So the had to submit the evidence no later than 3 days before the hearing.

They submitted the evidence on the 15th for a hearing on the 18th.

Had to take my shoes off for this one but that's exactly 3 days, hence it's not later than 3 days.

And this is a story why?

[wickedsolo]

So the had to submit the evidence no later than 3 days before the hearing.

They submitted the evidence on the 15th for a hearing on the 18th.

Had to take my shoes off for this one but that's exactly 3 days, hence it's not later than 3 days.

And this is a story why?

The lawyers were apparently looking at it from the stance that the trial was supposed to start (originally) at like 10AM on Monday and they didn't receive the evidence until 1:30pm on Friday or something...so "technically" that's not 3 full calendar days.

[Raveninwoodlawn]

The lawyers were apparently looking at it from the stance that the trial was supposed to start (originally) at like 10AM on Monday and they didn't receive the evidence until 1:30pm on Friday or something...so "technically" that's not 3 full calendar days.

Really, this is all being pushed by Florio.

I don't dislike him like so many here seem to, but throughout this case, he has taken this as a sort of courtroom type case since he is/was a lawyer. I don't think he can help himself from throwing himself into this...looking at legalities and not understanding why certain things are done certain ways...he is having a hard time separating the reality that when you deal with an agreed CBA, the same "proof" and "procedures' that you'd see in a court room do not apply.

[wickedsolo]

Really, this is all being pushed by Florio.

I don't dislike him like so many here seem to, but throughout this case, he has taken this as a sort of courtroom type case since he is/was a lawyer. I don't think he can help himself from throwing himself into this...looking at legalities and not understanding why certain things are done certain ways...he is having a hard time separating the reality that when you deal with an agreed CBA, the same "proof" and "procedures' that you'd see in a court room do not apply.

No doubt.

It was just an interesting perspective that I never thought of before and frankly I wouldn't be surprised if that kind of a technicality was being pursued to have the "charges" dropped.

[JAB1985]

well my thoughts are they never had strong evidence to begin with which is the whole reason they didnt share it (which i believe they have to share any known evidence with the defense), and missing a deadline for it to be admissible in court kind of proves that in my opinion. No case that is solely dependent upon this information would then allow it to not be admissible. If anything this may look better for Goodell than going to court with nothing and being outright destroyed by the defense and clearly over stepping his boundaries with his power. this way its a blunder but he gets to keep absolute power. these guys are being deemed guilty until proven innocent and kind of against everything we stand for here in america. just because we heard the coaches say they asked players to do things we dont like doesnt mean the players exchanged money and even if they did, it doesnt mean theres enough evidence to prove it. "Its not what you know, its what you can prove."

quite frankly i think this whole thing has been blown so far out of proportion its ridiculous. Youre talking about a violent game where men go out and slam into each other, but doing so with one intent is ok while another isnt even if it ends in the same result, which to this point im still waiting to see a dirty play that intentionally injured another player.

[Mista T]

Florio again sounds too much like a failed attorney than a journalist. Here's another take: 3 days = 3 days, not that 72 hours that Florio just invented to be part of the CBA.

If anything this may look better for Goodell than going to court with nothing and being outright destroyed by the defense and clearly over stepping his boundaries with his power. this way its a blunder but he gets to keep absolute power. these guys are being deemed guilty until proven innocent and kind of against everything we stand for here in america.

Interesting take. Perhaps Pash looked at all the evidence gathered, did a risk assessment for Goodell, and concluded that the hammer has come down adequately to prevent another bounty incident, so avoid the risk of having Goodell's decision overturned by a third party on substantive grounds.

However, "clearly over stepping his boundaries with his power". Huh? Exactly how has Goodell "clearly" over-stepped his boundaries? The NFL Commissioner has the authority under league rules and the CBA to mete out punishment for players' and coaches' behavior. What has he done which "clearly" violates that authority?

[Haloti92]

Where Goodell screwed the pooch was meting out the punishments to the players. They were simply too large for the nebulous "infractions." In terms of: prior warnings being ignored, the most effective way to discourage this from happening again, where the buck stops, and where the primary responsibility lies, the Saints organization should have been the most severely punished.

If Vilma's suspension was 4 games, Hargrove's 2 games, Smith's and Fujita's 1 game, PLUS the Saints organization was fined several million dollars, PLUS the Saints lost a few draft picks, then things would be a lot different. There still would have been appeals, but the issue would have passed by now. There wouldn't have been the same amount of league vs players animosity, and I think the chances of this behavior reoccurring (if such stiff penalties were given to the team itself) would still be zero.