SUPRMAN said:

RebirthOfCool said:

Because sometimes it could be a false arrest/false charges/false accusations or just a complete misunderstanding altogether, and GODdell will impose some sort of sanction before all that comes to light.

Has he done that in the past?

That doesn't make sense, and when he meets with the player, don't they have an opportunity to be heard?

Yep, he's done it before. And it doesn't matter if they're heard, he's GODdell.

RebirthOfCool said:

SUPRMAN said:

Has he done that in the past?

That doesn't make sense, and when he meets with the player, don't they have an opportunity to be heard?

Yep, he's done it before. And it doesn't matter if they're heard, he's GODdell.

I guess we have no way of knowing that.

SUPRMAN said:

RebirthOfCool said:

Yep, he's done it before. And it doesn't matter if they're heard, he's GODdell.

I guess we have no way of knowing that.

Of knowing what?

RebirthOfCool said:

SUPRMAN said:

Why do they think due process from the legal system should be a factor?

Because sometimes it could be a false arrest/false charges/false accusations or just a complete misunderstanding altogether, and GODdell will impose some sort of sanction before all that comes to light.

When has Goddell suspended a player and it turned out to be false circumstances?

RebirthOfCool said:

SUPRMAN said:

I guess we have no way of knowing that.

Of knowing what?

That's he done it before -

" Because sometimes it could be a false arrest/false charges/false accusations or just a complete misunderstanding altogether, and GODdell will impose some sort of sanction before all that comes to light."

SCNDLS said:

RebirthOfCool said:

Because sometimes it could be a false arrest/false charges/false accusations or just a complete misunderstanding altogether, and GODdell will impose some sort of sanction before all that comes to light.

When has Goddell suspended a player and it turned out to be false circumstances?

He did it to Pac Man before he was convicted of any of his charges. That was the big stink. They said GODdell was going off shit he got in trouble for when he wasn't even in the NFL.

SUPRMAN said:

RebirthOfCool said:

Of knowing what?

That's he done it before -

" Because sometimes it could be a false arrest/false charges/false accusations or just a complete misunderstanding altogether, and GODdell will impose some sort of sanction before all that comes to light."

He has. In fact, it's been only recently that he's decided to wait and let the judicial system play out before he started doling out punishment.

RebirthOfCool said:

SCNDLS said:

When has Goddell suspended a player and it turned out to be false circumstances?

He did it to Pac Man before he was convicted of any of his charges. That was the big stink. They said GODdell was going off shit he got in trouble for when he wasn't even in the NFL.

I really hope you got a better example than Pacman "Make It Rain" Jones.

SCNDLS said:

RebirthOfCool said:

He did it to Pac Man before he was convicted of any of his charges. That was the big stink. They said GODdell was going off shit he got in trouble for when he wasn't even in the NFL.

I really hope you got a better example than Pacman "Make It Rain" Jones.

In the end, yeah he deserved it. But dude hadn't even been convicted of shit yet before GODdell was putting shit in motion.

RebirthOfCool said:

SCNDLS said:

I really hope you got a better example than Pacman "Make It Rain" Jones.

In the end, yeah he deserved it. But dude hadn't even been convicted of shit yet before GODdell was putting shit in motion.

That fool should have been run out of the league............permanently.

Graycap23 said:

RebirthOfCool said:

In the end, yeah he deserved it. But dude hadn't even been convicted of shit yet before GODdell was putting shit in motion.

That fool should have been run out of the league............permanently.

If he fucks up in Cincy, he's done for good.

Goodell was trying to wake Pacman up - to get him to realize that it's a privilige AND a responsibility to play in the NFL. Still not sure dude has figured it out, though. Cinci is definitely going to be a team to watch this year.

Cerebus said:

Goodell was trying to wake Pacman up - to get him to realize that it's a privilige AND a responsibility to play in the NFL. Still not sure dude has figured it out, though. Cinci is definitely going to be a team to watch this year.

For some reason I think Pac is gonna be ok in Cincy.

RebirthOfCool said:

Cerebus said:

Goodell was trying to wake Pacman up - to get him to realize that it's a privilige AND a responsibility to play in the NFL. Still not sure dude has figured it out, though. Cinci is definitely going to be a team to watch this year.

For some reason I think Pac is gonna be ok in Cincy.

There is nothing 2 do there but ride the River and sleep.

Graycap23 said:

RebirthOfCool said:

For some reason I think Pac is gonna be ok in Cincy.

There is nothing 2 do there but ride the River and sleep.

I don't know, wherever there's a strip club, there's always trouble right around the corner. Or pole in this case.

RebirthOfCool said:

Graycap23 said:

There is nothing 2 do there but ride the River and sleep.

I don't know, wherever there's a strip club, there's always trouble right around the corner. Or pole in this case.

RebirthOfCool said:

SCNDLS said:

When has Goddell suspended a player and it turned out to be false circumstances?

He did it to Pac Man before he was convicted of any of his charges. That was the big stink. They said GODdell was going off shit he got in trouble for when he wasn't even in the NFL.

Why would he have to be convicted?

That's a separate process. The two are not contiguous or synonymous.

All Goodell needs is the facts, the same facts a court would apply to the law.

Goodell is not charged with enforcing criminal or civilian law.

Nor does he need to wait for a conviction.

If Pac-Man escaped conviction on a technicality rather than the evidence, does that mean Goodell should not be empowered to impose discipline, because Pac-Man wasn't found guilty in court?!!!!

RebirthOfCool said:

SUPRMAN said:

That's he done it before -

" Because sometimes it could be a false arrest/false charges/false accusations or just a complete misunderstanding altogether, and GODdell will impose some sort of sanction before all that comes to light."

He has. In fact, it's been only recently that he's decided to wait and let the judicial system play out before he started doling out punishment.

In what case?

Dealing with whom?

Why does he have to wait to let the judicial system play out?

That is totally separate.

So you are saying, that if they avoid a criminal conviction, then the league(s) should not be able to impose their own discipline?!!!

SUPRMAN said:

RebirthOfCool said:

He did it to Pac Man before he was convicted of any of his charges. That was the big stink. They said GODdell was going off shit he got in trouble for when he wasn't even in the NFL.

Why would he have to be convicted?

That's a separate process. The two are not contiguous or synonymous.

All Goodell needs is the facts, the same facts a court would apply to the law.

Goodell is not charged with enforcing criminal or civilian law.

Nor does he need to wait for a conviction.

If Pac-Man escaped conviction on a technicality rather than the evidence, does that mean Goodell should not be empowered to impose discipline, because Pac-Man wasn't found guilty in court?!!!!

And that's the issue, players don't want to be punished BEFORE the judicial process has taken place, that's what they're gonna be addressing this time around in the CBA.

SUPRMAN said:

RebirthOfCool said:

He has. In fact, it's been only recently that he's decided to wait and let the judicial system play out before he started doling out punishment.

In what case?

Dealing with whom?

Why does he have to wait to let the judicial system play out?

That is totally separate.

So you are saying, that if they avoid a criminal conviction, then the league(s) should not be able to impose their own discipline?!!!

I stated the Pac Man case. And I'm saying, in some cases there may not even be an infraction nor reason to arrest nor to be charged.

RebirthOfCool said:

SUPRMAN said:

Why would he have to be convicted?

That's a separate process. The two are not contiguous or synonymous.

All Goodell needs is the facts, the same facts a court would apply to the law.

Goodell is not charged with enforcing criminal or civilian law.

Nor does he need to wait for a conviction.

If Pac-Man escaped conviction on a technicality rather than the evidence, does that mean Goodell should not be empowered to impose discipline, because Pac-Man wasn't found guilty in court?!!!!

And that's the issue, players don't want to be punished BEFORE the judicial process has taken place, that's what they're gonna be addressing this time around in the CBA.

But there isn't always going to be a judicial process.

So if no one presses charges, then they can't be disciplined?

If there is no judicial process, they can't be disciplined, regardless of how their behavior affects the league, team, teammates etc?

So if there are no charges filed for bringing a gun into a locker room, then the league can't discipline someone, even though they are violating team and league rules?!!!!

RebirthOfCool said:

SUPRMAN said:

In what case?

Dealing with whom?

Why does he have to wait to let the judicial system play out?

That is totally separate.

So you are saying, that if they avoid a criminal conviction, then the league(s) should not be able to impose their own discipline?!!!

I stated the Pac Man case. And I'm saying, in some cases there may not even be an infraction nor reason to arrest nor to be charged.

But you can't prove that Goodell acted without hearing all the evidence.

And lack of a judicial proceeding does not mean rules weren't violated.

RebirthOfCool said:

SUPRMAN said:

Why would he have to be convicted?

That's a separate process. The two are not contiguous or synonymous.

All Goodell needs is the facts, the same facts a court would apply to the law.

Goodell is not charged with enforcing criminal or civilian law.

Nor does he need to wait for a conviction.

If Pac-Man escaped conviction on a technicality rather than the evidence, does that mean Goodell should not be empowered to impose discipline, because Pac-Man wasn't found guilty in court?!!!!

And that's the issue, players don't want to be punished BEFORE the judicial process has taken place, that's what they're gonna be addressing this time around in the CBA.

My guess is nothing changes.

The players don't have to accept Goodell's discipline.

They can quit the NFL and not be bothered with the discipline.

SUPRMAN said:

RebirthOfCool said:

And that's the issue, players don't want to be punished BEFORE the judicial process has taken place, that's what they're gonna be addressing this time around in the CBA.

But there isn't always going to be a judicial process.

So if no one presses charges, then they can't be disciplined?

If there is no judicial process, they can't be disciplined, regardless of how their behavior affects the league, team, teammates etc?

So if there are no charges filed for bringing a gun into a locker room, then the league can't discipline someone, even though they are violating team and league rules?!!!!

More than likely, there will be a judicial process of some sort, that's probably how GODdell is gonna find out to begin with. That process is usually gonna start with an arrest or charges or at the least allegations. Now, where did you ever see me write that they can't be disciplined if there's no judicial process? Show me.

SUPRMAN said:

RebirthOfCool said:

I stated the Pac Man case. And I'm saying, in some cases there may not even be an infraction nor reason to arrest nor to be charged.

But you can't prove that Goodell acted without hearing all the evidence.

And lack of a judicial proceeding does not mean rules weren't violated.

I never said he did or didn't. I'm just saying the issue with some of the players is that he's handing out discipline BEFORE the judicial process has played out, which again, is within his power to do so, but some don't like it and it will be addressed in the upcoming CBA negotiations.

SUPRMAN said:

RebirthOfCool said:

And that's the issue, players don't want to be punished BEFORE the judicial process has taken place, that's what they're gonna be addressing this time around in the CBA.

My guess is nothing changes.

The players don't have to accept Goodell's discipline.

They can quit the NFL and not be bothered with the discipline.

OR - The players can have his power tempered via the new CBA. Haven't you been paying attention to ANYTHING I've written about this?

RebirthOfCool said:

SUPRMAN said:

But there isn't always going to be a judicial process.

So if no one presses charges, then they can't be disciplined?

If there is no judicial process, they can't be disciplined, regardless of how their behavior affects the league, team, teammates etc?

So if there are no charges filed for bringing a gun into a locker room, then the league can't discipline someone, even though they are violating team and league rules?!!!!

More than likely, there will be a judicial process of some sort, that's probably how GODdell is gonna find out to begin with. That process is usually gonna start with an arrest or charges or at the least allegations. Now, where did you ever see me write that they can't be disciplined if there's no judicial process? Show me.

I was asking.

And more than likely there will be a judicial process of some sort?

For every league violation subject to discipline? I doubt it.

RebirthOfCool said:

SUPRMAN said:

But you can't prove that Goodell acted without hearing all the evidence.

And lack of a judicial proceeding does not mean rules weren't violated.

I never said he did or didn't. I'm just saying the issue with some of the players is that he's handing out discipline BEFORE the judicial process has played out, which again, is within his power to do so, but some don't like it and it will be addressed in the upcoming CBA negotiations.

You did say he did.

SUPRMAN said:

RebirthOfCool said:

Because sometimes it could be a false arrest/false charges/false accusations or just a complete misunderstanding altogether, and GODdell will impose some sort of sanction before all that comes to light.

Has he done that in the past?

That doesn't make sense, and when he meets with the player, don't they have an opportunity to be heard?

Yep, he's done it before. And it doesn't matter if they're heard, he's GODdell.

RebirthOfCool said:

SUPRMAN said:

My guess is nothing changes.

The players don't have to accept Goodell's discipline.

They can quit the NFL and not be bothered with the discipline.

OR - The players can have his power tempered via the new CBA. Haven't you been paying attention to ANYTHING I've written about this?

Yes I have.

But if the any player doesn't want to submit to discipline in the NFL or any other league, they aren't obligated to.

They can walk away. That is an option if they don't want to submit to discipline.

Yes, they can seek changes to the CBA I'm just pointing out that changing the CBA is not the only way this has to be dealt with.

What's wrong with someone dissatisfied leaving?

SUPRMAN said:

RebirthOfCool said:

Has he done that in the past?

That doesn't make sense, and when he meets with the player, don't they have an opportunity to be heard?

Yep, he's done it before. And it doesn't matter if they're heard, he's GODdell.

No, you're confused. That response you're quoting refers to me saying he's given out punishment without the judicial process concluding, I never said ANYTHING about him reviewing all the evidence and then giving out punishment.