Adrian Peterson Reinstated

[Mothman]

I don't understand the comments regarding the NFLPA giving Goodell the authority being the end all. It's seems to me they bargained for one thing and are getting another.....the court decisions seem to be backing that sentiment. It's like telling a community that voted in a representative, who turned his back on the constituents in favor of special interests after he promised reform, that it's their fault the guy couldn't be trusted.

Where this will really come back around is at the next negotiations. The precedents being set by the spontaneous disciplinary measures are going to be sticking points for one side or the other. Fans and sponsors maybe ok with the way Goodell is running things but I've yet to hear of much support for his use of this authority from anyone else in the league...and that includes the decisions around bountygate as well. Another set of decisions in which the ones taken to court were overturned, if I remember correctly.

I dunno....Goodell looks a bit like he's in Elliot Ness mode and is treating the players like he doesn't really care about the consequences....probably due to the fact that he has no oversight at all unless he gets taken to court.

So yeah, the NFLPA agreed to give him the authority....but this is just beginning IMO. I bet it could get pretty bogged down by the end of it.

I think so too. If you haven't read the article about the Missouri case that I linked to a few posts up, i recommend that you check it out. You and I seem to share a similar interest in the way Goodell is using his authority so I think you will find it very interesting.

[Pseudo Everything]

Blame isn't really the point, is it? Just because the union ceded this degree of authority to the league and Goodell in the last CBA, that doesn't mean Goodell isn't abusing it.

Just because the NFLPA doesn't like Goodell's discipline decisions (or the process) doesn't mean that he's abusing his authority. If you give someone nearly unlimited authority to take disciplinary action for personal conduct (outside of substance abuse), which the NFLPA gave to Goodell (not just in this CBA but in prior CBAs as well), and he then exercises that authority ... how can they subsequently claim abuse of power given Goodell's actions to date?

Both Peterson and Hardy voluntarily agreed to go on the Commissioner's Exempt List.

Do the Jets, Bills and Dolphins think Goodell abused his authority when he suspended Brady for four games? Do the Eagles, Giants and Washington think Goodell abused his authority when he suspended Hardy for 10 games?

Judge Doty said nothing about the propriety of the NFL's Personal Conduct Policy when deciding the NFLPA's appeal of the Peterson decision. He only said that Goodell could not apply his new Personal Conduct Policy retroactively. The same thing happened in the Rice appeal as well.

If the disciplinary process was important to the NFLPA they have had ample occasions to do something about it given that the NFL's original CBA has been renewed multiple times.

[Pseudo Everything]

I don't understand the comments regarding the NFLPA giving Goodell the authority being the end all. It's seems to me they bargained for one thing and are getting another.....

The NFLPA is getting EXACTLY what they bargained for. It's contained in the Collective Bargaining Agreement that they signed. When they signed the CBA they affirmed everything in it (and everything not it as well).

Most Collective Bargaining Agreements spell out in excruciating detail the protocols for discipline. The fact that the NFLPA gave Goodell the authority to set the terms of the Personal Conduct Policy (without oversight from the union), and the fact that there was no provision that required an independent arbitrator of Goodell's decisions is simply amazing. The NFLPA did a shockingly poor job of negotiating the terms of the CBA when it comes to protocols for discipline. Or perhaps the NFLPA didn't view the Personal Conduct Policy as that important and spent all of their energy on ... wait for it ... money.

the court decisions seem to be backing that sentiment.

Both court decisions (in the Rice and Peterson appeals) simply said that Goodell could not impose his new Personal Conduct Policy retroactively.

Where this will really come back around is at the next negotiations. The precedents being set by the spontaneous disciplinary measures are going to be sticking points for one side or the other.

Every time you negotiated an extension of a Collective Bargaining Agreement, you start from a blank slate. Everything is negotiable. There are no "precedents" in terms of binding law. The CBA is an employment contract between to private parties. Each party is free to negotiate in their best interests.

[Mothman]

Just because the NFLPA doesn't like Goodell's discipline decisions (or the process) doesn't mean that he's abusing his authority.

I didn't say it did.

Judge Doty said nothing about the propriety of the NFL's Personal Conduct Policy when deciding the NFLPA's appeal of the Peterson decision. He only said that Goodell could not apply his new Personal Conduct Policy retroactively. The same thing happened in the Rice appeal as well.

... and repeated attempts to apply it retroactively don't strike you as irresponsible use of his authority?

If the disciplinary process was important to the NFLPA they have had ample occasions to do something about it given that the NFL's original CBA has been renewed multiple times.

They're obviously trying to do something about it now. Let's not pretend this was as simple as the players just generously ceding this authority to the owners and consequently, to Goodell:

http://thelegalblitz.com/blog/2012/05/0 ... ayers-sue/

You have to remember that during the most recent lockout the players had bigger issues they needed resolved than discipline pursuant to the Personal Conduct Policy, which affects only a few players each season. They were fighting against a longer schedule, for improved safety, retirement benefits, and, of course, revenue sharing between the players and owners—matters that affect all union members. Appeal pursuant to the Personal Conduct Policy was certainly discussed during bargaining, in fact, it was one of the final issues to be agreed upon, but no change to the appeal process was included in the CBA as it was ratified. In fact, the Personal Conduct Policy is still not a part of the CBA at all. When it came down to the eleventh hour of negotiations, the NFLPA backed off its stance that Goodell’s retention of the appeal process was a deal breaker, and instead agreed to the terms of the CBA. The Personal Conduct Policy remains a league policy, and not a policy included in the CBA.

[Pseudo Everything]

... and repeated attempts to apply it retroactively don't strike you as irresponsible use of his authority?

Goodell's decision on Peterson's discipline was made before the independent arbitrator ruled on Rice's case. When did he apply it retroactively after that?

They're obviously trying to do something about it now. Let's not pretend this was as simple as the players just generously ceding this authority to the owners and consequently, to Goodell:
http://thelegalblitz.com/blog/2012/05/0 ... ayers-sue/

So the argument is that the NFLPA had a lot of issues to negotiate and that they got worn down by the league in negotiations? Man ... that's weak. The NFLPA literally had YEARS to prepare for negotiations to extend the CBA. The fact that they did nothing on the Personal Conduct Policy tells me that either they didn't view it as important or that their negotiators (DeMaurice Smith, etc) are not competent. Can you imagine the Teamsters telling their members that they caved on protocols for discipline because they just had too much else on their plate to negotiate?

[The Breeze]

The NFLPA is getting EXACTLY what they bargained for. It's contained in the Collective Bargaining Agreement that they signed. When they signed the CBA they affirmed everything in it (and everything not it as well).

Most Collective Bargaining Agreements spell out in excruciating detail the protocols for discipline. The fact that the NFLPA gave Goodell the authority to set the terms of the Personal Conduct Policy (without oversight from the union), and the fact that there was no provision that required an independent arbitrator of Goodell's decisions is simply amazing. The NFLPA did a shockingly poor job of negotiating the terms of the CBA when it comes to protocols for discipline. Or perhaps the NFLPA didn't view the Personal Conduct Policy as that important and spent all of their energy on ... wait for it ... money.

I agree that it was a dumb decision.

Both court decisions (in the Rice and Peterson appeals) simply said that Goodell could not impose his new Personal Conduct Policy retroactively.

And he/they still have refused to comply which is why he's being sued. The fact that he would try and impose the new code retroactively, to my understanding, went directly against the CBA. That fact that they had to go to court to get him to back off says he doesn't honor what's in the CBA....regardless of how poorly drawn up it is in defense of the players union

Every time you negotiated an extension of a Collective Bargaining Agreement, you start from a blank slate. Everything is negotiable. There are no "precedents" in terms of binding law. The CBA is an employment contract between to private parties. Each party is free to negotiate in their best interests.

Sure, in terms of what gets printed on the final agreement...but you can't be implying that the union is just going negotiate from the point of view that none of this ever happened.

If the league was hell bent on having this power during the last negotiations what will it take to satisfy the union in terms of going forward? Wasn't there a lockout last time?

You suggest the players greed caused this situation? Football players are some of the most poorly paid professional athletes out there. And considering the amount of money the league makes it's really glaring. Meanwhile Goodell is raking in $40+mill per year!... all the while residing over the worst PR campaign in the leagues history... stumbling and bumbling his way through. The league has spent the entire year in court against the very players who make the game happen.

I think the owners have continually taken advantage of an unfair situation and corporate capitalism is what's ruining this sport.....it's not the players, although they are less likable/honorable than in decades past IMO.

The cash factor effects it all unfortunately.

[The Breeze]

So the argument is that the NFLPA had a lot of issues to negotiate and that they got worn down by the league in negotiations? Man ... that's weak. The NFLPA literally had YEARS to prepare for negotiations to extend the CBA. The fact that they did nothing on the Personal Conduct Policy tells me that either they didn't view it as important or that their negotiators (DeMaurice Smith, etc) are not competent. Can you imagine the Teamsters telling their members that they caved on protocols for discipline because they just had too much else on their plate to negotiate?

I think that's an unfair characterization of what was actually going on. There was a lockout and it was getting to the point where games were going to be missed and paychecks would be lost. Not real significant for the top tier guys. but for the majority of the league.....guys making significantly less...that's a big deal, and the owners know that and can afford to wait them out on just about anything.

Comparing NFL negotiations to other union jobs is not apples to apples IMO.

[Mothman]

Goodell's decision on Peterson's discipline was made before the independent arbitrator ruled on Rice's case. When did he apply it retroactively after that?

As I understand it, the NFLPA is arguing that he applied it retroactively in both the Peterson and Hardy cases. Doty did rule that Goodell did that in the Peterson case, didn't he?

From http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/20 ... -of-court/

The union argues that the NFL disciplined Hardy under the new Personal Conduct Policy even though his behavior occurred when the prior Personal Conduct Policy was in effect. That’s precisely the type of outcome Judge Doty’s ruling in the Peterson case prohibits.

While the NFL has claimed that it applied the prior policy to Hardy, the NFLPA doesn’t believe it, comparing the punishment imposed against Hardy to the discipline imposed against first-time domestic violence offenders under the prior policy — two games. “Whether this was a good or a bad policy, it was the law of the shop,” the NFLPA writes. The union argues that the 10-game suspension represents the new Personal Conduct Policy’s baseline suspension of six games plus four additional games based on allegedly aggravating factors.

So the argument is that the NFLPA had a lot of issues to negotiate and that they got worn down by the league in negotiations? Man ... that's weak. The NFLPA literally had YEARS to prepare for negotiations to extend the CBA. The fact that they did nothing on the Personal Conduct Policy tells me that either they didn't view it as important or that their negotiators (DeMaurice Smith, etc) are not competent. Can you imagine the Teamsters telling their members that they caved on protocols for discipline because they just had too much else on their plate to negotiate?

No, but it never seemed to me like the NFLPA's negotiators were all that good. I don't want to get bogged down in the years-old CBA negotiations anyway because my point is, regardless of whether the player's union "gave" Goodell the authority he now possesses, he should use his authority fairly and responsibly.

[Pseudo Everything]

As I understand it, the NFLPA is arguing that he applied it retroactively in both the Peterson and Hardy cases. Doty did rule that Goodell did that in the Peterson case, didn't he?

Yes, that was in Doty's ruling.
Timeline:
July 2014 - Goodell suspends Ray Rice for two games
Sept 2014 - Goodell increases Rice's suspension to indefinitely
11/18/14 - Goodell suspends Peterson
11/28/14 - Barbara Jones, the independent arbitrator (and former Fed Judge) appointed by Goodell to hear the Rice appeal issued her ruling vacating the suspension immediately.
Feb 2015 - Doty reverses Henderson's ruling on Peterson

I went back and re-read Jones' ruling (okay ... skimmed it). Her argument was more about double jeopardy than it was about retroactive application.

My point is that no court or independent arbitrator had ruled that Goodell could not apply the Personal Conduct Policy retroactively at the time he suspended Peterson for the balance of the season. When Goodell suspended Peterson for more than 2 games, it was an open question as to whether or not he had the authority to do that.

You are right on Hardy. Goodell retroactively suspended Hardy after Doty's ruling. I don't fault Goodell for doing that. Do you want to defend Greg Hardy? A judge in NC found him guilty of assaulting his former girlfriend and it's only because of NC's quirky state law that gave Hardy the option to have another trial by jury. In the interim Hardy paid off the victim on the condition she not cooperate. The state dropped the case due to her unwillingness to testify. The NFL sued to get the evidence in that case including the pictures of the victim. Apparently Hardy beat the hell out of her. Does suspending Hardy for 10 games make Goodell a bad actor? Not in my book it doesn't. He'll very likely have it overturned on appeal but the NFL gets to make their point in the process.

[Mothman]

Yes, that was in Doty's ruling.
Timeline:
July 2014 - Goodell suspends Ray Rice for two games
Sept 2014 - Goodell increases Rice's suspension to indefinitely
11/18/14 - Goodell suspends Peterson
11/28/14 - Barbara Jones, the independent arbitrator (and former Fed Judge) appointed by Goodell to hear the Rice appeal issued her ruling vacating the suspension immediately.
Feb 2015 - Doty reverses Henderson's ruling on Peterson

I went back and re-read Jones' ruling (okay ... skimmed it). Her argument was more about double jeopardy than it was about retroactive application.

Thanks for posting that info.

My point is that no court or independent arbitrator had ruled that Goodell could not apply the Personal Conduct Policy retroactively at the time he suspended Peterson for the balance of the season. When Goodell suspended Peterson for more than 2 games, it was an open question as to whether or not he had the authority to do that.

I see what you're saying and it would have been an open question in terms of the courts but I'm thinking he likely realized he was stepping beyond the CBA at that point and did it anyway.

You are right on Hardy. Goodell retroactively suspended Hardy after Doty's ruling. I don't fault Goodell for doing that. Do you want to defend Greg Hardy?

No, I definitely don't want to defend Greg Hardy but I don't see faulting Goodell for intentionally reaching beyond the bounds of his authority as a defense of Hardy, just as a criticism of Goodell.

A judge in NC found him guilty of assaulting his former girlfriend and it's only because of NC's quirky state law that gave Hardy the option to have another trial by jury. In the interim Hardy paid off the victim on the condition she not cooperate. The state dropped the case due to her unwillingness to testify. The NFL sued to get the evidence in that case including the pictures of the victim. Apparently Hardy beat the hell out of her. Does suspending Hardy for 10 games make Goodell a bad actor? Not in my book it doesn't. Hardy is a thug who deserves every one those ten games (even if it was retroactive). He'll very likely have it overturned on appeal but the NFL gets to make their point in the process.

I feel it's the wrong way to make that point but I do understand your perspective and Hardy's behavior is certainly worthy of condemnation (I was extra careful when typing that because I didn't want auto-correct to change condemnation to commendation! That would have looked pretty bad).

[Pseudo Everything]

I think that's an unfair characterization of what was actually going on. There was a lockout and it was getting to the point where games were going to be missed and paychecks would be lost. Not real significant for the top tier guys. but for the majority of the league.....guys making significantly less...that's a big deal, and the owners know that and can afford to wait them out on just about anything.

What's unfair about it? Both sides had years to prepare for the negotiations. They commenced negotiations well in advance of the expiration of the CBA. If including the Personal Conduct Policy in the CBA was important to the NFLPA they should have stood their ground. I find it hard to believe that the league was prepared to engage in a work stoppage to keep the Personal Conduct Policy out of the CBA.

Comparing NFL negotiations to other union jobs is not apples to apples IMO.

How is it different?

[The Breeze]

What's unfair about it? Both sides had years to prepare for the negotiations. They commenced negotiations well in advance of the expiration of the CBA. If including the Personal Conduct Policy in the CBA was important to the NFLPA they should have stood their ground. I find it hard to believe that the league was prepared to engage in a work stoppage to keep the Personal Conduct Policy out of the CBA.

I don't know if we can say one way or the other about what either side was prepared to do....I know I can't. Definitely the players weren't prepared to sit out over it. But they might be now, which is the whole gist of my ire toward Goodell's actions and how they might reverberate in the future. I would love to see the players band together and crush the owners, actually.

How is it different?

First and foremost the discrepancy in pay between the top and bottom in regards to the members the union represents. You don't see that anywhere in a normal workplace. In a typical trade there is a journeyman wage where everyone of a certain tenure is making the same amount of dough therefore their interests are less likely to be divided if the situation calls for a work stoppage(which is the only real way the players have to get things done in this league).
Also, the players are only in the league for a few years on average and most have only a short time to make a significant amount of money, they are not nearly as liable to be convinced to walk out as would be a journeyman carpenter, dockworker, auto worker, steel worker...whatever, who has way more invested in terms of longevity at the job.

I don't know if the NFLPA reps are doing a bad job as much as it is their job is somewhat compromised by the conflicting economic interests of their members....probably both. Maybe Goodell will help unite them.

[fiestavike]

First and foremost the discrepancy in pay between the top and bottom in regards to the members the union represents. You don't see that anywhere in a normal workplace.

except the difference in pay between workers and union bosses!

[The Breeze]

except the difference in pay between workers and union bosses!

It's all pretty whacked. I don't know what I'm doing defending anyone in any of this....or expressing my dissatisfaction at what I see as hypocrisy, it's not about to change the flow of the river.

I like to watch football.....and I ultimately embrace the contradictions I see inherent in the NFL as no one is completely innocent in all of it anyway... IMO.

I do find that I am more disturbed in the long run by the infractions that are premeditated vs the ones that are emotional/mental over reactions. The latter are often more shocking and volatile from the PR standpoint while the former often seem trivial in the public sense.

There's no way on earth that I would ever believe that Ray Rice or AD planned to do what they did that got them in trouble....and each of them payed a fair price as a result. But no one died and from what can be perceived, the afflicted in those relationships have forgiven and moved on.

The league spent years misleading and covering up the dangers of concussions and prescription pain killers.....once caught they payed out money as compensation...money that is generated almost entirely by the players themselves and money that did not come directly out of the pockets of anyone working for the league. Multiple people have committed suicide and have had their lives seriously compromised by opiate addiction....yet, to my knowledge, not a single person working for the league has had to bear any responsibility as for consequences in the premeditated cover up and obstruction of those incidents. I could be wrong....but I don't think anyone got fired.

Pigs at the trough with absolutely zero oversight unless their employees sue them in court.

It's a most peculiar institution and I know that's the way it's all set up and somehow agreed to....seems a tad Orwellian to me.

[Norv Zimmer]

AP skipping OTA's and possibly all of training camp. WTF br a man and not a baby AP. So sick of this, sit at home and texas, don't play and don't get paid. I don't care anymore.