NFL Suspends Jonathan Vilma For Entire 2012 Season & More Players....

[Derrville]

Waste of time at this point.

[KNUBB]

LOL, appeal to Roger Goodell.

Difference with these appeals is they have the NFLPA and their lawyers at their disposal.

[JeremyHight]

You mean the same Greg Williams that lost several games cuz he didn't know how to hold back and protect a lead and you're saying Spags isn't a good DC? You crazy bro bro

Spags was a very good DC when he had arguably the best DLine in the NFL and pretty solid players all over the field. You can look like a genius when your front four is good enough to get pressure without blitzing. However, I don't think he'll have the luxury in NO.

[ralaw]

Difference with these appeals is they have the NFLPA and their lawyers at their disposal.

True, but Goodell is making the final decision, which was collectively bargained.

[jaxjaggywires]

Difference with these appeals is they have the NFLPA and their lawyers at their disposal.

And Goodell will listen quietly while the PA and the lawyers say what they want, and will then say "All done? OK, suspensions stand..."

[MrBill]

And Goodell will listen quietly while the PA and the lawyers say what they want, and will then say "All done? OK, suspensions stand..."

Peter King asked Goodell in an interview last week about the NFLPA's lawyers getting involved when he got around to announcing player suspensions as part of the bounty program. He said that Goodell just looked at him and said "we have pretty good lawyers as well". I don't think any appeals are going to be overturned, best for the players to just serve them and get reinstated when they are able.

[JayDizzle]

Merrill Hoge and Hasselbeck's Baby Brother are beefing about this on ESPN at the moment.

Hasselbeck is basically saying that Goodell is using this as a way to poke at the NFLPA with the suspension.

That won't come back to him in any way...

[1ke]

Rogz = fuckin banhammer!

Sent from my MB865 using Tapatalk 2

[Senser81]

Its an interesting legal/union issue. You have management suspending a union member for essentially trying to end the career of other union members, yet the union itself has to fight for the guy who was trying to injure its membership. The NFLPA is actually under no obligation to represent Vilma.

[BrntO4Life]

Its an interesting legal/union issue. You have management suspending a union member for essentially trying to end the career of other union members, yet the union itself has to fight for the guy who was trying to injure its membership. The NFLPA is actually under no obligation to represent Vilma.

And they shouldn't. What does that say to the rest of the players if they do?

[ralaw]

Andrew Brandt@adbrandt

The NFLPA has filed a grievance vs. the NFL challenging Commissioner Goodell's authority to suspend the four players he did. More to come.

NFLPA Takes Legal Action, Challenges Goodell’s Authority over Saints’ Players

The NFL Players Association has taken legal action challenging the authority of NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell to suspend four players for their alleged involvement in a so-called pay-for-performance/bounty program during the 2009-2011 Saints seasons. Earlier this week, Goodell issued suspensions to Jonathan Vilma, Anthony Hargrove, Will Smith and Scott Fujita.

Pro Player Insiders learned that late Thursday night the union filed a grievance with the NFL’s vice president of labor arbitration and litigation, Buckley Briggs, and a System Arbitration with the System Arbitrator, Professor Stephen Burbank of the University of Pennsylvania Law School. The complete filings are available below

In the filings, the NFLPA argues that the punishments issued to the players for their alleged actions “violated the [league’s] duty of fairness to the players” because the process violated various procedural requirements of the Collective Bargaining Agreement, including limits on Goodell’s authority over the matter and failure to disclosure sufficient evidence of the violations.

The system arbitration filing argues that, under the CBA, authority for any punishments to players for a pay-for-performance program rests with the System Arbitrator, not with Goodell.

In connection with entering into the 2011 CBA, the NFL agreed to release players of all pre-CBA conduct, which would mean that only events during the 2011 season could even be considered. The NFLPA’s grievance filing states that Goodell is “prohibited from punishing NFL players for any aspect of the ‘pay-for-performance/bounty’ conduct occurring before August 4, 2011.”

Vilma, still with the Saints, is suspended immediately for the full year without pay, and will be reinstated following the 2012 season’s Super Bowl. Fujita, now with the Browns, is suspended for the first three games of the 2012 season without pay. Anthony Hargrove, now with the Packers, is suspended for the first 8 games of the season without pay. Will Smith, still with the Saints, is suspended for the first four games of the season without pay.

System Arbitration Proceeding


With the filing of the System Arbitration, the union argues that under the 2011 NFL-NFLPA Collective Bargaining Agreement, the exclusive jurisdiction over the alleged conduct rest with the System Arbitrator Stephen Burbank rather than Goodell.

The key to this argument is that the alleged actions for which the players are being disciplined, according to the security reports and the Commissioner’s letters to the players, state that the conduct is in violation of the rule against non-contract bonuses and therefore are jurisdiction over these action is with the System Arbitrator not the commissioner.


As noted above, the NFL Security Report Stated that the alleged “pay-for-performance/bounty” program violated the CBA’s prohibition against non-contract bonus payments (Ex. A), at 1, 3 and the decision disciplining the Saints coaches stated that the “first” principle guiding the discipline was the “longstanding rule against non-contract bonuses” (Ex. B), at 4…


The NFL Security Report – upon which the discipline was based – is 100% accurate in describing the alleged conduct at issue as being governed by the CBA’s prohibition against non-contract payments to players. See, e.g. (Ex. A), at 1 (“The NFL has long had in place rules prohibiting ‘Non-Contract Bonuses.’ Such provisions violate both the NFL Constitution and By-Laws and the Collective Bargaining Agreement.”)…

As to violations of these provisions by the Club’s and players’ participation in an alleged undisclosed payment scheme, the exclusive jurisdiction for such issues rests with the System Arbitrator. See CBA, Article 15, Section 1…

Furthermore, the CBA provides that only the System Arbitrator is authorized to penalize players for alleged violations of the undisclosed payments provisions. See CBA, Article 14, Section 6(a).

Essentially, the system arbitration proceeding states that Commissioner Goodell has neither the authority nor the power to issue the punishments to players.

Non-Injury Grievance (Release of Pre-CBA Player Conduct)

The NFLPA, in its non-injury grievance, argues that the league is prohibited from punishing the players for any conduct that occurred before August 4, 2011.

The NFLPA’s grievance letter to Vice President of Labor Arbitration and Litigation W. Buckley Briggs, of the NFL Management Council, states:

In connection with entering into the 2011 CBA, however, the NFL released all players from conduct engaged in prior to execution of the CBA…

As a result of the release, the letter argues that Commissioner Goodell is “prohibited from punishing NFL players for any aspect of the alleged “pay-for-performance/bounty” conduct occurring before August 4, 2011.”

http://www.proplayerinsiders.com/nflpa-takes-legal-action-challenges-goodells-authority-over-saints-players/

The NFLPA seems to be trying to use a loophole. So after a summer of the NFL being in the courts it appears we're going to have to deal with it again.

[MrBill]

http://www.proplayerinsiders.com/nfl...aints-players/

The NFLPA seems to be trying to use a loophole. So after a summer of the NFL being in the courts it appears we're going to have to deal with it again.

Lawyers gonna litigate.

The players just need to take their medicine at this point. The "just following orders" defense has only worked once and that was in a movie (A Few Good Men).

[Senser81]

And they shouldn't. What does that say to the rest of the players if they do?

I am guessing that the NFLPA is taking issue with the length of the suspension and the lack of an appeals process...but its my understanding that the NFLPA agreed to the suspension determination and the lack of appeals in their most recent CBA bargaining. So not only does the NFLPA look stupid by representing members who were trying to take out other members, they are also "taking issue" with their own stupidity by agreeing to these terms in the first place. In my experience, this is par for the course when it comes to labor unions.

[NAHSTE]

Lawyers gonna litigate.

The players just need to take their medicine at this point. The "just following orders" defense has only worked once and that was in a movie (A Few Good Men).

But that defense didn't even work then, the two defendants in that movie were still dishonorably discharged for following the Code Red.

[JBregz]

Falcon Fans