Quote:
Originally Posted by over the mountain
idk, that was an interesting point that radio heads have been talking about. vick being suspended after getting indicted set a precedent that, in a fair nfl world, should be applied to all players.
an indictment really shouldnt be the bench mark for when the nfl assumes guilt and takes action.
the joke from some famous judge is that he could get his ham sandwhich indicted. grand jury proceedings are jokes.
|
i could see there being a difference here. with vick, there was quite a bit of evidence against him and he had lied directly to the commish. In this case, there may not be as much direct evidence at the time if/when Big Ben is indicted. It really may come down to a he said / she said situation which should not be enough to warrant a suspension. with vick, it was he said / all these dead dogs on your property said.
Hopefully, there will actually be some hard evidence that either exhonorates or condemns Rothlesberger.