Quote:
Originally Posted by HoopheadVII
You just:
A) made that argument that the "players still got all the money they were supposed to get" - which means the teams weren't being punished for paying the players too much money.
B) assumed that a verbal warning did not address something, when published reports quote sources saying the Clubs were warned not to do what the Skins did
C) argued that anyone could have done what the Skins did, and used the other team that got heavily punished as proof.
I have no idea what the apparently 6 or more verbal warnings contained. But, the NFL Bylaws give the Commissioner power to punish in this situation whether he warned them or not.
I agree that the Skins got screwed by the timing, process, and severity of the penalties, but that doesn't mean they weren't playing with fire and it doesn't mean the Commissioner doesn't have the right to punish them.
|
Ok so in our circling of issues ...... who hears complaints in regards to owners vs. owners? I'm assuming the Commish and Exec Committe? and if there is no satisfaction? court?
you might be right, however there still is the gentlemans way of handling the whole issue which if you have a problem with your neighbor you should address it with them first and if it goes no where then you call the police. Maybe the appeal process is just that a stepping stone of formality that everyone knows will go no where but should be done before court filing happens. That whay the courts can't ask was it taken to Arbitration first.
I still think there is something your missing though other wise there would be no reason to waist the Arbitrator's time when the two teams know the issue is more fitting for the court process instead of Arbitration.