NFL Discipline For Taylor

[MonkManiac]

Originally Posted by Schneed10

OK thanks for the clarification. But when it comes down to it, it's really splitting hairs when you're talking about the difference between "no contest" and a guilty plea. Either way you're sentenced as guilty, and you go down in the books as having committed the offense. In terms of the NFL's policy, I don't see any reason why they should punish Taylor any differently for a "no contest" compared to a "guilty" plea.

It's not splitting hairs - one plea admits guilt, the other does not. That's an important distinction.

The NFL must (and, I believe, will) take this distinction into account, because you can't punish someone for committing a crime when there is no finding in any court of law that they actual committed that crime. I'd be truly interested to see how the NFL can justify a severe punishment against ST considering this difference.

Again, I'm really interested to hear if anyone has heard of the types of punishments handed out for a plea of no contest. We've all seen the quote from some NFL source that the typical punishment has been a one or two game suspension and a fine for "similar incidents," but I just don't buy it.

[paulskinsfan]

Originally Posted by MonkManiac

It's not splitting hairs - one plea admits guilt, the other does not. That's an important distinction.

The NFL must (and, I believe, will) take this distinction into account, because you can't punish someone for committing a crime when there is no finding in any court of law that they actual committed that crime. I'd be truly interested to see how the NFL can justify a severe punishment against ST considering this difference.

Again, I'm really interested to hear if anyone has heard of the types of punishments handed out for a plea of no contest. We've all seen the quote from some NFL source that the typical punishment has been a one or two game suspension and a fine for "similar incidents," but I just don't buy it.

I don't think its an important distinction for NFL purposes. No contest is basically saying Im not telling you I did it, but there is enough evidence to prove I did.

[dmek25]

the nfl is all about image and i would be shocked if he wasnt suspended at least one game

[MonkManiac]

Originally Posted by paulskinsfan

I don't think its an important distinction for NFL purposes. No contest is basically saying Im not telling you I did it, but there is enough evidence to prove I did.

That's simply not true. That is not what a no contest plea is.

I agree, though, if the NFL does decide to suspend him, it will be a decision motivated solely by image concerns.

[GTripp0012]

Here we go, this good news from profootballtalk.com:

'SKINS EXPECT A FINE ONLY FOR TAYLOR

A league source tells us that the Washington Redskins anticipate that safety Sean Taylor's punishment for violating the league's Personal Conduct Policy will be a fine, not a suspension. Under the CBA, the Commissioner has the ability to impose discipline on players who engage in off-field criminal conduct.

Earlier this week, Taylor pleaded no contest to misdemeanor assault and misdemeanor battery as part of a resolution of charges that allowed him to avoid felony counts that carries a maximum of 45 years in prison.

The team, we hear, is 90 percent certain that Taylor won't be suspended.

We're also told that, even if Taylor is suspended, the Redskins won't try to recover any of the signing bonus money paid to the fifth overall pick in the 2004 draft.

[wilsowilso]

Can someone explain what profootballtalk.com is exactly?

[Master4Caster]

Originally Posted by paulskinsfan

I don't think its an important distinction for NFL purposes. No contest is basically saying Im not telling you I did it, but there is enough evidence to prove I did.

That's not what "no contest" is at all. To keep with a sports analogy, no contest is the same as a tie. Nobody won. The prosecution did not "prove" their case agaoinst Taylor, but he will not contest his sentence.

If the NFL fines Taylor under the good behavior rules, it will be because he was in an incident in the first place, regardless of the no contest plea. But, Sean still has to face the music for the spitting incident from the playoffs. There is a suspension coming for that, regardless of whatever comes from the Dade county case.

Wilsowilso, profootballtalk.com is a gossip site reporting all the "talk" going around about teams and players. They don't pretend to be giving facts.

[SanFranSkinsFan]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

Here we go, this good news from profootballtalk.com:

'SKINS EXPECT A FINE ONLY FOR TAYLOR

A league source tells us that the Washington Redskins anticipate that safety Sean Taylor's punishment for violating the league's Personal Conduct Policy will be a fine, not a suspension. Under the CBA, the Commissioner has the ability to impose discipline on players who engage in off-field criminal conduct.

Earlier this week, Taylor pleaded no contest to misdemeanor assault and misdemeanor battery as part of a resolution of charges that allowed him to avoid felony counts that carries a maximum of 45 years in prison.

The team, we hear, is 90 percent certain that Taylor won't be suspended.

We're also told that, even if Taylor is suspended, the Redskins won't try to recover any of the signing bonus money paid to the fifth overall pick in the 2004 draft.

Thanks for the news. I have been giddy since the verdict and he likely won't get suspended, if he does, 1 - 2 games....that would suck but GW can always make adjustments.....ST will be just fine but Archuletta better step up...either way, we have to be so happy right now that Terry Glenn and TO will be dropping balls over the middle with ST knocking heads off. Amen.

[Bandwagon]

I sincerely doubt that Tagliabue will take action against Taylor this close to his retirement from the job of commissioner. His replacement, whoever it might be, is going to be very careful his first months in the new job so as not to draw the wrath of management and fans alike and set the media hounds on his trail. I would argue that a light approach, most likely only a fine, would be the most likely result considering the regime change in progress.

[Giantone]

Originally Posted by SanFranSkinsFan

Thanks for the news. I have been giddy since the verdict and he likely won't get suspended, if he does, 1 - 2 games....that would suck but GW can always make adjustments.....ST will be just fine but Archuletta better step up...either way, we have to be so happy right now that Terry Glenn and TO will be dropping balls over the middle with ST knocking heads off. Amen.

CBS sportsline is hinting at 1 game .

[RedskinRat]

Originally Posted by wilsowilso

Can someone explain what profootballtalk.com is exactly?

Imagine your favorite bar (or in some peoples cases, steam room) and a bunch of gossipy old farts sitting around making stuff up? Well, that's PFT. Sometimes they get lucky and get a story right-ish. I read it for the East Coast humor.

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by Giantone

CBS sportsline is hinting at 1 game .

Oh well....if its sportsline...

25K and one game

[dmek25]

calaskin, welcome and is that the official word?

[Giantone]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

Oh well....if its sportsline...

well ,they still believe Lavar might go to Miami .