NFC North/NFL Thread 2016-17

[MU82]

I agree with this analysis:

The latest imposition of NFL power over its players goes something like this:

If someone, anyone, makes a public allegation, substantiated or otherwise, recanted or supported, of possible improper conduct, the player must submit to an investigation on the league's terms or face suspension.

It would be easy to say that a rule-abiding player has nothing to worry about, but I'm going to guess that New England Patriots quarterback Tom Brady and retired defensive lineman Anthony Hargrove, among others, might not agree.

 Based on recent history, at least, these players are more likely to be disciplined for their conduct during the investigation than for any of the allegations that spurred the investigation in the first place.

Brady will serve a four-game suspension to start this season because the NFL determined he was "more likely than not" involved in a scheme to deflate footballs in the 2014 AFC Championship Game. The league's final report, of course, carried not a shred of direct and verified evidence that Brady was involved -- or even that the balls themselves were artificially deflated. It focused heavily on Brady's refusal to provide his mobile phone, even though he said he provided all the information the league requested from it.

Hargrove, meanwhile, essentially lost his career in 2012 when the NFL pinned much of its Bountygate investigation on him telling his New Orleans Saints teammates to "pay me my money" after a hit on then-Minnesota Vikings quarterback Brett Favre. Hargrove adamantly denied saying it, and the NFL concluded he was not being truthful in his deposition. Later, an NFL Films video confirmed Hargrove's account. The NFL quietly acknowledged it.

The NFL already has a PEDs policy, to which all four players have been subject. The policy's testing procedure should be the source of any allegation. Unless one or more of them have tested positive, they are innocent under the terms of the agreed NFL-NFLPA policy. The policy does allow for discipline if violations are found through "sufficient credible documented evidence," but unless the NFL has uncovered something more than Al-Jazeera did from a now-discredited source, it's difficult to imagine what that might be.

In this case, the NFL is asking the players to step outside the policy and answer to the allegation anyway. Ask Brady and Hargrove, both of whom denied their respective accusations from the start, how that worked out for them.

In truth, this really isn't about PEDs. Again, the NFL has a policy for that. This is another maneuver in the now-ubiquitous power struggle between the league and its players. The NFL is emboldened by its legal victory over Brady and is using the same broad authority -- as written in Article 46 of the collective bargaining agreement -- to compel participation in an otherwise out-of-policy investigation.

I have been uneasy for some time about players facing "double jeopardy" for an offense - especially when the judge, jury and executioner are all the same person.

A guy commits a crime and he's found guilty ... that's why we have a legal system.

On the other hand, I know an employer has the right to discipline - or fire - an employee for a variety of reasons, and the NFL also has serious public relations issues.

[mu03eng]

While a different level of import, this is no different then someone making a vague accusation of wrong doing and the government using it as a pretext to search your home and find evidence of crimes that had nothing to do with the accusation. Even worse with Brady they said they found no evidence he broke rules after he cooperated but as a result of his cooperation he didn't provide any evidence he DIDN'T break the rules.

So if these players talk to the NFL, the NFL can suspend them for things they say that the NFL believes to be inaccurate. The NFL can also suspend the players because the players don't provide evidence that they didn't do the things they're accused of. And the NFL can suspend them if they don't talk.

I guess the NFL really believes all press is good press.

[GB Warrior]

While a different level of import, this is no different then someone making a vague accusation of wrong doing and the government using it as a pretext to search your home and find evidence of crimes that had nothing to do with the accusation. Even worse with Brady they said they found no evidence he broke rules after he cooperated but as a result of his cooperation he didn't provide any evidence he DIDN'T break the rules.

So if these players talk to the NFL, the NFL can suspend them for things they say that the NFL believes to be inaccurate. The NFL can also suspend the players because the players don't provide evidence that they didn't do the things they're accused of. And the NFL can suspend them if they don't talk.

I guess the NFL really believes all press is good press.

[GGGG]

While a different level of import, this is no different then someone making a vague accusation of wrong doing and the government using it as a pretext to search your home and find evidence of crimes that had nothing to do with the accusation. Even worse with Brady they said they found no evidence he broke rules after he cooperated but as a result of his cooperation he didn't provide any evidence he DIDN'T break the rules.

So if these players talk to the NFL, the NFL can suspend them for things they say that the NFL believes to be inaccurate. The NFL can also suspend the players because the players don't provide evidence that they didn't do the things they're accused of. And the NFL can suspend them if they don't talk.

I guess the NFL really believes all press is good press.

I actually think they don't really care because they know everyone will watch on Sundays anyway.

[mu03eng]

I actually think they don't really care because they know everyone will watch on Sundays anyway.

This is fair, but it does lead to the question....why the hell go after these players?

[brandx]

This is fair, but it does lead to the question....why the hell go after these players?

Strictly PR.

This is a league that hands out narcotic opiates like candy, but suspends players for using weed.

This is a very violent sport and by mid-season, almost every player in the league is nursing some sort of injury. If weed helps with the pain, it is better than risking long-term addiction to opiates. Players should be able to use any legal substance under the sun.

[brandx]

Here's an example: Let's say Matthews agrees to get interviewed, and a few questions he refuses to answer. He's not wrong to not answer them (this isn't a court of law). But is his answer perceived as implicit guilt? Ultimately the NFL can decide to do what it wants with his answers.

You nailed it, Dish.

Guilt or innocence is irrelevant to the NFL.

[naginiF]

I can't believe the argument is about who's worse Goodall/NFL or NFLPA.  One is an egomaniacal two faced profit whore and the other is a hypocritical enabler of societal misfits and behavior that actually puts its own constituents at risk.  Neither side is right and neither side is being 'fair'.

It's like defending Darth Vader in his actions in his interactions with the Emperor, or defending Mussolini's actions in his interactions with Hitler. 

Is the NFL being fair or establishing a disciplined approach? Nope - they/he has a pretty solid track record of being above the law or needing to follow a process.

Are the players involved doping? Yep - NFL players have a pretty solid track record of use and denial. 

AND don't we know how this will end?  Goodall will push the indefinite suspension threat to show he's "tough on PED's" and the NFLPA is going to seek arbitration/legal ruling.  We'll have some sort of non decision during next offseason and the same discussion will pop up for the next domestic violence/doping/firearms/whatever bizarre thing Bilichick is doing situation.

[mu03eng]

I do think that if the NFL flexes its muscles enough on this, it could incite a player revolt.

The other unexpected result of this commisioner sanctioned strong arming is that one of the main accusation against Matthews is Torodal acquisition. If that thread gets pulled they could accidentally expose a lot of teams/owners who have been pushing pain killers for decades, would be a very very very black eye for the NFL if it truly surfaced.

[GGGG]

I do think that if the NFL flexes its muscles enough on this, it could incite a player revolt.

90% of the players "revolt" will last until the next paycheck is supposed to arrive.  That is why the lockout was resolved so quickly a few years ago.  The players need their paychecks.  The owners don't.

[GGGG]

And Matthews, Peppers, et al. have now agreed to meet with the NFL.

[wadesworld]

Cook is a lot more athletic than I thought he was. I thought he was more in the mold of a Bubba Frank's who is a big target with good hands but not someone who's overly versatile. You can move Cook around and he's really athletic. He's going to be huge for the Packers.

[DegenerateDish]

It takes a lot to shock me these days, but I will be utterly shocked if Hoyer is a Bear come September.

[tower912]

The Detroit Lions season will come down to two things that are intertwined.   Offensive line play and keeping Stafford healthy.     Everything else looks decent.       

[jsglow]

For all you fans of other NFC North teams.

This just in.  The Packers are really, really good.  Now I understand that January is a very long way off and I acknowledge that top end talent (and health) is usually the key to deep playoff runs but this is a game of attrition and Green Bay has more depth than I can ever remember at essentially every position except QB.  And if Hundley's ankle remains a problem, Flynn is one phone call away.  In fact letting Williams go and paying Flynn a $50k signing bonus this week might not be a bad move.

[naginiF]

For all you fans of other NFC North teams.

This just in.  The Packers are really, really good.  Now I understand that January is a very long way off and I acknowledge that top end talent (and health) is usually the key to deep playoff runs but this is a game of attrition and Green Bay has more depth than I can ever remember at essentially every position except QB.  And if Hundley's ankle remains a problem, Flynn is one phone call away. In fact letting Williams go and paying Flynn a $50k signing bonus this week might not be a bad move.

I agree that the Packers are going to be good.  but please read the bolded sentence to anyone NOT a GB fan and tell me they don't laugh a little.

Very few teams have good backup plans so i'm not going to say Vikes is any better but i wouldn't try to put a positive spin on Flynn (unless you are at Benny's today drinking bloodies, playing volleyball and pining about the old days)

[jsglow]

I agree that the Packers are going to be good.  but please read the bolded sentence to anyone NOT a GB fan and tell me they don't laugh a little.

Very few teams have good backup plans so i'm not going to say Vikes is any better but i wouldn't try to put a positive spin on Flynn (unless you are at Benny's today drinking bloodies, playing volleyball and pining about the old days)

I totally agree with you.  Losing one's starting QB essentially dooms the season for most teams, including GB.  What I'm suggesting is that IF Hundley is unable to dress because of the ankle, then Flynn gives you a better chance to survive a week or two than a young Callahan.  So I'm saying that I might consider cutting Williams right now and inking Flynn IF the Packers are concerned that Hundley won't be ready.  If they're sure Hundley will be okay, then never mind.

I remember a couple years ago when ARodg went down and we were signing Tolzien off the street.  Think of this like the 'James Jones Plan B' plan.

[brandx]

The NFL punts on domestic abuse again.

Josh Brown has abused his wife more than 20 times in the last 7 years. He gets a 1 game suspension. That means he gets less than 3 MINUTES for each occurrence of abuse.


What a league!!

But, hey .... the money keeps rolling in, so who cares?

[GGGG]

He was arrested once, in May 2015, which is what earned him the suspension.  His wife claims the 20 prior incidents, but he wasn't arrested for them.  The May charges were eventually dropped.

It's pretty difficult for the league to suspend someone beyond that unfortunately. 

[mu03eng]

He was arrested once, in May 2015, which is what earned him the suspension.  His wife claims the 20 prior incidents, but he wasn't arrested for them.  The May charges were eventually dropped.

It's pretty difficult for the league to suspend someone beyond that unfortunately.

But they can threaten to suspend players who don't talk to them about a well discredited story that named other players that were already "cleared"

[GGGG]

But they can threaten to suspend players who don't talk to them about a well discredited story that named other players that were already "cleared"

Not sure why you think my response to one incident leads you to believe that I think the NFL is just in all incidents.

[brandx]

But they can threaten to suspend players who don't talk to them about a well discredited story that named other players that were already "cleared"

Exactly. Why hasn't Gooddell called Brown in to answer for the 20 allegations?

Brady is called in and punished for not answering. Matthews and Peppers have been told they will be punished for not answering.

Yet, Brown is not even questioned about abuse report after abuse report after abuse report - many of which are documented by police.

The answer is simple and clear. It was made clear with the minimal punishment of Rice (which was only increased after a public outcry) and now Brown. The NFL policy was clear with Kevin Hardy. Beating women is strictly a PR problem to Roger - nothing more.

Beating women is a very, very minimal offense in the NFL. However, taking the wrong substance to help your body recover from the beating it takes is a major criminal offense.

No different than Cub fans embracing a woman beater. Good pitching trumps assault and battery towards a woman every day of the week.

[mu03eng]

Not sure why you think my response to one incident leads you to believe that I think the NFL is just in all incidents.

Wasn't saying you think they are just. Was juxtaposing the NFLs apparent need to hammer on rule infractions that may or may not have actually taken place but have almost no response to someone who might be a danger to society as a whole despite being called out numerous times for not taking domestic violence seriously and swearing they will change.

[MerrittsMustache]

No different than Cub fans embracing a woman beater. Good pitching trumps assault and battery towards a woman every day of the week.

Mark Chmura was elected to the Packers' Hall of Fame. Production on the the field trumps off the field transgressions. It's sad but true.

[MerrittsMustache]

It takes a lot to shock me these days, but I will be utterly shocked if Hoyer is a Bear come September.

Yeah, he's been brutal. But who's your #2? Fales or Shaw? Or do they wait to see who gets cut?