Evidenciary BS
 

So its becoming clear that there is no substantial evidence against the team. At the same time, its clear that the NFL made a rash and heated decision that ended in a stalemate of sorts preventing either side from making progress in the disagreement. Goodell can't show the evidence without admitting wrong-doing and the players and coaches are stuck with suspensions and fines because the evil dictator says so.

All that being said, what happens if the evidence doesn't exist and that becomes fact. Goodell either admits its BS, or shows it to the media and it's fake or something else showing the Saints' innocence. This thing has already been appealed. Right? Even if it's all nonsense, SP&Co already had their chance and got turned down. We'd need a coup followed by an immediate replacement commisioner or board to replace him in order to change the ruling that has already been upheld.

In the real world, over here in America where most of us live, a case goes through a series of appeals until it's heard by the highest court in the land. The Supreme Court. A PANEL! After a decision is made, there is still the checks and balances of Congress who can overturn a decision with a 2/3 majority (I think).

There are ZERO checks and balances in the NFL. There is one guy, hearing the appeal he already made a ruling on with nobody to tell him he's wrong. Meanwhile, the media is involved pushing him to make decisions and waiting for something to be off so they can hammer him like they hammered us.

Not only is the system flawed for the Saints and any other team who wish to seek the justice that is not likely to ever be found. But its flawed for Goodell, a man who makes a decision and must stick to it to avoid criticism, backlash and possible termination. He cannot go against his initial word. Regardless of what has happened. He makes $20 million a year. In society, we expect someone making that much money, with that much power, to make the right decision the first time. And he knows that. So for him to change his mind with nothing new on the table - and audio from a scumbag filmmaker and new discoveries about the "well, they did it too" types - is to say he didn't make an informed decsion.

Say what you want about Goodell. You might be right. But the system is just as jacked up as his choices and the decision to stand by those choices.


This started off as a paragraph. MODS... feel free to blog it if its too much.

... well, in the real world, over here in the US, there are these entities called corporations :) When a person accepts a position with a corporation, that person agrees to abide by the rules of that corporation, more specifically, corporate policies and code of ethics, and while neither can go against the US Constitution, they still can contain certain policies and guidelines which, if broken, are valid grounds for dismissal or punitive action. One that always pops up in every corporation's code of ethics is the "image" of the corporation (this is why you hear of employers asking employee candidates for their Facebook passwords).

The NFL is a corporation. The "commissioner" is really the CEO of NFL Inc., appointed by the Board of Trustees (owners)
It would be rather easy to argue in court that Williams, Payton, Loomis and Vitt, as employees of NFL Inc., had tarnished its image by their actions.

so true...but the players have a STRONG union and it will be hard to punnish the players without some hard proof

and the union is in addition to the standard requirement of proof.

Mr. Mike, you make a very valid point. I was pointing out the flaw in the private appeals process in the NFL. You can say that image is very important, but that's just what the media makes their image to be. It started as the Saints are bad. So we got punished. Now what? The commissioner is bad. And Saints fans aren't the only voices saying it. So his actions are tarnishing the NFL's professionalism. Who the eff knows. We could tell Chad Johnson (years ago) to get rid of his gold teeth. Thats bad for our image. Regardless, his publicist told him to do it.

Matter of fact, Sean Payton from an image standpoint, only accepted responsibility and apologized. Seems like a pretty good image.

[QUOTE=JimmyB1775;398280]In the real world, over here in America where most of us live, a case goes through a series of appeals until it's heard by the highest court in the land. The Supreme Court. A PANEL! After a decision is made, there is still the checks and balances of Congress who can overturn a decision with a 2/3 majority (I think).

QUOTE]

1) Most litigation ends at the trial court level. Some cases go to appeal. Less than 100 are heard by the Supreme Court each year.

2) No one can "overturn" the Supreme Court except the Supreme Court in a later case. If the Court strikes down a law, Congress can enact a new one to get around the ruling. However, the new law is still subject to judicial review.

When the NFL comes up with something other than hearsay, and emails from ex-cons, which who knows if Cerullo didn't stage that as part of his snitch scheme, then I will agree that the Saints tarnished the league image.

But so far, I'm still waiting for the NFL to even show these documents, much less prove their sources to be legitimate. We have an ex-con, a disgruntled former employee, and an audio tape which was edited (taking out the part where Williams says not to do anything outside the rules) as the main "evidence" against the Saints. That isn't a very credible list.

[quote=Michigan_SF;398470]1) Cases don't go to appeal by the same judge a week later with the same jury

2) So what? So you're saying a DIFFERENT group on the Supreme Court can overturn it? But not the same group? Or perhaps a group of MORE members if Congress deems it so. I know they can do that. Regardless, nobody is making sure Goodell isn't screwing teams. The only protection I see from anyone is the NFLPA but their responsibilities are limited to players only. And to be honest, the players are the talent and nothing more. Without the talent, they are being shuffled in and out of the practice squads.

Any way you look at it, it stinks.

[quote=JimmyB1775;398534]I'm telling you only that:

(a) Congress cannot overturn a Supreme Court decision;
(b) Congress can enact a new law;
(c) The SCOTUS is the only court that can overturn a SCOTUS holding;
(d) It does not matter who the particular justices are with respect to (c).

This has nothing to do with football. I am just trying to help supplement your education in this area.