Re: SUSPENSIONS OVERTURNED
 

I'm happy mainly because this sends the statement that, to me, was always obvious... Roger never had any evidence to fit the punishments, and ruled as a dictator.

Beyond that, I would be very surprised if Roger let's this change his mind when it comes time for him to "re-assess" the suspensions. We'll probably end up right back where we started, at least for a bit... I say for a bit because that could cause him serious problems considering the judges did specifically tell Roger that he could only rule on a pay to injure bounty with *gasp* EVIDENCE. You'd think he'd learn his lesson after this ruling was overturned, but somehow I don't think his ego will let him give it up until he completely burns himself.

But if nothing else, this is a victory in showing that we fans aren't the only one's who aren't seeing the proof.

Re: SUSPENSIONS OVERTURNED
 

No... that isn't what it is about at all. This is mainly who has jurisdiction on who can impose punishment on this.

It comes down to is it a Salary cap violation... which everyone agrees it is not.
Is it a Detriment to the game violation which is where Roger will lean towards because the statements were made to that fact. Once it is clear then the latter is Rogers jurisdiction and then he can impose penalties.

Judge in the matter will have nothing to say or can't do anything because it falls under Rogers jurisdiction.

Re: SUSPENSIONS OVERTURNED
 

You are forgetting about Judge Berrigan. His evidence in her court has been primarily about pay for performance, with circumstantial (read: witness testimony) about injuries being a part of it. Now, when he reissues the punishments, he won't be able to use any of that pay for play evidence when trying to justify that his punishments weren't undue and malicious.

Re: SUSPENSIONS OVERTURNED
 

Goodell can issue a death by lethal injection writ if he wanted to, but that is not the point.

The point is that the appeals panel instructed Goodell that he has to define what is pay for performance (salary cap violation, not his jurisdiction) and what is conduct detrimental (his jurisdiction).

So, any money that was given to players for INTs, sacks, "kill the head", 4th and 1 stops, and so forth, is out Goodell's reach, and cannot lump it into one neat package of "pay-for-something, therefore you die".

Now, if Goodell attempts to call a salary cap violation "conduct detrimental", then he is going to have to suspend Jerry Jones, Jason Garrett, Daniel Snyder, Mike Shanahan, and whoever else is involved over the very recent salary cap violations of the Cowboys and Redskins. So, he's not going to do that. And he ( I don't think) would be stupid enough to call the Saints' salary cap violations "conduct detrimental", and issue the same punishments for the Saints, because he already set the precedent on salary cap violations.

So he's left to define what constitutes "conduct detrimental". So, this time around, to punish players, he's going to have to specify who did what when. An alleged ledger page showing 4 entries for alleged payments is not going to do it. He's going to have to say "this one is the payment for the cart-off". Then pinpoint the player who took the money. After all, if the player didn't take the money for the cart-off after the legal hit, then there's nothing that can be considered "conduct detrimental".

And Goodell needs to be very cautious as to how he handles this, because of the 2 court battles he's facing. Whatever he does here will have an impact in court.

And one other thing, once the "pay-for-performance" part is defined, when it goes to the rightful arbitrator, the CBA compels Goodell to give ALL evidence found in his investigation, which is what Vilma and Gingsberg (not to mention all Saints fans) wanted to see in the first place.

Re: SUSPENSIONS OVERTURNED
 

Well said...

:popcorn: