Pretty crazy stuff that most here would like to see, feel free to move to right Section.... What the hell happened for it to get overturned, not reduced, but fully overturned!?!??!
Why do you think it's a stupid decision? Honest question, because I've been only half following this. To me, if Goodell was out of his jurisdiction in suspending the players in the first place, this is a good decision.
If there was not enough evidence why do you say this the way the whole system works atm is stupid anyways. The guy who sets the bans shouldn't also see the appeals makes no sense.
It was kind of a knee-jerk reaction to be honest, I think it's strange and maybe not the best decision but not outwardly awful. My understanding is that the ruling against Goodell is based on the fact that the players accepting payment after injury isn't valid proof they intended to hurt someone. That sounds exceedingly stupid on the face off it, but I read this article that I think sums it up well. The player is put in a bad position with his employer if he refuses the money, and the logical easiest course for them to avoid it was to take the money and not actually try to injure anyone. If the Saints opponents didn't suffer a significant amount more injuries than other teams, it's really difficult to claim it was actually being done.
That's the way it's always been. And shame on the NFLPA leadership for agreeing to it once again in the last CBA.
Yeah, you know they would rather have that pick, and really their coaches, and GM reinstated and frankly would have been ok without the players getting reinstated.
Almost sounds as if Goodell folded his cards, out of concern the litigation filed against him for player defamation could end up sticking, if or when their half baked appeals process ever came under serious scrutiny. After all, the judgements they hand down, are likely derived at, or assessed more through their effect on public opinion and perception, than any Big BooK of Pigskin Penal Code Violations.
