Smith, Vilma suspensions overturned?

As best as I understand it, the players' union is the entity that keeps the pressure on the NFL to lift the player suspensions. Coaches have no union and so are subject to whatever discipline the league deems appropriate. But then again, the league's arbitration panel said that there was no evidence of a pay for performance scheme and that's what lifted the player suspensions. So if the pay for performance was the issue behind the coach/gm suspensions too, why weren't those also lifted.

I would guess there're probably some quiet negotiations going on between the league and the Saints regarding the coach/gm suspensions. On the other hand, Darth Roger may have painted himself into a corner and can't find a way to lift the coach/gm suspensions without saying "Ooops, sorry guys. I was flat out wrong," which would do nothing for his image as a touch disciplinarian. It's a different scenario with the players because HE hasn't said he was wrong, arbitrators said he was wrong. So he can always maintain that the arbitrators made a faulty decision.

I also wonder why CSP (or the Saints) haven't given some serious thought to suing the league for intentional interference with a contract. CSP's contract (and Loomis' and Vitt's) is with the Saints, not with the league. It seems to me that the league has the right to discipline a coach in terms of a fine or a franchise in terms of a fine or loss of draft picks. But telling a coach he can't coach for the team he contracts with, almost looks like meddling in the team's internal business affairs. But there's probably some boilerplate provision in a coach's contract that says he subjects himself to league discipline.

I dunno.

 

Good point Kyle, Wjray that was an excellent analysis. I don't see Roger Goodell as a type of guy who is EVER going to admit he was wrong. Especially when his blind ass probably doesn't even believe he is EVER wrong.

You would just think that if there is no crime, there can't be anyone held accountable.

 

As I understand it, all players (simply by virtue of making a roster) are members of the NFLPA. The NFLPA and the league have a collective bargaining agreement (which the parties argued about all last summer) and that document gives Darth Roger specific ability to discipline players. So while individual players contract with individual teams, especially in terms of compensation, as a member of the NFLPA they also contract with the league.

There is no such agreement between the league and its coaches, to the best of my knowledge. So the coaches contract with the teams and there is no privity of contract between the league and the coach.

Even if there are grounds for any coach or GM to bring an action, I can think of several reasons they wouldn't. 1) They don't want to piss off the league (and this is different from the players in that the union is pissing off the league, which it does on a regular basis anyway). 2) The litigation would last far longer than the suspensions (except for Gregg Williams) and would be, in most respects, moot. (Unless a coach/gm sought an injunction to stay the suspensions because the suspensions would cause irreparable harm while the matter was being litigated. That's a much closer question than Vilma's injunction because players have relatively short expected careers, while a coach can coach for decades.) 3) They might lose. All litigation is risky and a huge part of a lawyer's job is to assess that risk and advise a client accordingly.

 

Scott Fujita sums things up nicely:

"For me, the issue of player health & safety is personal," said Fujita. "For the league and the Commissioner, it's about perception & liability. The Commissioner says he is disappointed in me. The truth is, I'm disappointed in him. His positions on player health and safety since a 2009 congressional hearing on concussions have been inconsistent at best. He failed to acknowledge a link between concussions & post-career brain disease, pushed for an 18-game regular season, committed to a full season of Thursday night games, has continually challenged players' rights to file workers compensation claims for on-the-job injuries, and he employed incompetent replacement officials for the start of the 2012 season. His actions or lack thereof are by the league's own definition, "conduct detrimental".
"My track record on the issue of player health & safety speaks for itself. And clearly, as I just listed, the Commissioner's does too."

 

Anybody else find it, ummmmm, interesting that the suspensions of the current Saints players were kept intact and those of former Saints players were reduced. Or is that just my grassy knoll, Jim Morrision lives, Bigfoot, Area 51 conspiracy theory nutjob side talking?

 

You forgot the tinfoil hat, bro.