Well, at least the league’s positions on the latest bounty lawsuits are consistent.
And “improper” remains the key word for the league’s response to the new filing on behalf of the other three suspended players.
“As in the case of Mr. Vilma’s lawsuit, this is an improper attempt to litigate an issue that is committed to a collectively bargained process,” the league said in a statement forwarded to PFT. “There is no basis for asking a federal court to put its judgment in place of the procedures agreed upon with the NFLPA in collective bargaining. These procedures have been in place, and have served the game and players well, for many decades.”
Again, these suits don’t seem to be about getting a court to substitute its judgment for the judgment of Commissioner Roger Goodell, who served as the arbitrator. These actions attacj the process as unfair and partial to the league.
Though the league may not like it, there’s nothing improper about making good-faith arguments that the process culminating in an arbitration award wasn’t fair and impartial.