Skip to content

League responds to the latest court filings in the bounty case

gavel Getty Images

On Monday, the players suspended (again) for participating in a bounty program filed new motions in federal court, seeking to have his re-issued suspensions vacated — or at a minimum to have Commissioner Roger Goodell removed as the in-house arbitrator for the appeal of the suspension.

On Wednesday, the league responded.

The arguments are fairly simple.  First, the league points out that the courts have no ability to dismiss an arbitration ruling before the ruling has even been made.  Second, the NFL attacks the argument that Commissioner Roger Goodell isn’t qualified to serve as the arbitrator due to alleged bias and partiality.  Third, the NFL claims that the challenges to the league’s in-house appeal procedures do not justify vacating the eventual arbitration ruling.  Fourth, the NFL explains that the NFLPA’s attack on the new discipline imposed on Browns linebacker Scott Fujita should fail.

It’s all fairly standard legalese, part of the puzzle that eventually will result in the suspensions being served, or not being served.

It could be that the latest assault on the league’s procedures is aimed at influencing the internal appeal process, pressuring Goodell to create a hearing that objective seems more fair (or less unfair), and to possibly reduce the suspensions significantly via the appeal process.  Either way, the legal train will keep rolling forward, and it eventually will reach a destination.

We hope.

Permalink 17 Comments Feed for comments Latest Stories in: Cleveland Browns, Home, New Orleans Saints, Rumor Mill
17 Responses to “League responds to the latest court filings in the bounty case”
  1. dadindebt6 says: Oct 17, 2012 12:28 PM

    I really wish that this could be as simple as saying all four players admitted in their meeting with Goodell that the pay for performance program included rewards for ‘cart offs’. ‘Cart offs’ are a type of injury. Rewards for injuries are by definition a bounty. Case closed.

    I can dream! Can’t I?

  2. fuglyflorio says: Oct 17, 2012 12:40 PM

    I don’t really mind them trying to escape punishment. And perhaps they can find enough ‘legalese’ and loopholes to do just that. But if they do please don’t act like it means they’re innocent. Everyone knows they did it. There are confessions and admissions of guilt. Many are already serving out their suspensions with remorseful statements of apology. They may ‘get away with it’ … but they’re still guilty.

  3. rhodeislandpatriotsfan says: Oct 17, 2012 12:49 PM

    Roger Goodell is NOT an Article III judge; therefore, it follows that he shouldn’t be held here to the standards of one. Absent a showing of “evident partiality,” Commissioner Goodell shouldn’t have to appoint an appeals hearing officer other than himself. The appeals process contemplated under the CBA should again be allowed to first run its course. If Judge Berrigan later grants preliminary injunctive relief to the suspended players, overturns their suspensions, and/or denies Goodell’s motion to dismiss Vilma’s defamation suit, then I hope Goodell and the league will promptly petition the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals for an expedited hearing in an effort to vacate any such adverse lower court order.

  4. daysend564 says: Oct 17, 2012 12:59 PM

    You know this is going to cost him far more $$$ in legal fees than it would be for him to just sit out the 10 games. Nobody ever claimed he was smart.

    It isn’t a question of right or wrong, he knows he’s wrong.

  5. tabdanger says: Oct 17, 2012 1:27 PM

    In order to pay for all the legal fees these players are going to have to play another 10 years.

    I also feel this attack unfortunately is an attack on Collective Bargaining. Collective Bargaining gave power to Goodell. I thought Unions were supposed to like Collective Bargaining? I guess I was wrong.

  6. addmack24 says: Oct 17, 2012 1:30 PM

    Goodell hasn’t been fair in any aspect of this alleged incident. I mean he changed the reason for suspending Fujita 6 or 7 months after the fact. I mean if he had any actual proof he wouldn’t have done this right? This just leads me to believe that the other suspensions are based on hearsay as well. If they did it then they did it but it has to be a fair process under CBA guidelines and it has been nothing of the sort. Goodell needs to give up his power before it is taken and he is in the unemployment line, I hear that it is cold this time of year.

  7. sb44champs says: Oct 17, 2012 1:48 PM

    addmack24 says:
    Oct 17, 2012 1:30 PM
    Goodell hasn’t been fair in any aspect of this alleged incident. I mean he changed the reason for suspending Fujita 6 or 7 months after the fact. I mean if he had any actual proof he wouldn’t have done this right?
    ==========================
    You’re supposed to ignore the facts that support the Saints position, lol!!

  8. pappageorgio says: Oct 17, 2012 2:41 PM

    I have grown very tired of players suing the NFL and the public rhetoric surrounding all of it.

    The truth is that the players could have avoided having Goodell being judge, jury, and executioner when they wrote the CBA. But there would have been a catch: they would have to have given something in return.

    The players and D. Smith had a plan though…..”let’s get all the money and then sue about anything we don’t like in the document”…..”you mean the contract we’re about to sign”……”yeah that one, we should only have to live up to the parts of the agreement we like…..like cashing the checks”

    This whole thing leaves a sour taste in my mouth and is driving me to other sports.

  9. ilovefoolsball says: Oct 17, 2012 2:47 PM

    Can’t wait for the 30 for 30 episode comes out with that guy’s voice saying “what if I told you that you don’t need evidence to punish an entire city”

  10. addmack24 says: Oct 17, 2012 2:51 PM

    sb44champs says:
    Oct 17, 2012 1:48 PM
    addmack24 says:
    Oct 17, 2012 1:30 PM
    Goodell hasn’t been fair in any aspect of this alleged incident. I mean he changed the reason for suspending Fujita 6 or 7 months after the fact. I mean if he had any actual proof he wouldn’t have done this right?
    ==========================
    You’re supposed to ignore the facts that support the Saints position, lol!!

    ==============================

    Are there any of the actual facts that support the NFL’s position? I have yet to see anything factual to backup goofell’s hardball stance. Other than he is trying to cover the owner’s rear in the concussion lawsuits. Nothing else adds up!

  11. derakbrady says: Oct 17, 2012 3:50 PM

    Enough! Let them play! Let the Saints team and fans move on! You have those responsible. Like a soap opera. Tired of hearing it. Tired of those that’s it’s their team trying to defend themselves. Briefed of those that are against it fighting to prove ti a loyal fan. They same comments on every page. They same insults on every page.
    Let them play for sakes!!!

  12. cheddarrob says: Oct 17, 2012 4:47 PM

    This is a publicity stunt by fuehrer Goodell to make it seem as if he is cleaning up the game and making it “safer” for players. It’s all a ploy. You think this is the first bounty program ever? Just like concussion tests, helmet to helmet hits which are all circumstantial. If he cared enough about the players the Refs wouldn’t have been out 4 weeks. Fujita got a suspension for not standing up to the entire Saints organization? And now the NFL will try to tell courts what they can and can’t do. Goodell needs to go and so does rules allowing him to be the final say in all matters. This league brings in 9 Billion per year so why should one guy hold that much power? The players bring this league that money. Oh and by the way if the hits were so dirty why no flags on the Warner or Favre plays?

  13. aintasinner says: Oct 17, 2012 5:00 PM

    fuglyflorio and others who “know” they did it, please post the evidence so we can all see it. As a matter of fact, you might want to forward it to the NFL as well because they apparently don’t have any evidence other that “interpreted” notes and hearsay. However, a federal judge has ordered the NFL to turn over what they claim to have. Apparently, the real court system doesn’t accept “trust me, I have evudence.” If there really is any evidence, maybe we will finally get to see it. Until then, no one “knows” the players are guilty.

  14. rocksolid33 says: Oct 17, 2012 5:53 PM

    “Pay for performance” is not the same as “pay to injure”. In boxing or MMA you are paid to perform, if someone gets injured, that is the outcome of being in a rough sport.

  15. dadindebt6 says: Oct 17, 2012 6:43 PM

    rocksolid33 says:Oct 17, 2012 5:53 PM

    “Pay for performance” is not the same as “pay to injure”.
    —————————————————-
    But when the performance being paid for is a ‘cart off’ which all four players have admitted was part of the program, then the pay for performance IS in fact pay for an injury.

  16. dadindebt6 says: Oct 17, 2012 6:50 PM

    aintasinner says:Oct 17, 2012 5:00 PM

    fuglyflorio and others who “know” they did it, please post the evidence so we can all see it. As a matter of fact, you might want to forward it to the NFL as well because they apparently don’t have any evidence other that “interpreted” notes and hearsay.
    —————————————————–
    They have the admission of the coaches and the four players involved that their ‘pay for performance’ program included payments for causing ‘cart offs.’ Goodell is saying that ‘cart offs’ is a form of injury and rewarding players for causing that injury constitutes a bounty.

    None of the players or coaches involved is denying the existence of the pay for performance program OR that it included cart offs. SO their own testimony is evidence.

  17. addmack24 says: Oct 18, 2012 12:32 PM

    dadindebt6 says:
    Oct 17, 2012 6:50 PM
    aintasinner says:Oct 17, 2012 5:00 PM

    fuglyflorio and others who “know” they did it, please post the evidence so we can all see it. As a matter of fact, you might want to forward it to the NFL as well because they apparently don’t have any evidence other that “interpreted” notes and hearsay.
    —————————————————–
    They have the admission of the coaches and the four players involved that their ‘pay for performance’ program included payments for causing ‘cart offs.’ Goodell is saying that ‘cart offs’ is a form of injury and rewarding players for causing that injury constitutes a bounty.

    None of the players or coaches involved is denying the existence of the pay for performance program OR that it included cart offs. SO their own testimony is evidence.

    ===================================

    But if you had read the statements from the players and coaches they defined cart offs as knocking a player out for a play or two, not seriously injuring them and putting them out of the game. Find a list of players that were injured playing the Saints over the last 3 years, oh I forgot, there isn’t one because they didn’t injure anyone.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Not a member? Register now!