Advertisement
Help Keep Boards Alive. Support us by going ad free today. See here: https://subscriptions.boards.ie/.
https://www.boards.ie/group/1878-subscribers-forum

Private Group for paid up members of Boards.ie. Join the club.
Hi all, please see this major site announcement: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058427594/boards-ie-2026

The Weird, Wacky and Awesome World of the NFL - General Banter thread V2

1…233234236238239…327

Comments

  • #7052
    Realt Dearg Sec
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,285 ✭✭✭✭Realt Dearg Sec


    Yeah it's not exactly conducive to a positive dialogue when they have to sit down and negotiate with each other in future. They could all do with turning off their ****ing Twitter machines for a day or so and cooling down. Experience tells us the likelihood of that.


  • #7053
    Knex*
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 22,475 ✭✭✭✭Knex*


    Christ on a bike. This is massive.


  • #7054
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 22,384 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Beefy78 wrote: »
    There was a 160 page investigative report following a year's worth of investigation at the end of which they've weighed things up and made the determination that he was guilty. That a Court of Law has a higher threshold for obtaining a guilty verdict and as such no charges were pressed is neither here nor there. The NFL are able to put in place a code of conduct and this process around it because their agreement with the players enables them to do so.

    Again, what do they gain from screwing Zeke Elliot over? Dismissing the case would be much better for them.
    Beefy78 wrote: »
    At the end of the day none of us know what happened, it's no mystery considering what appears to be lies that have been told by both sides why it didn't make it to Court but on balance surely you need to accept the outcome of a 12 month investigation which considered all the evidence, spoke to all the parties and reached a considered verdict? The ban is a terrible look for the league.

    100% correct. In fact any post that says "I think he did this/I think she did that" about Elliott or his accuser pretty much miss the point. Opinions by third parties as to who did what are irrelevant, the parties agreed to submit such issues to a process, the process has made a finding, that's just the way it is. He can appeal, he may succeed, he may not, but taking evidence out of context and using it to support one side or the other...that's just a waste of time and amounts to little more than PR stuff by both sides.

    Having said that, the NFL should not have followed up with a comment about her, and think that's where they got it wrong. It doesn't affect matters, the decision was made. But their role should end once the decision is made.


  • #7055
    The Reservoir Dubs Anchorman
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,380 ✭✭✭The Reservoir Dubs Anchorman


    Two seperate abuse claims against Zeke, one from February and one from July. Police called both times.

    In addition the St Patricks day incident. No smoke without fire, girl had plenty of bruises. The bull **** about the bar fight was also explained in the report. No punches landed by either girl tiny incident of hair pulling. All with eye witnesses.

    Elliotts defence was all bull **** as well. She might have walked into tables, she might have got into another fight , she might have fallen down the stairs.


  • #7056
    PhilipsR
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 723 ✭✭✭PhilipsR


    The Reservoir Dubs Anchorman wrote: »
    Two seperate abuse claims against Zeke, one from February and one from July. Police called both times.

    In addition the St Patricks day incident. No smoke without fire, girl had plenty of bruises. The bull **** about the bar fight was also explained in the report. No punches landed by either girl tiny incident of hair pulling. All with eye witnesses.

    Elliotts defence was all bull **** as well. She might have walked into tables, she might have got into another fight , she might have fallen down the stairs.

    If he's not found guilty, the NFL should not be getting involved. It's as simple as that. He probably did do it but Goodell shouldn't be able to decide himself. I hope they're already discussing a new method for 2020 and beyond, because if not, there's a lockout coming.


  • Advertisement
  • #7057
    Christy42
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,111 ✭✭✭Christy42


    PhilipsR wrote: »
    If he's not found guilty, the NFL should not be getting involved. It's as simple as that. He probably did do it but Goodell shouldn't be able to decide himself. I hope they're already discussing a new method for 2020 and beyond, because if not, there's a lockout coming.

    I guarantee most companies will not require you to be proven guilty in a court of law if you breach their conditions and either damage them or their name. They will go on basis of probability as opposed to reasonable doubt.

    Granted the method needs to be changed but not on the basis of the Zeke case.


  • #7058
    raze_them_all_
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,794 ✭✭✭raze_them_all_


    Christy42 wrote: »
    I guarantee most companies will not require you to be proven guilty in a court of law if you breach their conditions and either damage them or their name. They will go on basis of probability as opposed to reasonable doubt.

    Granted the method needs to be changed but not on the basis of the Zeke case.

    most companies you can sue for wrongful dismissal if they punish you without any proof


  • #7059
    Beefy78
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,166 ✭✭✭Beefy78


    And Zeke can take legal action if he chooses to. Like Brady did.


  • #7060
    jack presley
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,687 ✭✭✭✭jack presley


    raze_them_all_ wrote: »
    most companies you can sue for wrongful dismissal if they punish you without any proof

    The players signed up to a CBA in this case though.


  • #7061
    j8wk2feszrnpao
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,438 ✭✭✭j8wk2feszrnpao


    Christy42 wrote: »
    There is no reason to discredit the accuser here.
    No reason? Not even the texts when she asks someone to lie for her?
    I agree with not lambasting anyone, as we don't really have proof and it's spin from both sides. But she's showing that she's not 100% credible in her texts.


  • Advertisement
  • #7062
    j8wk2feszrnpao
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,438 ✭✭✭j8wk2feszrnpao


    jack presley wrote: »
    The players signed up to a CBA in this case though.
    They did, and the actions taken by the office since is going to change things for the next CBA. Commissioner powers are going to be drastically reduced because of Goodell. But I guess when you earn millions for not doing a lot and probably expect to retire by 2020 (or move to another position), he doesn't really care.


  • #7063
    jack presley
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,687 ✭✭✭✭jack presley


    munstermagic11 wrote: »
    They did, and the actions taken by the office since is going to change things for the next CBA. Commissioner powers are going to be drastically reduced because of Goodell. But I guess when you earn millions for not doing a lot and probably expect to retire by 2020 (or move to another position), he doesn't really care.

    Yes but that the future and the next CBA. This mess has to be dealt with under the current CBA.


  • #7064
    j8wk2feszrnpao
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,438 ✭✭✭j8wk2feszrnpao


    jack presley wrote: »
    Yes but that the future and the next CBA. This mess has to be dealt with under the current CBA.
    Agreed. But this mess will have repercussions for the next CBA.


  • #7065
    Christy42
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,111 ✭✭✭Christy42


    munstermagic11 wrote: »
    No reason? Not even the texts when she asks someone to lie for her?
    I agree with not lambasting anyone, as we don't really have proof and it's spin from both sides. But she's showing that she's not 100% credible in her texts.

    People require absolute proof for Zeke to be lambasted for this. Should it not go both ways? No court has yet ruled she is guilty as far as I know.

    As for the person commenting on the wrongful dismissal, yep you can sue but as long as the company does have evidence about it you will likely lose. It does not need to be proved beyond reasonable doubt like a court room. Don't get me wrong serious evidence is still required but the burdon of proof for disciplinary action is not as strong.


  • #7066
    The Reservoir Dubs Anchorman
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,380 ✭✭✭The Reservoir Dubs Anchorman


    TOss Sweep wrote: »
    Why though? We can't even reference it and how the NFL handled it? This is a message board and it will come up again especially given how the NFL is now trying to handle bans. In fact on the face of it they are two very different issues but yet look at the bans handed out.

    There you go, you pointed it out yourself.


  • #7067
    eagle eye
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 42,029 ✭✭✭✭eagle eye


    The Reservoir Dubs Anchorman wrote: »
    There you go, you pointed it out yourself.
    It's not about the issues though, it's about Goodell. This is where the comparison starts and ends. Can you not understand that?


  • #7068
    The Reservoir Dubs Anchorman
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,380 ✭✭✭The Reservoir Dubs Anchorman


    eagle eye wrote: »
    It's not about the issues though, it's about Goodell. This is where the comparison starts and ends. Can you not understand that?

    Oh really. $hit I must have missed that part.


  • #7069
    Shedite27
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,618 ✭✭✭Shedite27


    Can we all at least agree that she's smokin hot???

    Tiffany-Thompson-HD-Wallpapers-1.jpg


  • #7070
    TOss Sweep
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,905 ✭✭✭TOss Sweep


    The Reservoir Dubs Anchorman wrote: »
    There you go, you pointed it out yourself.

    The point of my post went completely over your head. No point even trying to correct you on what is wrong with your response.


  • #7071
    TOss Sweep
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,905 ✭✭✭TOss Sweep


    The Reservoir Dubs Anchorman wrote: »
    Oh really. $hit I must have missed that part.

    I explained it enough in previous posts. But hey continue taking it out of context.


  • Advertisement
  • #7072
    The Reservoir Dubs Anchorman
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,380 ✭✭✭The Reservoir Dubs Anchorman


    TOss Sweep wrote: »
    The point of my post went completely over your head. No point even trying to correct you on what is wrong with your response.

    Yeah we'll just agree to disagree. Goodell is an ass but in this instance I dont think the NFL are wrong.

    From what I read in the report there was enough evidence to give him a ban and more power to the NFL for doing it.


  • #7073
    j8wk2feszrnpao
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,438 ✭✭✭j8wk2feszrnpao


    Christy42 wrote: »
    People require absolute proof for Zeke to be lambasted for this. Should it not go both ways? No court has yet ruled she is guilty as far as I know.
    No court has found either guilty.
    But the texts show she cannot be 100% trusted. Asking someone to lie to the police, lie in court, ...... she's guilty of that.


  • #7074
    bruschi
    Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 4,149 Mod ✭✭✭✭bruschi


    I dont know enough about this whole Zeke thing to get into details but this
    Beefy78 wrote: »
    So what about the photos conducive with domestic abuse time-stamped to when days when they were together with no strong explanation given from Zeke's side as to how they happened?

    if someone maintains they didnt hit someone, then how is it possible they can explain how the person had the injuries? Or even give a strong explanation? If he doesnt know, he doesnt know.

    The whole thing does seem to be a case of he said she said, and Roger will suspend for any given reason. Also seems to be a case of trying to win back favour over the Ray Rice episode but seems to be using the wrong case to do so. The NFLs suspension policy is a joke and the next CBA negotiations will be horrendous as a result.


  • #7075
    BizzyC
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,012 ✭✭✭BizzyC


    The Reservoir Dubs Anchorman wrote: »
    ....Goodell is an ass but in this instance I dont think the NFL are wrong.
    .....

    This is the part you're not getting.
    It doesn't matter what you think, it doesn't matter what anyone thinks.

    The comparison was drawn to deflategate to illustrate that under the current CBA, Goodell can impose any punishment he wants if he thinks there may have been wrongdoing.

    Is Zeke actually guilty? I don't know, his history suggests that something happened.
    But, if this is the beginning of the league taking a harder stance on abuse and a sign of things to come for these offences then it's not the worst thing in the world.


  • #7076
    Chardee MacDennis
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,228 ✭✭✭Chardee MacDennis


    This is not a court of law; there is no burden of proof, innocent until proven guilty, or beyond reasonable doubt. Goodell acted on the reports of four independent advisors. The players signed the CBA. This is how the league works. Goodell is Judge Judy and Executioner. If he feels the league has been brought into disrepute, then he can hand down suspensions as he sees fit.

    Also you dont need to have broken the law to be reprimanded by your employer or fired.

    I have no issue personally with the ban or the process to be honest.


  • #7077
    TOss Sweep
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,905 ✭✭✭TOss Sweep


    BizzyC wrote: »
    But, if this is the beginning of the league taking a harder stance on abuse and a sign of things to come for these offences then it's not the worst thing in the world.

    I hope this is a sign that they are going to take a harder stance but I do think it will come at the cost of bans that shouldn't be.

    As you said no one knows what went on other than Elliot and his Ex. Not even the NFL know what went on nor the police. Everybody is judging this case on what has been fed to us all by the media and both Elliot and his EX. So no one knows what part of it all is true.

    The CBA and the Owners have given the NFL carte blanche to do whatever they want here with vague as fook Player conduct rules. Basically you even fringe on any of the rules and we will ban you and you don't need to be guilty you just need to be guilty in our eyes. If Roger thinks you are guilty well then son you are guilty.

    Slippery slope really and the CBA will need to stand firm on the next shot they get and fight to get those rules tightened and more defined before the NFL starts throwing out bans left right and center.


  • #7078
    TOss Sweep
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,905 ✭✭✭TOss Sweep


    Chardee MacDennis wrote: »
    This is not a court of law; there is no burden of proof, innocent until proven guilty, or beyond reasonable doubt. Goodell acted on the reports of four independent advisors. The players signed the CBA. This is how the league works. Goodell is Judge Judy and Executioner. If he feels the league has been brought into disrepute, then he can hand down suspensions as he sees fit.

    Also you dont need to have broken the law to be reprimanded by your employer or fired.

    I have no issue personally with the ban or the process to be honest.

    Sorry had to bold the bit above. Just imagining Goodell as Judge Judy :D


  • #7079
    eagle eye
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 42,029 ✭✭✭✭eagle eye


    Chardee MacDennis wrote: »
    This is not a court of law; there is no burden of proof, innocent until proven guilty, or beyond reasonable doubt. Goodell acted on the reports of four independent advisors. The players signed the CBA. This is how the league works. Goodell is Judge Judy and Executioner. If he feels the league has been brought into disrepute, then he can hand down suspensions as he sees fit.

    Also you dont need to have broken the law to be reprimanded by your employer or fired.

    I have no issue personally with the ban or the process to be honest.
    What about Tremaine Brock then?


  • #7080
    TOss Sweep
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,905 ✭✭✭TOss Sweep


    eagle eye wrote: »
    What about Tremaine Brock then?

    He didn't get the media attention and no social media posts from him or his gf so the NFL had nothing on him........


  • Advertisement
  • #7081
    eagle eye
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 42,029 ✭✭✭✭eagle eye


    TOss Sweep wrote: »
    He didn't get the media attention and no social media posts from him or his gf so the NFL had nothing on him........
    I think you got it in one right there.


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement