Pacman DROPS appeal after 2nd private meeting with Goodell (1 Viewer)

[Snotbubbles]

stay out of trouble? The law doesnt define trouble. Who defines 'trouble'? Is this a subjective definition made by the commissioner? This is the issue hear, fair treatment under the agreement for each player. You cant treat one player differently from another. There really isnt a precedent for what the commisioner has done. Jones hasnt been convicted of anything.

Trouble could be defined as any conduct to the detriment to the League and professional football that would result from impairment of public confidence in the honest and orderly conduct of NFL games or the integrity and good character of NFL players.Convictions are irrelevant.

 

[CA_7]

What Punkman, the NFLPA, and the defenders are forgetting is this is a new era, a new commish, new standards,new rules and new punishments.

The old didn't work cause you still have losers like punkman and vick tarnish the image of the NFL, so now we have the new, get used to it.

"but players didn't used to get punished like that"... no duh you tool, thats why they call it NEW rules.

I agree that there is a new regime. But it is unfair to administer the same rules differently. I mean, if the new commish instituted new harsher rules, I would agree. But you cant take the same rules and administer them differently.

The commish and NFLPA instituted new rules: http://www.nfl.com/news/story/10119182What do you mean by "same rules"? THE NFLPA agreed to a NEW conduct policy, the old rules have no relevance.

Based on the new rules agreed to by the NFLPA, Pacman "shall be punishable by fine or suspension at the discretion of the Commissioner."

http://www.nflpa.org/RulesAndRegs/ConductPolicy.aspx

 

[waylander]

I don't think anyone is saying that punishment isn't justified, however it needs to be consistent. That's why the union is stepping in.

 

[JAA]

stay out of trouble? The law doesnt define trouble. Who defines 'trouble'? Is this a subjective definition made by the commissioner? This is the issue hear, fair treatment under the agreement for each player. You cant treat one player differently from another. There really isnt a precedent for what the commisioner has done. Jones hasnt been convicted of anything.

Trouble could be defined as any conduct to the detriment to the League and professional football that would result from impairment of public confidence in the honest and orderly conduct of NFL games or the integrity and good character of NFL players.Convictions are irrelevant.

I 100% disagree my eagles brother.Convictions have to be worse than accusations ... dont you agree?

 

[JAA]

What Punkman, the NFLPA, and the defenders are forgetting is this is a new era, a new commish, new standards,new rules and new punishments.

The old didn't work cause you still have losers like punkman and vick tarnish the image of the NFL, so now we have the new, get used to it.

"but players didn't used to get punished like that"... no duh you tool, thats why they call it NEW rules.

I agree that there is a new regime. But it is unfair to administer the same rules differently. I mean, if the new commish instituted new harsher rules, I would agree. But you cant take the same rules and administer them differently.

The commish and NFLPA instituted new rules: http://www.nfl.com/news/story/10119182What do you mean by "same rules"? THE NFLPA agreed to a NEW conduct policy, the old rules have no relevance.

Based on the new rules agreed to by the NFLPA, Pacman "shall be punishable by fine or suspension at the discretion of the Commissioner."

http://www.nflpa.org/RulesAndRegs/ConductPolicy.aspx

When were PacMan's indiscretions? Prior to April 10 2007?

 

[sho nuff]

What Punkman, the NFLPA, and the defenders are forgetting is this is a new era, a new commish, new standards,new rules and new punishments.

The old didn't work cause you still have losers like punkman and vick tarnish the image of the NFL, so now we have the new, get used to it.

"but players didn't used to get punished like that"... no duh you tool, thats why they call it NEW rules.

I agree that there is a new regime. But it is unfair to administer the same rules differently. I mean, if the new commish instituted new harsher rules, I would agree. But you cant take the same rules and administer them differently.

The commish and NFLPA instituted new rules: http://www.nfl.com/news/story/10119182What do you mean by "same rules"? THE NFLPA agreed to a NEW conduct policy, the old rules have no relevance.

Based on the new rules agreed to by the NFLPA, Pacman "shall be punishable by fine or suspension at the discretion of the Commissioner."

http://www.nflpa.org/RulesAndRegs/ConductPolicy.aspx

Problem is, Pacman was suspended based on a 2006 rule. Which is the basis of his appeal and the basis for the NFLPA sending a letter to Goodell to support Pacman's appeal.

 

[CA_7]

What Punkman, the NFLPA, and the defenders are forgetting is this is a new era, a new commish, new standards,new rules and new punishments.

The old didn't work cause you still have losers like punkman and vick tarnish the image of the NFL, so now we have the new, get used to it.

"but players didn't used to get punished like that"... no duh you tool, thats why they call it NEW rules.

I agree that there is a new regime. But it is unfair to administer the same rules differently. I mean, if the new commish instituted new harsher rules, I would agree. But you cant take the same rules and administer them differently.

The commish and NFLPA instituted new rules: http://www.nfl.com/news/story/10119182What do you mean by "same rules"? THE NFLPA agreed to a NEW conduct policy, the old rules have no relevance.

Based on the new rules agreed to by the NFLPA, Pacman "shall be punishable by fine or suspension at the discretion of the Commissioner."

http://www.nflpa.org/RulesAndRegs/ConductPolicy.aspx

Problem is, Pacman was suspended based on a 2006 rule. Which is the basis of his appeal and the basis for the NFLPA sending a letter to Goodell to support Pacman's appeal.

Wrong.From the NFL's view, his infractions that resulted in a year suspension had never been dealt with and once the new policy was in place they followed those new guidelines.

From March 22nd:

Jones, however, seems to have been the central figure in recent discussions around the league about off-the-field behavior by players and could be among the first players punished under the revised guidelines.

"Yes, the policy could be in effect immediately when (Goodell) decides he's comfortable with it and, yes, that could be as early as next week," Aiello said, not speaking about any player in particular. "And then we would begin dealing with whatever disciplinary matters are before us under the personal conduct policy. …

http://www.usatoday.com/sports/football/nf...ll-policy_N.htmThis may not be fair but I am just interpreting the NFL's view on the matter.

IMO, the NFLPA should have handled any pending suspensions better and asked for a decision before agreeing to such a strict, new policy.

 

[JAA]

What Punkman, the NFLPA, and the defenders are forgetting is this is a new era, a new commish, new standards,new rules and new punishments.

The old didn't work cause you still have losers like punkman and vick tarnish the image of the NFL, so now we have the new, get used to it.

"but players didn't used to get punished like that"... no duh you tool, thats why they call it NEW rules.

I agree that there is a new regime. But it is unfair to administer the same rules differently. I mean, if the new commish instituted new harsher rules, I would agree. But you cant take the same rules and administer them differently.

The commish and NFLPA instituted new rules: http://www.nfl.com/news/story/10119182What do you mean by "same rules"? THE NFLPA agreed to a NEW conduct policy, the old rules have no relevance.

Based on the new rules agreed to by the NFLPA, Pacman "shall be punishable by fine or suspension at the discretion of the Commissioner."

http://www.nflpa.org/RulesAndRegs/ConductPolicy.aspx

Problem is, Pacman was suspended based on a 2006 rule. Which is the basis of his appeal and the basis for the NFLPA sending a letter to Goodell to support Pacman's appeal.

Wrong.From the NFL's view, his infractions that resulted in a year suspension had never been dealt with and once the new policy was in place they followed those new guidelines.

From March 22nd:

Jones, however, seems to have been the central figure in recent discussions around the league about off-the-field behavior by players and could be among the first players punished under the revised guidelines.

"Yes, the policy could be in effect immediately when (Goodell) decides he's comfortable with it and, yes, that could be as early as next week," Aiello said, not speaking about any player in particular. "And then we would begin dealing with whatever disciplinary matters are before us under the personal conduct policy. …

http://www.usatoday.com/sports/football/nf...ll-policy_N.htmThis may not be fair but I am just interpreting the NFL's view on the matter.

IMO, the NFLPA should have handled any pending suspensions better and asked for a decision before agreeing to such a strict, new policy.

I understand and respect your opinion. However, it is not fair or right in my opinion.Cards are on the table, will be interesting to see how the NFL rules

 

[Christo]

'Pacman' Jones drops appeal

Associated Press, Updated 28 minutes ago STORY TOOLS:

NEW YORK (AP) - Tennessee Titans cornerback Adam "Pacman" Jones withdrew the appeal of his suspension Tuesday and will serve the one-year term imposed by NFL commissioner Roger Goodell.

"I understand my responsibilities to my teammates, the Titans and my fans and I am committed to turning my life around and being a positive member of the NFL," Jones said in a statement issued by his agent.

Jones met with Goodell at NFL headquarters Tuesday and was accompanied to New York by agent Michael Huyghue.

"Last week, I asked for an opportunity to meet privately with commissioner Goodell," Jones said in the statement. "I met with him earlier today to tell him about the steps I have taken to change my life since being suspended by the NFL. I accept the discipline that's been imposed on me and I am withdrawing my appeal."

Goodell suspended Jones on April 10 for a series of off-field episodes. He has been interviewed by police 10 times and been arrested five times since he was drafted in 2005. Jones and his attorneys appealed the suspension May 11. It could be reduced to 10 games if Jones meets all the restrictions set by Goodell.

Huyghue said Jones intended to keep working out and would go back to school, taking courses online from West Virginia University, where he played.

Jones' suspension was the most severe of three handed down this spring by Goodell as part of the commissioner's crackdown on player misbehavior during a year that included the arrest of nine Cincinnati Bengals.

Tank Johnson of Chicago and Chris Henry of Cincinnati each got eight games, Johnson after serving two months in jail for violating probation on a gun charge, and Henry — Jones' teammate at West Virginia — for four arrests in 14 months. Henry served a two-game suspension last season.

Neither the NFL nor the Titans had comment.

At the time of the suspension, Titans owner Bud Adams said the team respected Goodell's decision and added: "We are hopeful that it will achieve the goals of disciplining the player and eventually enabling him to return to the field of play."

The Titans took steps last weekend to fill Jones' spot by signing cornerback Kelly Herndon, a former starter for Seattle and Denver.

The length of Jones' suspension could hinge on developments in Las Vegas involving a fight and shooting at a strip club during the NBA All-Star weekend that paralyzed one person. Police there recommended felony and misdemeanor charges against Jones, but the investigation continues.

Jones was the sixth overall pick by the Titans in the 2005 draft. If he misses the entire season, the suspension will cost him his salary of $1,292,500.

FoxsportsYep, he sure scared Goodell.

 

[Capella]

Poor JAA.