What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

Players union wants Eagles to cut Owens (1 Viewer)

Even though some of you have mentioned TO would be a great fit in Dallas (which I happen to agree with), don't forget that touchdown celebration on the "star" at Texas stadium a few years ago. Remember also this was the reason for his previous suspension by the 49'ers. As a Cowboy fan, the prospect of the #1 NFL receiver joining our team on a playoff year is an enticing idea, the reality is Jerry Jones probably wouldn't dare sign Terrell Owens. The truth of the matter is the Dallas Cowboys don't need TO to win the Superbowl. What they need is Drew Bledsoe to perform.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
T.O. has talent. NFLPA says to Eagles "cut him".

Hell, I agree with post #7, Red Apples, who suggested Green Bay could use him.

T.O. did say Eagles would be undefeated with Favre as their QB - let him prove it!

WTF NOT?

Maybe Favre would throw bullets at him, and break a finger or two...

And win some games in the process

Would definitely make for an interesting combination...

And undoubtedly upset some Green Bay locals and many, many Packer fans...but not if he helped turn their season around!

JMTC
As a Bulls fan I hated Rodman when he played for the Pistons, but loved him as a Bull. He helped win Championships. I'm convinced if the Eagles were 7-1 and Owens did the exact same thing he'd be playing on Monday night. Winning cures all. Again, it's not like the dude rolled his car over someone or was caught snorting rails. According to the Eagles he was suspended for not "apologizing". WTF is that? Bunch of softies in Eagleland or what. Maybe Dr. Phil could step in and fix all the hurt feelings.
 
as an eagles fan, i could care less about the cap hit ... i'd keep him until his contract expired just to spite him.
Luckily for the rest of Eagles fandom, the Philly front office isn't a bunch of clowns.
 
I have a sneaky suspicion the union is going to win this one. I have been trying to get TO in return for one of my backup WRs in all my leagues. Just doesn't seem right to me that you can forbid a player who is on your roster from showing up for work, inactive or not. I think Upshaw has a good point. This situation is not one that the union can/should accept; this would set a very bad precedent.
Just so you know, and take it FWIW. Clayton from ESPN discussed this specific situation. He mentioned a couple of things: 1. The Eagles have no intention of letting TO be around the team no matter what an arbitrator rules. If worse comes to worse they will set up "practice" and workouts for TO at a completely different time from the rest of the team.

2. They will not waive TO until after the season.

3. An arbitrator can't rule that they have to play TO.

Again, I don't know what his sources are on this information, just letting you know what he said.

 
I have a sneaky suspicion the union is going to win this one.  I have been trying to get TO in return for one of my backup WRs in all my leagues.  Just doesn't seem right to me that you can forbid a player who is on your roster from showing up for work, inactive or not.  I think Upshaw has a good point.  This situation is not one that the union can/should accept; this would set a very bad precedent.
Just so you know, and take it FWIW. Clayton from ESPN discussed this specific situation. He mentioned a couple of things: 1. The Eagles have no intention of letting TO be around the team no matter what an arbitrator rules. If worse comes to worse they will set up "practice" and workouts for TO at a completely different time from the rest of the team.

2. They will not waive TO until after the season.

3. An arbitrator can't rule that they have to play TO.

Again, I don't know what his sources are on this information, just letting you know what he said.
What happens if an arbitrator rules the Eagles must let TO practice and be with the team or cut him?
 
I can’t remember where I read this but I saw an article that said the Eagles screwed up. They suspended him for the game against Washington on Saturday and that was it. They then went back to the union and added 3 games on Monday. The union is saying you can't punish a player twice for the same infraction. I also believed it said they can't make the eagles play Owens, but they will have to pay him for the additional 3 games.I don't think this will make a difference either way, but if this is true, Owens will only miss one game check.As far as my opinion, this whole things hurts football in general. I also think that Owens is right. McNabb has not been the same since his injury. He should have had the operation. He would have been back by now all healed up and everything would be fine in Eagle land. Instead, Mcnabb has been bouncing balls at Owens feet. I'd be POff too if I was him.

 
What happens if an arbitrator rules the Eagles must let TO practice and be with the team or cut him?
He won't. TO and the NFLPA have no leg to stand on here.
Why do you say that? Can you be specific? Is Upshaw just making this up? What is the appropriate case history or clause in the NFLPA agreement?For example, my employment contract has a two month non-compete clause. It says if I resign from my employmer, I have to give two months notice, during which time I will draw a salary from my employer. There has to be similar contractual language or a player's agreement that governs what the Eagles can do or can not do in this situation.

Upshaw is contesting what the Eagles have done/have a right to do. There must be some reason for this. This case appears to be uncharted territory. Nobody really knows what an abitrator can or cannot rule on this situation unless they are an attorney who is familiar with the governing agreements.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
What happens if an arbitrator rules the Eagles must let TO practice and be with the team or cut him?
Well, I'm not a lawyer or an arbitrator, but it seems a little far-fetched that an arbitrator would rule that he has to be allowed to be around people that don't want to be around him. Ruling that he should have equal access to facilities if he so desires sounds like something they could rule (although I don't know how likely that is--the NFLPA is notoriously weak as players associations go).I get the feeling that the arbitration is mostly going to be about $. I know T.O. want to play and Rosenhaus is going to pay that lip service, but everyone with any connections to the situation that I've heard say no way he plays and now way he gets released. Again, we've seen these things turn around in a hurry, but if I were playing percent chance, I'd give it about a 3% chance TO gets on the field again this year, but that's just IMO. I owned him in one redraft league, and I've already dropped him.

 
The Eagles don`t want him. Cut him loose now and save some cash.  The Cowboys would sign him in a second for the stretch drive!
Exactly. Parcells wouldn't dance around him like Reid and the Eagles did, or shelve him out of spite. TO rubbed Tuna the wrong way he'd be out of there. That's the way it should be. I really can't believe how lame it is the Eagles are taking arguably the most talented WR in the NFL and letting him rot.
Ladies and Gentleman...We have a TO owner who cant see past his own fantasy team.
 
This brings up a good question....why is the NFL trade deadline so earley? I doubt that the Eagles would trade TO anyway, but at least it would be an option. Right now they really have no other (practical) option other then deactivate him. They CANT take a chance the someone claims him off waivers.

 
the Eagles are turning out to be as classless as TO on this -- sitting him for spite.
Like I posted in the other thread:As has been pointed out numerous times in this thread the Eagles are on the hook for his salary whether they shelve him or release him. They are damnwell not going to pay his guaranteed salary and grant him the freedom to sign some additional lucrative deal with the Cowboys (for example, but obviously he'd sign somewhere that has playoff hopes), and perhaps have him spill team secrets and face him in the playoffs while he's still technically on their payroll. Furthermore, they are certainly not going to be the NFL team that sets the precedent that if you act like a boob you can become a FA pretty much at will. I am not saying there's no level of spite; they probably are pissed they can't get the benefits of the good contract they negotiated. However, that pales in comparison to the very real business/competitive reasons and not wanting to open the door for future Eagles to use this BS as a business ploy. If you don't want to be a valued member of this team, then watch soap operas and cash checks... you aren't going to be handed a reward.

 
Here is what Adam Shefter & Rich Eisen said about this subject on tonight's NFL Total Access (my transcript from my TiVo):

Eisen: We hear about Gene Upshaw saying he wants him reinstated this season, how might that come about?Shefter: Rich, on Wednesday I spoke with the NFLPA and basically they want the hearing, the arbitrator, in the hearing to make a ruling and if he decides in favor of TO, that TO can play again this season. The Eagles are adamant about suspending him for the four games then deactivating him for the remainder of the season, but the NFLPA is optimistic that they are going to win this grievance and TO will be reinstated this season. That hearing is Nov. 18th and that is when we will know if TO will play football again this season or not.Eisen: Couple of follow-up questions. Play football for whom? And, second, I thought this grievance was about money and not getting him back on the field?Shefter: First of all, the NFLPA is determined to get him back on the field this season and they think they can win this case & if the arbitrator rules in their favor, they think TO will be playing football again this season. The Eagles think differently, we will let the arbitrator decide who is right & who is wrong. Where he ends up this season is anybody's guess at this point.
Nov. 18th is when we should really have a clear view of this.
 
To begin with, there isn't an arbitrator in the world that would tell the Eagles that they would have to play Owens.So it boils down to practice. If the arbitrator says they have to let TO practice, then Andy Reid says: "Sure." Practice starts and Andy Reid says: " Mr. Owens, there is the next playing field. I want you out there running wind sprints for the next 3 hours."Owens packs it up and goes home.

 
If I were the Eagles, I'd tell TO he had to show up and collect tickets at the gate the rest of the year. If I'm paying his salary, I might even tell him he has to clean the stadium after the games are over.

 
It is simple. the NFLPA has to do this. If they didn't step forward and make some kind of statement in support of the player, the union would lose credibility. Bottom line is the Eagles are doing exactly what they are allowed to do. Suspending him and taking his money for 4 weeks, then they will simply deactivate him each week. They are fully within the rules to do this and Upshaw knows it.Only Tagliabue can step in and do something, and he would be very unwise to do so. He has done a very good job as a commissioner, but would lose any and all owner support if he manipulated this situation in the slightest.

 
To begin with, there isn't an arbitrator in the world that would tell the Eagles that they would have to play Owens.

So it boils down to practice. If the arbitrator says they have to let TO practice, then Andy Reid says: "Sure."

Practice starts and Andy Reid says: " Mr. Owens, there is the next playing field. I want you out there running wind sprints for the next 3 hours."

Owens packs it up and goes home.
I don't disagree. I think there is less than a 1% chance TO plays again this year. But I sure wouldn't drop TO until after this hearing.
 
If an arbitrator rules that team cancers either have to be allowed to infest a team further or alternatively be rewarded by being released to become defacto FAs at the competitive disadvantage of a former team, just go ahead and fold up shop. That's all she wrote. This whole PA position is ridiculous. They are arguing as if TO would not be paid (as is the case in suspension and why the max is 4 weeks). As long as a player is being paid as he is contractually owed, there is no harm to the player, period. Setting a precedence that if you are a big enough pain in the ### you can be rewarded is beyond insane.

 
The Eagles don`t want him. Cut him loose now and save some cash. The Cowboys would sign him in a second for the stretch drive!
Veterans (I forget how many years a player needs to have) salaries are guaranteed for the year once they make the opening day roster. So cutting TO does not save the Eagles any money. If they cut him too soon, the prorates signing bonus money will hit the 2005 cap, which gives them less money this year. So it makes much more sense to cut him in the off season because:1. they will have more flexibility in managing their cap

2. it keeps TO off other teams rosters (like the cowboys).

 
By suspending TO and then not allowing him to rejoin the team you are penalizing Owens twice for the same offense.

 
The Eagles don`t want him. Cut him loose now and save some cash. The Cowboys would sign him in a second for the stretch drive!
Exactly. Parcells wouldn't dance around him like Reid and the Eagles did, or shelve him out of spite. TO rubbed Tuna the wrong way he'd be out of there. That's the way it should be. I really can't believe how lame it is the Eagles are taking arguably the most talented WR in the NFL and letting him rot.
Ladies and Gentleman...We have a TO owner who cant see past his own fantasy team.
Actually I own TO in ZERO leagues this year. I have had him in leagues past when he was with SF and he was fun to watch play. I even have Reggie Brown in one league this year. I just find this whole situation not only interesting from a labor perspective and it's impact on the NFL and CBA, but also kind of comical. I also think TO is the most dominant WR the NFL has seen in a long time, and I do enjoy watching him play. All the other stuff is noise, the guy can play football. As a fan watching players excell at their craft, I hope he plays again while he is in his prime. I could care less that the Eagles have their feelings hurt. I would just as easily hate to not see Harrison play, or Holt play and I don't own those guys either. In fact in my big money league some dude has McNabb and Owens and he TOASTED me week 7. Babe Ruth was a tool by all accounts, but without 24hr news shows and the internet not too many people knew or cared, but the guy could play.
 
By suspending TO and then not allowing him to rejoin the team you are penalizing Owens twice for the same offense.
Deactivating him is a choice; it's not a punishment (in the contractual sense). There is nothing in Owens' contract or anyone else's that guarantees playing time or even practice time.If one of my employees came in and torched my office, he would be sentenced for arson. He would also be fired. That is not being punished twice for the same offense.

 
By suspending TO and then not allowing him to rejoin the team you are penalizing Owens twice for the same offense.
No, actually it is penalizing him one time for the offense and giving him a financial windfall for sitting on his butt. Why do you view free salary as a penalty. May the world penalize me if it is.
 
By suspending TO and then not allowing him to rejoin the team you are penalizing Owens twice for the same offense.
Deactivating him is a choice; it's not a punishment (in the contractual sense). There is nothing in Owens' contract or anyone else's that guarantees playing time or even practice time.If one of my employees came in and torched my office, he would be sentenced for arson. He would also be fired. That is not being punished twice for the same offense.
So what is TO's crime again?
 
By suspending TO and then not allowing him to rejoin the team you are penalizing Owens twice for the same offense.
Deactivating him is a choice; it's not a punishment (in the contractual sense). There is nothing in Owens' contract or anyone else's that guarantees playing time or even practice time.If one of my employees came in and torched my office, he would be sentenced for arson. He would also be fired. That is not being punished twice for the same offense.
So what is TO's crime again?
Breach of contract.
 
By suspending TO and then not allowing him to rejoin the team you are penalizing Owens twice for the same offense.
Deactivating him is a choice; it's not a punishment (in the contractual sense). There is nothing in Owens' contract or anyone else's that guarantees playing time or even practice time.If one of my employees came in and torched my office, he would be sentenced for arson. He would also be fired. That is not being punished twice for the same offense.
So what is TO's crime again?
One of the oldest crimes in the world. Taking pay from an organization, and refusing to abide by their rules.So, in this case, the organization says: We will suspend you without pay for as long as we are allowed to, and we will pay you for the rest of the year at the agreed upon rate. Other than that, we want nothing more to do with you.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
By suspending TO and then not allowing him to rejoin the team you are penalizing Owens twice for the same offense.
No, actually it is penalizing him one time for the offense and giving him a financial windfall for sitting on his butt. Why do you view free salary as a penalty. May the world penalize me if it is.
How many 1/2 seasons of being the dominant football player at his position does a 32 year old WR have left? For someone at the top of their game on the wrong side of 30, not being able to play is a penalty. For some real world stiff who hates what he does for a living and isn't very good at it, getting unemployment checks is probably a good deal.
 
By suspending TO and then not allowing him to rejoin the team you are penalizing Owens twice for the same offense.
Deactivating him is a choice; it's not a punishment (in the contractual sense). There is nothing in Owens' contract or anyone else's that guarantees playing time or even practice time.If one of my employees came in and torched my office, he would be sentenced for arson. He would also be fired. That is not being punished twice for the same offense.
So what is TO's crime again?
acting like a moron?
 
By suspending TO and then not allowing him to rejoin the team you are penalizing Owens twice for the same offense.
Deactivating him is a choice; it's not a punishment (in the contractual sense). There is nothing in Owens' contract or anyone else's that guarantees playing time or even practice time.If one of my employees came in and torched my office, he would be sentenced for arson. He would also be fired. That is not being punished twice for the same offense.
So what is TO's crime again?
One of the oldest crimes in the world. Taking pay from an organization, and refusing to abide by their rules.So, in this case, the organization says: We will suspend you without pay for as long as we are allowed to, and we will pay you for the rest of the year at the agreed upon rate. Other than that, we want nothing more to do with you.
Got confused by the arsonist analogy.I think his crime is that the Eagles suck this year. He's the fall guy.

 
T

.O. did say Eagles would be undefeated with Favre as their QB - let him prove it!
I thought Irvin said that..TO just agreed. TO did not bring the topic up.
 
The bottom line is that this ruling doesn't hurt TO.... he'll get his money. There is a lot of locker room talk we are not privy to but just from watching the games, TO makes the Eagles a better team on the field. The question of Owens' antics being so detremental to the play of the Eagles will not be revealed for a long tims as every player is now towing the company line. As it stands, I think the Eagles ownership has shown little class in this confrontation as they ignored all the other times Owens threw McNabb under the bus. It was only when Owens mentioned that the organization was classless did the wheels of discontent spin into motion.

 
By suspending TO and then not allowing him to rejoin the team you are penalizing Owens twice for the same offense.
No, actually it is penalizing him one time for the offense and giving him a financial windfall for sitting on his butt. Why do you view free salary as a penalty. May the world penalize me if it is.
How many 1/2 seasons of being the dominant football player at his position does a 32 year old WR have left? For someone at the top of their game on the wrong side of 30, not being able to play is a penalty. For some real world stiff who hates what he does for a living and isn't very good at it, getting unemployment checks is probably a good deal.
Well, I guess he went and blew his opportunity to play his 1/2 season then and boo frigging hoo he has to settle for free money because he's ruined any chance of fitting into the team he's under contract to. Seriously, what a team cancer apologist you are. Let's just set the NFL on its ear over this guy and his bipolar condition.
 
If an arbitrator rules that team cancers either have to be allowed to infest a team further or alternatively be rewarded by being released to become defacto FAs at the competitive disadvantage of a former team, just go ahead and fold up shop. That's all she wrote.

This whole PA position is ridiculous. They are arguing as if TO would not be paid (as is the case in suspension and why the max is 4 weeks). As long as a player is being paid as he is contractually owed, there is no harm to the player, period. Setting a precedence that if you are a big enough pain in the ### you can be rewarded is beyond insane.
Precisely. If the Eagles meet their contractual obligation (paying TO), they can sit his ### down, and there's not a darned thing the union or anyone else can say about it.
 
By suspending TO and then not allowing him to rejoin the team you are penalizing Owens twice for the same offense.
No, actually it is penalizing him one time for the offense and giving him a financial windfall for sitting on his butt. Why do you view free salary as a penalty. May the world penalize me if it is.
How many 1/2 seasons of being the dominant football player at his position does a 32 year old WR have left? For someone at the top of their game on the wrong side of 30, not being able to play is a penalty. For some real world stiff who hates what he does for a living and isn't very good at it, getting unemployment checks is probably a good deal.
Maybe TO should have thought about that before he shot off his mouth, in spite of repeated warnings from his coach.
 
By suspending TO and then not allowing him to rejoin the team you are penalizing Owens twice for the same offense.
No, actually it is penalizing him one time for the offense and giving him a financial windfall for sitting on his butt. Why do you view free salary as a penalty. May the world penalize me if it is.
because money is not everything.these players have very limited career life spans.

 
By suspending TO and then not allowing him to rejoin the team you are penalizing Owens twice for the same offense.
No, actually it is penalizing him one time for the offense and giving him a financial windfall for sitting on his butt. Why do you view free salary as a penalty. May the world penalize me if it is.
because money is not everything.these players have very limited career life spans.
Again, information he might have considered before making his association with this team impossible.
 
By suspending TO and then not allowing him to rejoin the team you are penalizing Owens twice for the same offense.
No, actually it is penalizing him one time for the offense and giving him a financial windfall for sitting on his butt. Why do you view free salary as a penalty. May the world penalize me if it is.
How many 1/2 seasons of being the dominant football player at his position does a 32 year old WR have left? For someone at the top of their game on the wrong side of 30, not being able to play is a penalty. For some real world stiff who hates what he does for a living and isn't very good at it, getting unemployment checks is probably a good deal.
Maybe TO should have thought about that before he shot off his mouth, in spite of repeated warnings from his coach.
Agreed. But the punishment still doesn't fit the "crime" IMO. What is so hard about shooting some damn fireworks off to placate the drama queen? The dude is high maintenance and probably does need therapy. Offer him some help, give him a hug, get him some meds. Let's play some ball, this Dr. Phil stuff is so lame on both sides. "You apologize", "no", "I'm warning you", "o.k., I apologize", "that's not good enough---your out of here". WTF
 
By suspending TO and then not allowing him to rejoin the team you are penalizing Owens twice for the same offense.
No, actually it is penalizing him one time for the offense and giving him a financial windfall for sitting on his butt. Why do you view free salary as a penalty. May the world penalize me if it is.
How many 1/2 seasons of being the dominant football player at his position does a 32 year old WR have left? For someone at the top of their game on the wrong side of 30, not being able to play is a penalty. For some real world stiff who hates what he does for a living and isn't very good at it, getting unemployment checks is probably a good deal.
Well, I guess he went and blew his opportunity to play his 1/2 season then and boo frigging hoo he has to settle for free money because he's ruined any chance of fitting into the team he's under contract to. Seriously, what a team cancer apologist you are. Let's just set the NFL on its ear over this guy and his bipolar condition.
Again, when was this all news to the Eagles? They signed the team cancer to a 7-year deal.
 
By suspending TO and then not allowing him to rejoin the team you are penalizing Owens twice for the same offense.
No, actually it is penalizing him one time for the offense and giving him a financial windfall for sitting on his butt. Why do you view free salary as a penalty. May the world penalize me if it is.
How many 1/2 seasons of being the dominant football player at his position does a 32 year old WR have left? For someone at the top of their game on the wrong side of 30, not being able to play is a penalty. For some real world stiff who hates what he does for a living and isn't very good at it, getting unemployment checks is probably a good deal.
Well, I guess he went and blew his opportunity to play his 1/2 season then and boo frigging hoo he has to settle for free money because he's ruined any chance of fitting into the team he's under contract to. Seriously, what a team cancer apologist you are. Let's just set the NFL on its ear over this guy and his bipolar condition.
Again, when was this all news to the Eagles? They signed the team cancer to a 7-year deal.
Yeah, because we all know T.O. promised to be an ahole the entire 7-years. Like I said in the other thread, I won't waste my time on :11: Seriously, this is you~~~> :bag:

 
By suspending TO and then not allowing him to rejoin the team you are penalizing Owens twice for the same offense.
No, actually it is penalizing him one time for the offense and giving him a financial windfall for sitting on his butt. Why do you view free salary as a penalty. May the world penalize me if it is.
How many 1/2 seasons of being the dominant football player at his position does a 32 year old WR have left? For someone at the top of their game on the wrong side of 30, not being able to play is a penalty. For some real world stiff who hates what he does for a living and isn't very good at it, getting unemployment checks is probably a good deal.
Well, I guess he went and blew his opportunity to play his 1/2 season then and boo frigging hoo he has to settle for free money because he's ruined any chance of fitting into the team he's under contract to. Seriously, what a team cancer apologist you are. Let's just set the NFL on its ear over this guy and his bipolar condition.
Again, when was this all news to the Eagles? They signed the team cancer to a 7-year deal.
Yeah, because we all know T.O. promised to be an ahole the entire 7-years. Like I said in the other thread, I won't waste my time on :11: Seriously, this is you~~~> :bag:
If you were on the Eagles you'd probably just be dropped outright.
 
By suspending TO and then not allowing him to rejoin the team you are penalizing Owens twice for the same offense.
No, actually it is penalizing him one time for the offense and giving him a financial windfall for sitting on his butt. Why do you view free salary as a penalty. May the world penalize me if it is.
because money is not everything.these players have very limited career life spans.
this discussion is about TO isn't it? it's always about the money
 
By suspending TO and then not allowing him to rejoin the team you are penalizing Owens twice for the same offense.
No, actually it is penalizing him one time for the offense and giving him a financial windfall for sitting on his butt. Why do you view free salary as a penalty. May the world penalize me if it is.
because money is not everything.these players have very limited career life spans.
this discussion is about TO isn't it? it's always about the money
not to defend TO too much but i think the biggest thing here is that TO equates money w/ respect. he believes the best wr in the league should be paid the most.
 
By suspending TO and then not allowing him to rejoin the team you are penalizing Owens twice for the same offense.
No, actually it is penalizing him one time for the offense and giving him a financial windfall for sitting on his butt. Why do you view free salary as a penalty. May the world penalize me if it is.
because money is not everything.these players have very limited career life spans.
this discussion is about TO isn't it? it's always about the money
not to defend TO too much but i think the biggest thing here is that TO equates money w/ respect. he believes the best wr in the league should be paid the most.
I'll admit I don't know the specifics of his contract, but if he's got a problem with his current one, why did he sign it?
 
Upshaw differentiated between the Eagles' suspension of Owens and Tampa Bay's decision two years ago to make Keyshawn Johnson inactive for the final six games of the season. Johnson signed in 2004 with Dallas, for whom he now plays."There was no suspension there. A team has the right to inactivate a player for whatever reason it wants," he said. "But in T.O.'s case, this is a team suspension, not a commissioner's deal. They're different. When we bargained in those rules, there was a reason for it. The most a player can be suspended is four games. You can't go beyond that."
The excessive-penalty argument is one of three the union will use with Bloch.The union will also argue that the five-game deactivation violates the agreement because it exceeds the maximum four-game suspension allowed under the rules for player misconduct. And it will say the penalty is a double punishment for Owens, because the team had already suspended him for last Sunday's game against the Washington Redskins.
As part of its case before arbitrator Richard Bloch on Nov. 18, the players' union will show examples of other incidents involving player misconduct that resulted in penalties far less severe than the four-game suspension and five-week deactivation of Owens.In one case, a player ran into the tunnel before the first half of a game ended because he was angry with his coach. The coach subsequently suspended the player for one game. In another, a player refused to practice when he was told he'd be working with the scout team instead of the starting unit. That player was also suspended for a game.
TO will be back this year. This is the letter of the law, there really is no debate here. This is a union, they have collective bargaining barring teams from doing what Philadelphia is doing.He's either going to be on the Eagles practice squad or released, where Houston or Green Bay will have the first choice to claim him.Book it.
 
Upshaw differentiated between the Eagles' suspension of Owens and Tampa Bay's decision two years ago to make Keyshawn Johnson inactive for the final six games of the season. Johnson signed in 2004 with Dallas, for whom he now plays.

"There was no suspension there. A team has the right to inactivate a player for whatever reason it wants," he said. "But in T.O.'s case, this is a team suspension, not a commissioner's deal. They're different. When we bargained in those rules, there was a reason for it. The most a player can be suspended is four games. You can't go beyond that."
TO will be back this year. This is the letter of the law, there really is no debate here. This is a union, they have collective bargaining barring teams from doing what Philadelphia is doing.He's either going to be on the Eagles practice squad or released, where Houston or Green Bay will have the first choice to claim him.

Book it.
What is the letter of the law? He spells it out right there in the first quote. He can only be suspended for four games. A team can deactivate a player for whatever reason they want. I am not sure what Upshaw thinks they are doing, but that is exactly what they plan to do. The precedent has already been set, a team can deactivate a player and tell him to stay away from the team, ala Keyshawn. The only question here is how many games he sits out without getting paid.He doesn't even make sense, he contradicts himself in the same paragraph. By the way, what exactly is a "commisioners deal?"

 
Lets face it. The Eagles do not want Owens back. That being the case just cut him loose right now. What is the difference? Be rid of your problem and distraction to your team right away. As long as Owens is suspended but still on the roster it will create problems and distractions. Just cut him and be done with it.

 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top