What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

RB Ezekiel Elliott, LAC (1 Viewer)

@WALLACHLEGAL

This is more than just a place-holder opinion. Now 3 judges have weighed in on 'fundamental fairness', and all 3 have sided with the NFLPA.
Click to expand...
By my count, 5 judges have weighed in on 'fundamental fairness'. 3 have sided with NFLPA, 2 with the NFL.

That's not counting those in the Brady case, which if included, would tilt the tally back in favor of the NFL.

 
davearm said:
The evidence against Elliott is documented in the NFL's letter to Elliott informing him of his suspension.  Surely the prosecutors had access to the same information (and possibly more).  That leads me to believe that they very likely agree with the NFL's conclusion that Elliott committed DV -- even though they chose not to file charges.

Meanwhile you have stated that the absence of criminal charges is definitive proof that Elliott is innocent, and that everyone who investigated the criminal case must think he's innocent.  I think that's laughable and naive.  But I'm long past expecting to change your mind on it.  Clearly you're entrenched in your view here.
Click to expand...
It doesn't matter if he committed domestic violence or not, all that matters is if Goodell believes he did. Just like Brady, the NFL will win. The 64 million dollar question is how long it drags out. 

 
ourmanflint said:
He did issue an opinion. A very strong one albeit not very long. Many who have followed this case do not believe it will be changed by Failla. He clearly was not phased by the CA2 Brady ruling and, in fact, he stated that their ruling did not "foreclose judicial review" of arbitration decisions. 
Click to expand...
If I'm understanding correctly, Mazzant and Crotty have ruled on the issue of the TRO.  Failla will not be ruling on a TRO, but on a preliminary injunction.

To be granted a TRO, there has to be a reasonable possibility of winning a PI (may have the exact verbiage incorrect but that's the spirit of it).

That alone would indicate the PI is a higher bar to clear.

 
beerbuff said:
It doesn't matter if he committed domestic violence or not, all that matters is if Goodell believes he did. Just like Brady, the NFL will win. The 64 million dollar question is how long it drags out. 
Click to expand...
Of course.  I think everyone agrees on this.

If I understand the path here, Elliott/NFLPA needs to...

Get a TRO granted (check)

Then get a PI granted (from Failla, before the end of October)

Then have the PI survive appeal

Then win at trial

Then have the trial verdict survive appeal

And if we reach this point, then the NFL has to re-do the suspension hearing in a manner that can pass as fundamentally fair, where the ultimate outcome is virtually certain to be no different (6 game suspension).

Feel free to chime in with corrections.

 
davearm said:
The evidence against Elliott is documented in the NFL's letter to Elliott informing him of his suspension.  Surely the prosecutors had access to the same information (and possibly more).  That leads me to believe that they very likely agree with the NFL's conclusion that Elliott committed DV -- even though they chose not to file charges.

She Meanwhile you have stated that the absence of criminal charges is definitive proof that Elliott is innocent, and that everyone who investigated the criminal case must think he's innocent.  I think that's laughable and naive.  But I'm long past expecting to change your mind on it.  Clearly you're entrenched in your view here.
Click to expand...
See, the problem with this discussion is that you have zero problem making things up and running with it. 

I said that Zeke didn't need to prove he wasn't guilty, because he was never even arrested or charged with the crime. Anyway... that's the last time that I am going to explain the same thing to you.

My thoughts on this matter are as simple as this. I do believe that Zeke is innocent of domestic abuse. I think that his ex was clearly pissed off that her recently highly drafted NFL RB boyfriend wanted nothing to do with her anymore. I think that she decided to try to ruin his career, as revenge. I think that the evidence in the case also points toward that. 

1, It was reported that several witnesses told authorities that she threatened to ruin Zeke's career, after he was in the car with another girl and walked away from his ex. This backs up Zeke's account of what happened. 

2. Thompson was in a fight with a girl before she called the police. A witness said that a girl walked up and hit her, and they fought for a few minutes, the friend had to physically break up the fight. This is one of the obvious ways that she had marks on her, which she later reported to police came from Elliott. Special duty officers confirmed this fight. Also, Thompson's friend told police that Zeke asked them to leave the party at which she later got into this fight with the girl.

3. She pulled up at the Carriage house with her friend behind her. Elliot was with another girl in a different car. Thompson goes up to them and starts yelling... according to all witnesses Elliott never came near her, ignored her, and walked into the Carriage house. At this time, Thompson calls the police to report that Elliott just yanked her out of her car by her wrist and yelled at her and called her a b***h. She then texts her friend, who saw the entire thing, and asked her to lie to the police when they arrive. Her own friend told police that at no time did Zeke come near her, and turned over her phone which had texts showing Thompson had text her and asked her to lie about what just happened. 

4. If most her story revolved around accusing Zeke of basically holding her hostage in their room together, abusing her and not allowing her to leave.... being extremely controlling over her. Why was it Zeke asking her to leave one of his parties, and ignoring her, while walking away at yet another party? Why would she wait until he walked away with another girl into his party to call the police, and sit outside until they came? Why was he so willing to leave her alone to do whatever she wanted if he was such a controlling boyfriend who wouldn't even allow her to leave their room? Why would she make up a fake story of abuse, which just happened to be the only time she accused him of abuse where there were actually witnesses around... and not a single person there verified her account of what happened.... not even her own friend.

5. After this all ended, months down the road... Zeke had to contact authorities because she was harassing him, wouldn't stop trying to contact him, called him over 50 times in a single night, hacked into his email account and sent untruthful messages to girls in his contacts.

6. Another one of Thompson's friends came forward with text messages where Thompson was discussing blackmailing Elliott with sex tapes of them that she had in her possession. 

So... I am well aware that just because she is not a likable person, she lied, and did terrible things... this doesn't prove that she couldn't have been a victim of domestic violence at some point. The problem is that.... nothing could ever prove that. Which was my point before. However, all we can do is look at the body of evidence, which in this case completely stacks against her, and favors Elliott. Which is why charges were never filed in the first place. Even the NFL's lead investigator who was the ONLY NFL investigator that interviewed Thompson reported that Thompson wasn't credible and suggested to Goodell that Zeke not be suspended. 

My theory on why Zeke was suspended. I think that his case came across at an unfortunate time for him, after the NFL dropped the ball so terribly with the previous domestic violence cases. I mean, Josh Brown not only admitted to abusing his wife, NFL staff actually had to break up the domestic violence and put Brown in a separate hotel room. So, they saw first hand what he had done, and only suspended him for one game! Of course, they laughably came back this year and suspended him for 6 games... only problem being that he isn't even in the NFL anymore.

So, Goodell was looking to clean up his rep on being soft on domestic violence. Which may have not been enough by itself.... however, Zeke made some terrible choices over the past year, and put himself in a lot of bad situations, and showed very questionable decision making. Even if he wasn't guilty of the night club fight, he just somehow couldn't stay away from bad situations. Pulling down that girls shirt, etc... it was just piling up. So, with none of those cases alone being enough to suspend Zeke. I think that Gooodell decided to send Zeke a wake up call and suspend him for 6 games, using the domestic violence case as grounds. The problem is.... that is an absolutely terrible thing to do... label a person a woman beater. This move will cost Zeke millions of dollars in contract money, millions of dollars in sponsorship money, especially considering how popular Elliot is. Let alone, they labeled him as a man who beats women. Roger Goodell made Ezekiel Elliott the face of domestic violence for the NFL. This is why we are in the position that we find ourselves in today. 

Did Zeke need a wakup call? Yes, he did. Without a doubt, he needed to learn that he's a target, and he has got to stop putting himself in bad situations, where there could even be a chance that something bad can happen. The problem is, that Zeke is just a young kid who likes to party. That doesn't make him a monster. It just obviously puts him in a vulnerable position. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
WiDDoW_MaKeR said:
See, the problem with this discussion is that you have zero problem making things up and running with it. 

I said that Zeke didn't need to prove he wasn't guilty, because he was never even arrested or charged with the crime. Anyway... that's the last time that I am going to explain the same thing to you.

My thoughts on this matter are as simple as this. I do believe that Zeke is innocent of domestic abuse. I think that his ex was clearly pissed off that her recently highly drafted NFL RB boyfriend wanted nothing to do with her anymore. I think that she decided to try to ruin his career, as revenge. I think that the evidence in the case also points toward that. 

1, It was reported that several witnesses told authorities that she threatened to ruin Zeke's career, after he was in the car with another girl and walked away from his ex. This backs up Zeke's account of what happened. 

2. Thompson was in a fight with a girl before she called the police. A witness said that a girl walked up and hit her, and they fought for a few minutes, the friend had to physically break up the fight. This is one of the obvious ways that she had marks on her, which she later reported to police came from Elliott. Special duty officers confirmed this fight. Also, Thompson's friend told police that Zeke asked them to leave the party at which she later got into this fight with the girl.

3. She pulled up at the Carriage house with her friend behind her. Elliot was with another girl in a different car. Thompson goes up to them and starts yelling... according to all witnesses Elliott never came near her, ignored her, and walked into the Carriage house. At this time, Thompson calls the police to report that Elliott just yanked her out of her car by her wrist and yelled at her and called her a b***h. She then texts her friend, who saw the entire thing, and asked her to lie to the police when they arrive. Her own friend told police that at no time did Zeke come near her, and turned over her phone which had texts showing Thompson had text her and asked her to lie about what just happened. 

4. If most her story revolved around accusing Zeke of basically holding her hostage in their room together, abusing her and not allowing her to leave.... being extremely controlling over her. Why was it Zeke asking her to leave one of his parties, and ignoring her, while walking away at yet another party? Why would she wait until he walked away with another girl into his party to call the police, and sit outside until they came? Why was he so willing to leave her alone to do whatever she wanted if he was such a controlling boyfriend who wouldn't even allow her to leave their room? Why would she make up a fake story of abuse, which just happened to be the only time she accused him of abuse where there were actually witnesses around... and not a single person there verified her account of what happened.... not even her own friend.

5. After this all ended, months down the road... Zeke had to contact authorities because she was harassing him, wouldn't stop trying to contact him, called him over 50 times in a single night, hacked into his email account and sent untruthful messages to girls in his contacts.

6. Another one of Thompson's friends came forward with text messages where Thompson was discussing blackmailing Elliott with sex tapes of them that she had in her possession. 

So... I am well aware that just because she is not a likable person, she lied, and did terrible things... this doesn't prove that she couldn't have been a victim of domestic violence at some point. The problem is that.... nothing could ever prove that. Which was my point before. However, all we can do is look at the body of evidence, which in this case completely stacks against her, and favors Elliott. Which is why charges were never filed in the first place. Even the NFL's lead investigator who was the ONLY NFL investigator that interviewed Thompson reported that Thompson wasn't credible and suggested to Goodell that Zeke not be suspended. 

My theory on why Zeke was suspended. I think that his case came across at an unfortunate time for him, after the NFL dropped the ball so terribly with the previous domestic violence cases. I mean, Josh Brown not only admitted to abusing his wife, NFL staff actually had to break up the domestic violence and put Brown in a separate hotel room. So, they saw first hand what he had done, and only suspended him for one game! Of course, they laughably came back this year and suspended him for 6 games... only problem being that he isn't even in the NFL anymore.

So, Goodell was looking to clean up his rep on being soft on domestic violence. Which may have not been enough by itself.... however, Zeke made some terrible choices over the past year, and put himself in a lot of bad situations, and showed very questionable decision making. Even if he wasn't guilty of the night club fight, he just somehow couldn't stay away from bad situations. Pulling down that girls shirt, etc... it was just piling up. So, with none of those cases alone being enough to suspend Zeke. I think that Gooodell decided to send Zeke a wake up call and suspend him for 6 games, using the domestic violence case as grounds. The problem is.... that is an absolutely terrible thing to do... label a person a woman beater. This move will cost Zeke millions of dollars in contract money, millions of dollars in sponsorship money, especially considering how popular Elliot is. Let alone, they labeled him as a man who beats women. Roger Goodell made Ezekiel Elliott the face of domestic violence for the NFL. This is why we are in the position that we find ourselves in today. 

Did Zeke need a wakup call? Yes, he did. Without a doubt, he needed to learn that he's a target, and he has got to stop putting himself in bad situations, where there could even be a chance that something bad can happen. The problem is, that Zeke is just a young kid who likes to party. That doesn't make him a monster. It just obviously puts him in a vulnerable position. 
Click to expand...
She had some prominent red marks & bruises on her. They were pretty significant. Did she beat herself up? I guess that's a theory.

Look, they both sound like they need to grow up, but even if she's a B, a liar, thief, ho, or whatever, she doesn't deserve to get beaten.

As a Cowboys fan, I sincerely hope Zeke didn't do anything & somehow dodges the suspension, but looking at it as objectively as I can, it's doubtful he's TOTALLY innocent of domestic abuse.

I hope I'm wrong.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
ourmanflint said:
Again, this is a completely different scenario and Crotty said as much in his 4 page ruling. CA2 never foreclosed on judicial review of arbitration cases and fundamental fairness does apply to NFL arbitration. 3 judges have clearly said so. 

https://twitter.com/bdunndunn/status/920472066209472512

3 federal judges disagree with your assessment that the 2 cases are the same.
Click to expand...
“3 federal judges disagree with your assessment that the 2 cases are the same?”

First, no 2 cases are the same.  There are different circumstances in every case.  Since the Brady case and Zekes case both deal with fundamental fairness & the NFLs power given to them by the CBA, they very clearly are similar.  As such, the decision in the Brady case is a precedent for this one.  

Second, the legal system doesn’t work that way: “3 judges are on my side, I win.”  The 2 judges that currently matter are the 2 judges who issued the majority decision in the Brady case; who said that Goodell CAN make mistakes, ignore facts & evidence he seems less important, etc as long as he adhere to the CBA.  742 district court judges can be on “your side,” and if 2/3 judges on the circuit court say they’re wrong, those 2 judges’ decision is what matters.  If Zeke loses in circuit court & appeals to the US Supreme Court (& they hear his case),  & he wins a 5-4 decision, those 5 judges on his side are all that matter.

 
Football Jones said:
She had some prominent red marks & bruises on her. They were pretty significant. Did she beat herself up? I guess that's a theory.

Look, they both sound like they need to grow up, but even if she's a B, a liar, thief, ho, or whatever, she doesn't deserve to get beaten.

As a Cowboys fan, I sincerely hope Zeke didn't do anything & somehow dodges the suspension, but looking at it as objectively as I can, it's doubtful he's TOTALLY innocent of domestic abuse.

I hope I'm wrong.
Click to expand...
You don't think that bruising could've come from the fist fight with another girl at the previous party? Seems like a pretty reasonable explanation to me. I mentioned it in the post, if you read the entire novel.  :D

 
WiDDoW_MaKeR said:
You don't think that bruising could've come from the fist fight with another girl at the previous party? Seems like a pretty reasonable explanation to me. I mentioned it in the post, if you read the entire novel.  :D
Click to expand...
You would likely see scratches if it was a cat fight. That's what chicks do. These looked like grab marks & general rough housing.

I don't pretend to be a pathologist or whatever kind of doctor determines what has happened to the human body, but I'm very skeptical about those particular marks & bruises coming from a fight with a girl.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Good lord this WiddowMaker kid is a terrible poster.... regardless of which side of the issue he falls on. It takes a LOT for me to block someone but damn... he's making this thread unreadable. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
NREC34 said:
Feels good to put him in the lineup. 

SF seems like a tasty matchup too. 
Click to expand...
While it does, it pushes back a game which he could now be suspended later.

My understanding (please anyone correct me if I'm wrong), is that he'll be allowed to play this week and next (@ 49ers, @ Redskins).  But if the suspension goes into effect then, he'll be missing the next 6 - 4 home games included, and games vs the current #27, 32 and 25th ranked run defenses.  He'd be back by week 15, at Raiders - but that would only matter if I'm in the playoffs.  Best case at this point he plays all year and and suspension is next year and can be planned around.

 
matttyl said:
While it does, it pushes back a game which he could now be suspended later.

My understanding (please anyone correct me if I'm wrong), is that he'll be allowed to play this week and next (@ 49ers, @ Redskins).  But if the suspension goes into effect then, he'll be missing the next 6 - 4 home games included, and games vs the current #27, 32 and 25th ranked run defenses.  He'd be back by week 15, at Raiders - but that would only matter if I'm in the playoffs.  Best case at this point he plays all year and and suspension is next year and can be planned around.
Click to expand...
That's correct, but some believe it will be pushed back till next year. Seems like it's a 50/50 split between legal experts again on what happens 10/30.

 
matttyl said:
While it does, it pushes back a game which he could now be suspended later.

My understanding (please anyone correct me if I'm wrong), is that he'll be allowed to play this week and next (@ 49ers, @ Redskins).  But if the suspension goes into effect then, he'll be missing the next 6 - 4 home games included, and games vs the current #27, 32 and 25th ranked run defenses.  He'd be back by week 15, at Raiders - but that would only matter if I'm in the playoffs.  Best case at this point he plays all year and and suspension is next year and can be planned around.
Click to expand...
The judge has until the 30th, she doesn't have to wait until then. She could rule against him and the suspension begins next week.

 
cloppbeast said:
Gonna screw around then We'll lose him for the play-offs.
Click to expand...
While that's possible, the fact the he got the TRO leads me to think the permanent judge will likely grant it as well.  The people I know in the legal system (not NY, so perhaps it's different there) say that judges tend to "have each other's back;" so she might not want to reverse his decision.  That leads to the assumption that since her colleague granted the "temporary" TRO (that's redundant), she would probably do the same.  Assuming the NFL can't get an expedited (and successful) appeal/overturn, that "permanent" TRO could allow Zeke to play out the year.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Throwing out my two cents, but even if Zeke prevails on the "fundamental fairness" argument, that pertains to his appeal / arbitration hearing. By that I mean, the court would intervene and tell the NFL that Elliott would get a do over for his NFL appeal, he would get access to all the documents and people involved, and the arbitrator would have to consider all of that and make another decision. 

The point being, the court can't tell the league how to police and punish its players. After another hearing, the league could still impose a 6 game suspension as their outcome and Elliott would have no other recourse but to serve it. 

 
The General said:
The judge has until the 30th, she doesn't have to wait until then. She could rule against him and the suspension begins next week.
Click to expand...
Did I read somewhere that she's on vacation until the 30th, and that's why this other judge granted the TRO? If so, then we probably shouldn't expect anything before then.

But I may be completely getting this wrong. This case makes my brain hurt.

 
Good Luck getting an liberal judge to throw out a TRO against an employee who was wronged by corporate America as deemed by 4 federal judges (2 conservative) already agree the case has merits to proceed. Not predicting, but seems like a tough hill.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
zftcg said:
Did I read somewhere that she's on vacation until the 30th, and that's why this other judge granted the TRO? If so, then we probably shouldn't expect anything before then.

But I may be completely getting this wrong. This case makes my brain hurt.
Click to expand...
That's one thing I haven't read is when she actually comes back. The date the she has to give us the ruling is by the 30th is my understanding, but could be any time before that.

Everyone says he is playing this weekend so I assume her vacation is at least through this week.

 
davearm said:
If I'm understanding correctly, Mazzant and Crotty have ruled on the issue of the TRO.  Failla will not be ruling on a TRO, but on a preliminary injunction.

To be granted a TRO, there has to be a reasonable possibility of winning a PI (may have the exact verbiage incorrect but that's the spirit of it).

That alone would indicate the PI is a higher bar to clear.
Click to expand...
Remember the good old days when you logged on to a football site and pi referred to pass interference?

 
The General said:
That's one thing I haven't read is when she actually comes back. The date the she has to give us the ruling is by the 30th is my understanding, but could be any time before that.

Everyone says he is playing this weekend so I assume her vacation is at least through this week.
Click to expand...
Given the way this whole story has played out, isn't it a matter of time before Schefter is live-tweeting her vacation: "She's left the cabana and is in the pool. No word on her opinion of Elliott's appeal, but an hour ago she ordered a strawberry margarita on the rocks."

 
General, you have also been constantly wrong with your opinion but here you are to continue to tell us how you think it works. This board has no shame with if they are wrong they just keep going, because if they get one thing right and miss on ten others it dont matter, because no one ever holds people accountable in this thread, they just also worry about being right. Hold the people who have been constantly wrong in this thread, they will stop being so free with their opinions if they are held to the fire when everything they say has been wrong.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
This is looking more and more like Zeke isn't going to serve the suspension this year. Just this snippet alone is very telling of the court's opinion on the matter:

In an opinion accompanying the ruling, Crotty agreed with the Texas judge who had backed the claims of Elliott's attorneys. Crotty wrote that Henderson's denial of testimony from Goodell and Thompson was significant because of credibility issues related to Thompson.

"In effect, (Elliott) was deprived of opportunities to explore pertinent and material evidence, which raises sufficiently serious questions," Crotty wrote.
Click to expand...
Then the NFL side of things is this:

Attorney Daniel Nash, arguing for the NFL, accused Elliott's legal team of seeking relief from courts in Texas to evade courts in New York and the effect of the April 2016 ruling that reinstated a four-game suspension of New England quarterback Tom Brady in the "Deflategate" scandal.

Nash warned Crotty that allowing the union to continue to delay the suspension would invite "every player who's suspended" to go to court for relief.

"They know under the Brady decision they have no chance of success. None," Nash said.
Click to expand...
The players have a legal right to do so. This whole thing isn't about Elliott. And it wasn't about Brady. It's about power. The NFL wants to be able to have absolute control to make these types of determinations. 

 
Up for legal debate now is whether Elliott’s chances at a victory have improved. That’s in large part due to Crotty’s decision to delay the suspension – which included an opinion that a core issue remains unresolved in the court system: whether NFL players have the right to a standard of “fundamental fairness” in the disciplinary process laid out in the collective bargaining agreement.

The league has argued that it has the power to levy decisions in the process and manner the commissioner deems fit. Elliott’s lawyers – like Tom Brady’s legal team in his case – have argued that isn’t the case. Crotty has suggested that the question of “fundamental fairness” as a standard in the league’s arbitration process is still unresolved.

It might be a sliver of hope for Elliott in his case in this way: If Judge Failla returns and also rules that issues of “fundamental fairness” are in play for arbitration decisions, it’s likely Elliott’s suspension will be set aside and his case will play out in federal court. But Failla doesn’t have to agree with Crotty’s opinion.

If Failla doesn’t see the “fundamental fairness” question as being any different than the one Brady lost previously (and which set precedent), Elliott’s lawsuit against the NFL would likely be over.

Failla could return from vacation to rule in the case as early as next week, but no later than Oct. 30.
Click to expand...
https://sports.yahoo.com/vacationing-judge-may-saved-ezekiel-elliott-fundamental-fairness-still-play-055231576.html

 
Anyone seeing any Elliot movement in your leagues?

Tempted to make a move for him in one of my leagues. He was moved for McKinnon in another one of mine (evidently a clear example of one owner anticipating a suspension and the other banking on a stay until next season). Hard to gauge his value right now.

 
Tommy Collins said:
This is looking more and more like Zeke isn't going to serve the suspension this year. Just this snippet alone is very telling of the court's opinion on the matter:

Then the NFL side of things is this:

The players have a legal right to do so. This whole thing isn't about Elliott. And it wasn't about Brady. It's about power. The NFL wants to be able to have absolute control to make these types of determinations. 
Click to expand...
I think it would be more accurate to say the NFL wants to exert the absolute control the CBA they negotiated with the players affords them.

 
Football Jones said:
You would likely see scratches if it was a cat fight. That's what chicks do. These looked like grab marks & general rough housing.

I don't pretend to be a pathologist or whatever kind of doctor determines what has happened to the human body, but I'm very skeptical about those particular marks & bruises coming from a fight with a girl.
Click to expand...
I've seen plenty of nasty girl fights. It's not only the hits from each other that make the bruises. When they wrestle around, they bruise up easily from the hard surfaces that they slam off of. She claimed that Zeke full on punched her in the face. I would expect to see much more damage on her face from a good sized NFL running back. 

 
Moonshine said:
Anyone seeing any Elliot movement in your leagues?

Tempted to make a move for him in one of my leagues. He was moved for McKinnon in another one of mine (evidently a clear example of one owner anticipating a suspension and the other banking on a stay until next season). Hard to gauge his value right now.
Click to expand...
was offered AJ Green for him straight up.  Came close to pulling the trigger but assuming Zeke is going to play all season, he's the better keep.  I believe he'll play all season, so I decided not to do it.  

 
Moonshine said:
Anyone seeing any Elliot movement in your leagues?

Tempted to make a move for him in one of my leagues. He was moved for McKinnon in another one of mine (evidently a clear example of one owner anticipating a suspension and the other banking on a stay until next season). Hard to gauge his value right now.
Click to expand...
Traded Larry Fitz for him on Sunday night in a redraft PPR.  He's 1-5, so he couldn't afford to wait on the 6 game suspension. 

 
Bayhawks said:
“3 federal judges disagree with your assessment that the 2 cases are the same?”

First, no 2 cases are the same.  There are different circumstances in every case.  Since the Brady case and Zekes case both deal with fundamental fairness & the NFLs power given to them by the CBA, they very clearly are similar.  As such, the decision in the Brady case is a precedent for this one.  

Second, the legal system doesn’t work that way: “3 judges are on my side, I win.”  The 2 judges that currently matter are the 2 judges who issued the majority decision in the Brady case; who said that Goodell CAN make mistakes, ignore facts & evidence he seems less important, etc as long as he adhere to the CBA.  742 district court judges can be on “your side,” and if 2/3 judges on the circuit court say they’re wrong, those 2 judges’ decision is what matters.  If Zeke loses in circuit court & appeals to the US Supreme Court (& they hear his case),  & he wins a 5-4 decision, those 5 judges on his side are all that matter.
Click to expand...
Btw, Brady raised a few fundamental fairness issues that are *worse* than what happened here with Zeke:

No notice of the disciplinary policies that would be applied to him, the disciplinary standards, or of the potential penalties.

- ball inflation guidelines were a club policy, only talked about a fine, and club policies are supposed to apply to clubs (not the player)

- being suspended for "general awareness" of a violation, which had never happened before and is nowhere in the CBA

- non-cooperation only resulted in a fine for all other cases

http://www.bplegal.com/webfiles/New Cliff Notes.pdf

"The legal problem for Elliott and Brady before him is that Article 46 simply doesn’t require the NFL to make any specific witnesses available or share any specific types of notes."

https://www.si.com/nfl/2017/09/05/ezekiel-elliott-dallas-cowboys-suspension-lawsuit-temporary-restraining-order

 
Moonshine said:
Anyone seeing any Elliot movement in your leagues?

Tempted to make a move for him in one of my leagues. He was moved for McKinnon in another one of mine (evidently a clear example of one owner anticipating a suspension and the other banking on a stay until next season). Hard to gauge his value right now.
Click to expand...
I own Elliott (and Morris and McFadden) in both of my $$$ leagues and haven't had so much as a soft inquiry.  I'm waiting and would definitely trade him for the right offer, but not even a sniff-around.

 
Bayhawks said:
Second, the legal system doesn’t work that way: “3 judges are on my side, I win.”  
Click to expand...
Of course it doesn't. But Zeke has 4 federal judge opinions (Mazzant twice, Graves and Crotty) that side with him and state that fundamental fairness applies to the NFL arbitration process. That matters and it weighs on future judges who hear the case. 

Bayhawks said:
The 2 judges that currently matter are the 2 judges who issued the majority decision in the Brady case; who said that Goodell CAN make mistakes, ignore facts & evidence he seems less important, etc as long as he adhere to the CBA.  742 district court judges can be on “your side,” and if 2/3 judges on the circuit court say they’re wrong, those 2 judges’ decision is what matters.  If Zeke loses in circuit court & appeals to the US Supreme Court (& they hear his case),  & he wins a 5-4 decision, those 5 judges on his side are all that matter.
Click to expand...
Not true. The 4 opinions above do matter as they serve as confirmation and guidance. CA2 doesn't have to agree, but they will not ignore them. But CA2 never foreclosed on fundamental fairness as applicable to NFL arbitration in their ruling. They merely said fundamental fairness doesn't apply to collateral witnesses such as Pash.

This is clearly shown in the fact that Crotty read the CA2 ruling and then ruled for Zeke. In his opinion, he stated the NFL was wrong for assuming that CA2 ruled that fundamental fairness didn't apply.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Evilgrin 72 said:
I own Elliott (and Morris and McFadden) in both of my $$$ leagues and haven't had so much as a soft inquiry.  I'm waiting and would definitely trade him for the right offer, but not even a sniff-around.
Click to expand...
As an owner, what level of player would it take to get him from you? I only understand his perceived value from a potential buyer position, and don't own any shares of him myself, so it's interesting to get an owner's perspective.

 
Bayhawks said:
While that's possible, the fact the he got the TRO leads me to think the permanent judge will likely grant it as well.  The people I know in the legal system (not NY, so perhaps it's different there) say that judges tend to "have each other's back;" so she might not want to reverse his decision.  That leads to the assumption that since her colleague granted the "temporary" TRO (that's redundant), she would probably do the same.  Assuming the NFL can't get an expedited (and successful) appeal/overturn, that "permanent" TRO could allow Zeke to play out the year.
Click to expand...
Couldn't agree more. Crotty is a well respected judge. She won't reverse him. Zeke is going to play all year.

 
WheelsUp said:
General, you have also been constantly wrong with your opinion but here you are to continue to tell us how you think it works. This board has no shame with if they are wrong they just keep going, because if they get one thing right and miss on ten others it dont matter, because no one ever holds people accountable in this thread, they just also worry about being right. Hold the people who have been constantly wrong in this thread, they will stop being so free with their opinions if they are held to the fire when everything they say has been wrong.
Click to expand...
You seem like a great guy :lol:

 
ourmanflint said:
Of course it doesn't. But Zeke has 4 federal judge opinions (Mazzant twice, Graves and Crotty) that side with him and state that fundamental fairness applies to the NFL arbitration process. That matters and it weighs on future judges who hear the case. 

Not true. The 4 opinions above do matter as they serve as confirmation and guidance. CA2 doesn't have to agree, but they will not ignore them. But CA2 never foreclosed on fundamental fairness as applicable to NFL arbitration in their ruling. They merely said fundamental fairness doesn't apply to collateral witnesses such as Pash.

This is clearly shown in the fact that Crotty read the CA2 ruling and then ruled for Zeke. In his opinion, he stated the NFL was wrong for assuming that CA2 ruled that fundamental fairness didn't apply.
Click to expand...
Seems disingenuous to continuously cite the three judges that sided with Elliott, and how weighty their opinions must be, but ignore that two other judges took the opposite position in this case.

Also disingenuous to count Mazzant twice.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

JohnnyU
RB Quinshon Judkins, CLE
28 29 30
Replies
1K
Views
69K
Faust
Faust
T
Travdogg's final 2025 mock draft (3 rounds) (post draft grades on page 2)
2
Replies
68
Views
5K
BassNBrew
BassNBrew
JohnnyU
RB Isaiah Davis, Jets
Replies
32
Views
4K
Faust
Faust

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)
Back
Top