Actually I was shocked (shocked I tell you) to learn the NFL has hired Paul Clement to argue the matter. News flash to the Brady camp ... this barrister is no joke and has argued before SCOTUS more than anyone else on earth right now. He argued such cases as ObamaCare and DOMA to name others ... and is likely going to wind up on the very bench he often argues before depending which was the Presidential election goes in 2016, and the health of one Justice Ginsberg. The Brady camp would be wise to hire some higher power staff on their side to match.
But alas, I am not talking about that particular brand of NFL buffoonery, it is the type where the NFL continues to fine players for their "uniform violations" which support good causes. While I wrote about DeAngelo Williams the other day, today it is William Gay and his fine of $5787 for wearing purple cleats to support his mother who was killed in an act of domestic violence.
Oh look, here is a handy list of NFL players who have been arrested for domestic violence in the last couple of years from SI. Yes indeed, we certainly don't want any NFL player to make a positive statement about domestic violence since the league is doing such a good job disciplining its players for it.
Just as a casual reminder regarding the rageaholic Cowboy, Greg Hardy and what he was found guilty of (from SI):
On May 13, Hardy was arrested for communicating threats and assault against his then-girlfriend. Hardy reportedly threw the woman into a bathroom, then dragged her into the bedroom, choked her, picked her up again, and threw her on a couch covered in firearms. He also reportedly threatened to shoot her if she told anyone about the fight.
You want to do something constructive NFL? While you have the cancer scam going in October ... why don't you continue in November with "Stop Domestic Violence" and give everyone purple cleats, gloves, and towels. $h!t you can even make some money on it, like you do the cancer promotion. For the love of all things holy though, stop protecting these thugs, and let players like Gay who have been touched by this crime wear something purple.
To do otherwise continues to deepen the turmoil the NFL finds itself in with regard to player conduct and the absurd punishments it hands out ... which (spoiler alert) will be further degraded by the decision in the 2nd Circuit.
Please oh please let deflategate go to SCOTUS when the NFL gets crushed there ... and please let Justice Scalia write for the majority. #lawgeek
You miss two obvious points. (1) It is called a uniform for a reason. (2) The players' union agreed to these rules in the Collective Bargaining Agreement. Gay would have done better to publicly donate $6000 to the anti-violence charity of his choice.
ReplyDeleteActually Frank, I didn't, albeit they were intentionally not obvious in this particular post.
Delete(1) I spoke about the difficulty the NFL would be in should it deviate substantially from its uniform policy is my last linked article on point.
Specifically:
"Listen, I get why the NFL can't support having players wearing what they want all the time, it would descend an already morally challenged league into visual chaos. There are uniform standards to uphold and sponsors pay big money for their stuff to be seen. I understand."
That said, if you read the Bleacher Report article, you would have noted Williams has been wearing "Find the Cure" eye black for (5) years with nary a whisper from the NFL. Weird huh?
This also goes to your point (2) where we agree the "standard" is in the CBA, yet the NFL is doing what it wants and not following it's own rules that were agreed to. So they are not uniform in enforcing their uniform policy.
The second part of your point (2) is also flawed as players must donate the fine to the charity of their choice ... and guess where it went.
So the players win by bringing attention to their cause as any fine goes to the charity they are championing anyway and the NFL "leadership" continues to make a mess out of a feel good story that legitimately can do some good.
That is the obvious point here.
Thanks for reading and taking the time to comment,
KB