There are 141 users in the forums

Remember
Not a member? Register Now!

The NFL thinks it's above the justice system

Originally posted by crzy:
In ANY job, if someone is suspended based on an UNPROVEN accusation, then that is WRONGFUL termination.

Originally posted by BirdmanJr:
Exactly, if I'm accused of slapping a b***h at work twice but they don't find me guilty for anything you think my job doesn't have the right to suspend me?

Absolutely. They have no right to suspend you based on an accusation unless that accusation is proven.


It's a simple concept. There should be no punishment unless there is proof.

Thats ridiculous. I think you need to start your own company man, lets see how much sense that would make to you
  • crzy
  • Veteran
  • Posts: 39,284
Originally posted by danimal:
Originally posted by crzy:
In ANY job, if someone is suspended based on an UNPROVEN accusation, then that is WRONGFUL termination.

Originally posted by BirdmanJr:
Exactly, if I'm accused of slapping a b***h at work twice but they don't find me guilty for anything you think my job doesn't have the right to suspend me?

Absolutely. They have no right to suspend you based on an accusation unless that accusation is proven.


It's a simple concept. There should be no punishment unless there is proof.

Thats ridiculous. I think you need to start your own company man, lets see how much sense that would make to you

You think it's fair to punish people in real job situations based on hearsay and accusations?

If a person is charged with a crime, convincted of a crime, caught on videotape doing something immoral, or there's at least ONE witness who saw this person doing something against company policy.....then that's completely different.


Ben was only suspended because he was tried in the court of public opinion which is BS.
Originally posted by crzy:
Originally posted by danimal:
Originally posted by crzy:
In ANY job, if someone is suspended based on an UNPROVEN accusation, then that is WRONGFUL termination.

Originally posted by BirdmanJr:
Exactly, if I'm accused of slapping a b***h at work twice but they don't find me guilty for anything you think my job doesn't have the right to suspend me?

Absolutely. They have no right to suspend you based on an accusation unless that accusation is proven.


It's a simple concept. There should be no punishment unless there is proof.

Thats ridiculous. I think you need to start your own company man, lets see how much sense that would make to you

You think it's fair to punish people in real job situations based on hearsay and accusations?

If a person is charged with a crime, convincted of a crime, caught on videotape doing something immoral, or there's at least ONE witness who saw this person doing something against company policy.....then that's completely different.


Ben was only suspended because he was tried in the court of public opinion which is BS.

Fair is a juvenile concept. I am strictly asking you to put yourself in the shoes of somebody who is looking out for the bottomline. Unless of course you want a society where nobody would ever start a company because their hands are tied at every turn. That doesn't sound too good does it.
[ Edited by danimal on Apr 22, 2010 at 11:53 AM ]
Originally posted by crzy:
Originally posted by danimal:
Originally posted by crzy:
In ANY job, if someone is suspended based on an UNPROVEN accusation, then that is WRONGFUL termination.

Originally posted by BirdmanJr:
Exactly, if I'm accused of slapping a b***h at work twice but they don't find me guilty for anything you think my job doesn't have the right to suspend me?

Absolutely. They have no right to suspend you based on an accusation unless that accusation is proven.


It's a simple concept. There should be no punishment unless there is proof.

Thats ridiculous. I think you need to start your own company man, lets see how much sense that would make to you

You think it's fair to punish people in real job situations based on hearsay and accusations?

If a person is charged with a crime, convincted of a crime, caught on videotape doing something immoral, or there's at least ONE witness who saw this person doing something against company policy.....then that's completely different.


Ben was only suspended because he was tried in the court of public opinion which is BS.

how many times at a place of employment, do people get suspended/fired for doing something "not illegal"

The NFL has a company policy that Big Ben violated....he gets suspended
  • crzy
  • Veteran
  • Posts: 39,284
Originally posted by danimal:
Originally posted by crzy:
Originally posted by danimal:
Originally posted by crzy:
In ANY job, if someone is suspended based on an UNPROVEN accusation, then that is WRONGFUL termination.

Originally posted by BirdmanJr:
Exactly, if I'm accused of slapping a b***h at work twice but they don't find me guilty for anything you think my job doesn't have the right to suspend me?

Absolutely. They have no right to suspend you based on an accusation unless that accusation is proven.


It's a simple concept. There should be no punishment unless there is proof.

Thats ridiculous. I think you need to start your own company man, lets see how much sense that would make to you

You think it's fair to punish people in real job situations based on hearsay and accusations?

If a person is charged with a crime, convincted of a crime, caught on videotape doing something immoral, or there's at least ONE witness who saw this person doing something against company policy.....then that's completely different.


Ben was only suspended because he was tried in the court of public opinion which is BS.

Fair is a juvenile concept. I am strictly asking you to put yourself in the shoes of somebody who is looking out for the bottomline. Unless of course you want a society where nobody would ever start a company because their hands are tied at every turn. That doesn't sound too good does it.

Well, I guess I live by a different set of principles then.

And don't think that I care for Ben Roethlisberger. I hate the Steelers and I can't stand Big Ben.

I'd argue the same thing with anybody. The judicial system decided Big Ben did nothing wrong, and I just feel that the NFL should abide by that.
he violated a company policy and was reprimanded for it. Nothing too egregious about that. Remember how much image is tied to the NFL and he is making the NFL look bad. The NFL brands itself as being marketable to everyone and if they don't act on something that makes them look like they harbor and support bad actions and bad people, then they'll lose (potentially) audience.

If he was banned from the league, then you would have a point.
Originally posted by crzy:
Originally posted by danimal:
Originally posted by crzy:
Originally posted by danimal:
Originally posted by crzy:
In ANY job, if someone is suspended based on an UNPROVEN accusation, then that is WRONGFUL termination.

Originally posted by BirdmanJr:
Exactly, if I'm accused of slapping a b***h at work twice but they don't find me guilty for anything you think my job doesn't have the right to suspend me?

Absolutely. They have no right to suspend you based on an accusation unless that accusation is proven.


It's a simple concept. There should be no punishment unless there is proof.

Thats ridiculous. I think you need to start your own company man, lets see how much sense that would make to you

You think it's fair to punish people in real job situations based on hearsay and accusations?

If a person is charged with a crime, convincted of a crime, caught on videotape doing something immoral, or there's at least ONE witness who saw this person doing something against company policy.....then that's completely different.


Ben was only suspended because he was tried in the court of public opinion which is BS.

Fair is a juvenile concept. I am strictly asking you to put yourself in the shoes of somebody who is looking out for the bottomline. Unless of course you want a society where nobody would ever start a company because their hands are tied at every turn. That doesn't sound too good does it.

Well, I guess I live by a different set of principles then.

And don't think that I care for Ben Roethlisberger. I hate the Steelers and I can't stand Big Ben.

I'd argue the same thing with anybody. The judicial system decided Big Ben did nothing wrong, and I just feel that the NFL should abide by that.

well, technically, the defendant dropped the case and there wasnt enough evidence to prove one way or the other.
Originally posted by Chief:
Maybe because the justice system is f**ked up, Rapistberger deserves a lot worse.

helll yeah. this
Originally posted by Chief:
Maybe because the justice system is f**ked up, Rapistberger deserves a lot worse.

this.


Originally posted by lamontb:
I feel sorry for the people that don't understand why he was suspended

and this.
Ben wasn't suspended the first time this happened, with the Nevada case. However now with two accusations in less than one year it's clear that Ben is behaving in a way that Gooddell finds unacceptable, I mean even Ben admitted that something happened and that he acted inappropriately. And the whole bodyguard blocking the friend thing? That makes him look very bad.

You don't see this sort of thing happening with Peyton Manning or Patrick Willis. For two accusations in less than a year to occur, I completely agree with the league in suspending him and having him take corrective action, just as any company with employees and expected behavioral standards would.
Originally posted by crzy:
Originally posted by danimal:
Originally posted by crzy:
Originally posted by danimal:
Originally posted by crzy:
In ANY job, if someone is suspended based on an UNPROVEN accusation, then that is WRONGFUL termination.

Originally posted by BirdmanJr:
Exactly, if I'm accused of slapping a b***h at work twice but they don't find me guilty for anything you think my job doesn't have the right to suspend me?

Absolutely. They have no right to suspend you based on an accusation unless that accusation is proven.


It's a simple concept. There should be no punishment unless there is proof.

Thats ridiculous. I think you need to start your own company man, lets see how much sense that would make to you

You think it's fair to punish people in real job situations based on hearsay and accusations?

If a person is charged with a crime, convincted of a crime, caught on videotape doing something immoral, or there's at least ONE witness who saw this person doing something against company policy.....then that's completely different.


Ben was only suspended because he was tried in the court of public opinion which is BS.

Fair is a juvenile concept. I am strictly asking you to put yourself in the shoes of somebody who is looking out for the bottomline. Unless of course you want a society where nobody would ever start a company because their hands are tied at every turn. That doesn't sound too good does it.

Well, I guess I live by a different set of principles then.

And don't think that I care for Ben Roethlisberger. I hate the Steelers and I can't stand Big Ben.

I'd argue the same thing with anybody. The judicial system decided Big Ben did nothing wrong, and I just feel that the NFL should abide by that.

Don't say abide by that. Just say what you mean. You think they should eat it.

Clearly we have different principles. I am sensitive to workers rights AND I sympathize with business owners as well. YOu seem content to just ignore the latter.

What if the NFL lost fans because of this incident? What if there will now be some tangible amount of ticket sales gone, merchandise sales gone, ad values decreased?

Sorry NFL owners, just eat the losses because the Justice system tells you to, and that would be fair.

Like I said, come talk to us when you are a business owner who has a problem employee who is slick enough to never get popped yet his mischief causes you loss of clients regardless. Come talk to us than and lets see how fair you would be
  • crzy
  • Veteran
  • Posts: 39,284
lol at the NFL losing business owners based on this incident. That's a good one

If the NFL survived Leonard Little, Donte Stallworth, Michael Vick....I think the NFL will survive this rape allegation.
  • BigRon
  • Veteran
  • Posts: 14,778
In the Criminal Justice system. you are guilty if proven by commission/
In the Celebrety Justice system, you are guilty by association.
  • crzy
  • Veteran
  • Posts: 39,284
The NFL Player's Union is completely useless, by the way. It should just dissolve.

Not only are they the only major pro sports league without guaranteed contracts, but they let Roger Goodell do whatever he wants.
Originally posted by crzy:
lol at the NFL losing business owners based on this incident. That's a good one

If the NFL survived Leonard Little, Donte Stallworth, Michael Vick....I think the NFL will survive this rape allegation.

I take it back. Do NOT start your own business.

I am fairly certain business people don't track themselves by having meetings to determine if they are still surviving or not. Any perceived notion of even a small loss is closely inspected....so that way one day your business just not just die from neglect

And yes the NFL has survived all those other dudes.

Gee, I wonder if that has anything to do with the fact they SUSPEND players.

Agree with it or not...the NFL owners and commissioner is convinced they save customers by suspending players.

And you point to how successful the NFL is. Exactly, which is why from a business perspective I don't question their methods.
[ Edited by danimal on Apr 22, 2010 at 12:31 PM ]