Quote:
Originally Posted by Tuckdaddy
As you see below and like I said before Roger gets to decide what is detrimental to the game. It's his opinion that he needs to have a conversation with them and he has the power to do so. Note the "Public Confidence" reference. "Note the Stimulants or other drugs for the purpose of attempting to enhance on-field performance"
This is the paragraph that gives him everything. Does it suck? For the players it does for sure but this is what the owners all fought for so bashing him for doing what they want him to do is not really fair.
|
Yes, as I stated above he probably does have the authority to suspend for conduct detrimental, based on the recent rulings. The question is whether one provision trumps literally everything else in the agreement. The answer seems to be "yes".
"bashing him for doing what they want him to do"? No, it's bashing him for what he does. The owners fought to give him plenty of power and authority, but is he using it wisely and fairly? I think many would argue that he is not. He's using it like a hammer when he could use it like a knife.
And for that reason if no other, (1) NFL/NFLPA relations are at/near an all-time low, and (2) I'd be shocked if there wasn't an extended and bitter strike/lockout after 2020, and I'll be on the players side for perhaps the first time in my life. The NFLPA must get an independent arbitrator to rule on this things, because they absolutely cannot trust Herr Kommissar to run a fair process.