|
Those are both good explanations, but they miss the part about ownership and that sue robinson has to take into consideration disparate punishments. The delicious irony is that the same douche bags who preach about the shield are the same guys who limited their power to enforce player punishments by refusing to punish themselves. The nflpa was locked and loaded with an appeal to complain about snyder, jones and to some extent kraft. They set the benchmark at 0 games which is why the nflpa suggested 0 games. The nfl cannot appeal even though they want 12 games because they know this exposes the owners.
And now this has to be a new precedent set. If Jim irsay gets 0 games for a dui how can a player get 4? How can Watson get 12 games when jones, snyder and kraft get 0? This type of light punishment was set up because the owners ended up tying their own hands.
|