The NFLPA filed a response on Thursday evening in support of its motion to vacate the suspensions imposed by NFL commissioner Roger Goodell on four current and former New Orleans Saints players. The NFLPA’s filing directly responds to the filing by the NFL on Wednesday of its opposition to the motion to vacate. The NFLPA’s response, included in the link below, further supports the Players Associations assertions that Goodell has demonstrated partiality in the case, making him an inappropriate arbitrator under the rules of arbitration law required by the Collective Bargaining Agreement.
Beyond the detailed legal arguments in the filing, one new and noteworthy piece of evidence submitted in Thursday’s filing refers to an ESPN segment from 1996 entitled “Smash for Cash” which detailed former NFL player funded incentive pools for legitimate plays. The segment included Reggie White talking about paying $500 for “big hits” on opposing players. At the end of the segment, an NFL spokesperson is quoted as saying that “the program is within the rules as long as players use their own monies, the amounts are not exorbitant and the payments are not for illegal hits.
The filing argues that the NFL’s interpretation in 1996 is also consistent with the current NFL Constitution and Bylaws. Amidst the complex array of legal arguments, the ESPN story referenced in the new filing not only provides new information, it provides a “smoking gun” in terms of a public statement by the league of their own interpretation of NFL rules at the time the story aired.
The NFL filing on Wednesday followed the filing by the NFLPA, representing Will Smith, Anthony Hargrove and Scott Fujita, and by Jonathan Vilma on Monday in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana. Monday’s filings were seeking to have NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell remove himself from the appeals process as it relates to the suspensions he issued to the four players last week. That’s something that the Commissioner, to date, has been unwilling to do. Under the CBA, Goodell can designate responsibility for the internal appeal to someone else.
In its motion, the NFLPA wrote that the, “players seek only what the law requires: an objectively unbiased arbitrator who can provide them with a fundamentally fair process and a bona fide opportunity to defend themselves against the Commissioner’s false charges concerning an alleged “bounty” scheme to encourage injuring NFL players.”
The NFLPA in its motion argued that although Goodell was given the power in the current CBA to discipline players for conduct detrimental to the game, he may only do so if he complies with “governing legal standards.” The NFL is challenging the players’ argument that Goodell failed to comply with governing legal standards.
On September 7, in accordance with the CBA, a three person panel reviewed Goodell’s previous disciplinary decision and then overturned the suspensions of Will Smith (4-games), Johnathan Vilma (entire season), Anthony Hargrove (8-games), and Scott Fujita (4-games). The panel said that Goodell was punishing the players for their involvement in a pay-to-play scheme which falls under the jurisdiction of the System Arbitrator and therefore overturned the suspensions. It directed the Commissioner to refine the parameters of the suspensions and to clarify why discipline was being imposed. Following that decision, Smith, Vilma, Hargrove and Fujita each met with Goodell.
“[The] Commissioner went through the motions of receiving additional evidence and meeting with the players, purportedly to determine if any discipline remained appropriate under his conduct detrimental authority as required by the CBA Appeals Panel,” the NFLPA writes in its motion.
As evidence of the lack of due process the NFLPA points out that the Commissioner re-issued 28 of the 31 games he previously imposed and alleges that his decision ignored conflicting testimony, evidence and failed to objectively evaluate the facts. The motion states that “despite representations that the Commissioner would objectively reconsider the discipline, the NFL orchestrated a charade which took its prior disregard for fair process to new heights.”
The internal (league) appeals hearings for all four players are currently scheduled to take place in New York City next Tuesday according to NFL.com. The filings by the players are asking U.S. District Court Judge Ginger Berrigan to bar Goodell from handling any further action in the bounty matter and appoint a neutral arbitrator.
“I know this: We believe that it was our responsibility to do everything to protect the integrity of the game and player health and safety,” Goodell said Tuesday at the league owners’ meetings in Chicago on the Saints bounty scandal. “This information was brought to us three years ago. We then had new information come up just under a year ago late last season, followed it and I think established very clearly that this was occurring.
“We disclosed it and we are dealing with it because bounties don’t belong in football, and we are going to make sure they aren’t there in the future. That is good for the game.”
In addition, NFL fans have gotten into the legal fray this week, as a group of Saints fans filed a class action lawsuit against Roger Goodell for his actions against the Saints, which have reduced the competitiveness of the team and the value of their season tickets. The fans stated that they purchased season tickets expecting “that the Saints would be capable of competitively fielding a contending team comprised of the finest athletes, and the best coaches … without dictatorial, unreasonable, vindictive, and unfounded, interference from the commissioner and the league, devoid of due process,” the complaint said. The class action suit seeks $5 million in damages.
One Response to “NFLPA Files Memorandum Supporting Vacating Suspensions”