🦅🤠 NFC East 🤷‍♂️🆘 | Celebrating the Cowboys' 28 Years of Sadness

[MKnight82]

This is how I see Cowboys fans trying to justify not suspending Ezekiel Elliot.  

[Jroc04]

2 minutes ago, Matts4313 said:

There was no line crossed, the woman said so herself. Theres nothing to press charges over. If a line was crossed, than this would be a different conversation. But thats a pretty stupid hypothetical. I mean, your girl could press charges for rape next time your together... but she wont because she is consenting to the act. 

And Gronk used to post pictures with him and pornstars naked online. Youre way off base here. 

 

Isn't that his point? Just opposite spectrum. 

Zeke could have public orgies but just because the girls (guys) say it's ok, should mean the NFL thinks it's ok? The NFL is a private organization. If they feel the need to punish someone that it thinks it's damaging it's brand, then they can. Zeke crossed NFL's moral compass line. That's the only line that matters. 

Why is this difficult?

Your company would probably fire you if you posted your schedule for the upcoming KKK meetings next month on FaceBook. Right?

The NFL, as a whole, is a more conservative company. For good reason. The more baseline they conduct themselves, the broader the income stream. Guys have to fall in line to a more conservative off the field lifestyle or they become a bruise to their franchise which costs the NFL money. It's their product. Their rules.  

[Matts4313]

Just now, MKnight82 said:

Ya see I think you as a Dallas fan are blowing this up to be way more egregious than it is.  A knucklehead employee of a multi-billion industry did some stupid stuff and was reprimanded for it.  There's really nothing more complicated about it than that.  

Thats because you insist on lumping all the acts into the reason for the suspension. Which if the NFL had done, I would have *NO PROBLEM WITH*. Literally - if the league sad "Zeke, your out 6 games because of all the bad press, and all the incidents the past few months" - I would have been 100% on board with it. 

 

But the league is accusing him of beating the tar out of a girl. That girl lied. Its on record that she lied. The police said he didnt do it. The NFL's investigative team said he didnt do it. HE SHOULDN'T BE SUSPEND HIM FOR SOMETHING HE DID NOT DO.

But thats were you and I differ. Im still waiting to know if you would give up 1/3 of your salary if some lobbed a baseless accusation at you. 

[Matts4313]

1 minute ago, Jroc04 said:

Why is this difficult?

Because he didnt get suspended for showing a boob. 

Why is it this difficult to understand? 

He got suspended for beating the hell out of a girl. Not for the boob. The NFL did not punish him for the boob, they barely cared at all. 

[MKnight82]

1 minute ago, Matts4313 said:

Thats because you insist on lumping all the acts into the reason for the suspension. Which if the NFL had done, I would have *NO PROBLEM WITH*. Literally - if the league sad "Zeke, your out 6 games because of all the bad press, and all the incidents the past few months" - I would have been 100% on board with it. 

 

But the league is accusing him of beating the tar out of a girl. That girl lied. Its on record that she lied. The police said he didnt do it. The NFL's investigative team said he didnt do it. HE SHOULDN'T BE SUSPEND HIM FOR SOMETHING HE DID NOT DO.

But thats were you and I differ. Im still waiting to know if you would give up 1/3 of your salary if some lobbed a baseless accusation at you. 

But he did lead to a bunch of bad press and had several other incidents.  

[MKnight82]

5 minutes ago, Matts4313 said:

Thats because you insist on lumping all the acts into the reason for the suspension. Which if the NFL had done, I would have *NO PROBLEM WITH*. Literally - if the league sad "Zeke, your out 6 games because of all the bad press, and all the incidents the past few months" - I would have been 100% on board with it. 

 

But the league is accusing him of beating the tar out of a girl. That girl lied. Its on record that she lied. The police said he didnt do it. The NFL's investigative team said he didnt do it. HE SHOULDN'T BE SUSPEND HIM FOR SOMETHING HE DID NOT DO.

But thats were you and I differ. Im still waiting to know if you would give up 1/3 of your salary if some lobbed a baseless accusation at you. 

I'd also like to point out that you're admitting you think its ok for the NFL as a business to suspend him based on his behavior over the past year.  

Plus, you know that Goodell has the power to suspend people based on the broad category of conduct detrimental to the league.  

So what really is the complaint here?  You're pissed about the wording of his suspension?  Who gives a crap about that?  He deserved to be suspended and was.  End of story.

[Matts4313]

16 minutes ago, MKnight82 said:

But he did lead to a bunch of bad press and had several other incidents.  

None of that is the reason for his suspension though. I dont know how many different ways I can phrase this. I mean, ive literally said it like 3 dozen times over the last few months. 

 

1. They did not suspend him for going to a weed shop

2. They did not suspend him for wreckless driving

3. They did not suspend him for showing a boob

4. They did not suspend him for getting in a fight.

5. They did not suspend him for the bad press associated with any of the above.

_____________________________________

 

^^^ None of that is relevant to the suspension. Are we on the same page?

 

6. They did suspend him for beating up a chick.

a. Their is no credible evidence that he did it

b. the police say he did not do it

c. the NFL says he did not do it

d. her friends say he did not do it

e. she admitted she was lying to "ruin his career"

f. The NFL took all of this information, threw it out the window, and suspended him for strictly point #6.

So when they go to court - the judge isnt going to be like "Well zeke, clearly you are innocent of the domestic abuse, but you did show a boob once". They are going to *ONLY/STRICTLY/100%* be focused on the merits of abuse and the investigative process/hearing that followed.

I literally can not make it any more clear.

Edited October 20, 2017 by Matts4313

[Matts4313]

3 minutes ago, MKnight82 said:

I'd also like to point out that you're admitting you think its ok for the NFL as a business to suspend him based on his behavior over the past year. 

Youre just now picking up on that point? Ive been saying that ad nausuem since like August. How have you not understood that? My entire point:

a. Based on the actual terms for why Zeke was suspended, he has a legal/ethical case that he should not be suspended. His investigation was unfair and as far as I can see from all public knowledge, the entire thing is bush league from the NFL. Its wrong for him to be suspended for beating up a chick if he did not commit the crime.

 

b. If the NFL had attempted to suspend him for being a knucklehead the past year - they totally have a legit case. But not only did they not do that, they also notated in his suspension that he was not being punished for the other things. They literally said "we dont care about the rest of it". 

 

c. If the league doesnt care about boob-gate, than I dont get why you all make a big deal about it. Its not legally or morally wrong. Same with the weedshop.

[MKnight82]

10 minutes ago, Matts4313 said:

None of that is the reason for his suspension though. I dont know how many different ways I can phrase this. I mean, ive literally said it like 3 dozen times over the last few months. 

 

1. They did not suspend him for going to a weed shop

2. They did not suspend him for wreckless driving

3. They did not suspend him for showing a boob

4. They did not suspend him for getting in a fight.

5. They did not suspend him for the bad press associated with any of the above.

_____________________________________

 

^^^ None of that is relevant to the suspension. Are we on the same page?

 

6. They did suspend him for beating up a chick.

a. Their is no credible evidence that he did it

b. the police say he did not do it

c. the NFL says he did not do it

d. her friends say he did not do it

e. she admitted she was lying to "ruin his career"

f. The NFL took all of this information, threw it out the window, and suspended him for strictly point #6.

So when they go to court - the judge isnt going to be like "Well zeke, clearly you are innocent of the suspension, but you did show a boob once". They are going to *ONLY/STRICTLY/100%* be focused on the merits of abuse and the investigative process/hearing that followed.

I literally can not make it any more clear.

No we aren't on the same page.  He was suspended for violating the league's personal conduct policy which has a much broader scope than you are suggesting here.  

[Matts4313]

Just now, MKnight82 said:

No we aren't on the same page.  He was suspended for violating the league's personal conduct policy which has a much broader scope than you are suggesting here.  

.......

He is suspended for breaking the domestic abuse clause in the personal conduct policy. And in the letter they sent to Zeke, they literally said they were not taking action on the other incidents. IIRC - they even specifically addressed that he was not being punished for showing a boob. 

[MKnight82]

Just now, Matts4313 said:

.......

He is suspended for breaking the domestic abuse clause in the personal conduct policy. And in the letter they sent to Zeke, they literally said they were not taking action on the other incidents. IIRC - they even specifically addressed that he was not being punished for showing a boob. 

And?  

He did all the other stupid crap.  The official statement from the NFL was that he was suspended for violating the league's personal conduct policy.  

He's going to be suspended.

If he continues to appeal he will lose.

You even admit he deserves to be suspended for his behavior.

Why is this even a conversation?

[Jroc04]

6 minutes ago, Matts4313 said:

Because he didnt get suspended for showing a boob. 

Why is it this difficult to understand? 

He got suspended for beating the hell out of a girl. Not for the boob. The NFL did not punish him for the boob, they barely cared at all. 

I didn't say anything about him getting suspended and what for. You said, there was no line crossed. I objected to it. 

I made a post earlier defending his right to appeal as much as he can. He should. It's the league's burden to produce evidence and convict without a shadow of a doubt. Which is why this is taking so long.

But defending his indiscretions because the parties involved were ok with the incidents are short-sighted and narrow-minded. He's in the public eye and is representing his team every second he's in witness to another. It's the price they pay for being compensated as a millionaire. He reflects poorly on himself and his company and that company has its right to tell him it's not ok. For every scummy fan saying it's ok for him to act like that, there's another fan, and probably way more, saying his actions are morally corrupt. The NFL has to protect its image against that. 

And the NFL did care about the boob. They wrote a letter saying,

 “your behavior during this event was inappropriate and disturbing, and reflected a lack of respect for the woman.”

and 

“suggests a pattern of poor judgment.”

I wouldn't want my company shinging that kind of light on me, discipline or not. That's a pretty sturn letter. 

Which can explain why the mounting indiscretions would have the NFL so willing to go after him. And to save his career basically. 

Something else I don't understand why you're so vehemently defending him. He NEEDS discipline to right his life and career. He keeps acting up without discipline and he'll find himself out of the league in short order. Is that ok with you? Is any of this?

[Jlash]

Can we all agree that Zeke is a moron and move on?

[Matts4313]

Just now, MKnight82 said:

And?  

He did all the other stupid crap.  The official statement from the NFL was that he was suspended for violating the league's personal conduct policy.  

He's going to be suspended.

If he continues to appeal he will lose.

You even admit he deserves to be suspended for his behavior.

Why is this even a conversation?

Now Im getting frustrated. So basically you have no working knowledge of anything involved and are just trolling me? You literally just made a point - it was 100% false - and when I told you that, you respond with "And"?

1. I never said he deserves to be  suspended for the other crap. I said I would have been 100% okay with it. The NFL is within its jurisdiction to suspend based on all those events. No, I personally do not think he should miss 1/3 of his pay/work year based on showing a boob or (allegedly) getting in a fight. But I would have understood their stance.

2. The official statement from the NFL is that he is being suspended for: "Actions that happened between July 17, 2016 and July 21, 2016 and separately on March 11, 2017."

A. The events of July are completely bogus, as has been outlined for you numerous times.

B. The incident on March 11th is boobgate. The league found that (paraphrased) "It was disturbing, shows a lack of respect for women and a pattern of poor judgement". But here is the key part - and read this carefully "it will not be considered a separate incident for the basis of additional punishment". <== In layman's terms - we are calling you out for it, but on its own it does not merit its own punishment. We are lumping it in with the rest to prove you can be kinda of a jerk.

3. It further goes on to explain that "that the policy is clear, the first offense for *physical force against a woman* is 6 games." (note it does not say physical force against a woman + bad press + showing a boob+ allegedly getting in a fight). 

 

https://usatcowboyswire.files.wordpress.com/2017/08/ezekiel-elliott-discipline-letter_8-11-17.pdf

 

Please attempt to at least know what your talking about in this if you are going to debate with me... for months... 

[Matts4313]

13 minutes ago, Jroc04 said:

I didn't say anything about him getting suspended and what for. You said, there was no line crossed. I objected to it. 

I made a post earlier defending his right to appeal as much as he can. He should. It's the league's burden to produce evidence and convict without a shadow of a doubt. Which is why this is taking so long.

But defending his indiscretions because the parties involved were ok with the incidents are short-sighted and narrow-minded. He's in the public eye and is representing his team every second he's in witness to another. It's the price they pay for being compensated as a millionaire. He reflects poorly on himself and his company and that company has its right to tell him it's not ok. For every scummy fan saying it's ok for him to act like that, there's another fan, and probably way more, saying his actions are morally corrupt. The NFL has to protect its image against that.

1. I meant no line was crossed between he and her. It wasnt harassment or sexual abuse. From a legal and moral stand point, two adults were being drunk and flirtatious. But neither party was victim to any offense. If she had not been consenting, than he would have crossed the line both legally and morally. 

2. I understand your point. I really do. I get that he reflected poorly on himself. I agree that he needs to hold himself to a higher standard now as a professional instead of a fratboy. As I stated, the league would be in its jurisdiction to punish him - as would the Cowboys. And hopefully they did. Garrett is pretty good about internal punishment, though he refuses to talk about it publicly. 

Just like weed is legal but the NFL will suspend you for it, so is boobgate. They could have suspended him for that incident. And we wouldnt be talking. But the NFL said that it does not merit its own punishment (it wasnt a big deal). So we are back again to the fact that he is suspended for domestic violence that he did not commit.

----------------------------------------------------

 

As for the rest of your comment, both you and MK are twisting my stance because I am a Cowboys fan. I actually think the suspension will be good for him. I am arguing this from a legal perspective only. Legally he should not be suspended for abuse. Legally nothing was wrong with showing boobs at a party.