Jump to content

No suspension for Reuben Foster


A TRAIN 89

Recommended Posts

Best case for us. I mean we took a chance and I think by what they reported it seems like the checks are to let him know even without real incident the news is bad so they got him for a repeat. So hopefully this guys here healthy and let’s see what we can find in this draft class.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's the best news we could have possibly heard. It's just like getting another first round pick to be honest 

I know we won't do it but could you imagine the speed at ilb if we drafted Devin Bush at 15 to pair with Reuben?

Edited by Bo Duke
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

45 minutes ago, Bo Duke said:

That's the best news we could have possibly heard. It's just like getting another first round pick to be honest 

I know we won't do it but could you imagine the speed at ilb if we drafted Devin Bush at 15 to pair with Reuben?

That’s who I’ve mocked too us I love that pick!!!

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Foster and and NFLPA need to file a grievance. There's no way he should lose two game checks if he's not being suspended. The NFL rules for players are out of control and how they determine penalties. There is uniformity.

If I was a player, this would have to end in the next CBA.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, turtle28 said:

Foster and and NFLPA need to file a grievance. There's no way he should lose two game checks if he's not being suspended. The NFL rules for players are out of control and how they determine penalties. There is uniformity.

If I was a player, this would have to end in the next CBA.

I think he should take the gift he was given and let it go. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, lavar703 said:

I think he should take the gift he was given and let it go. 

If the NFL is taking two games checks but not handing out a suspension they're admitting there's no proof he did anything wrong. So, he shouldn't have two game checks taken. It's an easy case to make for any union rep.

Edited by turtle28
Link to comment
Share on other sites

50 minutes ago, turtle28 said:

If the NFL is taking two games checks but not handing out a suspension they're admitting there's no proof he did anything wrong. So, he shouldn't have two game checks taken. It's an easy case to make for any union rep.

He took it because while he did nothing he loses the checks since because while theirs no evidence it was a publicly bad image for months and could have been suspended for that alone being a repeat!!! This is him showing he appreciates his chance

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, turtle28 said:

Foster and and NFLPA need to file a grievance. There's no way he should lose two game checks if he's not being suspended. The NFL rules for players are out of control and how they determine penalties. There is uniformity.

If I was a player, this would have to end in the next CBA.

I completely agree here. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, ripsean21 said:

He took it because while he did nothing he loses the checks since because while theirs no evidence it was a publicly bad image for months and could have been suspended for that alone being a repeat!!! This is him showing he appreciates his chance

Bad image? For what? It ended up being nothing that could be proven.

I'm tired of athletes being guilty in the eye of public opinion before actually being proven guilty by the court of law just like everyone else. Innocent until proven guilty.

This has to change. If I was a player I’d strike over it if they league won't change it.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, turtle28 said:

Bad image? For what? It ended up being nothing that could be proven.

I'm tired of athletes being guilty in the eye of public opinion before actually being proven guilty by the court of law just like everyone else. Innocent until proven guilty.

This has to change. If I was a player I’d strike over it if they league won't change it.

I see what you're trying to say, and I agree when it comes to Foster (since she has recanted), but the conduct policies in every contract also allow this to happen prior to a court finding a person guilty. Nor should a business always have to wait for the slow wheels of justice in order to mete out punishment. 

For example -> the Kareem Hunt video was damning. And while I don't think he;s been convicted of anything yet, that was enough to warrant a punishment IMHO.

But for this one since there is no evidence? Yeah, not sure why they can get away with it

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Thaiphoon said:

I see what you're trying to say, and I agree when it comes to Foster (since she has recanted), but the conduct policies in every contract also allow this to happen prior to a court finding a person guilty. Nor should a business always have to wait for the slow wheels of justice in order to mete out punishment. 

For example -> the Kareem Hunt video was damning. And while I don't think he;s been convicted of anything yet, that was enough to warrant a punishment IMHO.

But for this one since there is no evidence? Yeah, not sure why they can get away with it

It's not about getting away with it. It's about the NFL as a business being able to circumvent the legal system of the USA. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, turtle28 said:

It's not about getting away with it. It's about the NFL as a business being able to circumvent the legal system of the USA. 

Except they are not. There's nothing that states that if someone is accused of doing something that a business MUST wait to punish/fire that person until it goes to trial and the jury renders a verdict. 

In the NFL, the same thing. In Hunt's case, they didn't need to wait for a conviction. The video evidence was enough to show that he did it. And given that the conduct policies are in every contract. And every player who signs agrees to that contract, then it is enough for the NFL to punish the player. 

In Foster's case, it was an unproven allegation that had no evidence to back it up. So I'm not sure what the NFL could hang their hat on to justify forfeiture of 2 game checks. Even without waiting for the conviction or acquittal, the NFL still needs to have evidence in order to punish, IMHO.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...