Aaron Rodgers Back to the IR.

[incognito_man]

10 minutes ago, JBURGE25 said:

I'm into this. Stupid sexy Flanders

[JBURGE]

nsfw

[JAF-N72EX]

On 12/27/2017 at 7:09 PM, CWood21 said:

This isn't about what will happen with the NFL.  It's already been shown that nothing will happen to the NFL.  This is about why you think that the Packers should be punished BEYOND what is the "standard" punishment.  IF you want to provide a link to your reasoning, I'd LOVE to hear that.

 

Quote

 

Because I have two separate issues here. The Packers for breaking the rules and the leagues constant mis-handling of situations.  

Problem 1) The leagues own (flawed) rule book and judgment calls.

I'm a firm believer that if a rule is put in place BY the league, then the league should follow that rule as per written in order to remove(or at least lessen) the degree of subjectivity when it comes time to apply those rules. This should be a pretty simple thing to do. Instead, the league constantly becomes very selective on choosing whether or not to ignore their own set of rules and when or when not to apply them and this is just another example of that. Especially when it comes down to punishments and this has been an on-going issue for the last decade (Goodell) and remains one of the biggest problems in the NFL today. Which brings me to problem 2. 

Problem 2) By rule, a team broke IR policy, therefore, they should be forced to follow the said rule and be held accountable for trying to get away with it. No matter how ridiculous the rule is. If the rule is ridiculous, then the league should have revised or remove the ridiculous rule to avoid situations like this. And I would feel the way damn way about any other team.

 

Bottomline, the league dropped the ball here. Once again showcasing exactly why they need to revamp their entire ruling process. 

[CWood21]

4 hours ago, JustAnotherFan said:

Bottomline, the league dropped the ball here. Once again showcasing exactly why they need to revamp their entire ruling process. 

Unless I missed it, I'm still not getting the answer to my question.  Your original comment said that you felt that the Packers should be forced to release Rodgers AND be docked a draft pick(s).  Unless I'm mistaken, the penalty for that is just the release of Rodgers.  Where do you get the notion that the Packers should be docked draft pick(s)?

[JAF-N72EX]

6 hours ago, CWood21 said:

Unless I missed it, I'm still not getting the answer to my question.  Your original comment said that you felt that the Packers should be forced to release Rodgers AND be docked a draft pick(s).  Unless I'm mistaken, the penalty for that is just the release of Rodgers.  Where do you get the notion that the Packers should be docked draft pick(s)?

Having them release Rodgers is not a penalty though, that's just following proper procedure as per written in their own rule book. That would still not be holding the Packers organization accountable for purposely breaking the rules in the first place and trying to get away with it. So being docked a pick or two was my suggestive penalty for this action.

Quote

Problem 2) By rule, a team broke IR policy, therefore, they should be forced to follow the said rule and be held accountable for trying to get away with it. No matter how ridiculous the rule is. If the rule is ridiculous, then the league should have revised or remove the ridiculous rule to avoid situations like this. And I would feel the way damn way about any other team.

 

[Pugger]

2 hours ago, JustAnotherFan said:

Having them release Rodgers is not a penalty though, that's just following proper procedure as per written in their own rule book. That would still not be holding the Packers organization accountable for purposely breaking the rules in the first place and trying to get away with it. So being docked a pick or two was my suggestive penalty for this action.

 

Then your beef should be with the LEAGUE and not the Packers seeing the folks in NY signed off on allowing GB to put Rodgers back on IR.  In effect the NFL brass broke their own rule.  It would disingenuous if the league would then punish the team afterwards to making a move they had no problem with to begin with.

[incognito_man]

3 hours ago, JustAnotherFan said:

Having them release Rodgers is not a penalty though, that's just following proper procedure as per written in their own rule book. That would still not be holding the Packers organization accountable for purposely breaking the rules in the first place and trying to get away with it. So being docked a pick or two was my suggestive penalty for this action.

 

Every holding call on the field now accompanied by losing a draft pick.

That'll show em!

[CWood21]

4 hours ago, JustAnotherFan said:

Having them release Rodgers is not a penalty though, that's just following proper procedure as per written in their own rule book. That would still not be holding the Packers organization accountable for purposely breaking the rules in the first place and trying to get away with it. So being docked a pick or two was my suggestive penalty for this action.

So...you argue that the NFL should have a set penalty in place and follow through with them, which in this case is the Rodgers release?  But on top of that you think they should be docked a draft pick or two?  Laughable.  IF you don't think the release of Rodgers (or any other player they manipulate the IR for) isn't a big enough penalty I don't know what to tell you.  The NFL simply isn't going to come down hard on a relatively minor infraction.  If that were the case, the Patriots should have been docked their Super Bowl for their deflated football and the Seahawks should have as well for their extra practices.

[JAF-N72EX]

39 minutes ago, CWood21 said:

So...you argue that the NFL should have a set penalty in place and follow through with them, which in this case is the Rodgers release?  But on top of that you think they should be docked a draft pick or two?  Laughable.  IF you don't think the release of Rodgers (or any other player they manipulate the IR for) isn't a big enough penalty I don't know what to tell you.  The NFL simply isn't going to come down hard on a relatively minor infraction.  If that were the case, the Patriots should have been docked their Super Bowl for their deflated football and the Seahawks should have as well for their extra practices.

Oh boy....

You clearly don't understand that there's a huge difference between policies and rules. Learn those first and then we can continue this discussion. 

 

[CWood21]

Just now, JustAnotherFan said:

Oh boy....

You clearly don't understand that there's a huge difference between policies and rules. Learn those first and then we can continue this discussion. 

And you can learn to not be condescending.  That would go a long way.  I'm done.  You haven't shown the ability to post respectfully, so I'm not going to feed you anymore.

[JAF-N72EX]

1 hour ago, Pugger said:

Then your beef should be with the LEAGUE and not the Packers seeing the folks in NY signed off on allowing GB to put Rodgers back on IR.  In effect the NFL brass broke their own rule.  It would disingenuous if the league would then punish the team afterwards to making a move they had no problem with to begin with.

Ah, so we're supposed to just ignore the initial reason WHY the league was forced to make a decision in the first place......

[ChazStandard]

44 minutes ago, CWood21 said:

So...you argue that the NFL should have a set penalty in place and follow through with them, which in this case is the Rodgers release?  But on top of that you think they should be docked a draft pick or two?  Laughable.  IF you don't think the release of Rodgers (or any other player they manipulate the IR for) isn't a big enough penalty I don't know what to tell you.  The NFL simply isn't going to come down hard on a relatively minor infraction.  If that were the case, the Patriots should have been docked their Super Bowl for their deflated football and the Seahawks should have as well for their extra practices.

...you do know the Patriots were fined $1million and lost a draft pick for an equipment violation that "probably" happened, right?

[CWood21]

1 minute ago, ChazStandard said:

...you do know the Patriots were fined $1million and lost a draft pick for an equipment violation that "probably" happened, right?

It wasn't just the "probably" likely to happen equipment violation.  It also had to do with the fact that the Patriots weren't exactly helpful in the NFL investigation.  This isn't a real life court case, it isn't innocent beyond a reasonable doubt.  There was more than enough evidence to suggest that the Patriots did indeed tamper with the footballs.  Correct me if I'm wrong, but Brady broke his phone and Belichick wouldn't let the NFL reinterview any of the people involved a 2nd time?

[incognito_man]

4 minutes ago, ChazStandard said:

...you do know the Patriots were fined $1million and lost a draft pick for an equipment violation that "probably" happened, right?

They got that penalty for the ensuing shenanigans, not for the infraction itself.

[Pugger]

39 minutes ago, JustAnotherFan said:

Ah, so we're supposed to just ignore the initial reason WHY the league was forced to make a decision in the first place......

Forced?  Who was forcing the league to do anything?