What is the contact information for the NFL league office? (3 Viewers)

[bergeaux]

What's with all the naysayers? The doom and gloom? Is it really too much to ask to put forth just a bit of effort for your favorite team?

Email here : Roger.Goodell2@nfl.net

Send mail here : National Football League
280 Park Avenue
New York, NY 10017

Call here : 1-212-450-2000

Sent to that Email address:

Mr. Goodell,

I have been continually disappointed with the way that the NFL has handled the StarCaps situation. From the revelation that the NFL knew that the StarCaps product was tainted and didn’t tell the players after it being on the approved list, to the seemingly haphazard way that things have been handled in the offseason up until now.

I hope you realize that this entire episode would be better dropped for the NFL’s sake. It really makes the organization seem unreasonable and poorly managed.

Respectfully,

Jean-Paul Bergeaux

 

[IceHot]

I read about 90% of that legal pdf....and unfortunately I cant get behind this.

The MN boys arent getting off because they are from MN they are getting of because MN drug testing laws are different.

How can you suggest that 3 guys from LA should be able to violate Drug Testing contracts but the rest of the population in the entire state has to abide by them.

Seems to me your sense of entitlement is mightly skewed by the desired outcome that appears unfair on the surface.

While I disagree with the way the NFL handled the knowledge of the Butameth....chemical that portion of the ruling was upheld for all 5 players.

 

[taygolf]

im sorry, who of the 3 players that might be effected by the starcaps is "one of the best saints ever"

 

[mid-city fan]

Unfortunately, I think Professor is right...

They have gotten too high on themselves to listen to the people who make them successful. It's the first sign of a coming collapse. Eventually it will come back to haunt the NFL, but it may take some time.

I don't look at it that way. Look at how RG responded to the issue in his recent Chat on NFL.com...

Brian Hildreth, Atlanta


Mr. Commissioner, do you have the ability to dismiss the StarCaps pursuit against the Minnesota Vikings defensive tackles ? If so, why are you still pursuing ?

Commissioner Roger Goodell, NFL.com




Brian, this is a legal matter to protect the integrity of our collectively bargained drug program. It has been held as the highest standard for drug programs in professional sports and we don't feel it should be compromised. We are expecting a decision from the appellate court any day

I think the NFL looks at this issue, especially with the spotlight of publicity that has come as the issue drags on, as going to the heart of it's drug policy. If they make arbitrary exceptions to a clear written policy, they can no longer claim the policy is applied evenly...so the policy falls apart. They have to take a hard line to make the policy stick. The recent court ruling is not the end of this...not even close. This issues cuts at the heart of the collective bargaining process and will end up having wide-ranging effects on the future CBA negotiations.

 

[efil4stnias]

I don't look at it that way. Look at how RG responded to the issue in his recent Chat on NFL.com...

I think the NFL looks at this issue, especially with the spotlight of publicity that has come as the issue drags on, as going to the heart of it's drug policy. If they make arbitrary exceptions to a clear written policy, they can no longer claim the policy is applied evenly...so the policy falls apart. They have to take a hard line to make the policy stick. The recent court ruling is not the end of this...not even close. This issues cuts at the heart of the collective bargaining process and will end up having wide-ranging effects on the future CBA negotiations.

and those negotiations begin after this season. All the more reason for the NFL to make this go away. and soon.

 

[MSUSousaphone]

Yeah. Ok I don't know where you've been but they did that. They're getting the shaft about as hard as one can get "the shaft" (shut yo mouth). After all, Deuce McAllister himself sent it in for review, and it was approved.

lus-un2:

It does sound like several people missed that somehow...

 

[bergeaux]

I don't look at it that way. Look at how RG responded to the issue in his recent Chat on NFL.com...

I think the NFL looks at this issue, especially with the spotlight of publicity that has come as the issue drags on, as going to the heart of it's drug policy. If they make arbitrary exceptions to a clear written policy, they can no longer claim the policy is applied evenly...so the policy falls apart. They have to take a hard line to make the policy stick. The recent court ruling is not the end of this...not even close. This issues cuts at the heart of the collective bargaining process and will end up having wide-ranging effects on the future CBA negotiations.

It's not arbitrary if they KNEW of a problem with a product that was on the "approved" list and removed it and didn't tell the players. That's not an exception, that's reality and reason.

The whole thing comes across as arrogant and pig-headed. "We can do no wrong" says the NFL.

Um, yes you can and you did.

 

[IceHot]

It's not arbitrary if they KNEW of a problem with a product that was on the "approved" list and removed it and didn't tell the players. That's not an exception, that's reality and reason.

Actually you are wrong there. I read that part of the legal pdf.

The CBA clearly and legally gave them the right not to inform any of the players and yet still hold them responsible for what goes into their body.

That part of the issue could not be challenged legally.
(While I dont agree with that professionally or morally thats not whats at issue).

The only part that can be chalenged is the that the NFL did not follow MN drug testing laws.

I see how that can exempt 2 guys from MN, but I see no rational reason how that can exempt 3 guys from LA.

 

[Grumpy Old Manatee]

I read about 90% of that legal pdf....and unfortunately I cant get behind this.

The MN boys arent getting off because they are from MN they are getting of because MN drug testing laws are different.

How can you suggest that 3 guys from LA should be able to violate Drug Testing contracts but the rest of the population in the entire state has to abide by them.

Seems to me your sense of entitlement is mightly skewed by the desired outcome that appears unfair on the surface.

While I disagree with the way the NFL handled the knowledge of the Butameth....chemical that portion of the ruling was upheld for all 5 players.

But are not all players of all teams considered employed by the NFL and not their respective teams? Perhaps I'm mistaken, but I thought that all players were basically considered "contract workers" for the National Football League? If that's the case, shouldn't all the players be subject to drug testing rules of the locality of their "employer"? If not, then what's to stop a state from passing some bogus law allowing use of POD's for "professional" athletes? Sure, it's far fetched and even a bit silly, but, c'mon? Are, say, GM employees in Detroit tested or treated any differently than GM employees in Tennessee?

Just wonderin' while I'm wanderin'...

MG

 

[Whodatarian9]

As I was scrolling down, I did not take time to read the letter that was posted. Just like nobody of importance in the NFL office will.

 

[IceHot]

But are not all players of all teams considered employed by the NFL and not their respective teams? Perhaps I'm mistaken, but I thought that all players were basically considered "contract workers" for the National Football League? If that's the case, shouldn't all the players be subject to drug testing rules of the locality of their "employer"? If not, then what's to stop a state from passing some bogus law allowing use of POD's for "professional" athletes? Sure, it's far fetched and even a bit silly, but, c'mon? Are, say, GM employees in Detroit tested or treated any differently than GM employees in Tennessee?

Just wonderin' while I'm wanderin'...

MG

In that legal pdf it goes over the court rulings that a CBA can not have jursidiction over state laws. Believe me Godell wishes it did.

I think it was the Brown vs NFL case where the guy got hit by the referee flag. The CBA cannot protect the NFLs intrest over state laws.

The NFL wants to suspend all players thats what they are trying to do.

The MN players are escaping this by an MN law.

Thats no excuse for the LA players. There is no such LA law to protect them.

 

[Jonesy77]

There are maybe 3 people on this site with the knowledge and ability to craft a letter to the league that would be beneficial to our suspended players. Unless we relegate that duty to any combination of those 3 people, I would say any letters are only going to hurt their suspension chances.

 

[bergeaux]

Actually you are wrong there. I read that part of the legal pdf.

The CBA clearly and legally gave them the right not to inform any of the players and yet still hold them responsible for what goes into their body.

That part of the issue could not be challenged legally.
(While I dont agree with that professionally or morally thats not whats at issue).

The only part that can be chalenged is the that the NFL did not follow MN drug testing laws.

I see how that can exempt 2 guys from MN, but I see no rational reason how that can exempt 3 guys from LA.

That's a cop out answer by the NFL in my judgment.

All authorities that enforce the rules and laws have to be judicial in making decisions. It's how the world works. Judges and juries declare people innocent who make MISTAKES all the time. Even though they might have broken the law.

Is defending one's self against an intruder in your house a cut and dry issue? No, it usually isn't. There are some judgment calls that have to be made by a judge and jury.

Same here.

 

[IceHot]

That's a cop out answer by the NFL in my judgment.

I agree, personally I think the NFL should have manned up when Duece filed his petition.
They darn well should have done the right thing and informed the players.

All authorities that enforce the rules and laws have to be judicial in making decisions. It's how the world works. Judges and juries declare people innocent who make MISTAKES all the time. Even though they might have broken the law.

However as it turns out the Courts have ruled that the NFL can suspend the players without informing them as long as they follow the respective rules of the states the employees are employeed in.

Those rules were followed with the Saints players so they can get suspended.
Those rules were not followed with the MN players so despite Godells desire to suspend the MN players he can not?
So the question is should he still be able to carry out the rules against the players that he can carry them out against?
I say yes the Saints players cant use the lame excuse that the NFL didnt conform to MN law so they are immune to the limit of the contract which they legally breached.

 

[IceHot]

Rules and laws are different wherever you guy.
If I swat my 2 year old son for disobeying me, should he come to me and say that his friends dont get swatted when they disobey their parents?

In what world is that a valid argument that your punishment should not be enforced because the same punishment isnt enforced unilaterally?