good god, I am beginning to wonder...
You too? Why can't you just admit that NFL players are not all treated in a fair and equal manner for like deeds? It is obvious to anyone who saw and heard what CJ and Peyton and Smith and TO did, and then saw that ONLY TO was punished for his misdeed. And, as for fights, there are many many many inter-team fights in locker rooms each year that never get mentioned, much less punished.
First of all, from what I understand there was language. And it is inherent in the contract that players follow the rules of the team as long as they don't supercede palyers association rules (which the eagles'r rules did not). It is also inherent in the contract that you listen to coaches, that is called "disobedience" and "duties ass asigned" of which fan autograph sessions are a part of.
No kidding... and as I've already said this should have applied to TO, Smith, Peyton and CJ but seemingly was only applied to TO. That is not fair or equitous.
Conduct detrimental to the team, by any reasonable standard means not fighting teammates and team officials.
Right, and those other guys I am sure had those contract wording and rules as well as probably "conduct unbecoming"... and yet once again only TO was punished. That is not fair or equitous.
Owens did all of these things. There is language in his contract that covers these things.
Right... as there is for CJ, Smith, Peyton and probably every other single NFL football player who messed up... yet, once again, it appears that only TO was punished for these misdeeds. That is not fair or equitous.
Your argument strikes me as akin to those people who say "wehre is the right to privacy in the consittution"? Except this is more than clear cut.
What is clear cut? The right to Privacy, the right to be an asshole as was TO, CJ, Peyton, Smith and others, or what are you talking about now? BTW, there also isn't any constitutional right to be treated fairly or equitously under your employers rules.... but that shouldn't stop one from noticing it when it happens.
There is a listing in every players contract about behavior and what is expected. You can't find a contract that would explicityl permit not listening to coaches, slamming the organization publicly and physcially fighting teammates. The fact you don't understand this is getting to be beyond the pale.
Err, obviously you don't seem to get it. Those misdeeds are either detailed specifically in TO's contract alone, or it isn't in any contract with regard to those specific misdeeds, and the interpretation and adminstration of punishment for various misdeeds lies with the individual organizations...thereby, creating a system which results in unfair and unequitous distribution of punishment. You are agruing with yourself and you don't even know it because possibly you are just so adamant in denying that punishing TO while not punishing others for the same misdeeds or worse is unfair.
ITs like saying when you got hired that you didn't know fighting a coworker was wrong, or telling your boss "you speak when spoken to" -- it is so basic to any understanding of "conduct detrimental to the team" it is amazing you are still arguing.
Once again... what is your point. TO fights, he gets punished as he should be. Others fight, they do not get punished. Just admit it... unfair and inequitous. You are continually backing up to my conclusion over and over and over again.
You want to argue TO is a good player? Fine? Want to argue the Eagles football wise handled it dumb, fine?
I agree with both of thsoe statements. And, as I've said TO deserved to be punished and his punishment may be fair if in fact others who do those same misdeeds or worse get proportionately fair punishment as TO... and, IMO, that hasn't happened as seen by like incidents by Smith, CJ, and Peyton
You can argue many things but these two, you ultimately can't:
One: TO did in fact behave in behavior edetrimental to the team. He has admitted it, witnesses have attested to it, and an approved arbitrator upheld that notion. Anyone will concede that fighting and disobedience fulfill this notion. You also can't deny that cotnracts address this issue.
I've never disputed that... what is your point?
e Eagles were well within their rights to do so. TYhey did so, and again the league/players association representative agreed.
Right again... never disputed that either... so what?
follows, there was nothing unfair about anything. The Eagles told him that behavior detrimental to the team would be punsihed. Owens was are of that. He chose to act the way he did, got called on it, got deactivated. Nothing more to say, fair is fair as all parties were apprised of what his responsiblites were.
Well, that's where you go astray. The fact that CJ, Peyton, Smith and others have done the same misdeeds and worse, and not been punished is proor of the unfairness and ineguity that exists in the NFL regarding these incidents.
ow you bring up other exampels by the way, and leave out keyshawn. The Eagles had precident on their side as well. Ownes just had the audcatity to challenge it, and he lost.
Well, since you brought Keyshawn into the picture, I guess that he would also be an example of unfair and inequitous treatment in the NFL?
Seems like your extreme pro Eagle management bias is preventing you from seeing that although TO's punishment might have been warranted, when compared to the lack or discrepency that exists in punishing like deeds in the NFL, it was unfair.
Maybe, what the NFL needs is some kind of published "threshold" of misdeeds that needs to occur before a player gets punished? If the players knew what that threshold was for the entire league, then they would know exactly when to stop and could prevent crossing that seemingly invisible line between no punishment and season ending banishment.