there is a video tape somewhere that the NFL is aware of and are trying to get ahead of the outrage. I agree with Paulie, they will find a way to have him out there in Week 1 though.
there is a video tape somewhere that the NFL is aware of and are trying to get ahead of the outrage. I agree with Paulie, they will find a way to have him out there in Week 1 though.
Not so sure. They didn't find a way to get Brady out there week 1 last year
RE: RE: If Elliott gets anything in the 4-6 game range
there is a video tape somewhere that the NFL is aware of and are trying to get ahead of the outrage. I agree with Paulie, they will find a way to have him out there in Week 1 though.
Not so sure. They didn't find a way to get Brady out there week 1 last year
? They delayed Brady's suspension an entire year, not just week 1.
It will be six games, he'll appeal, the appeal won't be completed until after game one against the Giants, and the suspension will be reduced to one or two games right after week one so that one of the games he's not playing is Denver. I truly will be shocked if it plays out any other way.
No team should be allowed to play the Cowboys at less than
open up against the Giants, but if you are a team with a player with a looming suspension, wouldn't you want him to serve it and get it over rather than have it extend into the season a bit?
Seems like the continuity issues outweigh the fact he's missing the Giants game.
When the Steelers or Pats lost Bell and Brady to start a year, it had a slight impact, but then they at least know both guys are back week 5 and they are ready to roll.
Jerruh is now in the Hall, NFL has been dragging this out
because of that underlying reason. Give Elliot his richly deserved 4 games, and lets move on already. Let him appeal,
that's what they do.
RE: RE: RE: If Elliott gets anything in the 4-6 game range
there is a video tape somewhere that the NFL is aware of and are trying to get ahead of the outrage. I agree with Paulie, they will find a way to have him out there in Week 1 though.
Not so sure. They didn't find a way to get Brady out there week 1 last year
? They delayed Brady's suspension an entire year, not just week 1.
Didn't that have to with the suspension being taken to court?
Suspension was because it went to the Supreme Court that's why it was delayed he will serve his suspension this year
.
It never went to the Supreme Court, they would have laughed
at that case, and never would have taken it.
The Supreme Court doesn't deal with PSI in a football.
It's not Roe vs. Wade, same sex marriage or even the Ali situation years ago.
If the suspension is truly being handed out tomorrow
why would people believe it won't be ruled upon until after Week 1 of the season? What would they do for the next month, just not talk about it?
If he is suspended there will certainly be an appeal, but I don't see why that appeal would not be resolved well before the Week 1 kickoff. If he is on the field against us I expect it would be because the suspension was lifted, not because he will serve it starting Week 2.
open up against the Giants, but if you are a team with a player with a looming suspension, wouldn't you want him to serve it and get it over rather than have it extend into the season a bit?
Seems like the continuity issues outweigh the fact he's missing the Giants game.
When the Steelers or Pats lost Bell and Brady to start a year, it had a slight impact, but then they at least know both guys are back week 5 and they are ready to roll.
Perhaps if they were playing another team, but given that the Giants and Cowboys will be the two teams vying for the NFC East, I could see the Cowboys working hard to keep one of their main offensive weapons in the season opener. Were they playing the 'Skins or Philly, they might not be quite as concerned. It's not out of the realm of possibilities that the NFC East comes down to a head-to-head or division record. That's why I tend to think they will do what they can to keep Elliot in the game.
why would people believe it won't be ruled upon until after Week 1 of the season? What would they do for the next month, just not talk about it?
If he is suspended there will certainly be an appeal, but I don't see why that appeal would not be resolved well before the Week 1 kickoff. If he is on the field against us I expect it would be because the suspension was lifted, not because he will serve it starting Week 2.
why would people believe it won't be ruled upon until after Week 1 of the season? What would they do for the next month, just not talk about it?
If he is suspended there will certainly be an appeal, but I don't see why that appeal would not be resolved well before the Week 1 kickoff. If he is on the field against us I expect it would be because the suspension was lifted, not because he will serve it starting Week 2.
Mike on target
Well look at the Tom Brady situation. He appealed and then took it to court. I would expect Jerrah to do the same. I can see this going until next season.
why would people believe it won't be ruled upon until after Week 1 of the season? What would they do for the next month, just not talk about it?
If he is suspended there will certainly be an appeal, but I don't see why that appeal would not be resolved well before the Week 1 kickoff. If he is on the field against us I expect it would be because the suspension was lifted, not because he will serve it starting Week 2.
Mike on target
Well look at the Tom Brady situation. He appealed and then took it to court. I would expect Jerrah to do the same. I can see this going until next season.
Who knows? Question is, who has/had the stronger case for appeal, Brady or ZE?
Most appeals don't require a federal court ruling as well. And the only reason this has dragged out as long as it has is because the NFL is making sure to dot all i's and cross all t's before going ahead with the suspension. If there is an appeal, it won't be successful, and it won't require the backing of a federal court before it's implemented.
Not that I care. The Giants will kick Cowboys ass with or without Elliot.
Not for any of the "beating them with their best" stuff but because we are going to beat them anyway. Let Elliot sit out games where he could be the difference. That's what's best for us.
It's pre-season. If they hand out a suspension couldn't the Cowboys say they are reviewing their options etc until shortly before game 1 and then appeal so he would be in the clear at least for game 1?
RE: The Tom Brady case was unique for several reasons
Most appeals don't require a federal court ruling as well. And the only reason this has dragged out as long as it has is because the NFL is making sure to dot all i's and cross all t's before going ahead with the suspension. If there is an appeal, it won't be successful, and it won't require the backing of a federal court before it's implemented.
Not that I care. The Giants will kick Cowboys ass with or without Elliot.
Yet the biggest commonality is ownership. I can see Jones doing everything Kraft did and fight it as much as possible.
The Giants have never lost a game where Alfred Morris was the lead RB right? I know they've lost at least a couple while he was with the Redskins and the Cowboys have a better OL.
The Giants have never lost a game where Alfred Morris was the lead RB right? I know they've lost at least a couple while he was with the Redskins and the Cowboys have a better OL.
The majority of the damage Morris did against the Giants was in the read option with WSH when we couldn't figure out how the fuck to defend it.
I'm far less concerned about him now.
far less concerned about Morris than McFadden? Not sure I get that, it's really the OL, neither RB is fearsome at this stage, but McFadden is 30 years old coming off injury and was ineffective last year in the few carries he had spelling Zeke.
no clue why someone would be concerned about McFadden but far less concerned about Morris.
The Giants have never lost a game where Alfred Morris was the lead RB right? I know they've lost at least a couple while he was with the Redskins and the Cowboys have a better OL.
How many of those games did we have Snacks?
My point was simply the story line of yeah there's no Elliott but they still have McFadden isn't complete, they have Alfred Morris too.
Don't fear Morris, then good for you, the Giants can stop either McFadden or Morris and Ronnie Hilman once he fumbles the ball.
I wasn't saying I fear any of them or the Giants will struggle with any of them.
The fact that it seems the NFL is waiting to make the announcement
will be fresh for game 1, well before McFadden has his usual injury. For one or two games they can spell Zeke. They were legit Rbs in this league whereas a player like Randle (I think he was a back up RB for Dallas) is a JAG.
The majority of the damage Morris did against the Giants was in the read option with WSH when we couldn't figure out how the fuck to defend it.
I'm far less concerned about him now.
far less concerned about Morris than McFadden? Not sure I get that, it's really the OL, neither RB is fearsome at this stage, but McFadden is 30 years old coming off injury and was ineffective last year in the few carries he had spelling Zeke.
no clue why someone would be concerned about McFadden but far less concerned about Morris.
Doesn't seem like you really read my post.
I said nothing about Morris in relation to McFadden. I'm talking about Alfred Morris now and Alfred Morris 5 years ago.
Just said on @SiriusXMNFL that I anticipated Zeke suspension to be 1-4 games & got immediate text from good source: "DON'T RULE OUT 6"
Thank you - he got the 4 when he destroyed his cell phone the day the NFL asked to look at it.
Not so sure. They didn't find a way to get Brady out there week 1 last year
Quote:
there is a video tape somewhere that the NFL is aware of and are trying to get ahead of the outrage. I agree with Paulie, they will find a way to have him out there in Week 1 though.
Not so sure. They didn't find a way to get Brady out there week 1 last year
? They delayed Brady's suspension an entire year, not just week 1.
Agreed...if they have any guys injured, the game should be postponed until they're all healthy.
Seems like the continuity issues outweigh the fact he's missing the Giants game.
When the Steelers or Pats lost Bell and Brady to start a year, it had a slight impact, but then they at least know both guys are back week 5 and they are ready to roll.
Me too. Even if it's one game against the Rams.
because of that underlying reason. Give Elliot his richly deserved 4 games, and lets move on already. Let him appeal,
that's what they do.
Quote:
In comment 13555708 Matt in SGS said:
Quote:
there is a video tape somewhere that the NFL is aware of and are trying to get ahead of the outrage. I agree with Paulie, they will find a way to have him out there in Week 1 though.
Not so sure. They didn't find a way to get Brady out there week 1 last year
? They delayed Brady's suspension an entire year, not just week 1.
Didn't that have to with the suspension being taken to court?
Um, Brady served his suspension already.
It never went to the Supreme Court, they would have laughed
at that case, and never would have taken it.
The Supreme Court doesn't deal with PSI in a football.
It's not Roe vs. Wade, same sex marriage or even the Ali situation years ago.
If he is suspended there will certainly be an appeal, but I don't see why that appeal would not be resolved well before the Week 1 kickoff. If he is on the field against us I expect it would be because the suspension was lifted, not because he will serve it starting Week 2.
Hitting the bottle early?
Seems like the continuity issues outweigh the fact he's missing the Giants game.
When the Steelers or Pats lost Bell and Brady to start a year, it had a slight impact, but then they at least know both guys are back week 5 and they are ready to roll.
Perhaps if they were playing another team, but given that the Giants and Cowboys will be the two teams vying for the NFC East, I could see the Cowboys working hard to keep one of their main offensive weapons in the season opener. Were they playing the 'Skins or Philly, they might not be quite as concerned. It's not out of the realm of possibilities that the NFC East comes down to a head-to-head or division record. That's why I tend to think they will do what they can to keep Elliot in the game.
intra-division
sorry to be the grammar dick, not going to be the spelling dick though, so there's that.
If he is suspended there will certainly be an appeal, but I don't see why that appeal would not be resolved well before the Week 1 kickoff. If he is on the field against us I expect it would be because the suspension was lifted, not because he will serve it starting Week 2.
Mike on target
Somehow I believe this to be the case unfortunately
Quote:
why would people believe it won't be ruled upon until after Week 1 of the season? What would they do for the next month, just not talk about it?
If he is suspended there will certainly be an appeal, but I don't see why that appeal would not be resolved well before the Week 1 kickoff. If he is on the field against us I expect it would be because the suspension was lifted, not because he will serve it starting Week 2.
Mike on target
Well look at the Tom Brady situation. He appealed and then took it to court. I would expect Jerrah to do the same. I can see this going until next season.
Quote:
In comment 13555860 Mike from Ohio said:
Quote:
why would people believe it won't be ruled upon until after Week 1 of the season? What would they do for the next month, just not talk about it?
If he is suspended there will certainly be an appeal, but I don't see why that appeal would not be resolved well before the Week 1 kickoff. If he is on the field against us I expect it would be because the suspension was lifted, not because he will serve it starting Week 2.
Mike on target
Well look at the Tom Brady situation. He appealed and then took it to court. I would expect Jerrah to do the same. I can see this going until next season.
Who knows? Question is, who has/had the stronger case for appeal, Brady or ZE?
Not that I care. The Giants will kick Cowboys ass with or without Elliot.
Not that I care. The Giants will kick Cowboys ass with or without Elliot.
Yet the biggest commonality is ownership. I can see Jones doing everything Kraft did and fight it as much as possible.
Under terms of NFL personal conduct policy, Ezekiel Elliott could be facing potential 6-game suspension for allegation of physical violence.
Agreed. Too, with the exception here and there, EVERY GAME against an NFC East opponent is a war..Rarely easy..We'd be far from a lock
Also Alfred Morris. He's killed us before.
If Elliott does get a 6 game suspension, don't be surprised if Jaylon Smith's brother emerges and starts getting a good deal of touches.
Quote:
Suspension was because it went to the Supreme Court that's why it was delayed he will serve his suspension this year
Hitting the bottle early?
I read that as a terrible run on sentence... I think he meant that Zele would serve his suspension this year, not Brady...
The Giants have never lost a game where Alfred Morris was the lead RB right? I know they've lost at least a couple while he was with the Redskins and the Cowboys have a better OL.
I'm far less concerned about him now.
The Giants have never lost a game where Alfred Morris was the lead RB right? I know they've lost at least a couple while he was with the Redskins and the Cowboys have a better OL.
How many of those games did we have Snacks?
I'm far less concerned about him now.
far less concerned about Morris than McFadden? Not sure I get that, it's really the OL, neither RB is fearsome at this stage, but McFadden is 30 years old coming off injury and was ineffective last year in the few carries he had spelling Zeke.
no clue why someone would be concerned about McFadden but far less concerned about Morris.
Quote:
the Cowboys also have Alfred Morris.
The Giants have never lost a game where Alfred Morris was the lead RB right? I know they've lost at least a couple while he was with the Redskins and the Cowboys have a better OL.
How many of those games did we have Snacks?
My point was simply the story line of yeah there's no Elliott but they still have McFadden isn't complete, they have Alfred Morris too.
Don't fear Morris, then good for you, the Giants can stop either McFadden or Morris and Ronnie Hilman once he fumbles the ball.
I wasn't saying I fear any of them or the Giants will struggle with any of them.
Quote:
The majority of the damage Morris did against the Giants was in the read option with WSH when we couldn't figure out how the fuck to defend it.
I'm far less concerned about him now.
far less concerned about Morris than McFadden? Not sure I get that, it's really the OL, neither RB is fearsome at this stage, but McFadden is 30 years old coming off injury and was ineffective last year in the few carries he had spelling Zeke.
no clue why someone would be concerned about McFadden but far less concerned about Morris.
Doesn't seem like you really read my post.
I said nothing about Morris in relation to McFadden. I'm talking about Alfred Morris now and Alfred Morris 5 years ago.