PDA

View Full Version : Pac-Man Prepared To Sue NFL


kwilk103
05-16-2007, 03:38 PM
reported by Clayton on NFL Live--also heard on Mike&Mike this AM

-said he only expects Tank Johnson to get 4-6 games
-Pac's lawyers will sue if this happens
-said both incidents (pac and tanks) happened before the new policy-tanks been clean since, but pac has had minor incidents
-sclereth and clayton said pac would have a good case as he hasnt been convicted and some have only been allegations, and tank was in jain on a federal weapons charged
-schlereth went on to say, if he does suspend tank 4-6 games, its opening pandora's box
-schlereth also said goodell set the bar high, w/ pac, and he should have the same standards for everyone (was talking about vick)
-said if 16 games is good enough for pac, its good enough for tank and vick

some interesting points; i kinda figured pac would sue if tank got less; has a chance at winning since he has no convictions (major ones--like tank)

discuss

JF4
05-16-2007, 03:40 PM
I can't see this getting very far.

Scotty D
05-16-2007, 03:54 PM
I support Pac-Man in this issue. A year was a bit much. Tank should be getting a year if anyone.

bearsfan_51
05-16-2007, 04:05 PM
He has absolutely no chance.

And for the Tank argument, that makes no sense to me. Tank has had two felonies, Pac-Man has a laundry list. It shouldn't matter either way if he served jail time because that's not the issue. This is action against players that are a public embaressment to the league and no player is so much so than Mr.Jones.

kwilk103
05-16-2007, 04:10 PM
pac has had incidents, not convictions (unless you count speeding tickets); schlereth and clayton thinks he has a good chance to win; cuz if tank is suspended less, it becomes a matter of goodells personal beliefs/morals

theres probably a lawyer on here, to give us his take

PACKmanN
05-16-2007, 04:11 PM
can he stop wasting his time and move on, he lucky its only one season.

bearsfan_51
05-16-2007, 04:12 PM
pac has had incidents, not convictions (unless you count speeding tickets); schlereth and clayton thinks he has a good chance to win; cuz if tank is suspended less, it becomes a matter of goodells personal beliefs/morals

theres probably a lawyer on here, to give us his take
What law school did Mark Schlereth go to again?

Windy
05-16-2007, 04:17 PM
What law school did Mark Schlereth go to again?

School of Hard Knocks

steelersfan43
05-16-2007, 04:19 PM
hahahaha, he should get an extra year for this.

bored of education
05-16-2007, 04:23 PM
Pac man should deal with it suck it up and learn from his mistakes

bsaza2358
05-16-2007, 04:31 PM
By the time the suit gets through the court system, Pacman will probably be reinstated. At that point, he'll be fighting to get the lost money back. It's pointless to try to use the federal court system as leverage in a suspension appeal.

skinzzfan25
05-16-2007, 04:35 PM
I bet his lawyers are named Candy and Sugarbuns.

He pays in singles too.

bored of education
05-16-2007, 04:37 PM
Yeha, 6-8 months before it even gets looked at as a civil proceeding

bsaza2358
05-16-2007, 04:38 PM
6-8 months until it gets a preliminary hearing to even go into legal discovery. Discovery is another 6 months or so before they even set a trial date. Before it even gets there, the NFL could get a motion of summary judgement to kill this case before it starts. I really think Pacman is just threatening the lawsuit to use as leverage in the appeal.

bored of education
05-16-2007, 04:39 PM
He is moronic. It's not like someone will schedule it to be on Judge Judy next tuesday afternoon.

bearsfan_51
05-16-2007, 04:41 PM
Which he has none. Absolutely none.

Let's get another thing clear. "Pac-Man" isn't doing anything. He probably can't even spell appeal. These are just attorneys blowing wind and doing what attorneys do. If they didn't appeal they would be peripheral and would recieve no money. Pac-Man is signing off on this because he's run by handlers, like most professional athletes.

bryanGENE
05-16-2007, 05:14 PM
I agree that Tank Johnson should be suspended for the year as well, but it won't happen. Pacman would have a legit case if this were to happen though. Two felonies means you're nothing less than a thug. Unfortunately, the NFL is full of thugs.

bryanGENE
05-16-2007, 05:15 PM
He has absolutely no chance.

And for the Tank argument, that makes no sense to me. Tank has had two felonies, Pac-Man has a laundry list. It shouldn't matter either way if he served jail time because that's not the issue. This is action against players that are a public embaressment to the league and no player is so much so than Mr.Jones.

Leave it up to you to stick up for Tank Johnson. LAWL :D

Bengals1690
05-16-2007, 05:15 PM
Tank should get a year... on NFL live they were expecting him to get 4 games, saying they happened under a different code of conduct, and that he already got suspended for 1 game by the team. Well, Chris Henry is in the same boat, except he got suspended 3 games by the team, and he still got 8 games. The NBA and NFL commisoners are so full of ****, its not even funny.

eaglesfan_45
05-16-2007, 05:25 PM
Packman should be grateful he still has the chance to play in the NFL he has made a ton of bad choices and been involved in numerous cases while tank has only been involved in one (that I know of). In Vegas Packman reportedly told the guard I'm going to kill you and a couple minutes later he was shot and paralyzed for life by someone in pack's group. Packman should just serve his sentence and get over it he got what he deserved. Packman is lucky he is even allowed to play anymore.

bryanGENE
05-16-2007, 05:28 PM
The NFL needs to rid of these thugs. They need extensive background checks, and should not allow any repeat offenders or felons to play in the league. To play in the NFL is a privelege, not a right. Kids look up to NFL players. Thugs like Tank Johnson, Chris Henry, Pacman Jones, and Mike Vick are a disgrace!

TheChampIsHere
05-16-2007, 05:43 PM
I agree that Tank Johnson should be suspended for the year as well, but it won't happen. Pacman would have a legit case if this were to happen though. Two felonies means you're nothing less than a thug. Unfortunately, the NFL is full of thugs.


a statement like that means youre nothing less than an ignorant moron.

niel89
05-16-2007, 05:46 PM
He has absolutely no chance.

And for the Tank argument, that makes no sense to me. Tank has had two felonies, Pac-Man has a laundry list. It shouldn't matter either way if he served jail time because that's not the issue. This is action against players that are a public embaressment to the league and no player is so much so than Mr.Jones.

very good point, its not about the legality its about how they reflect the league.

volman88
05-16-2007, 05:47 PM
They wouldn't reinstate him, but he could get his money. i think he could have legit shot.

Shiver
05-16-2007, 06:18 PM
The NFL needs to rid of these thugs. They need extensive background checks, and should not allow any repeat offenders or felons to play in the league. To play in the NFL is a privelege, not a right. Kids look up to NFL players. Thugs like Tank Johnson, Chris Henry, Pacman Jones, and Mike Vick are a disgrace!

:rolleyes:

bearsfan_51
05-16-2007, 08:01 PM
Leave it up to you to stick up for Tank Johnson. LAWL :D
I'm not sticking up for Tank. I think we should cut Tank. But what he's done is nowhere near as damaging to the reputation of the league as what Pac-Man has done.

Tank had a bunch of guns in his house.

Pac-Man hit a women, bit a cop, and has about 20 other felony charges to his name.

It's not even comparable.

bearsfan_51
05-16-2007, 08:02 PM
a statement like that means youre nothing less than an ignorant moron.
That's already a well-established fact.

yourfavestoner
05-16-2007, 08:18 PM
The NFL needs to rid of these thugs. They need extensive background checks, and should not allow any repeat offenders or felons to play in the league. To play in the NFL is a privelege, not a right. Kids look up to NFL players. Thugs like Tank Johnson, Chris Henry, Pacman Jones, and Mike Vick are a disgrace!

Do you expect everybody to live up to your morals, or just NFL players?

Hurricane Ditka
05-16-2007, 08:23 PM
Tank doesn't have any felonies, he went to jail for violating probation, which he received on misdemeanor charges.

CC.SD
05-16-2007, 09:20 PM
This is INSANE, if a regular person ordered a hit on a guy like Pac Man did, he would be in JAIL, not suing his employer for suspending him.

someone447
05-16-2007, 09:36 PM
I'm not sticking up for Tank. I think we should cut Tank. But what he's done is nowhere near as damaging to the reputation of the league as what Pac-Man has done.

Tank had a bunch of guns in his house.

Pac-Man hit a women, bit a cop, and has about 20 other felony charges to his name.

It's not even comparable.

When those are convictions, I will be all for throwing Pacman out of the league. I completely understand the NFL is a private employer and has no obligation to allow him to play. I just think it sets a bad precedent.

What about all the people who have hit their wives/girlfriends, suspend them all too. Randy Moss hit a cop with a car, suspend his ass. I'm not defending what Pacman allegedly did. I am saying that you have to be consistent with your punishments.

If you want to base punishments on who has hurt the league most, Merriman deserves to be suspended indefinitely. It isn't known how involved Pacman was with the shooting, if it comes up that he had anything to do with it, then kick him out of the league. As far as anyone knows, his friend did it without him knowing, kinda like DH in Playmakers.

someone447
05-16-2007, 09:38 PM
This is INSANE, if a regular person ordered a hit on a guy like Pac Man did, he would be in JAIL, not suing his employer for suspending him.

This is INSANE, if a regular person was charged with ordering a hit on a guy like PacMan is being charged with, he would be innocent until proven guilty, not being crucified by people who know nothing of the case.

Until more comes out, you can't say he is guilty.

bearsfan_51
05-16-2007, 09:53 PM
This is INSANE, if a regular person was charged with ordering a hit on a guy like PacMan is being charged with, he would be innocent until proven guilty, not being crucified by people who know nothing of the case.

Until more comes out, you can't say he is guilty.
Sure he would. People get fired for being charged with crimes all the time. Welcome to the real world.

As for your previous post, you're comparing offenses that occured under Tagliabue with those happening now. It's a new commish..it's a new conduct policy..it's an entirely different case. Tags, even if he wanted to, couldn't have been as harsh on people like Moss becuase he didn't have the backup to do it. So your comparison doesn't hold water.

cunningham06
05-16-2007, 10:02 PM
Pac-Man does have some grounds to fight this on. What is happening with him is unconstitutional. Ex Post Facto. He was involved in these altercations before the league behavior policy was in place. They established the behavior policy afterwards and then punished him for being "involved" in several incidents, that since he was not found guilty, were not against the rules. But I don't know how much that would effect the NFL they can suspend whoever they want and there is little anyone can do about it. I doubt Pac-Man gets anywhere with this but he does have a case.

bigbluedefense
05-16-2007, 10:03 PM
For everyone who says Pacman hasnt been convicted of anything etc, remember that doesn't stop employers from firing employees in any other line of work.

Had Pacman been a mailman instead of a CB, he wouldnt been fired 10 felonies ago. You don't have to be convicted to get fired. Thats how the real world operates.

cunningham06
05-16-2007, 10:04 PM
Sure he would. People get fired for being charged with crimes all the time. Welcome to the real world.

As for your previous post, you're comparing offenses that occured under Tagliabue with those happening now. It's a new commish..it's a new conduct policy..it's an entirely different case. Tags, even if he wanted to, couldn't have been as harsh on people like Moss becuase he didn't have the backup to do it. So your comparison doesn't hold water.

The fact that he has been accused of so many crimes and has been involved in so many incidents it's pretty safe to say he has done something illegal even if the courts can't prove it.

JK17
05-16-2007, 10:06 PM
Pac-Man does have some grounds to fight this on. What is happening with him is unconstitutional. Ex Post Facto. He was involved in these altercations before the league behavior policy was in place. They established the behavior policy afterwards and then punished him for being "involved" in several incidents, that since he was not found guilty, were not against the rules. But I don't know how much that would effect the NFL they can suspend whoever they want and there is little anyone can do about it. I doubt Pac-Man gets anywhere with this but he does have a case.

Eh...the bolded part there is your answer. If it were a legal system maybe he would have grounds to fight on...but its not its a business. And as long as they aren't discriminating they can pretty much do whatever the hell they want.

someone447
05-16-2007, 10:28 PM
Sure he would. People get fired for being charged with crimes all the time. Welcome to the real world.

As for your previous post, you're comparing offenses that occured under Tagliabue with those happening now. It's a new commish..it's a new conduct policy..it's an entirely different case. Tags, even if he wanted to, couldn't have been as harsh on people like Moss becuase he didn't have the backup to do it. So your comparison doesn't hold water.

What I said had nothing to do with him getting in trouble. It was the fact that that guy said he was getting treated different by the police. I was just pointing out the fact that he is getting treated different by every, both not having been charged, and already being seen as guilty by most people.

someone447
05-16-2007, 10:30 PM
For everyone who says Pacman hasnt been convicted of anything etc, remember that doesn't stop employers from firing employees in any other line of work.

Had Pacman been a mailman instead of a CB, he wouldnt been fired 10 felonies ago. You don't have to be convicted to get fired. Thats how the real world operates.

The only thing I am saying is to be consistent, it sets a bad precedent to arbitrarily dish out punishments. The NFL has every right to ban him from the league if they so choose. However, if it isn't kept consistent, he does have a case. He wouldn't get reinstated, but he might win a large award due to discrimination. It is unlikely, but possible.

All I ask is to keep consistent with everyone in the league.

bearsfan_51
05-16-2007, 10:32 PM
Pac-Man does have some grounds to fight this on. What is happening with him is unconstitutional. Ex Post Facto. He was involved in these altercations before the league behavior policy was in place. They established the behavior policy afterwards and then punished him for being "involved" in several incidents, that since he was not found guilty, were not against the rules. But I don't know how much that would effect the NFL they can suspend whoever they want and there is little anyone can do about it. I doubt Pac-Man gets anywhere with this but he does have a case.

This is not a consitutional issue.

And he committed violations both before and after the policy, unlike Tank who only commited them under the old one.

stephenson86
05-17-2007, 04:47 AM
being accused alot is not as bad as actually being arrested, tank deserves a year just like pac

if he doesnt get it im gonna be pissed, and i hope he does sue

ATLDirtyBirds
05-17-2007, 05:06 AM
:rolleyes:

That is my feelings as well.

tylerb929
05-17-2007, 07:20 AM
They could punish him just the same even by the old rules. The new rules are more strict, but the old rules state the commish can do whatever he wants for the better of the league, and this falls under that category, therefore its in the old rules.

eacantdraft
05-17-2007, 07:30 AM
The Federal Courts (especially the Supreme Courts) generally side with businesses. PacMan has little chance of winning.

He still doesn't get it.

PapaBearHalas
05-17-2007, 11:02 AM
Pac-Man does have some grounds to fight this on. What is happening with him is unconstitutional. Ex Post Facto. He was involved in these altercations before the league behavior policy was in place. They established the behavior policy afterwards and then punished him for being "involved" in several incidents, that since he was not found guilty, were not against the rules. But I don't know how much that would effect the NFL they can suspend whoever they want and there is little anyone can do about it. I doubt Pac-Man gets anywhere with this but he does have a case.

There is no state action here so there is no constitutional issue involved.

This guy is a complete moron and is clearly a slave to the impulses and influence of those around him. Talking heads giving their "legal analysis" is laughable at best and engaging in the unlawful practice of law at worst. The likelihood that Pac-Man will end up with anything other than a lot less money is slim...like Olsen twins slim.

bsaza2358
05-17-2007, 11:05 AM
This is a union issue, not a courtroom issue. Different treatment of equal workers is something that needs to be resolved between management and the union. Suing does no one any good.

bryanGENE
05-17-2007, 11:33 AM
That is my feelings as well.

engirish pweez

someone447
05-17-2007, 12:47 PM
This is a union issue, not a courtroom issue. Different treatment of equal workers is something that needs to be resolved between management and the union. Suing does no one any good.

I guess the most likely thing would be the Union suing the league, thats what I was talking about anyway. Pacman can't sue himself if he is a member of the Players Union, which I am sure he is.

Moses
05-17-2007, 12:49 PM
The fact that he has been accused of so many crimes and has been involved in so many incidents it's pretty safe to say he has done something illegal even if the courts can't prove it.

I'm glad you're not in charge of justice.

bsaza2358
05-17-2007, 12:51 PM
I don't think the Player's Union will sue the NFL, but I do think that Pacman can sue once the grievance process is complete. He has to go internal first before checking out external options. The NFLPA agreed to the tougher standards and asked for them from the commish. They also allowed him to wield all of the power in this matter. Stupid on their part.

Mr. Stiller
05-17-2007, 01:13 PM
For everyone who says Pacman hasnt been convicted of anything etc, remember that doesn't stop employers from firing employees in any other line of work.

Had Pacman been a mailman instead of a CB, he wouldnt been fired 10 felonies ago. You don't have to be convicted to get fired. Thats how the real world operates.

If anyone ever watched Law and Order: SVU.

While I know it's a show and based on fiction, you realize that if someone brings allegations against a person, they can be suspended or fired?

"Conduct in defamatory nature"

Pacman is a jack-ass and frankly, he's "Defamed" the NFL on numerous occasions.

I'd hate to see what my employer would do if I bit a cop, Hired a hit, and smacked around my g/f. I'd have to look for work, then explain my "tainted" Background.

someone447
05-17-2007, 02:06 PM
If anyone ever watched Law and Order: SVU.

While I know it's a show and based on fiction, you realize that if someone brings allegations against a person, they can be suspended or fired?

"Conduct in defamatory nature"

Pacman is a jack-ass and frankly, he's "Defamed" the NFL on numerous occasions.

I'd hate to see what my employer would do if I bit a cop, Hired a hit, and smacked around my g/f. I'd have to look for work, then explain my "tainted" Background.

There is no evidence that he hired a hit, so everyone just needs to quit saying that. Guess what, many, many, many NFL players have hit their wife/gf. Just stay consistent. Pacman won't be able to sue, the Union would have to. And if they start dishing out different punishments arbitrarily, they will sue.

ks_perfection
05-17-2007, 06:54 PM
I don't think the Player's Union will sue the NFL, but I do think that Pacman can sue once the grievance process is complete. He has to go internal first before checking out external options. The NFLPA agreed to the tougher standards and asked for them from the commish. They also allowed him to wield all of the power in this matter. Stupid on their part.

Its not stupid since the majority of the players are in favor of it. This is what they want and there happy because its here.

cunningham06
05-17-2007, 09:14 PM
I'm glad you're not in charge of justice.

I'm speaking from a FO standpoint. The fact that he has been accused over and over again can't just be coincidence, if he were my employee I would fire him, or suspend him in the NFL's case.

wogitalia
05-18-2007, 01:44 AM
Pac-Man hit a women, bit a cop, and has about 20 other felony charges to his name.

So charges > convictions now? Thank god the legal system doesnt work that way.

I am against suspensions. Suspensions punish everyone, mostly the fans who are paying to see the product. Fine them to death, I dont have a problem there but suspensions are stupid, unless they do something ridiculously bad(being accused of something like Pacmans is not ridiculous).

You dont want to end up with situations like the NBA just had where because they implemented a rule and had a stupid suspension attached to it with no room for movement or suspensions two good players didnt play for what is basically nothing. It was a blight on the sport and made the entire league look far worse than guys like Pacmans actions ever could, it literally ruins the integrity of the sport.

You should fine, especially for guys who havent even been convicted. But what happens when Peyton Manning is caught speeding on the way to the superbowl? Its breaking the law and via this precedent, he shouldn't play in the superbowl. Or what if his mate gets done for DUI while Peyton is in the car? Essentially this is what Pacman is at the moment being suspended for.

I just really am against suspension, it should be a last resort, fine the guys, fine them real amounts of money not amounts that would have meant something in 1970 but nowadays is pocket change. Hell fine him his whole years salary. But dont punish the fans and dont make the game a worse product because you are on a power trip. I'm really worried by the way he is going about things to be honest. Stinks of Sternism and Stern has all but ruined the NBA over the last 10 years or so. It doesnt take long for a commissioner to ruin a league and Goodell looks determined to give it his best shot. Superbowls in different countries, obsessive suspensions and just a general power trip. Not good.

nobodyinparticular
05-18-2007, 03:09 AM
Pac-Man does have some grounds to fight this on. What is happening with him is unconstitutional. Ex Post Facto. He was involved in these altercations before the league behavior policy was in place. They established the behavior policy afterwards and then punished him for being "involved" in several incidents, that since he was not found guilty, were not against the rules. But I don't know how much that would effect the NFL they can suspend whoever they want and there is little anyone can do about it. I doubt Pac-Man gets anywhere with this but he does have a case.

Well then, I guess it's a good thing that it's not Congress that's doing this, huh?

eacantdraft
05-18-2007, 07:05 AM
So charges > convictions now? Thank god the legal system doesnt work that way.

I am against suspensions. Suspensions punish everyone, mostly the fans who are paying to see the product. Fine them to death, I dont have a problem there but suspensions are stupid, unless they do something ridiculously bad(being accused of something like Pacmans is not ridiculous).

You dont want to end up with situations like the NBA just had where because they implemented a rule and had a stupid suspension attached to it with no room for movement or suspensions two good players didnt play for what is basically nothing. It was a blight on the sport and made the entire league look far worse than guys like Pacmans actions ever could, it literally ruins the integrity of the sport.

You should fine, especially for guys who havent even been convicted. But what happens when Peyton Manning is caught speeding on the way to the superbowl? Its breaking the law and via this precedent, he shouldn't play in the superbowl. Or what if his mate gets done for DUI while Peyton is in the car? Essentially this is what Pacman is at the moment being suspended for.

I just really am against suspension, it should be a last resort, fine the guys, fine them real amounts of money not amounts that would have meant something in 1970 but nowadays is pocket change. Hell fine him his whole years salary. But dont punish the fans and dont make the game a worse product because you are on a power trip. I'm really worried by the way he is going about things to be honest. Stinks of Sternism and Stern has all but ruined the NBA over the last 10 years or so. It doesnt take long for a commissioner to ruin a league and Goodell looks determined to give it his best shot. Superbowls in different countries, obsessive suspensions and just a general power trip. Not good.

Only a suspension will send Pacman a message. Touch if you think it punishes the fans. The responsibility falls back on Pacman. If he louses it up, he is the one that is punishing the team and their fans, not the Commisioner.

CC.SD
05-18-2007, 10:15 AM
I'm pretty sure bearsfan51 is the only person here who has a grasp on how employment really works; you don't have to get proven guilty to get fired or suspended from a job. You can get fired or suspended for pretty much any reason at all. If your employer no longer wants you to represent their business, you are GONE.

The NFL is no different. Pac Man is pretty clearly a thug and a menace who doesn't have the life skills to keep himself out of trouble. Kids are watching the news and thinking that they can get away with this kind of ***** too. Because of this, the NFL should have a higher morality standard than the real world, not the polar opposite. Whether they like it or not, these guys are role models.

bored of education
05-18-2007, 10:23 AM
The NFL is an entity seperate from the United States. It's like getting fired from your job just for being charged for something. Their are stipulations and clauses in job contracts. You have a job in Seattle and in Baltimore you were a sex offender and never registered, guess what BYE BYE.

CC.SD
05-18-2007, 10:27 AM
The NFL is an entity seperate from the United States. It's like getting fired from your job just for being charged for something. Their are stipulations and clauses in job contracts. You have a job in Seattle and in Baltimore you were a sex offender and never registered, guess what BYE BYE.

Yes, it happens all the time. If your employers found out you were being investigated by the police for running around biting people like a goddam crazy person, insinuating shooting incidents, etc. etc. etc., they would can you in a second.

bsaza2358
05-18-2007, 11:32 AM
The NFL is an employer, just like any other company. They just happen to pay their employees large amounts of money in non-guaranteed contracts. Everyone has a right to play in the NFL under the rules of the contract negotiated by the union. Under the union contract, the commish has the right to suspend or discipline players for off-field conduct. There are no stipulations about convictions. The policy guards against conduct detrimental to the NFL and the player. No one can deny that Pacman's behavior is unacceptable. What you can argue is whether a year-long suspension is justifiable based on what he did or whether it is fair compared to other offenders' punishments.

Fairness is what Pacman is trying to argue here. I don't think he has any belief that he won't be suspended for at least 8 games. His motivations here are to limit his suspension and save the money that he is losing. Nothing more.

bsaza2358
05-18-2007, 11:33 AM
If Pacman were working in any corporate job, any one of his incidents would be grounds for termination. He might be able to sue for wrongful termination, but he probably would not win.