Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="jaybadger82" data-source="post: 445290" data-attributes="member: 6211">I can't recall anyone here denying Hargrove's involvement in the the bounty program here. The guy probably deserves to sit a few games. Doesn't change the fact that the league's discipline process is remarkably opaque. The NFL has said that 22 to 27 Saints players were involved (<a href="http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/7881761/nfl-bans-four-players-new-orleans-saints-bounty-roles" target="_blank">source</a>), yet only four were suspended on the basis of their "leadership role" in the program without much explanation for how these four were identified as leaders or why their suspensions range from a few games to the entire season. That's the issue, a lack of transparency. As far as the Warren Sapp comments go, consider the source. I'm hardly surprised by an NFL Network analyst making comments supporting the NFL on all of this. (Not to mention the guy's just an ***hole in general.) But let's suppose that Sapp is correct about the league usually being right on these things: What's the problem with greater transparency in the process? If the government did this, it would be unconstitutional. Most private employers have policies that offer better protections for professionals. The NFLPA is correct to challenge the league for more information on the rationale behind its disciplinary decisions and to seek a more open process.</blockquote>

Total: 609 (members: 4, guests: 605)