Today at 3:00, Steve will be holding a press conference regarding the criminal investigation involving Tyreek Hill and Crystal Espinal. This will be held in our 4th floor conference room.
Originally Posted by BryanBusby:
He has zero obligation to follow anything he directed to be written. He can bend the rules as he sees fit because the Collective Bargaining Agreement gave him the power to do so.
He's gone against his own policy many times in the past. Don't assume he's going to follow that fully. It's a kangaroo court basically.
This is patently false. JFC where do you guys come up with this shit? The policy was written into the last CBA, the WRITTEN POLICY.
Goodell can decide what the punishment is if evidence of a violation is found but there still has to be evidence. [Reply]
Originally Posted by TravelingChiefs:
The only way and I repeat the ONLY way Hill gets a suspension is if he refuses to cooperate with the NFL. Hill is not getting suspended because Brooke Pryor was looking for a scoop.
That's good news, at least ...
For if that were the case, we'd all be in deep, deep trouble.
Goodall as Brooke's little bitch is a frightening concept.
Originally Posted by Marcellus:
This is patently false. JFC where do you guys come up with this shit? The policy was written into the last CBA, the WRITTEN POLICY.
Goodell can decide what the punishment is if evidence of a violation is found but there still has to be evidence.
They did it to Ezekiel Elliott with no real proof. Why are you clinging to that shit? [Reply]
If Hill did this he is a horrible person!! And I cannot like him as a person or player!!
But what bothers me about the Hunt situation is that we cut him just to let another team sign him!! We got nothing for doing the right thing and the Browns got an amazing player that will be more motivated than ever for a cheap contract!! Now everyone expects us to cut Hill!! [Reply]
Side Bar: The WORST thing the Player Association ever did was allow the Commissioner to be judge and jury on all forms of punishment. It's nuts. [Reply]
He can. I read the CBA and there's a portion that gives him the authortiy if he thinks a player makes the league look bad. That of course is just a simple way of putting it. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Eleazar:
If the Chiefs already have removed Hill from their future plans, as some reports had said, due to his history and his ongoing legal issues, they'd be looking at having this year left with him, and maybe next year under the tag.
If he's going to be exempt for a while and suspended after that, he may not have many games in a Chiefs uniform left regardless. Cutting him might (save them the issue of tagging him) and PR relief, at the cost of only a handful of games of Tyreek Hill, in their view. And his ongoing legal issues severely diminish his trade value next offseason.
Who in the fuck would ever want to play for an organization who wont stand behind a employee who in the eyes of the law is guilty of nothing. Someone may be but who is it? [Reply]
