beast
6 years ago

This seems to have been a "news story " to give the talking heads something for over the holiday weekend.
We here mire about it early this week , there might be something to it.
I'll side with Andrew Brandt for now.

Originally Posted by: buckeyepackfan 


I think both sides are correct, that the Packers did break the legal lawyer reading of the IR rule... but Brandt is probably right that at the end of the year, that the NFL let's teams break type of rule, for the past couple of decades.

Though based on the wording I've seen, I'm confused who decides the injury classification as major or minor. I know that minor is supposed to be less than 6 weeks until healed, but it looks as if the team doctors get to make that decision (along with greater medical staff that may or may not directly work for the team).

Point being is that it seems like any of the team doctors could give any and all of the injuris a major injury classification level, even if they heal in 3 weeks and just say, "oops it healed faster than we thought". The punishment for doing this on purpose is NOT automatically, said player is a free agent... but whatever the commissionor decides should be the punishment.

So even if the Packers purposely broke this rule, the commissioner would have to come up with a punishment that he could get out of the Packers stock holder meeting alive... plus the commissioner normally wants to sweep things under the rug... unless other owners and/or high staff members are getting after him. This just doesn't seem like something that would upset the normal owner, because it's hard to see them seeing lose their star player due to a paperwork error.
UserPostedImage
Barfarn
6 years ago
The rule is in place to prevent a team from stashing a not severely injured or healthy player on IR. If GB did this w/ Rodgers the NFL will order his release, PERIOD! Not sure what concoction of psychedelic drugs is being imbibed or what idealolic mancrush fan drool insanity is capturing imaginations of those that think this rule won’t be enforced because it’s Rodgers.

But, as is so often the case, this reporting is sensational click-bait attention seeking poppycock.

Teams don’t routinely abuse the spirit of IR rules at end of year. Sure, some are put on IR with a “3 week injury” with 2 games left; but only with the blessing of the player and the NFL. If the league don’t sign off, the guy is not IRed. Also, there is nothing in the IR or DTR-IR rules speaks of a new injury, so these clowns opining that Rodgers needs a new injury to go back on IR is 100% absurd. The only question to consider is does GB have a legitimate medical basis for IRing the player; if so, as Tony Saprano would say, “forgetaboutit.”

Every player that plays gets injured during the season. Some players are allowed to play, some are not. Some play a game or two; the med or coaching staff doesn’t like the way the injury responds and the player is put on IR. 99% of the severity of injury is unique to the person, often with volatile speculation amongst experts as to what injuries a player can play with or which must be shut down.

Rodgers has an injury that takes at least 6 months to fully heal. This is an immutable scientific fact at this stage of our scientific knowledge. In this case the team let Rodgers play with an injury that was not fully healed and decided to IR him after one game, so what? No one could say 1265 was wrong for letting Rodgers play weeks 15-17, or leaving him on IR, or letting him play 1 game and IRing him for the last 2; because a reasonable medical basis can be established for all three scenarios.

Whose behind it: No doubt, the 3 “convicted” of civil RICO and mobbed-up Saprano-wannabe Wilf brothers [Ziggy, Mark and Lenny (Who they call a cousin, but is an inbred brother)], who used their daddy’s launder mob money to buy their little play toy Vikings instead of a red fire engine are behind this. If there’s a 2nd team, I’ll double down on dhazer’s thoughts on Browns. They have the most to gain; that ole’ sneak Dorsey is trying creatively acquire Rdogers.
beast
6 years ago

If GB did this w/ Rodgers the NFL will order his release, PERIOD! Not sure what concoction of psychedelic drugs is being imbibed or what idealolic mancrush fan drool insanity is capturing imaginations of those that think this rule won’t be enforced because it’s Rodgers.

But, as is so often the case, this reporting is sensational click-bait attention seeking poppycock.

Teams don’t routinely abuse the spirit of IR rules at end of year. Sure, some are put on IR with a “3 week injury” with 2 games left; but only with the blessing of the player and the NFL. If the league don’t sign off, the guy is not IRed. Also, there is nothing in the IR or DTR-IR rules speaks of a new injury, so these clowns opining that Rodgers needs a new injury to go back on IR is 100% absurd. The only question to consider is does GB have a legitimate medical basis for IRing the player; if so, as Tony Saprano would say, “forgetaboutit.”

Originally Posted by: Barfarn 


Do you have access to the new bylaws on DTR-IR rules? Because I've been looking for them and it'd be nice to see them especially to see the "new injury" or lack there of. Because without that "new injury" part, then this whole drama is based on lies.

You seem to be the only person that believes the NFL will actually force his release... for me, it has less to do with "because it's Rodgers" (other than GB would kill him), but much more to do with that fact I can't remember the NFL enforcing this rule in the last couple of decades... so while Packers could get punished, I don't see anything more than a draft pick taken away and a team fine.

Also you said teams don't abuse abuse the rules, and then followed it by saying, sure they do (if they have the blessing of the player and the NFL). Note, they don't always have the blessing of the player... just like Packers reportedly didn't have Rodgers blessing as he wanted to keep playing.


UserPostedImage
Barfarn
6 years ago
I didn’t say NFL would force Rodgers’ release; I simply indicated that if GB violated a Constitutional bylaw [they didn’t] it will be enforced. The legal ramifications for the league looking the other way on this would shake the NFL to its core; perhaps end the league as we know it.

You speak of what you think the punishment should be; but this BYLAW provision has a punishment built in: the player is released as soon as healthy. So, that is what will happen, PERIOD. Now, if the league deems that’s enough of a punishment, then it’ll end there. If not, then fines and/or disqualifying picks could be incurred on top of Rodgers’ release.

There is no “readable” set of bylaws; the 1970 Bylaws you’ve probably found are it; plus 10,000 changes 😂. Some of the individual changes [thru 2006] can be found online attached to the 1970 bylaws. It’s a lawyers’ way of making sure they’re needed in the future.

Probably the closest thing online to what you’re looking for is: 2016 BYLAW PROPOSAL NO 7 , which was adopted as is.

You’ll notice there is no language about returning an IR-DTR guy to IR; I mean who’d have thunk it, right? There’s no language that indicates a player must be 100% recovered from his injury to be activated. It’s then logical to assume a guy who was restored to the roster thru IR-DTR goes to IR under the same provisions as anyone else would. So think of it this way: Rodgers is not put on IR, but is inactive for 8 weeks with injury; he plays week 15 and is then put on IR. No one would say a word. It is much less complicated than some are making it, as it has ZERO to do with the IR-DTR designation. It’s about 1 thing: did GB have a medical basis for shutting Rogers down? And who can argue that a not fully healed broken collarbone in a QB’s throwing shoulder is not a “major injury?” NO ONE!

The apparent logic is that Rodgers’ shoulder was healed; therefore it would take a “new injury” to put him on IR; hence, if there was no new injury; Rodgers was illegally stashed on IR. But, given the nature of his shoulder injury this logic is 100% a pile of steaming bulldung.

Next there was concern about teams violating/not violating the rules being some sort of contradiction. What was articulated is that a team might violate the literal language of the rule, while at the exact same time being 100% compliant with the “spirit” of the rule. Some WRITTEN rules easily convey their spirit, for example, a speed limit sign on an interstate. After reading the sign one knows exactly what is expected and enforcement is simple, go 1 MPH over limit and both the WRITTEN language and SPRIT are violated.

You know the spirit of the IR rule; you can imagine its abuses and difficulties in its enforcement. It is impossible to WRITE an IR rule that allows for an exact classification of time missed given the millions of different and degrees of severity of those injuries; varying medical opinions; and varying reactions or responses to therapy by different players to the exact same injury; etc. This IR WRITTEN rule can only at best provide a guideline, wildly subject to interpretation and extenuating circumstances.

Someone quoted Brandt as saying people are put on IR with “hangnails” as season’s end. Can’t believe he was so flip; but if he said it, he was walking out on a long limb of poetic license. If a team submitted a report to NFL that a guy was going on IR because of a hangnail [As Brandt suggests]; the league would say, “WTF, there better be an infection that threatens the future use of the appendage because this seems bogus, you can expect an investigation.” If the team is smart, and they generally are, they won’t IR this player for a simple hangnail.

You talk about Rodgers wanting to play; but a player must agree to be illegally stashed on IR. If the player insists he can play and the team says we dont care what you think; he will notify his rep and the NLFPA will inform the league of the player’s concerns. If the IR request isn’t shot down by the league upon its submission; the team knows an investigation will probably ensue. So it’d never gets this far unless the team was highly confident they had a medical basis for IRing the guy and the player/union a dunce.

The problems will come for a team when they say the player has a broken collar bone and it is later learned the team lied or exaggerated the injury.

If a team informs the league a guy has a an ankle sprain guaranteed to keep him through the end of the year; and the NLFPA and player “sign off;” and the NFL signs off; then the rule isn’t violated. Even though NORMALLY, the ankle sprain MIGHT not be considered a 6 week injury.
Fan Shout
dfosterf (4h) : Maybe
Mucky Tundra (4h) : Yes
Zero2Cool (5h) : No.
Mucky Tundra (7h) : End of a Degu-era
dhazer (8h) : Steelers sign Patterson because of new kickoff rule interesting
Zero2Cool (10h) : Former #Packers TE Josiah Deguara is signing a 1-year deal with the Jaguars, per source.
Zero2Cool (12h) : They do not do it for "content sake".
dfosterf (22h) : For the record, I enjoy Beast and Mucky drafts
Zero2Cool (27-Mar) : Haha
Mucky Tundra (27-Mar) : No time for talking! Back to work beast!
beast (27-Mar) : You saw only 4,201 of my mocks? 🥺 I think that means you missed more than half of them 😢
dfosterf (27-Mar) : Does anyone know what Lambeau field improvements got put on hold? My guess would be for the 2025 draft
Zero2Cool (27-Mar) : It's like listen, you made 4,201 mocks, no shit.
Zero2Cool (27-Mar) : Cuz during the draft "I had them mocked there!" as if it's amazing.
Zero2Cool (27-Mar) : They're fun to do once in awhile. It's people who think they are "content" that annoy me.
dfosterf (27-Mar) : Against tbd
dfosterf (27-Mar) : Answer to your question is yes, it's a Thursday, will be the Chiefs aga
dfosterf (27-Mar) : Luckily for all concerned, I don't post them. I did one, but that was like 25 mocks ago
Zero2Cool (27-Mar) : NFL 2024 gonna start Sept 5th isn't it???
Zero2Cool (27-Mar) : Ugh... kids these days!
dfosterf (27-Mar) : I'm gonna go do some more mock draft hell instead 🤪
Zero2Cool (27-Mar) : Did we do one of those prediction threads yet for 2024 season?
dfosterf (27-Mar) : In my city, they are playing the nimby game, in order to keep some railroad tracks vs. 2 professional sports teams and a concert venue.
dfosterf (27-Mar) : And/Or a city council, of which I haven't seen a good one in a very long time
dfosterf (27-Mar) : That sounds like a Mayor, not a city.
buckeyepackfan (26-Mar) : Packers halt scheduled 80mil upgrade of stadium until lease agreement talks are restarted
Zero2Cool (26-Mar) : City of Green Bay puts Packers' Lambeau Field lease talks on hold
buckeyepackfan (26-Mar) : Packers 1 of 3 teams to vote no on new kickoff rule.
Zero2Cool (26-Mar) : Packers sign another Kicker
dfosterf (26-Mar) : Lengthy explanation at PFF if you click the link
dfosterf (26-Mar) : Kickoff rules officially changed.ngthy explan
Zero2Cool (26-Mar) : lol
Cheesey (26-Mar) : 2009? No thanks! One open heart surgery is enough!
dfosterf (26-Mar) : Good for you!
Zero2Cool (26-Mar) : Yes. That's the one.
dfosterf (26-Mar) : Is that "Lady Dugan" per chance?
dfosterf (26-Mar) : Crystal?
dfosterf (26-Mar) : Please refresh my memory
Zero2Cool (26-Mar) : Alan posts. Crystal back in my life. It's 2009 all over again! Lol
Mucky Tundra (26-Mar) : BAH GAWD! THAT'S CHEESEYS MUSIC!
Zero2Cool (25-Mar) : Gutekunst said early stages of Jordan Love contract being discussed.
Zero2Cool (25-Mar) : Shouldn't be penalized cuz official screwed up
Zero2Cool (25-Mar) : Yeah, challenge until you are incorrect twice.
Zero2Cool (25-Mar) : Fining them is the goal, per the people who made the rule anyway.
dfosterf (25-Mar) : Still waiting on the kickoff rule changes. Did hear yesterday that the touchback proposal will now be the 30 yard line, not the 35
dfosterf (25-Mar) : Probably speed of game issues with your proposal
dfosterf (25-Mar) : Hopefully the refs don't get in the habit of throwing flags on this
beast (25-Mar) : I think when it comes to Challenges should get two strikes, so unlimited challenges as long as they keep winning them, but 2 wrong then done
dfosterf (25-Mar) : Still subject to the fines etc
dfosterf (25-Mar) : Yes, I should have been more specific. Also, they are now saying it would be a 15 yard penalty. That makes more sense .
Please sign in to use Fan Shout
2023 Packers Schedule
Sunday, Sep 10 @ 3:25 PM
Bears
Sunday, Sep 17 @ 12:00 PM
Falcons
Sunday, Sep 24 @ 12:00 PM
SAINTS
Thursday, Sep 28 @ 7:15 PM
LIONS
Monday, Oct 9 @ 7:15 PM
Raiders
Sunday, Oct 22 @ 3:25 PM
Broncos
Sunday, Oct 29 @ 12:00 PM
VIKINGS
Sunday, Nov 5 @ 12:00 PM
RAMS
Sunday, Nov 12 @ 12:00 PM
Steelers
Sunday, Nov 19 @ 12:00 PM
CHARGERS
Thursday, Nov 23 @ 11:30 AM
Lions
Sunday, Dec 3 @ 7:20 PM
CHIEFS
Monday, Dec 11 @ 7:15 PM
Giants
Sunday, Dec 17 @ 12:00 PM
BUCCANEERS
Sunday, Dec 24 @ 12:00 PM
Panthers
Sunday, Dec 31 @ 7:20 PM
Vikings
Sunday, Jan 7 @ 3:25 PM
BEARS
Sunday, Jan 14 @ 3:30 PM
Cowboys
Saturday, Jan 20 @ 7:15 PM
49ers
Recent Topics
4h / Green Bay Packers Talk / buckeyepackfan

22h / Green Bay Packers Talk / dfosterf

22h / Green Bay Packers Talk / bboystyle

27-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

27-Mar / Random Babble / Zero2Cool

27-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

26-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

26-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

26-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / bboystyle

25-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

25-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

24-Mar / Around The NFL / dhazer

24-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

24-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

22-Mar / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

Headlines
Copyright © 2006 - 2024 PackersHome.com™. All Rights Reserved.