UPDATE: Aaron Hernandez All discussion about past and present merge)

[Qwiz]

A wild troll appears! Goes to show even during press conference for an NFL player being charged with murder you can't get through it without a troll appearing.

Troll? Looks like a monkey to me lol.

[Gavin]

A wild troll appears! Goes to show even during press conference for an NFL player being charged with murder you can't get through it without a troll appearing.

Just some kid trying to make a name for himself in some way, there is some *s out there

[TAPLOOK]

But when a person comes out of it and leads to having a good life we could say it didn't hurt them either.

It's why your statement was wrong to begin with

 

I'll say that I came from a well grounded lower-middle class family. If a good foundation doesn't exist the money will hurt you. It won't fix a bad marriage or straighten out a drugged up kid. It has the total opposite effect.  I live in a nicer neighborhood than AH and about 50% of the kids have been in rehab  or in trouble with the law multiple times. Where I grew up in a tough blue collar neighborhood it was rare that someone had serious troubles. I'm 51 and still friends with my childhood buddies and we get together all the time.    

[southwest1]

I said it has nothing to do with due process in the legal system. Yes, a fired employee has legal recourse, but that's entirely unrelated to an NFL player being released. 

My point was a "Dept of Resources" and "an appeals process" is a form of legal protection i.e. due process Superman. Sorry for not making myself more clear there my friend. My fault; not yours. 

 

Point taken though Superman. We are on the same page now. But, it begs the question, why were CBA negotiations so prolonged over medical coverage of players if any owner can terminate any player contract at whim? Sounds counterproductive to me. 

[Blackhawk4]

Looks like he's been held without bail. Welp.

 

EDIT: Interesting tweet from Mike Florio 

 

  @ProFootballTalk
Great point from CSNNE analyst: Will Hernandez and his fiancee get married quickly so that she can't be compelled to testify against him?
6/26/13 3:50 PM

[Superman]

My point was a "Dept of Resources" and "an appeals process" is a form of legal protection i.e. due process Superman. Sorry for not making myself more clear there my friend. My fault; not yours. 

 

Point taken though Superman. We are on the same page now. But, it begs the question, why were CBA negotiations so prolonged over medical coverage of players if any owner can terminate any player contract at whim? Sounds counterproductive to me. 

 

What does one have to do with the other?

 

The medical coverage issue was primarily regarding benefits for retired players, not only players retired now, but also future benefits for current players. But the major hangups were revenue sharing and restricted free agency. The benefits issue was dragged into that because the owners wanted to earmark part of the players' slice for retiree benefits, and the players didn't want to give that up.

 

The issue of guaranteed contracts was never really on the table during negotiations. 

 

Why do you think a team would have a legal issue on their hands for terminating a contract over an unresolved legal issue, but they can terminate a contract if a player misses practice? Teams can release players at their discretion, with or without cause. The terms of the CBA and the individual contract hold sway with regard to money that is still owed to the player and cap ramifications. But even if a player has a fully guaranteed contract, the team can release him for whatever reason they choose.

 

Legal recourse for unlawful termination really only comes up if there's some sort of discrimination that the employer (team, in this case) is accused of. So, if the Patriots released Hernandez because he came out as a gay person, or if he was bipolar, or something like that, then they'd probably have a lawsuit on their hands. But, as someone else mentioned, unlawful termination is usually pretty difficult to prove.

[southwest1]

What does one have to do with the other?

 

The medical coverage issue was primarily regarding benefits for retired players, not only players retired now, but also future benefits for current players. But the major hangups were revenue sharing and restricted free agency. The benefits issue was dragged into that because the owners wanted to earmark part of the players' slice for retiree benefits, and the players didn't want to give that up.

 

The issue of guaranteed contracts was never really on the table during negotiations. 

 

Why do you think a team would have a legal issue on their hands for terminating a contract over an unresolved legal issue, but they can terminate a contract if a player misses practice? Teams can release players at their discretion, with or without cause. The terms of the CBA and the individual contract hold sway with regard to money that is still owed to the player and cap ramifications. But even if a player has a fully guaranteed contract, the team can release him for whatever reason they choose.

 

Legal recourse for unlawful termination really only comes up if there's some sort of discrimination that the employer (team, in this case) is accused of. So, if the Patriots released Hernandez because he came out as a gay person, or if he was bipolar, or something like that, then they'd probably have a lawsuit on their hands. But, as someone else mentioned, unlawful termination is usually pretty difficult to prove.

My point is simple really. If safety was such a difficult issue to negotiate in the new CBA, what's to stop any owner from releasing any injury prone or trouble making player without case, with provocation, without warning just because they can? That ties right into collective bargaining/ union protections especially if a player is injured on the team field. Why would the NFL PA give owners a fail safe mechanism like this? It makes no sense at all. Owners must be required to demonstrate that players cannot perform on the field either through physical limitations or permanent incarceration periods. 

[chad72]

Not sure which organization one would like to play for, the Ravens' organization that stuck through with Ray Lewis though he served time and gave him a chance for redemption, or the Pats' organization that cuts ties with AH without knowing the results of the conviction.

[bayone]

call me an * , I just dont get murder , let alone from someone with so much to live for

[The Fish]

"the results of the conviction"?

 

the results of the trail.

[Superman]

My point is simple really. If safety was such a difficult issue to negotiate in the new CBA, what's to stop any owner from releasing any injury prone or trouble making player without case, with provocation, without warning just because they can? That ties right into collective bargaining/ union protections especially if a player is injured on the team field. Why would the NFL PA give owners a fail safe mechanism like this? It makes no sense at all. Owners must be required to demonstrate that players cannot perform on the field either through physical limitations or permanent incarceration periods. 

 

You can release an injured player, but there is an injury settlement process that's governed by the CBA. That's why you'll see a hurt player released with the designation "waived-injured." But once a player has three years in the league, he has retiree benefits. Whether hurt, in legal trouble, whatever. I'm not sure if your retiree benefits are rescinded if you're convicted of a serious crime. I don't think so, but in Hernandez's case, if he's convicted of murder, he doesn't really need to worry about medical insurance and a pension, amiright?

 

A team can release a trouble maker without due process. That doesn't impact the player's retiree benefits. That's still governed by the CBA.

[crazycolt1]

you would think they would atleast wait for the verdict

I doubt that the Pats want the media circus around. 

[southwest1]

 

 

Why do you think a team would have a legal issue on their hands for terminating a contract over an unresolved legal issue, but they can terminate a contract if a player misses practice? Teams can release players at their discretion, with or without cause. The terms of the CBA and the individual contract hold sway with regard to money that is still owed to the player and cap ramifications. But even if a player has a fully guaranteed contract, the team can release him for whatever reason they choose.

 

Legal recourse for unlawful termination really only comes up if there's some sort of discrimination that the employer (team, in this case) is accused of. So, if the Patriots released Hernandez because he came out as a gay person, or if he was bipolar, or something like that, then they'd probably have a lawsuit on their hands. But, as someone else mentioned, unlawful termination is usually pretty difficult to prove.

I never said unlawful termination was easy to prove Superman. In fact, I repeatedly mentioned that meeting that thresh hold was very high [Post #156].

 

I find incredibly hypocritical that an owner can fire Hernandez with no evidence, but yet the Browns owner Jerry Haslam can be the subject of an FBI & IRS investigation & he hasn't been fired yet. Where's the equality & fairness here exactly Roger Goodell? Hmmm...

 

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/nfl/news/20130529/two-plead-guilty-in-federal-probe-of-cleveland-browns-owner-jimmy-haslam.ap/

[Smurphy1]

I never said unlawful termination was easy to prove Superman. In fact, I repeatedly mentioned that meeting that thresh hold was very high [Post #156].

 

I find incredibly hypocritical that an owner can fire Hernandez with no evidence, but yet the Browns owner Jerry Haslam can be the subject of an FBI & IRS investigation & he hasn't been fired yet. Where's the equality & fairness here exactly Roger Goodell? Hmmm...

 

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/nfl/news/20130529/two-plead-guilty-in-federal-probe-of-cleveland-browns-owner-jimmy-haslam.ap/

 

Employers can fire employees when it suits them how does that apply to Jerry Haslam? He's an owner not an employee. Goodell can't just fire Haslam.

[Superman]

I never said unlawful termination was easy to prove Superman. In fact, I repeatedly mentioned that meeting that thresh hold was very high [Post #156].

 

I find incredibly hypocritical that an owner can fire Hernandez with no evidence, but yet the Browns owner Jerry Haslam can be the subject of an FBI & IRS investigation & he hasn't been fired yet. Where's the equality & fairness here exactly Roger Goodell? Hmmm...

 

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/nfl/news/20130529/two-plead-guilty-in-federal-probe-of-cleveland-browns-owner-jimmy-haslam.ap/

 

You're kind of all over the place right now.

 

An NFL player is an employee, under contract. And the contract is governed by the CBA. He can be terminated for any reason, at any time, and unless he can prove unlawful termination, he really has no legal recourse. The Pats could have released Hernandez a month ago because they didn't like his attitude, and he would have no legal recourse.

 

An owner of an NFL team, like Jimmy Haslem, is NOT an employee. He's a partner of the league, made up of 32 teams, and the terms of that business relationship are quite different than those governing a player's employment with a team. The other teams in the NFL can get rid of Haslem, but that's a much different animal, legally and otherwise. But the NFL and Roger Goodell can't just terminate his partnership at their discretion. It's entirely different.

[southwest1]

Employers can fire people when it suits them how does that apply to Jerry Haslam? He's and owner not an employee. Goodell can't just fire Haslam.

Goodell came into this league claiming to "protect the NFL shield". Tell me how are federal indictments a public relations blessing exactly? Goodell is the figure head for all the owners & they all have a vote at the owners meetings. Bad publicity equals a loss in your wholesome NFL, PG family product. Hernandez & Haslam are on equal footing. No exception should be made in either case IMO. 

[GoPats]

Not sure which organization one would like to play for, the Ravens' organization that stuck through with Ray Lewis though he served time and gave him a chance for redemption, or the Pats' organization that cuts ties with AH without knowing the results of the conviction.

 

Ray Lewis was never charged with murder. Big difference there.

 

They gathered enough evidence to charge Hernandez in only eight days. That's pretty quick as far as homicide investigations go. There is obviously very strong evidence against him. Of course that all has to play out in court.

But, to the point of the Patriots cutting him... is there any question - at all, at this point - that he was involved somehow? I'm not sure even the most homery homer would defend him at this stage. 

 

I, personally, would rather root for a bunch of scrap-heap free agents than a Pro Bowl player who is involved in this type of thing, or who consorts with people who would be involved. They killed a guy, for crying out loud. Football is meaningless by comparison.

[jvan1973]

Goodell came into this league claiming to "protect the NFL shield". Tell me how are federal indictments a public relations blessing exactly? Goodell is the figure head for all the owners & they all have a vote at the owners meetings. Bad publicity equals a loss in your wholesome NFL, PG family product. Hernandez & Haslam are on equal footing. No exception should be made in either case IMO.

one owns a team .. the other is employed by a team. goodell didn't punish, the patriots did two completely different scenarios entirely

[Smurphy1]

Goodell came into this league claiming to "protect the NFL shield". Tell me how are federal indictments a public relations blessing exactly? Goodell is the figure head for all the owners & they all have a vote at the owners meetings. Bad publicity equals a loss in your wholesome NFL, PG family product. Hernandez & Haslam are on equal footing. No exception should be made in either case IMO. 

 

Haslam hasn't been charged with anything. That's a big difference right there.

[southwest1]

You're kind of all over the place right now.

 

An NFL player is an employee, under contract. And the contract is governed by the CBA. He can be terminated for any reason, at any time, and unless he can prove unlawful termination, he really has no legal recourse. The Pats could have released Hernandez a month ago because they didn't like his attitude, and he would have no legal recourse.

 

An owner of an NFL team, like Jimmy Haslem, is NOT an employee. He's a partner of the league, made up of 32 teams, and the terms of that business relationship are quite different than those governing a player's employment with a team. The other teams in the NFL can get rid of Haslem, but that's a much different animal, legally and otherwise. But the NFL and Roger Goodell can't just terminate his partnership at their discretion. It's entirely different.

Okay, so therefore a different income bracket entitles an owner to different rights & regulations & the owner is only beholden to their investors or Board Of Trustees is it? That's ridiculous. Legally, a different sets of rules exist I will admit, but law breaking is law breaking whether an owner does it or a player. 

[amfootball]

Haslam hasn't been charged with anything. That's a big difference right there.

39 players have been arrested this past month. 39. The NFL has a much bigger problem than just this case.

[bayone]

39 players have been arrested this past month. 39. The NFL has a much bigger problem than just this case.

 

Yes NFL does but if u look at other charges this tops the list by a wide margin

 

still has to be proven and pass the does the glove fit case , just saying, in some cases u just never get a finite verdict as far as we the people are concerned

[southwest1]

one owns a team .. the other is employed by a team. goodell didn't punish, the patriots did two completely different scenarios entirely

True, but Goodwell has taken away #1 draft picks for infractions from Jerry Jones & Tom Benson & that can affect teams down the road in terms of depth & the quality of the roster. The Commissioner can indeed affect a team's ability to improve their squad on a yearly basis. So, please don't tell me that Goodell can't influence the independence of teams at all. Sorry, I don't buy that completely.

[deedub75]

I just don't think there's anything wrong with waiting for more information before deciding whether to release him. It's been a week. It's possible that, instead of him being arrested today, the police could have come out and said that he's not considered a suspect, they are clearing him of suspicion, and the investigation is centered on someone else. The evidence that was supposedly destroyed at his home might have been linked to someone else, and Hernandez might just have been in the wrong place at the wrong time. 

 

That obviously didn't happen. But waiting for more information seemed prudent.

 

And now that more information is available, and Hernandez is further implicated in some sort of wrongdoing, it makes sense for the Patriots to act on this new information. That's just from a matter of principle -- they don't want a player who is definitely implicated in a murder investigation on their team.

 

Aside from the principle of the matter, there's the distraction that comes from all this. And that's obviously something the Patriots want no part of.

 

I think the Patriots saw the writing on the wall and wanted to release him before he was officially charged with murder.  I think they had some insider information that he was going to be charged with murder and it looked better for them from a public standpoint to cut ties with him before the public knew he was going to be charged with murder.  Kraft probably already had his mind made up to release Hernandez if he were arrested. 

[Susie Q]

marv was never charged if remember right ??  , just investigated , if he would of been things would be different

Agree Barry 100% being investigated and being charged has a whole different outcome in my opinion.

[bayone]

I think the Patriots saw the writing on the wall and wanted to release him before he was officially charged with murder.  I think they had some insider information that he was going to be charged with murder and it looked better for them from a public standpoint to cut ties with him before the public knew he was going to be charged with murder.  Kraft probably already had his mind made up to release Hernandez if he were arrested. 

 

 

actually according to NFL network Patriots knew were issues, not exactly what, all teams have ex FBI agents or otherrs that have contacts to get info, supposedly patriots decided this last week  whatever the charge it wouldn't of mattered as long as was realated to the murder he would be released

[Superman]

Okay, so therefore a different income bracket entitles an owner to different rights & regulations & the owner is only beholden to their investors or Board Of Trustees is it? That's ridiculous. Legally, a different sets of rules exist I will admit, but law breaking is law breaking whether an owner does it or a player. 

 

???

 

Who said anything about an income bracket? Haslem and Hernandez could make the exact same amount of money. The difference lies in their roles and respective contracts/partnership agreements with the league. Hernandez is an employee. Haslem is a partner. They are not beholden to the same rules, they aren't even playing the same game. Haslem can test positive for Adderall and won't be suspended for violating the substance abuse policy because he's not beholden to the substance abuse policy. He can't have his contract terminated under the terms of the CBA because he's not employed under the terms of the CBA.

 

It's a completely different thing. It's like you saying that a military official can be discharged for DUI, but a member of congress can't be removed from his seat. They both work for the government, but one is beholden to certain terms of employment that the other isn't. 

 

If Haslem is guilty of breaking the law, then the NFL and it's respective ownership partners will have legal recourse to get rid of him. They need that legal right to do so. Teams don't need legal recourse to get rid of players, whether they are guilty of breaking the law or not. Teams can get rid of players for whatever reason they choose, so long as it's not discriminatory. 

[Superman]

I think the Patriots saw the writing on the wall and wanted to release him before he was officially charged with murder.  I think they had some insider information that he was going to be charged with murder and it looked better for them from a public standpoint to cut ties with him before the public knew he was going to be charged with murder.  Kraft probably already had his mind made up to release Hernandez if he were arrested. 

 

That's very possible. But there's still an "if" there, one that hadn't been fulfilled prior to this morning.

[jvan1973]

True, but Goodwell has taken away #1 draft picks for infractions from Jerry Jones & Tom Benson & that can affect teams down the road in terms of depth & the quality of the roster. The Commissioner can indeed affect a team's ability to improve their squad on a yearly basis. So, please don't tell me that Goodell can't influence the independence of teams at all. Sorry, I don't buy that completely.

it doesn't change the fact that those two scenarios are not in anyway similar

[amfootball]

That's very possible. But there's still an "if" there, one that hadn't been fulfilled prior to this morning.

Here on local radio it was being reported that Kraft had his people on the inside of the North Andover force and new of the charges coming. Apparently the Pats were planning on the release as early as last week but waited until AH was officially arrested for PR purposes. Kraft has a lot of clout in this city, more than even the mayor so he was well aware of the dire situation and got out. There is no doubt in mind he knew it was a first degree murder charge and also knew of the ridiculous amount of evidence stacked against AH including 5 charges for illegal weapon possession. This is not Ray Lewis and this is not O.J. AH is going to jail for a long, long time.

[jvan1973]

Here on local radio it was being reported that Kraft had his people on the inside of the North Andover force and new of the charges coming. Apparently the Pats were planning on the release as early as last week but waited until AH was officially arrested for PR purposes. Kraft has a lot of clout in this city, more than even the mayor so he was well aware of the dire situation and got out. There is no doubt in mind he knew it was a first degree murder charge and also knew of the ridiculous amount of evidence stacked against AH including 5 charges for illegal weapon possession. This is not Ray Lewis and this is not O.J. AH is going to jail for a long, long time.

i guess due process means something else in the northeast.

Innocent until proven guilty.

[deedub75]

i guess due process means something else in the northeast.

Innocent until proven guilty.

 

If someone is arrested for murder or rape, it doesn't seem to matter whether he is guilty or not. 

[amfootball]

i guess due process means something else in the northeast.

Innocent until proven guilty.

This is not a northeast thing. Powerful people who have built a sports dynasty have connections. It has always been this way and always will. I can't begin to tell you the mecca that is now Foxborough. Not sure if that town was even on the map in MA until Kraft came and set up Patriot Place and built one of the best stadiums in the NFL. He is a very, very powerful man.

[amfootball]

If someone is arrested for murder or rape, it doesn't seem to matter whether he is guilty or not. 

Probably because those two crimes are the most heinous. If you are assoicated with either you kind of can't expect the benefit of the doubt.

[schwamm]

i guess due process means something else in the northeast.

Innocent until proven guilty.

The legal authorities continue to abide by due process, as expected. The Patriots organization has no such obligation, and ought to act in its best interest, which is what they've done. I see nothing wrong with this.

[dw49]

I think they're offense will be fine. To me, the question is the same as it has been the last three years: Can the defense hold its own and make plays? If so, the Patriots have as good a chance at a Super Bowl as anyone else, because of Tom Brady and Bill Belichick. They were up 21-3, on the road, in the 2006 AFCCG, with a much worse receiver corps. Assuming Brady is healthy, the offense will be fine.

 

Also, Rob Gronkowski is being written off by a lot of people, but he might be ready to go by the start of the season. Even if he takes it slow and comes back in October, he's still one of the best tight ends in the league. That's a significant upgrade for them.

 

All this really means is that the Patriots don't have the best tight end tandem in the league anymore. I'm sure they'll adjust.

 

 

 

I guess we just disagree on this one. They replaced Welker with an injury prone down grade ... Imo anyway.What Gronk has proved so far is that he can't stay on the filed , great when he's in there but has been injury prone since college. I don't have a real reason to believe he can be counted on. The Wr position is crazy bad. Heck the only one I can think of is the second round rookie from Marshall. To just look at this receiving pile of poop and say "they'll be fine " is where we agree to disagree. But they are the pats and they do have TB...

[Superman]

I guess we just disagree on this one. They replaced Welker with an injury prone down grade ... Imo anyway.What Gronk has proved so far is that he can't stay on the filed , great when he's in there but has been injury prone since college. I don't have a real reason to believe he can be counted on. The Wr position is crazy bad. Heck the only one I can think of is the second round rookie from Marshall. To just look at this receiving pile of poop and say "they'll be fine " is where we agree to disagree. But they are the pats and they do have TB...

 

I'm not saying they have a great receiving corps. I'm just saying I think they'll make due with whatever they have, and they'll still win a bunch of games.

[Warhorse]

 I'm not sure even the most homery homer would defend him at this stage. 

 

You deserve a tall cold beer for the creation of this phrase...

[Susie Q]

Ray Lewis was never charged with murder. Big difference there.

 

They gathered enough evidence to charge Hernandez in only eight days. That's pretty quick as far as homicide investigations go. There is obviously very strong evidence against him. Of course that all has to play out in court.

But, to the point of the Patriots cutting him... is there any question - at all, at this point - that he was involved somehow? I'm not sure even the most homery homer would defend him at this stage. 

 

I, personally, would rather root for a bunch of scrap-heap free agents than a Pro Bowl player who is involved in this type of thing, or who consorts with people who would be involved. They killed a guy, for crying out loud. Football is meaningless by comparison.

Good post Go Pats  I was hoping someone would post such a post.

[Susie Q]

I guess we just disagree on this one. They replaced Welker with an injury prone down grade ... Imo anyway.What Gronk has proved so far is that he can't stay on the filed , great when he's in there but has been injury prone since college. I don't have a real reason to believe he can be counted on. The Wr position is crazy bad. Heck the only one I can think of is the second round rookie from Marshall. To just look at this receiving pile of poop and say "they'll be fine " is where we agree to disagree. But they are the pats and they do have TB...

Well maybe TB will now be playing TE position.