Do you think the league should punish players for actions DURING the lockout?

In an ideal world, I agree here. However, trusting that teams will "police their own" when all of the performance and $$ pressures are there is just not realistic. There has to be a check and balance by a "disinterested" third party. Should this be Goodell??? Not necessarily either. I do not profess to have the answer here, but I do think that leaving this exclusively to the teams is not the answer.

 

Jake Scott says all players received a document stating that they were not actively employed by the team or the NFL during the lockout. Knowing this, how could an employer punish someone for something they did when they weren't employed by them?

 

If that were the case then we would have 1700 free agents and a crazier NFL world than now. I am sure that was some sort of union de-certification ploy. No getting around that unless the players were released they had contracts with teams, thus they were employees.

 

I can agree with that. Wherever the punishment comes from, I don't think these guys that got into trouble should get off without as much as a slap on the wrist. Even though I can understand the 'technically they weren't employed' argument, come on, we all (players, fans, etc.) knew this was going to be resolved sooner or later. And the players were still representatives of the league as well as their respective teams IMO.

When Kenny Britt got into his trouble(/s) what were the headlines? Was it "Titan Kenny Britt (insert offense here)" or "Former professional football player Kenny Britt (insert offense here)"?

It's a tricky situation for sure, but that's my take on it anyway.

 

Every other Friday is pay day in the NFL. So 17 paydays went down to 9. The final week of the regular season is a one week check. Playoff checks are on top of your contract.

 

Did that change with the new CBA?

 

Not everything, but some of it.

 

I don't understand. The teams/NFL sent a document informing the players they were not actively employed during the lockout and you're claiming they were? lol

 

This is interesting. In the previous CBA, paragraphs 2 and 15 require NFL players to always conduct themselves in a way that shows they are in recognition "of the fact that the success of professional football depends largely on public respect for and approval of those associated with the game."

 

Just took this from last years CBA, but I'm not sure if it's in the new one, but read this.
This is who the CBA applies to.
"All professional football players who have been previously employed
by a member club of the National Football League who are seeking
employment with an NFL Club"

The way I am interpreting that is that if you plan on being employed by an NFL team, this applies to you.

I think the NFL will try to punish Britt, especially since Munchak wont.