jbooma Posted April 21, 2004 Share Posted April 21, 2004 Seems as Clarett and Williams still have a chance. If the NFL does not have a good arguement she is going to overturn the stay. My position just changed on this. The fact it went to this I think the stay will be overturned and will be in the draft. She didn't even have to ask for an arguement the fact she does then they have a good complaint. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redskin56 Posted April 21, 2004 Share Posted April 21, 2004 Ruth Bader Ginsberg is the most liberal justice on the Supreme Court (this is not a left wing bashing statement, its just the truth). It wouldn't suprise me in the least if she overturned the stay no matter what the NFL argues. Because she oversees the circuit in which this appeal was taken, she has the authority to grant extraordinary writs (such as a writ of mandamus, which is probably how this came to her). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jbooma Posted April 21, 2004 Author Share Posted April 21, 2004 Originally posted by redskin56 Ruth Bader Ginsberg is the most liberal justice on the Supreme Court (this is not a left wing bashing statement, its just the truth). It wouldn't suprise me in the least if she overturned the stay no matter what the NFL argues. Because she oversees the circuit in which this appeal was taken, she has the authority to grant extraordinary writs (such as a writ of mandamus, which is probably how this came to her). Then you have to give credit to Clarett's lawyer for doing this. I have never heard of such a thing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redskin56 Posted April 21, 2004 Share Posted April 21, 2004 It's not that common; however, it is an easy way to get something infront of the presiding justice over the circuit you are appealing from. I had no idea that Bader-Ginsberg was the presiding justice from that circuit. I'll tell you this, she is going to lean toward the right to work and anti-trust violations any day of the week (which is exactly what Clarett is arguing and the NFL is denying). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkinsRback04 Posted April 21, 2004 Share Posted April 21, 2004 She's the 'Celebrity' chasing Justice...a Judicial Activist. This case has no merit and the NFL's case is solid. The fact that she has asked for arguments is not a good sign for Truth, Justice and the American Way. But I could be wrong...she just may be dotting the I's and crossing the T's/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Utah Posted April 21, 2004 Share Posted April 21, 2004 Well, hopefully one way or another this whole thing gets resolved and we can get on with the important stuff. We pick #5 right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkinInsite Posted April 21, 2004 Share Posted April 21, 2004 How is the NFL case rock solid? If the NFL teams doesn't want these guys then don't draft them. What's the harm of letting them entering the draft. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redskin56 Posted April 21, 2004 Share Posted April 21, 2004 Here's the thing with Bader-Ginsberg's request. If she was going to summarily deny Clarett's petition, she would not have ordered a response from the NFL. The fact that she ordered them to respond (did she set a deadline that is prior to the draft? Big question.) leads me to believe that she is considering granting the petition and lifting the stay. I haven't seen the actual report, but if she ordered them to respond by, lets say, Thursday, it is not going to be good news for the NFL. She may ask for the input of the whole court, but she doesn't have to. She can grant the petition and lift the stay. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jbooma Posted April 21, 2004 Author Share Posted April 21, 2004 Originally posted by SkinInsite How is the NFL case rock solid? If the NFL teams doesn't want these guys then don't draft them. What's the harm of letting them entering the draft. Exactly and the fact they keep saying they will be allowed in a supplemental draft kills their case. Why does it have to wait when you can do it now. The NFL is going to lose. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jbooma Posted April 21, 2004 Author Share Posted April 21, 2004 Originally posted by redskin56 Here's the thing with Bader-Ginsberg's request. If she was going to summarily deny Clarett's petition, she would not have ordered a response from the NFL. The fact that she ordered them to respond (did she set a deadline that is prior to the draft? Big question.) leads me to believe that she is considering granting the petition and lifting the stay. I haven't seen the actual report, but if she ordered them to respond by, lets say, Thursday, it is not going to be good news for the NFL. She may ask for the input of the whole court, but she doesn't have to. She can grant the petition and lift the stay. I heard something they have to respond by today or early thursday since she will rule thursday or friday. The fact she is acting fast on this tells me she is going to block the stay and let them in the draft. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redskin56 Posted April 21, 2004 Share Posted April 21, 2004 Clarett Docketing Sheet Above is the docketing sheet from the Supreme Court. It doesn't state that she has ordered a response from the NFL, but that doesn't mean that it hasn't happened. It would normally be posted the evening after the order was entered. If she has ordered a response that quickly, I'd be hard pressed to think that she was not entertaining the idea of granting the petition and overturing the stay. The NFL will have to be pretty convincing. And just the simple fact that Ginsburg is the justice leads me to believe that no matter what the NFL argues, they are fighting a loosing battle. So the next question is, who is going to take Mike Williams and does this open up opportunities for the #5 pick? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkinsRback04 Posted April 21, 2004 Share Posted April 21, 2004 Originally posted by SkinInsite How is the NFL case rock solid? If the NFL teams doesn't want these guys then don't draft them. What's the harm of letting them entering the draft. The case is solid as the petition is based on anti-trust violation. As the disqualifying factors are the result of agreement between the NFL and the NFLPA, the argument is invalid. There is nothing anti-trust about this case. It is all about 'individual rights' and whether the disqualifying time limitation, reached in mutual agreement, is arbitrary. It doesn't matter one whit that the NFL told these guys they could enter the draft...as long as they also told them the NFL was going to fight for the standard reached through the collective agreement. Redskin56: As to the #5...That is the likely unexpected bonus fruit which could fall from this tree. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
miragv Posted April 21, 2004 Share Posted April 21, 2004 I really hope it is not overturned. This will protect the NFL and it will also set a precedent for the NBA to institute a similar age-restriction. This ruling is key for the future of the NFL, NBA, and NCAA football and basketball. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkinsThug Posted April 21, 2004 Share Posted April 21, 2004 It seems to me if she is "liberal", then she will favor labor-management agreement already in place (as it has labor's blessing), and not favor (for lack of a better term) the "right-to-work" argument of Clarett. Just my two cents. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BD Posted April 21, 2004 Share Posted April 21, 2004 While we're waiting on Ginsburg, a clarification: The NFL has a “three years out of high school” requirement negotiated with the players' union, NOT a “no teenagers” or "age" requirement – and that’s a significant component of the case. Clarett is not a teenager (he’s 20), so even if that was the requirement, he would be in the draft. At the time of last year’s draft, future Defensive Rookie of the Year Terrell Suggs was a mere 18 days older than Clarett is today. In fact, Clarett is the same age as several of the current draft-eligible players. WR Reggie Williams, CB Chris Gamble, TE Kellen Winslow and FS Sean Taylor are all less than six months older than Clarett, and are guaranteed to be first round picks. Likely top five pick WR Larry Fitzgerald is one month older. DeAngelo Hall is sure to be the first CB off the board, and he’s actually a month younger than Clarett – and DT Randy Starks and WR PK Sam are even younger. It’s fine to think that Clarett shouldn’t get in, but don't defend an age requirement that doesn’t exist. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NavyDave Posted April 21, 2004 Share Posted April 21, 2004 I hope it is overturned. Liberal or not Ginsburg only has to look at the precedents in other sports. Heck she can look in the NFL at the Chicago Bears. Halas felll in love with a college running back who had to stop playing college football to take care of his family and Halas just called Rozelle and told him to make it hapen the kid played for 6 years in the league yeah he was 19 years old and that was in the 60's. The way I see it if a 16 year old with parents permission could join the military, if a 18 to 20 year old can handle dealing with land and sea mines or enemy fire a 19 or 20 yr old WR or RB should be able to have a chance to make it in the NFL. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dissonance19 Posted April 21, 2004 Share Posted April 21, 2004 Even if it is overturned and they are allowed back in. The NFL is different than the NBA. Kids will think about coming out early but then decided against it cuz they'll get better advice and stay in school. They actually apply to see how high they could go and do you think someone in the NFL will tell em something good? No way. NBA is about potential. NFL isnt. We all get a general consensus on how high someone will go. It will NEVER get how it is in the NBA. Besides teams are starting to smarten up when it comes to drafting high schoolers in basketball. The teams that will be in the top 3 prolly wont even think about drafting one. Orlando needs help now so they dont lose Mcgrady, Chicago has drafted highschoolers in the past(Tyson Chander, Jamal Crawford), and Washington drafted Kwame Brown and are still waiting for his potential. I dont think they will take more chances on these high schoolers as much. There will be some teams like Atlanta, who want hometown boy Dwight Howard. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.