Federal judge rules against Falcons

The forum for general posting. Come join the madness. :)
Post Reply
Message
Author
User avatar
ne1410s
Posts: 2961
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 5:26 pm
Location: The Friendly Confines

Federal judge rules against Falcons

#1 Post by ne1410s » Mon Feb 04, 2008 1:45 pm

He ruled that Michael Vick's 20 million dollar signing bonus did not have to be returned to the Falcons. Doing so would violate the collective bargaining agreement between the league and the players.

Vick is in minimum security in Leavenworth, KS.
"When you argue with a fool, there are two fools in the argument."

User avatar
jarnon
Posts: 6861
Joined: Tue Oct 09, 2007 9:52 pm
Location: Merion, Pa.

Re: Federal judge rules against Falcons

#2 Post by jarnon » Mon Feb 04, 2008 2:17 pm

An arbitrator recently ruled that Terrell Owens has to repay part of his signing bonus to the Eagles. I suppose T.O.'s offenses (missing practice, dissing his QB, etc.) were worse than killing dogs.

User avatar
Bob78164
Bored Moderator
Posts: 22044
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 12:02 pm
Location: By the phone

Re: Federal judge rules against Falcons

#3 Post by Bob78164 » Mon Feb 04, 2008 4:16 pm

jarnon wrote:An arbitrator recently ruled that Terrell Owens has to repay part of his signing bonus to the Eagles. I suppose T.O.'s offenses (missing practice, dissing his QB, etc.) were worse than killing dogs.
I've seen a story on the case. The issue had nothing to do with the extent or gravity of the misconduct, and everything to do with the type of bonus. --Bob
"Question with boldness even the existence of a God; because, if there be one, he must more approve of the homage of reason than that of blindfolded fear." Thomas Jefferson

User avatar
Appa23
Posts: 3770
Joined: Thu Oct 11, 2007 8:04 pm

Re: Federal judge rules against Falcons

#4 Post by Appa23 » Mon Feb 04, 2008 9:18 pm

Bob78164 wrote:
jarnon wrote:An arbitrator recently ruled that Terrell Owens has to repay part of his signing bonus to the Eagles. I suppose T.O.'s offenses (missing practice, dissing his QB, etc.) were worse than killing dogs.
I've seen a story on the case. The issue had nothing to do with the extent or gravity of the misconduct, and everything to do with the type of bonus. --Bob
Yes, as I heard it, the decision was based on the fact that they could not ask for signing bonus for the years that Vick already played. The Falcons were allowed to have Vick repay the amount that was attributable to the years of service that they would not be receiving. (the "dog" years.)

Post Reply