MANDATORY MINICAMP

[Rastak]

There are reasons other than likelihood of success not to do so. I was mainly pointing out it's probably not as hard as you claimed to win.

With a concussion I would venture nearly impossible. Preponderance of the evidence with no way to test?

I suppose he could retire, then pop up like Favre. I'm only pointing out he has a few options. Packers hold most but not all the cards. I still say he reports most likely.

[Rastak]

On the flip side, do you have examples of a recent player faking an injury? If it never really happens, there won't be any lawsuits.

A good question, it's been a while and alot of times we'd never know about. I don't have names, several players get called for faking injuries on the field. Look man, I know it seems I'm trolling, I recall reading a few times where fan bases suspect it's like the blue flu during a work stoppage. I only point out he can pull that.


edit:

I guess this is what I am taking about. Can't prove a back injury that suddenly disappears as it's hard to detect and prove.

https://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2019/10/16/jalen-ramsey-is-cured/

[sharpe1027]

With a concussion I would venture nearly impossible. Preponderance of the evidence with no way to test?

I suppose he could retire, then pop up like Favre. I'm only pointing out he has a few options. Packers hold most but not all the cards. I still say he reports most likely.

All true, however, the situation is a bit different when there's clear motive and a history of actions that tell a compelling story for why someone is faking. Don't you think?

[Rastak]

All true, however, the situation is a bit different when there's clear motive and a history of actions that tell a compelling story for why someone is faking. Don't you think?

I agree, however, court requires proof and not "Your honor we feel he is faking and want 30 Million dollars" just because he is motivated to be guilty of such. You need a bit more than that, wouldn't you agree? You level a lawsuit, kind of like Trump's guys did in Pennsylvania, the Republican judge told Giuliani "you can't come to court with a theory, you need evidence".


edit: Sharpe, appreciate the debate, I am bored as hell tonight as you may have noticed.


double edit: Sharpe is probably fuck you.....(I didn't exactly articulate that right, meaning you might think that my motive)

[sharpe1027]

I agree, however, court requires proof and not "Your honor we feel he is faking and want 30 Million dollars" just because he is motivated to be guilty of such. You need a bit more than that, wouldn't you agree? You level a lawsuit, kind of like Trump's guys did in Pennsylvania, the Republican judge told Giuliani "you can't come to court with a theory, you need evidence".


edit: Sharpe, appreciate the debate, I am bored as hell tonight as you may have noticed.

You definitely need facts, but you don't need the same level of proof as a criminal case.

[Rastak]

You definitely need facts, but you don't need the same level of proof as a criminal case.

Agreed, it is a smaller standard but you need more than a theory, you need at least SOME evidence as a preponderance isn't "we simply think this is the case".

[bobblehead]

You have any examples of recent NFL team lawsuits contending a player isn't really hurt? I don't. Can you imagine if a team sued a player saying they were faking an injury and a court bought that? What a shit deal for players actually hurt with teams threating to sue if they didn't play hurt. Man, that would be a crazy deal that would likely never happen.

Martellus Bennett.

[bobblehead]

I agree, however, court requires proof and not "Your honor we feel he is faking and want 30 Million dollars" just because he is motivated to be guilty of such. You need a bit more than that, wouldn't you agree? You level a lawsuit, kind of like Trump's guys did in Pennsylvania, the Republican judge told Giuliani "you can't come to court with a theory, you need evidence".


edit: Sharpe, appreciate the debate, I am bored as hell tonight as you may have noticed.


double edit: Sharpe is probably fuck you.....(I didn't exactly articulate that right, meaning you might think that my motive)

Don't bring in politics, or I feel compelled to respond. But trump was suing criminally and not civilly. Big difference just on that merit.

[bobblehead]

Agreed, it is a smaller standard but you need more than a theory, you need at least SOME evidence as a preponderance isn't "we simply think this is the case".

Actually a jury is allowed to consider "we think he is lying" as evidence. As in "we think that given all the drama around it Rodgers was lying about his headache."

I agree its unlikely to happen generally speaking, but again, the NFLPA frowns on it. Ramsey is widely regarded as an asshole and gets no endorsements and after football will be regarded as a punk. Rodgers doesn't want that. He has an addiction to crack...as in people kissing his.