USA TODAY sports
Not long ago, some members of the NFL Players Association floated the notion that a lawsuit stemming from the NFL’s lengthy suspension of Browns quarterback Deshaun Watson could potentially result in Watson playing the Panthers in the first week. Now, the NFLPA seems to have backed away from that argument.
“The tide turned this on as an option‘ Yahoo Sports’ Charles Robinson tweeted Monday afternoon. “The chances of successfully arguing it now seem extremely slim. The first question will be why, if they wanted to be granted a restraining order, why would they not have taken the extra step and filed a cross appeal.”
That’s one of the points we made over the weekend, dissecting a very flimsy argument. The union was unable to appeal Judge Sue L. Robinson’s six-game suspension. The NFL’s appeal applies only to failure to suspend him for more than six games. The first six games are simply not contentious as the case progresses. Any lawsuit would be relevant for week seven, not week one.
It’s child’s play. Judge Robinson issued a six-game suspension. The union did not appeal against this. This part of the case is closed. Finished. Finally. The only question that remains is whether the Union can avoid a ban of more than six games.
There is also the question of the number of games that would lead to a court battle. If Peter Harvey bans Watson for 12 games, would the union fight it in court?
What if Harvey suspended Watson for 12 games and fined him $10 million, taking the salary he earned from not playing last year? While some who should know better continue to insist that Watson’s failure to play in 2021 had nothing to do with his situation off the field, the simple truth is that if he didn’t deal with civil proceedings and /or criminal investigation would have played 2021 – for anyone other than the Texans. The Dolphins, for example, were willing to act for Watson if he settled the 22 lawsuits then pending against him. But for four holdouts it would have happened. If there had been no lawsuits or criminal investigations, he would have been traded and he would have played.
So why not fine the $10 million he made from not playing in 2021? There’s logic to that, especially when he’s also suspended for a dozen games in 2022. It also gives Harvey a chance to appear like he’s not doing exactly what the League wants him to do. Even if he ultimately is.