If this is all true...it's better that he's gone.

[McCarthy12]

Yeah, I'm not sure it's always that simple.

[JuTMSY4]

I keep seeing this argument made over and over. Could one of the many lawyers here address this? Sounds bogus to me. I can think of plenty of statements the Eagles could have made that would have had no negative consequences.

because saying something (anything) yields more risk than saying nothing.

[joe9518]

Just like the dumb ass fans who think they're owed a championship. They're all idiots.

If you think you are owed a championship then yeah, you're an idiot.

Fans can hope for a championship but they're not owed anything.

[McCarthy12]

I mean, obviously if there was actual criminal activity in play, Jackson and his attorneys would prefer the Eagles didn't bring additional info public. That said, from an evidence standpoint it would only matter in the unlikely scenario where the Eagles were in possession of incriminating information that law enforcement was unaware of. This is all moot since there is no reason to believe he has committed any crime.

[Maniac]

because saying something (anything) yields more risk than saying nothing.

Saying nothing has consequences.

I'm looking for a lawyers opinion. Are you a lawyer?

[Maniac]

If you think you are owed a championship then yeah, you're an idiot.

Fans can hope for a championship but they're not owed anything.

Even after the Saints, Bucs and Seahawks have one? Even after fifty years and counting?

[Maniac]

I should have been more specific.

Could the Eagles have made a statement about Jackson's release that lessened the damage to his reputation without legal risk?

[McCarthy12]

Yes and, in my opinion, they should have if the story wasn't a factor, given the damage that perpetuating the story could do to his reputation. "Today our organization has chosen to part ways with Desean Jackson. While we are aware of the story that was recently published on NJ.com, the decision to release Desean was based solely on where we see our team heading from a personnel standpoint." End of story.

[Maniac]

Yes and, in my opinion, they should have if the story wasn't a factor, given the damage that perpetuating the story could do to his reputation. "Today our organization has chosen to part ways with Desean Jackson. While we are aware of the story that was recently published on NJ.com, the decision to release Desean was based solely on where we see our team heading from a personnel standpoint." End of story.

You're hired!

[joe9518]

Even after the Saints, Bucs and Seahawks have one? Even after fifty years and counting?

Then become a Saints, Bucs or Seahawks fan. Problem solved, you got your Championship.

No one is holding a gun to your head to be an Eagle fan and no one is coming to put you in jail if you are not an Eagle fan.

[McCarthy12]

Haha!

[joe9518]

Yes and, in my opinion, they should have if the story wasn't a factor, given the damage that perpetuating the story could do to his reputation. "Today our organization has chosen to part ways with Desean Jackson. While we are aware of the story that was recently published on NJ.com, the decision to release Desean was based solely on where we see our team heading from a personnel standpoint." End of story.

And if they had nothing to do with the story written by nj.com, then they don't have to say a word.

[Birdwatcher]

I just heard Trotter on the radio...

I keep seeing this argument made over and over. Could one of the many lawyers here address this? Sounds bogus to me. I can think of plenty of statements the Eagles could have made that would have had no negative consequences.

he suggested the the NFLPA CBA does not allow teams to air the reasons for cutting players, as it may have a negative impact on future deals.

Trot also lays all the blame on DeSean, pointing out that he is sure Kelly made it clear that whatever the previous staff allowed him to get away with would not be tolerated. He gave him a year, but when he skipped his exit interview at the end of the season I think Chip had enough.

Imagine you were working for a new boss, who was paying you big bucks to boot, and the entire staff was going on hiatus for a couple of months, but all were required to meet one last time with the boss. Then you skip the meeting, would you still have a job?

[Birdwatcher]

They can't even do that...

And if they had nothing to do with the story written by nj.com, then they don't have to say a word.

It could be construed as drawing more attention to the article. BTW, NJ.com has stated the Eagles did not leak the story to them...but I guess everyone except DeSean is lying here.

[harls]

he suggested the the NFLPA CBA does not allow teams to air the reasons for cutting players, as it may have a negative impact on future deals.

Trot also lays all the blame on DeSean, pointing out that he is sure Kelly made it clear that whatever the previous staff allowed him to get away with would not be tolerated. He gave him a year, but when he skipped his exit interview at the end of the season I think Chip had enough.

Imagine you were working for a new boss, who was paying you big bucks to boot, and the entire staff was going on hiatus for a couple of months, but all were required to meet one last time with the boss. Then you skip the meeting, would you still have a job?

It's obvious trotter is in on the smear!