 Sponsored Links
|
| |
 |
America's Debate Radio - 235th Live Edition: Sep 17 2010, 09:00 PM EST.
Stream or Download the newest show | Subscribe to the podcast: iTunes · RSS
|
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Maurice Clarett Case, Turned down by the Supreme Court |
 Apr 22 2004, 09:07 PM
Post
#1
|
|
 Member Group: Members Posts: 16 Member No.: 2,949 Joined: April-20-04 Gender: Male Politics: Slightly Conservative Party affiliation: Undisclosed  |
Maurice Clarett has been turned down by the Supreme Court to enter the upcoming NFL Draft. I believe it to be a good ruling, so that the college football does not suffer the same type of water-downing like college baseball and basketball have endured. So my question for debate is:
Do you think the ruling not letting Maurice Clarett into the NFL draft is fair and right? |
 |
 
|
 |
|
Apr 22 2004, 10:07 PM
Post
#2
|
|
|
Millennium Mark Group: Members Posts: 1,303 Member No.: 1,540 Joined: October-23-03 From: Atlanta, GA Gender: Male Politics: Moderate Party affiliation: Independent |
The ruling was both fair and correct. The ruling was limited to staying the lower court order TRO to force the NFL to allow him into the draft.
Here's one scenario: he's allowed into the draft, but then the court trial turns out that he cannot have done so. NFL is seriously harmed, Clarrett is harmed (his contract would be voided and he'd have to return money). Second scenario: he's NOT allowed into the draft, but then the court trial turns out that he CAN be part of it, so the NFL holds -- at its expense -- a supplemental draft. NFL not really harmed, Clarrett only slightly harmed in the delay to allow him to be drafted and get paid lots of bucks (a doubtful proposition anyway, considering how out of shape he is, but that's beside the point). Ginsberg ruled correctly to do the least amount of harm while awaiting trial. |
|
|
|
|
Apr 22 2004, 10:17 PM
Post
#3
|
|
|
Advanced Senior Contributor Group: Members Posts: 2,864 Member No.: 421 Joined: February-3-03 From: Missouri Gender: Male Politics: Conservative Party affiliation: Republican |
I agree with amf on this one, the ruling was fair and correct. The supplemental draft option, and the NFL has always held a supplemental draft is a decent fall back position for the NFL, and it will afford Clarett the chance to play in the NFL although it won't be for the same kind of money he may think he deserves.
 The person this ruling really hurts is Mike Williams from USC though. Everything I've read on him puts him in the top 10 for the draft and because of this ruling, he won't be eligible either. Even if eventually he is picked in the first round of the supplemental, and I would expect he would be probably by San Diego or Oakland, he's probably not going to see the kind of contract he would had he been a regular top 10 draft choice.
|
|
|
|
|
Apr 22 2004, 11:48 PM
Post
#4
|
|
|
Contributor Group: Members Posts: 72 Member No.: 2,588 Joined: March-5-04 From: Washington, DC and Michigan Gender: Male Politics: Slightly Conservative Party affiliation: Independent |
I think they should both be allowed to enter the draft. Clarett has no future outside of football, and it should be his decision if he wants to take the risk of football. If someone is willing to draft him I see no reason to have an outside source refuse a sought after employee the eligibility to be offered a contract from a willing contractor.
|
|
|
|
|
Apr 23 2004, 04:08 AM
Post
#5
|
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 16 Member No.: 2,949 Joined: April-20-04 Gender: Male Politics: Slightly Conservative Party affiliation: Undisclosed |
QUOTE I think they should both be allowed to enter the draft. Clarett has no future outside of football, and it should be his decision if he wants to take the risk of football. If someone is willing to draft him I see no reason to have an outside source refuse a sought after employee the eligibility to be offered a contract from a willing contractor. I dont think the real question here is whether or not Clarett has a future, its a broad view of what it will do to the NFL and college football; i.e., the watering down of college football, and the disappropriations of the NFL. I see your last point, from a business standpoint, but i think it goes a little further than a "business deal". Maurice is 2 years out of high school, not near mature enough to play in the NFL. Secondly, he had trouble holding up in a 12 game, college season. IMO, he wouldnt stand a chance in the NFL. He needs to mature, bottom line. |
|
|
|
|
Apr 23 2004, 11:51 AM
Post
#6
|
|
|
Like Kryptonite to Stupid  February 2007 Group: Sponsors Posts: 3,610 Member No.: 504 Joined: February-16-03 Gender: Private Politics: Undisclosed Party affiliation: Private |
QUOTE(wildwest @ Apr 22 2004, 05:07 PM) Do you think the ruling not letting Maurice Clarett into the NFL draft is fair and right? QUOTE Here in Columbus, Ohio, the center of all things Maurice Clarett, we get saturation news coverage if Clarett scratches himself in public, but even here the response to Mo being told "No" was a collective yawn. Clarett is a immature, spoiled kid with a sense of entitlement as big as all outdoors. I've wearied of his arrogant attitude that he's some kind of trail blazer. Nothing could be further from the truth. He's just a jock looking for a big payday. Proof positive of Clarett's arrogance was his futile attempt to make an end run around the Supreme Court and after Justice Ginsburg turned him down, Clarett's attorneys tried to get Justice Stevens to get involved. AS IF! Supreme Court justices don't dis each other that way and it was stupid of Clarett's attorneys to go "shopping" for a justice sympathetic to Clarett. Next stop: The CFL or a supplemental draft. Good riddance to Maurice Clarett. |
|
|
|
 |
 
|
Simple Version | Time is now: September 9th, 2010 - 12:52 PM |
