Antonio Bryant suspended again goes to court to stop it

NeedsMoreCheese · Post #1 » by **NeedsMoreCheese** » Sun Oct 28, 2007 2:46 am

http://cbs.sportsline.com/nfl/story/10435442/rss

DENVER -- Former San Francisco 49ers receiver Antonio Bryant filed a motion Friday asking a federal judge to stop the NFL from disciplining him for allegedly violating the league's substance abuse policy.

Last week, Bryant filed a lawsuit in U.S. District Court against the NFL seeking to stop the league from requiring him to submit to drug testing, arguing the league's policy doesn't apply to him anymore because he is not currently a player.

In the latest filing, Bryant's lawyer, Peter Schaffer, said Bryant received a letter from the NFL on Friday stating that it had set a hearing for Nov. 7 to discuss a positive test on Aug. 16 and a failure to submit to a test on July 12.

Schaffer said the letter was sent in retaliation for Bryant's lawsuit and is "further evidence of the NFL's continued use of bully tactics and coercive and fraudulent behavior."

NFL spokesman Brian McCarthy declined to comment.

Schaffer said Bryant wasn't an NFL player and wasn't looking for another job in football from late July through the second week of October. However, he said that Bryant is currently looking to sign with an NFL team and the fight over testing is making that difficult.

"He's being damaged every day that this is going forward," said Schaffer, who filed the suit in Denver, where he is based.

Bryant was released in March, just one season after he signed a four-year contract with the 49ers worth $14 million.

Bryant caught 40 passes last season for a team-leading 733 yards. But he repeatedly clashed with coach Mike Nolan and was suspended four games for violating the NFL's substance abuse policy.
AP NEWS
The Associated Press News Service

So because he was a free agent hes arguing he wasnt an NFL player and the test shouldnt count? Well if he isnt an NFL player then the suspension shouldnt matter to him. It seems he doesnt quite get the contradiction. Well really its just a desperate legal tactic but a pretty bad one.

skitch815 · Post #2 » by **skitch815** » Sun Oct 28, 2007 8:53 am

Well he says that he is NOW attempting to join a team, which means that the suspension would matter to him. I mean obviously I think its the guys problem since he obviously can't or won't stop doing whatever it was that got him in trouble in the first place, but from a strictly legal standpoint, he has a pretty good argument here.

NeedsMoreCheese · Post #3 » by **NeedsMoreCheese** » Sun Oct 28, 2007 9:07 am

skitch815 wrote:Well he says that he is NOW attempting to join a team, which means that the suspension would matter to him. I mean obviously I think its the guys problem since he obviously can't or won't stop doing whatever it was that got him in trouble in the first place, but from a strictly legal standpoint, he has a pretty good argument here.

You're assuming his agent never contacted any teams before this, which i highly doubt. Plus its not like any teams are going to deny it if he did.

Then again, now that i looked at it more, he may not have. Only because he wasnt even reinstated to the NFL at the point of these tests.

What i really dont get here is why the NFL reinstated him on September 17th. The NFL had to have known about these tests before he was reinstated since they issued them. Why would they grant Reinstatement if the guy failed another drug test?

Something is wrong with this, i dont know if its the timeline or what. Maybe they reinstated him knowing hed be suspended again but that makes no sense. And now since they are trying to suspend him hes decided to pull a Travis Henry and sue.

Either way the guy is a bust with huge attitude issues, the drug issue just compounds it.

Post #4 » by **Icness** » Tue Oct 30, 2007 2:36 pm

It's an interesting argument he's trying. I don't know enough legalese to know if he has a leg to stand on, but it's a valiant attempt anyways.

Kohl--I totally agree with the last 3 paragraphs in your last post. I think they reinstated him for the purpose of suspending him, although that date was the day after Week 2 ended (and my b-day) so his suspension might have just expired. You're absolutely right about him being a huge bust with attitude and, apparently, drug problems. Bryant was Mel Kiper's #4 overall talent in his draft class.

NeedsMoreCheese · Post #5 » by **NeedsMoreCheese** » Tue Oct 30, 2007 9:03 pm

Icness wrote:It's an interesting argument he's trying. I don't know enough legalese to know if he has a leg to stand on, but it's a valiant attempt anyways.

Kohl--I totally agree with the last 3 paragraphs in your last post. I think they reinstated him for the purpose of suspending him, although that date was the day after Week 2 ended (and my b-day) so his suspension might have just expired. You're absolutely right about him being a huge bust with attitude and, apparently, drug problems. Bryant was Mel Kiper's #4 overall talent in his draft class.

Yea he was a huge disappointment. I also never liked how they gave him that jersey number. He didnt deserve it.