2 items for discussion.
1- since he was traded, will anything even be pursued here.
2- hypothetical, he doesn’t get traded, what is consideration for punishment? Not fulfilling CBA is about the worst thing you can do regarding the NFLPA.
Since it was the Chiefs probably nothing will happen..if it was the other way around we would probably lose a draft pick?
If he wasn't traded, I assume the Chiefs would just claim they couldn't reach a long term deal
Definitely would be hard to prove. Highly doubt anything comes of this.
Since neither party was harmed and it’s not based in New York, no legal action will be pursued.
National writers can not fathom the Titans winning anything, can they?
You don’t have to harm someone to break the law or a contract. If there is a contractual agreement and one party violated the agreement, that violation in and of itself is grounds for punishment. The CBA is a legal contractual agreement so it doesn’t matter if the Chiefs, Titans and Sneed are all happy.
But next time you get pulled over for speeding I highly suggest you try the “nobody was harmed so I’m innocent!” excuse lol. See how that works out for ya
So ridiculous.
Last edited by a moderator:
You missed the joke in my post.You don’t have to harm someone to break the law or a contract. If there is a contractual agreement and one party violated the agreement, that violation in and of itself is grounds for punishment. The CBA is a legal contractual agreement so it doesn’t matter if the Chiefs, Titans and Sneed are all happy.
But next time you get pulled over for speeding I highly suggest you try the “nobody was harmed so I’m innocent!” excuse lol. See how that works out for ya
nonsense... without damages to sue for one cannot sueYou don’t have to harm someone to break the law or a contract. If there is a contractual agreement and one party violated the agreement, that violation in and of itself is grounds for punishment. The CBA is a legal contractual agreement so it doesn’t matter if the Chiefs, Titans and Sneed are all happy.
But next time you get pulled over for speeding I highly suggest you try the “nobody was harmed so I’m innocent!” excuse lol. See how that works out for ya
Speeding is a crime. Crimes do not need damages or a victim. Breaking a contract is not illegal. All civil lawsuits start with the plantiff claiming damages.You don’t have to harm someone to break the law or a contract. If there is a contractual agreement and one party violated the agreement, that violation in and of itself is grounds for punishment. The CBA is a legal contractual agreement so it doesn’t matter if the Chiefs, Titans and Sneed are all happy.
But next time you get pulled over for speeding I highly suggest you try the “nobody was harmed so I’m innocent!” excuse lol. See how that works out for ya
tell us more about sh1t you are ignorant aboutYou don’t have to harm someone to break the law or a contract. If there is a contractual agreement and one party violated the agreement, that violation in and of itself is grounds for punishment. The CBA is a legal contractual agreement so it doesn’t matter if the Chiefs, Titans and Sneed are all happy.
But next time you get pulled over for speeding I highly suggest you try the “nobody was harmed so I’m innocent!” excuse lol. See how that works out for ya
https://www.forbes.com/advisor/legal/how-sue-someone/
"You cannot just sue someone for things you don’t like–they must have violated some rule or requirement in a way that harmed you and in a way you can be compensated for."
Last edited by a moderator:
So clueless. If the Chiefs tagged Snead with the sole intention of trading him, that is a direct violation OF A LEGALLY BINDING CONTRACT. The Players Union has every right to sue the Chiefs for breach of contract even if Snead, the Titans and the Chiefs are all happy with how things worked out.
What exactly do you think is “ignorant”? Do tell, Timmy.
I imagine this to be very tough to prove.
And with him getting the new contract, I imagine the want to pursue is pretty real low.
you are bigly wrong and you know it
without provable damages that can be made right one CANNOT sue.
The breach of contractual obligations must have caused a loss, primarily financial.
Sneed got what he wanted, to get PAID!
The end
The end
Last edited by a moderator:
to be fair to @Dangermode any clown that can get a lawyer can 'sue' but every judge should immediately toss the case out of court because No Damages
I mean I guess that is in fact 'suing' someone ... in the technical sense
any lawyer that takes a case without any damages is just taking the clients money
I mean I guess that is in fact 'suing' someone ... in the technical sense
any lawyer that takes a case without any damages is just taking the clients money
So NFLPA association threatened legal action for the Broncos BENCHING Wilson in violation of the CBA. Explain to us all how benching Wilson for two games caused him “provable damages”.
https://deadspin.com/report-nflpa-threatened-legal-action-over-russell-wils-1851132344
This entire conversation is ridiculous. You’re literally arguing in support of people violating contracts and/or committing crimes so there’s no point in continuing this.
If the CBA doesn't allow shit players to be benched then the CBA is a joke and should always be broken just to show how retarded it is
That entire theory of benching a player being against CBA would be a contradiction in the CBA to every player that is not starting 22 + ST.
I noticed there was only a “threat” of legal action.
Put up or shut up in that sense. Just cause some dummy said they would sue doesn’t mean they have any leg to stand on whatsoever.
