Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: For all you lawyer types
Eagles Forum > Philadelphia Eagles Message Board > Philadelphia Eagles or Football Related Discussion
nephillymike
You are presented with the case of Evan Mathis.

You played at a Pro Bowl level for two years and even got selected as an alternate despite missing half the year last year.

Your play was deemed so good, that your employer offered you a raise which you declined.

Your last game tapes of last year is evidence that you played at a high level, judged by the team offering you the raise and your peers, voting you to a PB alternate despite injury.

You don't play one down or take one practice snap since then.

You decline to go to voluntary workouts for your team. The practices are defined as voluntary in a collectively bargained legal agreement with consideration being given by the players association for such designation.

You have not missed one mandatory day of work.

Your boss publicly attempts to embarrass you by saying that no other employer wanted you.

You are fired before the mandatory work year begins.

Does Mathis have a winnable wrongful termination lawsuit here?

I think he does and I think it is a slam dunk.

Now of course, should he sign elsewhere for more money, he can't show damages. But if he doesn't make as much, he has a winnable case IMO.

Anyone??
Zero
QUOTE (nephillymike @ Jun 11 2015, 10:46 PM) *
Does Mathis have a winnable wrongful termination lawsuit here?

I think he does and I think it is a slam dunk.

I think you're nuts!

Realizing that football isn't the real world, Mathis had a contract, a good, fair contract. He wanted more. After debate he was offered more. He turned it down. During that time frame he was allowed to seek a trade. It didn't happen. He was released and is free to negotiate a fair market deal anywhere.

The final sentence is the relevant one. He was offered a raise and refused it. He's free to seek competitive compensation anywhere he chooses. What is damaging about that?

Plus, there's missing information. What was Mathis saying/doing that turned his teammates against him? All we know is what was made public. Do you believe there's not more to this?
nephillymike
QUOTE (Zero @ Jun 12 2015, 05:46 AM) *
I think you're nuts!

Realizing that football isn't the real world, Mathis had a contract, a good, fair contract. He wanted more. After debate he was offered more. He turned it down. During that time frame he was allowed to seek a trade. It didn't happen. He was released and is free to negotiate a fair market deal anywhere.

The final sentence is the relevant one. He was offered a raise and refused it. He's free to seek competitive compensation anywhere he chooses. What is damaging about that?

Plus, there's missing information. What was Mathis saying/doing that turned his teammates against him? All we know is what was made public. Do you believe there's not more to this?



Did you ever have a coworker who management thought was a real good employee because they said and did the right things publicly, but you know from hearing the person say private things that they really didn't believe what they said publicly and as a matter of fact, felt very different about it. I can think of plenty of people who fit that bill. It could be that those who spoke out were telling Chip what he wanted to hear.
Zero
QUOTE (nephillymike @ Jun 12 2015, 06:56 AM) *
Did you ever have a coworker who management thought was a real good employee because they said and did the right things publicly, but you know from hearing the person say private things that they really didn't believe what they said publicly and as a matter of fact, felt very different about it. I can think of plenty of people who fit that bill. It could be that those who spoke out were telling Chip what he wanted to hear.

True. But I don't get that sense about Peters. Regardless, the man is free to search for a job and I don't see how that is actionable.

Need to replenish my Breckinridge Brewery Vanilla Porter.
D Rock
QUOTE (Zero @ Jun 12 2015, 10:46 AM) *
I think you're nuts!

Realizing that football isn't the real world, Mathis had a contract, a good, fair contract. He wanted more. After debate he was offered more. He turned it down. During that time frame he was allowed to seek a trade. It didn't happen. He was released and is free to negotiate a fair market deal anywhere.

The final sentence is the relevant one. He was offered a raise and refused it. He's free to seek competitive compensation anywhere he chooses. What is damaging about that?

Plus, there's missing information. What was Mathis saying/doing that turned his teammates against him? All we know is what was made public. Do you believe there's not more to this?

Yes to this.

So too, his advanced age and injury from last year are contributing factors.
nephillymike
QUOTE (D Rock @ Jun 15 2015, 06:35 PM) *
Yes to this.

So too, his advanced age and injury from last year are contributing factors.


Wouldn't the fact that he was rated #2 OG on his play last year after the injury and was voted to the PB as alternate, also after the injury, alleviate both the age and injury concern? His injury isn't a recurring issue and despite his older age, he has not played as much as many of the younger OG because he was a sub for a while early on.

I don't think either would be a factor in a three year deal.

Now if they were looking at Peters and how his play dropped later in the year, age might be a concern as may two achilles tears. Peters could rebound and he expects to and I think he will, but based on his play, Mathis age or injury should not be an issue.
BirdsWinBaby
QUOTE (Zero @ Jun 12 2015, 06:46 AM) *
What was Mathis saying/doing that turned his teammates against him?


i dont think this part is hidden at all...

Mathis spent more than a year bucking Chip's system. peters in on record saying that he doesnt like how much hype the Dallas OL gets cuz he thinks they are better

it wont happen the first week, or maybe even the 5th, but at some point players who have bought into Chip (cuz its the only game in town) are gonna first say, "dude, WTF??!!"...."there is NO endgame here for you which means we will be understaffed!"...."you cant win this man, you are making a ton of cash for your position so unless its personal you have no beef!"...."we are with Chip....if you arent it means your are taking a dump on us as well!"....its been months and eventually everyone becomes resigned to the inevitable

basically the players who have been cowed by Chip will be INCENSED that one of their number is making trouble. when CHIP's players/minions say say "stop this **** man!!" month after month, and your teammate doesnt conform to you or Chip, you dismiss him and move on because you dont have any choice

the whole premise all along has been, " you do this and Chip will cut you!".....knowing he is going to be cut, coupled with Mathis skipping OTAs (final straw) means you have to remake your concept of 'team' and include whatever stiff was filling in

this wasnt hidden....there is only one side on this team. either you are on it? or your are gone. PERIOD! Mathis knew it, Peters knew it.

its why Mathis stayed away...its why Peters was free to say whatever he wanted
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.
Invision Power Board © 2001-2017 Invision Power Services, Inc.