Quote:
Originally Posted by maulaga58
They can basically keep player on 53 just keep him inactive on the 46 gameday roster. it starts getting tricky if more than 1 really good player does it. Then the question would be whether Goddell would create roster exemption for such players.
I'm pretty sure this wouldn't stand an appeal/grievance/legal action. The team owner would need to be able to plausibly explain that sitting, or not suiting, the player(s) in question was a "football decision", and not discipline. I'm pretty sure that's going to be in the CBA.
This is the same dilemma the owners are in regarding C.Kaepernick. Kaepernick's near replacement level ability gives them that plausibility. However, notice no owner has come out and directly said they won't give him a job because of his protest history.