12-23-2004, 04:44 AM
Kaplan originally was supposed to make the argument that stern couldn't rule on stuff that happened "Off the court?".. And stern had power of what went on "on the court"...but yet he reduces JO's suspension which was "on the court" and stern had every right to hand down? But Jax and Rons took place off the court in the stands? I could have sworn that was how he was looking at it. Funny he didn't reduce johnsons? for the money that is? I just think theres a little bit of star treatment going on here to. JO did the same thing Johnson did...but got 25? CAUSE HE'S A STAR...And that's why stern hit him with that. Now he's beind reduced cause he's a star. And drives sales of jerseys and all sorts of crap. Plus TV Ratings. I think JO got the star treatment both ways. And the only reason we got him back is because they threw us a bone on this one. Knowing damn well it won't make THAT MUCH of a difference.