Brown, who had his first helmet grievance denied by an arbitrator on Aug. 12, is now arguing he should be provided the same right as other players in terms of having a one-year grace period to phase out using his helmet. He is claiming the NFL is arbitrarily applying its rules.
Pro Football Talk first reported the news.
It’s expected that the arbitration will happen “on an expedited basis,” Rapoport added, though an exact time frame is unknown.
NFL Network’s Tom Pelissero added Brown is also arguing the NFL is unreasonably exercising its management rights in the seemingly never-ending saga of A.B. drama that, in reality, extends all the way back to the final days of the receiver’s 2018 season with theSteelers.
As the world of Brown turns, his trek west came in March when he was traded from Pittsburgh to Oakland for a pair of draft picks (a third-round selection and a fifth).
Initially, Brown’s status was deemed due to frostbitten feet; hardly a common football injury, but one apparently caused by failing to wear proper footwear while in a cryogenic therapy chamber.
Then came news ofBrown’s unhappiness with the NFL’s helmet regulations, which would force the wideout to switch to a new model of helmet other than the one and only model he has used for the duration of his playing days. With that revelation, news also came that Brown would be filing a grievance against the NFL in the hopes of being able to continue wearing his helmet.
However, exactly a week ago, anarbitrator denied Brown’s grievance.
Brown subsequently returned to practice, but that didn’t last long.
And on Sunday, with Brown missing in action once more,RaidersGM Mike Mayock called reporters over for an impromptu scrum and said it was time for the superstar receiverto be present and part of the team going forward.
Brownwas back with the team on Monday— though there was no practice — but not long after news of another grievance came to the forefront.
And so theAntonio Brownhistrionics continue with no end in sight.