Here is my understanding of the current situation, help me out if I am missing something or have something wrong.
After the ruling by the appeals panel on Friday, 9/7, the ball is now back in Roger's court. He will have to reconsider the suspensions, either keeping them the same, or changing them in any way he sees fit, and simply has to state that the suspensions are for "conduct detrimental to the NFL, for participating in a scheme to injure other players, blah, blah, blah..." He has sole authority to rule on this, and when he is done, that is the end of the process. Right? ... But what about that huge elephant over in the corner stomping his foot and demanding to be noticed?
There is a case pending before a federal judge, (Helen G. Berrigan), filed by Jonathan Vilma, in which he states that he was defamed and wronged by Roger Goodell. Judge Berrigan has already indicated that she is leaning toward ruling in Vilma's favor if she has to rule, because Goodell has failed to provide and legal, substantiated evidence that will support the NFL's side of the case. So if Goodell re-suspends the players he originally suspended for their conduct, he most likely will have to provide actual, legal evidence to support his claims before Judge Berrigan. His only other option would be to try to work out a settlement with the players, getting them to accept his punishments. If Vilma refuses to settle and the court rules in his favor, the entire Bounty-gate case falls, and Goodell most likely will have to also re-consider the suspensions of the coaches as well.
So that is how I understand it. Any thoughts on this?