odon59
-
Posts
48 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Gallery
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by odon59
-
-
Also one of my favorite plays in recent memory. Nice front side blocking by the oline, and textbook backside wall by three receivers. Also very nifty piece of running. That kind of 3rd and long conversion will demoralize an opponent. Pretty awesome all around.
-
In the previous thread, after reading the briefs filed with the court, I predicted Judge Berman would overturn the suspension on notice grounds. This was Brady's strongest argument. It's possible the Nfl will appeal to the second circuit, but they probably won't get a stay of Bermans ruling in the mean time.
-
I don't disagree with your point that the judge is attempting to put pressure on both sides by pointing out weaknesses to each sides arguments.
The judge has asked how did the league conclude that there was a consipirancy when there was no specific evidence that suports that conclusion. He also asked how can it be believed that the more deflated balls had an affect on the game when it was the opposite, that Brady performed better with the reinflated balls. The judge has also asked the Brady side very pointed questions regarding the phones and its destruction.
The problem that the league has is that they "over punished" (in my opinion) for a transgression involving his participation that has not been clearly proven. If the league would have punished Brady for two games, with a possible reduction to one game under appeal, their position would have been much stronger.
It's very common for trial judges to apply pressure on parties to settle by asking questions that aren't necessarily germane to how the case/motion would be decided as a matter of law. In other words, just because Judge Berman asked questions about the evidence and factual conclusions doesn't mean he plans on relitigating the whole thing in his courtroom. Just my two cents.
-
Thanks! I didn't look at the cases. The linked piece within is by Alan Milstein, who is a very prominent and high powered attorney who has fought the league before (Maurice Clarett). He may well be overly biased. I just don't know enough to judge.
Ohhhhhhh that makes so much more sense now. He's been criticized constantly within the sports law community for filing Clarett's suit in Manhattan, where he lost badly on appeal. There is no doubt that the 8th Circuit's antitrust law is much more favorable to plaintiffs, and that was the main claim in Clarrett's suit. Maybe he's just using this to save face?
-
According to this, he's better off in NY: http://sports-law.blogspot.co.uk/2015/08/another-home-field-advantage-for-tom.html .
Also: http://sports-law.blogspot.co.uk/2015/07/more-of-brady-bunch.html .
This is an interesting read. A cursory look at the 2d Cir (NY) cases cited doesn't reveal they are really that favorable to Brady (one case was non-precedential, meaning it isn't supposed to be cited or relied on in future decisions, and the other actually confirmed the arbitration award, which is what the league wants). Time will tell...
By the way, my reasoning for writing my initial post was 1) I had a little bit of knowledge but none of my lawyer friends wanted to talk about it, so I needed a forum, and 2) I wanted to hear a discussion that is more informed that whatever Adam Schefter or Bill Polian decides to spew on ESPN on any given day. I think I succeeded in both, so thanks for engaging!
-
Thanks again. Just a guess on my part but I would have thought that the Commissioner could not be considered to have acted arbitrarily in making reasonable inferences especially since these arbitration appeals seem to allow for new evidence and therefore presumably for findings of fact (unlike what goes on in real appellate courts which strictly review matters of law). Otherwise the person hearing the appeal would be very much hamstrung. As for deciding what is within or without the CBA would seem to involve simply construing the document, though I can appreciate that this exercise might not be straightforward.
That could be the case. My overall reading was that the league is quite exposed on this issue, but I could be wrong.
-
Can a player's refusal to comply with the mandatory requirement to cooperate in a league investigation be considered conduct detrimental?
Not sure there is a requirement, but even if there is, Brady argues that even the Wells report concluded he cooperated in every other way. Your question really comes down to whether Brady has to turn over cell phone records. It's certainly not in the CBA, so your guess is as good as mine.
Can the texts between Jastremski and McNally that indicate Brady offered various merchandise in exchange for "the deflator" to provide balls inflated to Brady's specifications, lead a reasonable person to conclude that Brady was "generally" aware of McNally's activity?
Sure can and that's basically what the Wells report did. The issue is whether that awareness is culpable.
Can the refusal to provide specific phone records from a specific phone later found to be destroyed, also be construed by a reasonable person that Brady was trying to cover up his "general awareness" of the activities?
See above.
GO BILLS!!!
-
Thanks, that is very helpful. So Brady's position is that as a factual matter he had no knowledge of their wrongdoing but that, in any event, even if he did he is not responsible for their conduct. When hearing the appeal is the Commissioner allowed to make "reasonable" inferences from the facts before him, including for example the testimony of the appellant in the appeal itself, his course of conduct etc...or is he limited to opining only on the adequacy of the decision under appeal?
Yes that's basically it. This is a great question that unfortunately I do not know off hand. Below is a quote from the judge in the Peterson case in Minnesota, setting forth the standard of review for arbitration awards.
Arbitration awards, however, are not inviolate, and the court need not merely rubber stamp the arbitrator's interpretations and decisions. The court must vacate the award if it fails to “draw its essence” from the agreement, such that the arbitrator imposed “his own brand of industrial justice.” Associated Elec., 751 F.3d at 901. An arbitration award may also be vacated when the arbitrator “exceed[ed] the authority given to him by the CBA or decide[d] matters parties have not submitted to him.” Doerfer Eng'g v. NLRB, 79 F.3d 101, 103 (8th Cir.1996).
Nat'l Football League Players Ass'n v. Nat'l Football League, No. CIV. 14-4990 DSD/JSM, 2015 WL 795253, at *5 (D. Minn. Feb. 26, 2015) -
But isn't the bias criteria more favorable to Brady in NY (2nd circuit?) than Minn?
No Brady would have been better off in Minnesota, which he tried to do. But honestly I don't know how much better off he would have been. The big NYC case that is cited for showing the this region is pro-league is the Maurice Clarrett case, which was an antitrust claim and not a labor dispute.
-
Well my assumption was that the process, however it might offend someone's sense of "fairness" as not having the trappings and outward appearance of a truly independent proceeding, would pass legal muster if it was contemplated by the CBA and if the participants were not bias, in other words, were not plainly acting fraudulently.
It's possible though that the standard is different and if so it would help advance the discussion if a real expert could weigh in.
The standard for reviewing an arbitrator's decision is, ironically, whether the decision was "arbitrary or capricious." What that means exactly has been interpreted differently in different forums. Federal courts in Minnesota have been more apt to find in favor of the players, whereas NYC is more league friendly.
-
How exactly did the League fail to observe its own policies and the CBA. Whether it was "fair" or not I think most of us were under the impression that the League had the authority to act as it did.
Brady's strongest argument is with respect to "Notice." The CBA requires that players have adequate notice, either being verbally informed or receiving notice in writing, as to what conduct they may be disciplined for and the extent of that punishment. Brady makes several arguments as to notice, but the two strongest ones, in my view, are that 1) only teams, not individual players, are subject to punishment for equipment tampering and 2) Brady did not have notice that he could be subject to discipline for being "aware" of the wrongful conduct of others - in this case the ball boys.
1) With respect to the argument that Brady didn't have notice that he could be personally punished for equipment tampering, Brady points to the lack of any provision in the CBA for equipment tampering punishment as well as the league's unilateral policy on equipment tampering, which explicitly says that teams are subject to punishment and is silent on players. In response, the NFL argues that it didn't punish Brady under the equipment tampering policy, but rather the suspension is valid because Brady's conduct was detrimental to the league. Conduct detrimental to the league is something that the players do have notice as to their potential punishment. However, keep the idea of "conduct" in mind when reading below:
2) "Awareness v. Conduct" - this is where I think Brady, much to my chagrin, has them. The Wells report concludes only that Brady was "more likely than not generally aware." Brady argues that nothing in the CBA or league policies put him on notice that he could be punished for his "awareness" of the conduct of others. Goodell got really slippery when it came to this. In the appeal, Goodell took the evidence in the Wells report along with an "adverse inference" based on Brady destroying his phone, that Brady had in fact been directly involved. So on one hand the league used the Wells report for its fact finding and conclusions, but then on appeal it only used the Wells report for individual facts but came to its own heightened conclusions. So the question for the Judge here is, did Goodell act arbitrarily in going from "generally aware" to actually involved in his findings? I think the answer to that is yes, but we shall see.
-
I know that inside and out. That's not what we were talking about. Another poster said Brady wax going to sue the league in a civil case not the process thing.
Well to that end, this is THE CIVIL CASE. Brady doesn't have any other recourse. The CBA bars players from filing some end-around lawsuit to relitigate the underlying facts. Also, in regards to the speculation that the judge could just delay delay delay - that's true but Brady could just file an application for a temporary restraining order or preliminary injunction, which would force the judge to rule quickly. All of this is moot because the judge said he would rule by Sept. 4.
-
I'm a lawyer and I read the briefs filed by Brady and the league last week. I think Brady's arguments are very strong compared to the league's. I'd say 70/30 chance that the judge grants Brady's motion to vacate the suspension. Also, Kelly the Dog, the procedural posture of the federal court litigation doesn't really make the ball boys' testimony relevant. It's all about whether the NFL followed its own policies and the CBA in dishing out this punishment.
-
I'm a lawyer and read the briefs filed by Brady and the NFL last week. I think Brady's arguments are very strong compared to the league's. My conclusion is the judge will likely grant Brady's motion to vacate. Happy to discuss my reasoning.
-
Are you serious? Of course not!! They want the highest price from the best buyer (ie someone keeping them in WNY).
What the trust "wants" is a very complicated issue that has gotten mischaracterized both here and in the media. The trust and the trustees have a fiduciary duty to the trust beneficiaries (the people who will receive the proceeds from the sale of the team) that is governed by the trust agreement (a legal document similar to a will) and applicable state law. To my knowledge there has not been a public disclosure as to what the trust agreement says - it could say the team must go to the "highest bidder," or say something much more ambiguous like "reasonable offer." It could also say something about the team's location or not. The point is we just don't know. Another wrinkle to this is if the trustees and beneficiaries are the same people, in which case they simply owe a fiduciary duty to themselves in which case they can probably do whatever they want.
-
Watch CJ's long TD run. Marcel and Barnett got completely man-handled. That play wasn't Mario's fault, and it was as bad a defensive play as you'll ever see. This team needs an attitude across the board, MW included.
-
The camera angle argument has no merit when you can see daylight between the nose of the ball and the post. There is virtually no "wrong" angle that would show space between the two objects when in fact there is none. It was short, the refs blew it, and the announcers gave them a free pass because they won't say anything criticizing the NFL.
-
I live in Brooklyn and would definitely be interested in a McFadden's alternative. I know there are others out there that would, but I'm not sure what the best way to advertise is. They should definitely mention it on their Yelp page and do some magic with their website so a google search makes them return. Guaranteeing 40-50 right off the bat might be tough, but who else is going to a bar on Sundays? I hope they are successful.
-
Who is tracking flights to BUF today? When is RW coming in from Detroit for the press conference?
If you happen to know the plane's tail number, use flightaware.com
-
Was mostly kidding.
I know you were kidding, but I just wanted to chime in.
I actually had the pleasure of growing up in Fredonia in the 80's and early 90's and spent my summers riding my bike to SUNY Fredonia to watch them practice (I still try to forget about the nights in late January I cried myself to sleep).
Then I went to college in Rochester, and what do you know, the Bills moved their training camp there. I lived there for the next 11 years and was a season ticket holder.
Although the camp in Fredonia was great for me as a kid, holding it in Rochester was a brilliant move. The facility is great, very accessible for everyone in the community who wants to go, and it really solidified the Rochester fan base. This is a fan base the Bills need in order to remain profitable in WNY. Good job Russ Brandon on that one.
That is all...
-
By the end of the first sentence we had a grip on the amount of intelligents that was going to be put into this post , and from the N.Y. thug standpoint he probably graduated much higher than the rest of his neighborhood .
But that being said i think the IQ still runs about a flat 7 in the forty at the combine !!!!
What is "intelligents" and why is someone who says "intelligents" talking about other people's intelligence?
-
Chara's a goon and Bruins fans only wish he had half the skill that Myers has. At least one Buffalo sports team knows how to draft and win. Go Sabres!
Boston needs to stop complaining. They are saying the NHL should suspend Tyler "Morris" as they called him down there, (not Tyler Myers)They are also saying Chara did nothing wrong when he hit Kaleta from behind and Buffalo needs to suck it up. Sounds like a bunch of sour a$$es to me.
-
The problem is, which one of them has 800 million in cash to spend, and can they get their money back if the team stays in Buffalo? My answer is none of them!
I don't argue that there is a lack of rich folks in the area, whose net worth is on par with other NFL owners. Likewise, the Bills are currently quite profitable and they have a great fan base for sure. The problem is that the Bills likely may not be profitable if an owner has to service any debt required to buy the team, not to mention any debt on a new stadium (which they will need eventually). Likewise, even if someone has the "cash" to buy the Bills outright, he's still essentially loaning himself the money to buy the team and losing possible interest on that cash so it's the same thing as debt interest.
I'm not one of these doom and gloom Bills fans who thinks all hope is lost, but we have to remember that the profitability of the team while Ralph owns it free and clear could be quite different from the teams profitability when someone has to pony up the better part of 1 billion dollars for the team. Just my thoughts....
-
The man has, from the evidence alluded to in the article, a bullet STILL lodged in his body from a gun he saw being shot from Marvin Harrison. No need to smear. A simple ballistics test and confirmation will confirm the case against Harrison.
Keep in mind that the police found casings from multiple guns, not just Harrison's 5-7 caliber (there were 9 mm casings as well). We don't know what kind of bullet is in Nixon's back. We have no idea who fired first and things of that nature.
What is pretty obvious is that to at least some degree, Harrison endangered the public by his actions. He didn't have to take that fight to the street. He could have called the cops before it escalated, but he didn't. As a result, someone was shot and a toddler came very close to being a shot. He should have been prosecuted for this.
You can take the thug out of the ghetto but you can't take the ghetto out of the thug, no matter how mild-mannered he may appear to be.
Steelers game is key to Bills making the playoffs
in The Stadium Wall Archives
Posted
And if they beat the Steelers and Jets, their playoff odds are 99%.