Rob's House

The point is that the penalties have fallen outside the guidelines of the law.

What do you mean by that?

The problem with your argument is you're making a common sense inference that Brady must have had more than "general knowledge," and you're probably right, but the NFL investigation upon which the penalty was based only said it was more probable than not that he had general knowledge. You can't overcome your own evidence. The NFL rightfully lost. And deflating football's a little isn't that big a deal. I feel the need to give much respect to Tom here because even though we're on different sides of this issue he is doing a magnificent job of presenting his case.

It's funny. I've hated Brady so much for so long and now I find myself defending him. It reminds me of something a wise man once told me: people don't have a strong sense of justice; they have a strong sense of injustice. I feel that because for however much I've hated him and the Pats*, I hate the trumped up, unjust accusations more. I just don't think manipulating the air pressure in footballs is that big a deal. Maybe it's karmic balance because Spygate was a much bigger deal and was basically glossed over, but this is much ado about nothing IMO.

I can see a strong argument that merely having knowledge of misconduct does not subject one to penalties under that section.

That's not an endorsement of the factual findings. It's a simple acknowledgement of the court's role in this case.

Dude, you're definitely a xenophobe. You're probably a nativist and a racist too, for that matter.

He's getting paid a lot of money to play. Football's a tough sport for tough people. Personally, I don't care because he's the Saints problem. But if I were a Saints fan I'd be a little pissed that this soft mother!@#$er's eating up a huge chunk of our cap to sit on the sideline rubbing lotion on his sprained vagina. And Byrd sucked against the run. I watched a lot of all 22 his last year here and I remember attributing a lot of big runs to his backpedaling and lack of agility and speed. I don't think it's a coincidence that our run D improved dramatically once he and Alonso were out of the line up.

If it comes down to Hillary v Trump, that burrito outing might come back to pay dividends.

No way that would work. He'd have to get the ballboy to hire the sharp shooter so they can only prove Mario was generally aware of what was going on. Now THAT might work.

Now that's !@#$ing interesting. I'll have to ponder that one. My first inclination is to say there must be some standard - I mean, who's to say that wearing a Speedo at the beach isn't conduct unbecoming - but that's a tough one.

That's not it exactly, but think about it in terms of law. You can use broad language to encompass types of behavior without spelling out every detail as long as the prohibited conduct is reasonably identifiable by the rule, but you can't make a rule after the fact and punish someone accordingly. In law that's called ex post facto and it's unconstitutional. Or more simply, how can you break a rule that doesn't yet exist?

That's not it either. The league didn't conclude that he did that. They concluded it was likely that he was aware of it. The rules didn't provide for punishment for mere awareness of misconduct, not did it provide for punishment for noncooperation with an investigation. Those were the two things he was penalised for.

That's not what they're saying at all. They're saying the NFL's rules did not make it clear that anything Brady did was punishable. You can't decide after the fact that something should have been illegal and then retroactively impose a punishment as though it were.

All I know is what I've heard in a few snippets so I could be wrong, but I thought the gist of the ruling was that the report only found that Brady was probably aware of misconduct and that the CBA doesn't provide for penalties for merely having general knowledge of misconduct.

Pretty sure I can and did. I gave a disclaimer and said how I felt. If you want a legal analysis you can send me a check and I'll write you a brief.

Come on man. I said I wasn't commenting on the legal aspect.

Having not read the CBA or the opinion I can't comment on the legal aspect, but I think the outcome is just for 2 reasons: 1. "More likely than not" is a bull **** standard for imposing penalties. 2. Underinflating footballs isn't that big of a deal.

Both were a liability against the run.

I can't speak for everyone, but I was one of the few staunch defenders of the decision to let Tyrd walk and I'm not happy with Whaley for dropping Fred. I think you may have this backwards.

Also a good poster child for why it's not always a good idea to "pay da man" whatever he wants.

I told you guys he wasn't really the word.

Rogue - used to describe something or someone that is different from others in usually a dangerous or harmful way. 1 :resembling or suggesting a rogue elephant especially in being isolated, aberrant, dangerous, or uncontrollable <capsized by a rogue wave> 2 :corrupt, dishonest <rogue cops> 3 :of or being a nation whose leaders defy international law or norms of international behavior <rogue states>

You're discounting the extent to which he set up those blocks.