26CornerBlitz Posted August 12, 2015 Share Posted August 12, 2015 @AP_NFL #Deflategate judge presses NFL for direct evidence linking Brady to deflated footballs http://apne.ws/1ModlMw Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave mcbride Posted August 12, 2015 Share Posted August 12, 2015 (edited) This is NOT looking good for the league ... https://twitter.com/PPVSRB Edited August 12, 2015 by dave mcbride Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelly the Dog Posted August 12, 2015 Share Posted August 12, 2015 I of course have no idea. I don't find it probable, but honestly, I wouldn't put it past him. Those guys play hardball, and Pash in particular always has. As I recall, he was the attack dog for Tags (who seemed very nice and had a reputation for being very nice). If I were you, at this point I wouldn't assume anything about the level of editing he did. ALSO: for those who want to follow this in real time: https://twitter.com/PPVSRB If I were you I would consider the implications of what he did IF he altered the findings from innocence to guilt, and you actually believe that was possible. That the NFL found out Brady was innocent but changed the report to imply he was guilty. I know what you're saying but the real world application is preposterous. Could he have way overstepped his bounds? Of course. Although there is not even one insinuation from anyone that he did. Could he change the facts of the video and the texts and the meaurements of the balls, which are the entirety of the case? No. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
K-9 Posted August 12, 2015 Share Posted August 12, 2015 If they changed anything that mattered, the little pisspot Wells would have thrown a hissy fit. The point is, sure, we can argue whether or not the NFL should or should not have done that, and we already have, and I think we all agree it was not smart or downright dumb. No one here that I have seen is arguing that. But in order for any of it to make any difference whatsoever, you would have to believe he changed content, and that notion is preposterous because of several reasons that have already been laid out and debated to death. It was dumb. Yes. Did it change anything that actually matters? No. Because if Pash did it, it's a 10x bigger scandal than Deflategate itself. I don't really either. Nor do I think Wells is all that admirable. Nor do I think Goodell is all that admirable. It's downright almost impossible to find one person in this whole mess who is admirable. But unless you want to even consider the fact that Jeff Pash altered the findings and conclusions of Wells to make Brady more guilty when he wasn't, and Wells and Goodell just played along with that, arguing that he did anything other than edit/wordsmith something that he shouldn't have edited is something everyone already agrees on. Admirable qualities, or lack thereof, of any of the players in this proceeding have nothing to do with anything. Whether someone is the biggest douche or nicest guy in the world in no way alters the findings by anyone involved. GO BILLS!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelly the Dog Posted August 12, 2015 Share Posted August 12, 2015 I'm guessing somewhere in this 101 page thread, this has already been addressed. But believe it or not, I'm too busy to read the whole damn things. A client of mine is a very busy Arbitration judge, mostly dealing with union/management issues. We got to talking about the Brady thing. He basically thinks the issue comes down to this: The NFLPA agreed to give Goodell and the NFL the power to make these decisions, and dole out the punishment. The court only needs to look at the legality of the contract. If it's in order, the court shouldn't be able to overturn the suspension. Now, we know that isn't the way it's going to go down. But it's probably the way it should, IMO. That's exactly the issue. The judge is trying to get them to settle on the entirety of the case out of court, however, before he makes that ruling you addressed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave mcbride Posted August 12, 2015 Share Posted August 12, 2015 Admirable qualities, or lack thereof, of any of the players in this proceeding have nothing to do with anything. Whether someone is the biggest douche or nicest guy in the world in no way alters the findings by anyone involved. GO BILLS!!! I agree with you about that. I was just adding some personal context. I don't think it's relevant to the case; i was just trying to convey some of things informing my opinion about all of this. That's exactly the issue. The judge is trying to get them to settle on the entirety of the case out of court, however, before he makes that ruling you addressed. This isn't a standard case though. Believe it or not, it's the highest profile court case in the country right now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
K-9 Posted August 12, 2015 Share Posted August 12, 2015 @AP_NFL #Deflategate judge presses NFL for direct evidence linking Brady to deflated footballs http://apne.ws/1ModlMw Interesting in that we've all been under the impression that the judge wouldn't be determining evidentiary aspects at this point. That it was all about "the process." GO BILLS!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GG Posted August 12, 2015 Share Posted August 12, 2015 This is NOT looking good for the league ... https://twitter.com/PPVSRB Why is it bad? Your Honor, the NFL's position is that we cannot provide direct evidence, as it is our contention Mr. Brady deliberately destroyed such evidence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave mcbride Posted August 12, 2015 Share Posted August 12, 2015 Michael McCann @McCannSportsLaw 4m4 minutes ago If today was the 1st quarter in Tom Brady v. NFL, Brady might actually get some rest in the 4th. A good day for him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelly the Dog Posted August 12, 2015 Share Posted August 12, 2015 This is NOT looking good for the league ... https://twitter.com/PPVSRB He is asking every question about it from both sides and not taking sides. Way down the line he says stuff like "it appears these two guys deflated the balls, why would they do that without Brady's permission?" And the Brady camp answer is maybe they just wanted to help him. :lol: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave mcbride Posted August 12, 2015 Share Posted August 12, 2015 Why is it bad? Your Honor, the NFL's position is that we cannot provide direct evidence, as it is our contention Mr. Brady deliberately destroyed such evidence. I think the line of questioning and the pressing by the judge was very, very hard on the league. My sense from this is that the judge doesn't seem to care that much about the phone issue even though it was raised. I could be wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. WEO Posted August 12, 2015 Share Posted August 12, 2015 If they changed anything that mattered, the little pisspot Wells would have thrown a hissy fit. The point is, sure, we can argue whether or not the NFL should or should not have done that, and we already have, and I think we all agree it was not smart or downright dumb. No one here that I have seen is arguing that. But in order for any of it to make any difference whatsoever, you would have to believe he changed content, and that notion is preposterous because of several reasons that have already been laid out and debated to death. It was dumb. Yes. Did it change anything that actually matters? No. Because if Pash did it, it's a 10x bigger scandal than Deflategate itself. I don't really either. Nor do I think Wells is all that admirable. Nor do I think Goodell is all that admirable. It's downright almost impossible to find one person in this whole mess who is admirable. But unless you want to even consider the fact that Jeff Pash altered the findings and conclusions of Wells to make Brady more guilty when he wasn't, and Wells and Goodell just played along with that, arguing that he did anything other than edit/wordsmith something that he shouldn't have edited is something everyone already agrees on. Why would Wells care at all? He was paid to produce a report. And paid well. He is the NFL's lawyer on other issues. I don't see how he would care at all. He produced the report they paid for. And for all of those posters who claim this discussion is about minor details--it's not. It started (my part anyway) about whether the NFL was biased in it's investigation/appeal. That is what the NFLPA is arguing, in part. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave mcbride Posted August 12, 2015 Share Posted August 12, 2015 He is asking every question about it from both sides and not taking sides. Way down the line he says stuff like "it appears these two guys deflated the balls, why would they do that without Brady's permission?" And the Brady camp answer is maybe they just wanted to help him. :lol: you may laugh, but the initial take is that that Brady's side is doing well. If only you could have been the judge, Dog! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelly the Dog Posted August 12, 2015 Share Posted August 12, 2015 I think the line of questioning and the pressing by the judge was very, very hard on the league. My sense from this is that the judge doesn't seem to care that much about the phone issue even though it was raised. I could be wrong. have you read all 100+ tweets since it started? you may laugh, but the initial take is that that Brady's side is doing well. If only you could have been the judge, Dog! I read through dozens and dozens of tweets on what the judge was asking, and he was doing the same to both sides. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave mcbride Posted August 12, 2015 Share Posted August 12, 2015 (edited) have you read all 100+ tweets since it started? I have, and I honestly think that only the Baghdad Bob equivalent of the league's side could interpret what transpired as an even distribution of skepticism. You appear to be missing the forest for the trees - he's focusing on issues that people didn't expect to emerge (what a conspiracy really is; evidence levels; "generally aware", etc.) that inherently favor Brady. You do realize that he may rule against the side you've taken and you could still be right in theory, correct? Just chalk it up to a rogue judge. I'm actually not shocked by what happened. Edited August 12, 2015 by dave mcbride Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelly the Dog Posted August 12, 2015 Share Posted August 12, 2015 I have, and I honestly think that only the Baghdad Bob equivalent of the league's side could interpret what transpired as an even distribution of skepticism. You appear to be missing the forest for the trees - he's focusing on issues that people didn't expect to emerge (what a conspiracy really is; evidence levels; "generally aware", etc.) that inherently favor Brady. You do realize that he may rule against the side you've taken and you could still be right in theory, correct? Just chalk it up to a rogue judge. I'm actually not shocked by what happened. He is trying to get these two sides to settle. He is not ruling on 80% -90% of the issues he is asking about. It's very clear what he is doing. He wants both sides to reconsider their hardline stance. But he's NOT going to rule on whether or not the NFL was right or wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
K-9 Posted August 12, 2015 Share Posted August 12, 2015 I'd ask Kessler why McNally would think deflating balls was something Brady would appreciate. GO BILLS!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave mcbride Posted August 12, 2015 Share Posted August 12, 2015 (edited) He is trying to get these two sides to settle. He is not ruling on 80% -90% of the issues he is asking about. It's very clear what he is doing. He wants both sides to reconsider their hardline stance. But he's NOT going to rule on whether or not the NFL was right or wrong. Of course he wants them to settle. But he's also signaling which side he'll favor absent a settlement. That's what happens in these settings. Edited August 12, 2015 by dave mcbride Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelly the Dog Posted August 12, 2015 Share Posted August 12, 2015 Of course he wants them to settle. But he's also signaling which side he'll favor absent a settlement. That's what happens in these settings. No he's not, IMO. Because he knows that is not his jurisdiction. It's possible he will let his personal feelings on guilt or innocence or the actual case for or against influence him. Judges have been known to do that. But then he gets himself in a real pickle in this particular case because he would have to say to himself that Brady is guilty as hell, but the NFL did not prove he was guilty as hell, but according to their own laws they don't really have to but I am going to step in here and make my ruling based on facts not really pertinent to the case, whether or not as a judge I don't think they truly proved he did it. I find it very hard to believe he is going to do that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YoloinOhio Posted August 12, 2015 Author Share Posted August 12, 2015 @SportsCenter: Court has adjourned in Tom Brady proceedings, and no settlement has been reached. Next court date set for August 19. http://t.co/5RXea9Evpj @BenVolin: Kessler argued that IF McNally and Jastremski deflated the balls, they were freelancing and not doing so under Bradys orders Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts