MattM Posted August 31, 2015 Share Posted August 31, 2015 (edited) Same here....I want so badly for him to lose. NYT ran an article this morning quoting a professor of Sports Law saying that the NFL will win this case. From his quote it sounded like he didn't even think it was close, FWIW. http://mobile.nytimes.com/2015/08/31/sports/football/looking-for-clues-on-how-decision-will-swing-for-tom-brady.html Edited August 31, 2015 by MattM Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KD in CA Posted August 31, 2015 Share Posted August 31, 2015 NYT ran an article this morning quoting a professor of Sports Law saying that the NFL will win this case. From his quote it sounded like he didn't even think it was close, FWIW. That's my guess too. The CBA gives Goodell the authority, correct? Isn't that all the judge should be concerned with? I assume he's not 'reviewing evidence' of the case. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. WEO Posted August 31, 2015 Share Posted August 31, 2015 That's my guess too. The CBA gives Goodell the authority, correct? Isn't that all the judge should be concerned with? I assume he's not 'reviewing evidence' of the case. No one is challenging Goodell's authority. The entire argument before the judge is whether Goodell acted as an unbiased fashion. In other words, did he use the powers granted in the CBA fairly in this case--specifically in Brady's appeal. That's all this case is about. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4merper4mer Posted August 31, 2015 Share Posted August 31, 2015 No one is challenging Goodell's authority. The entire argument before the judge is whether Goodell acted as an unbiased fashion. In other words, did he use the powers granted in the CBA fairly in this case--specifically in Brady's appeal. That's all this case is about. If Goodell is so biased against Brady then why has he been allowed to call his own RTP and PI penalties for years? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoSaint Posted August 31, 2015 Share Posted August 31, 2015 If Goodell is so biased against Brady then why has he been allowed to call his own RTP and PI penalties for years? if thats your take, ask the officials, i suppose.... though they liked roger enough to strike in that time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
plenzmd1 Posted August 31, 2015 Share Posted August 31, 2015 No one is challenging Goodell's authority. The entire argument before the judge is whether Goodell acted as an unbiased fashion. In other words, did he use the powers granted in the CBA fairly in this case--specifically in Brady's appeal. That's all this case is about. So if it goes against Brady, does he appeal? I guess then the hope is the appeal lasts until after the season, but the risk is the appeal gets heard in December? I ask you Weo as you seem more attuned to the Pats side of this and might have better insight Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
K-9 Posted August 31, 2015 Share Posted August 31, 2015 So if it goes against Brady, does he appeal? I guess then the hope is the appeal lasts until after the season, but the risk is the appeal gets heard in December? I ask you Weo as you seem more attuned to the Pats side of this and might have better insight If it goes against the league, does the NFL appeal? The Peterson case is still under appeal, for example. I hope they do. There is a lot at stake here. GO BILLS!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoSaint Posted August 31, 2015 Share Posted August 31, 2015 If it goes against the league, does the NFL appeal? The Peterson case is still under appeal, for example. I hope they do. There is a lot at stake here. GO BILLS!!! either way, does an appeal take it through january? ill say i think this ends up an nfl win, but not a slam dunk. and way uglier than it needed to be for them to get the W. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
K-9 Posted August 31, 2015 Share Posted August 31, 2015 either way, does an appeal take it through january? ill say i think this ends up an nfl win, but not a slam dunk. and way uglier than it needed to be for them to get the W. Most likely it goes to January at least. The Peterson appeal was filed months ago and I can't find anything new on that. Nothing is ever a slam dunk when it comes to predicting how a judge will rule, but I don't think the ugliness can be solely attributed to the NFL. Brady and the Pats* could have mitigated a lot of the crap storm that ensued at the outset of the investigation. GO BILLS!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
plenzmd1 Posted August 31, 2015 Share Posted August 31, 2015 either way, does an appeal take it through january? ill say i think this ends up an nfl win, but not a slam dunk. and way uglier than it needed to be for them to get the W. Am I right to also assume then Saint that Brady will win an injunction to keep playing while the appeal is heard if he loses? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
K-9 Posted August 31, 2015 Share Posted August 31, 2015 Am I right to also assume then Saint that Brady will win an injunction to keep playing while the appeal is heard if he loses? That's not a slam dunk, either. But if he files in Mass, he will have a better chance. GO BILLS!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelly the Dog Posted August 31, 2015 Share Posted August 31, 2015 Most likely it goes to January at least. The Peterson appeal was filed months ago and I can't find anything new on that. Nothing is ever a slam dunk when it comes to predicting how a judge will rule, but I don't think the ugliness can be solely attributed to the NFL. Brady and the Pats* could have mitigated a lot of the crap storm that ensued at the outset of the investigation. GO BILLS!!! I read an interesting argument about that point a couple months ago. I assumed, knowing nothing about the legalities, that a judge would likely rule in favor of an injunction before the case was settled, since the games themselves are really the issue here (except in Brady's mind, which is his reputation), and if he were to sit out the four games he couldn't get them back if he won the case. That seems very reasonable to me now, even though I don't think he should or will win. But... someone explained that a judge will likely not look at "harm" the way I or we would, but rather actual harm. Like would it truly hurt his career? I judge could argue that isn't clear there is any harm. One could argue at 38 or so those four games might not be able to be returned but one could also argue if he doesn't play these four and doesnt take the punishment maybe he could play four more later. That's kind of ridiculous but this lawyer said that is the way the judge will look at it. He will say does it do actual harm to his family, missing these paychecks. Does it do actual harm to his team (no, because they have another QB that will play, he won't consider that Brady is 10x better than the next guy). It was quite interesting. He sounded like he knew what he was talking about. I don't know either way. Ben Volin, who is a shill for the Patriots and Deflategate today said people he spoke to thought it might be difficult to get a judge to give an injunction in this case, too. I think it seems easy to get one but I don't know the legalities at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Best Player Available Posted August 31, 2015 Share Posted August 31, 2015 Myself there is no other QB with the pats** i want to run out of the tunnel on 9/20 than that weeny whiner. So politics aside let him go to any court he wants. just be suited up in Buffalo to take your beat down. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
K-9 Posted August 31, 2015 Share Posted August 31, 2015 I read an interesting argument about that point a couple months ago. I assumed, knowing nothing about the legalities, that a judge would likely rule in favor of an injunction before the case was settled, since the games themselves are really the issue here (except in Brady's mind, which is his reputation), and if he were to sit out the four games he couldn't get them back if he won the case. That seems very reasonable to me now, even though I don't think he should or will win. But... someone explained that a judge will likely not look at "harm" the way I or we would, but rather actual harm. Like would it truly hurt his career? I judge could argue that isn't clear there is any harm. One could argue at 38 or so those four games might not be able to be returned but one could also argue if he doesn't play these four and doesnt take the punishment maybe he could play four more later. That's kind of ridiculous but this lawyer said that is the way the judge will look at it. He will say does it do actual harm to his family, missing these paychecks. Does it do actual harm to his team (no, because they have another QB that will play, he won't consider that Brady is 10x better than the next guy). It was quite interesting. He sounded like he knew what he was talking about. I don't know either way. Ben Volin, who is a shill for the Patriots and Deflategate today said people he spoke to thought it might be difficult to get a judge to give an injunction in this case, too. I think it seems easy to get one but I don't know the legalities at all. Months ago (and I don't know how many pages back), one of the lawyers who more often posts over at SabreSpace, posted his opinion about "harm" as well and it echoed your post. "Harm" in the legal sense is quite different. It's quite possible that Brady wouldn't be "harmed" at all by losing those four games. I wouldn't repeat that within a 100 mile radius around New England. GO BILLS!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
plenzmd1 Posted August 31, 2015 Share Posted August 31, 2015 Thx Kelly Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. WEO Posted August 31, 2015 Share Posted August 31, 2015 So if it goes against Brady, does he appeal? I guess then the hope is the appeal lasts until after the season, but the risk is the appeal gets heard in December? I ask you Weo as you seem more attuned to the Pats side of this and might have better insight I don't have any insight (nice try!). Just saying what the case is about. MAny here still don't know what's being decided by the judge. If he appeals, he would have to convince a judge that he could likely win in his court appeal in order to get an injunction. I still think he gets 2 games. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnC Posted September 1, 2015 Share Posted September 1, 2015 I don't have any insight (nice try!). Just saying what the case is about. MAny here still don't know what's being decided by the judge. If he appeals, he would have to convince a judge that he could likely win in his court appeal in order to get an injunction. I still think he gets 2 games. The judge can't alter the punishment. He either decides that RG's ruling stands or it doesn't. The judge can't modify the punishment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoSaint Posted September 1, 2015 Share Posted September 1, 2015 Most likely it goes to January at least. The Peterson appeal was filed months ago and I can't find anything new on that. Nothing is ever a slam dunk when it comes to predicting how a judge will rule, but I don't think the ugliness can be solely attributed to the NFL. Brady and the Pats* could have mitigated a lot of the crap storm that ensued at the outset of the investigation. GO BILLS!!! They could've. I think my thing there though is the league should know better. They will deal with immature players, arrogant players, and sometimes players they don't believe but are being totally honest. Brady will come and go, but if the league creates systematic problems over and over again.... I just think they'd be wise to hold themselves to a better standard Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. WEO Posted September 1, 2015 Share Posted September 1, 2015 The judge can't alter the punishment. He either decides that RG's ruling stands or it doesn't. The judge can't modify the punishment. True, but the discussion had veered towards an appeal if Brady (or even the NFL) is ruled against. If Brady loses, he should be looking to deal.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
K-9 Posted September 1, 2015 Share Posted September 1, 2015 They could've. I think my thing there though is the league should know better. They will deal with immature players, arrogant players, and sometimes players they don't believe but are being totally honest. Brady will come and go, but if the league creates systematic problems over and over again.... I just think they'd be wise to hold themselves to a better standard No doubt the league needs to clean up their act in these matters. But in this case, there is evidence of a player engaging in paying a club employee to circumvent the rules, lying about it, and then refusing to cooperate in the ensuing investigation. Where does the league draw the line here? Just chalk it up as, "well, players will come and go and occasionally engage in illegal activities, but hey, what can we do?" Yes, these systematic problems get created, but they are not all necessarily related and the league would be derelict in its duties to every team in the league if they allowed these things to go unchecked. You have to take a principled stand, regardless. Otherwise, it's open season. And that's why owners of sports teams have commissioners and other league officials; to save them from themselves. GO BILLS!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts