Pneumonic Posted September 6, 2015 Share Posted September 6, 2015 Just because the judge ruled against the NFL doesn't mean Brady is innocent. Nor should it be assumed that Brady is guilty ........ based on the assumptions culled from the findings of a seriously flawed "independent" report commissioned by the league. The judge didn't gut the terms of the CBA by his ruling. What he stressed in his ruling is that RG and the league didn't abide by the terms of the CBA as demonstrated by the way this case was processed by the league. Most analysts prior to the decision overwhelmingly believed that the league would win this cased based on the glaring imbalance in disciplinary authority given to the league by the terms of the CBA. That wasn't the issue in this fracas although that is the hollow position he is taking after his humiliating loss. It has to be emphasized that the union didn't challenge the league's authority in this case (so stated in court to the judge); it challenged their rogue behavior in following the rules proscribed in the disciplinary process. Go back and scan the judge's ruling. It catalogued a list of blatant violations of conduct relating to the process. There was little mention of "balls" and player behavior in the judge's summary. The reason for the judge's focus is that was the core issue (process) he was supposed to address. This case exposed to the public how incompetently, arbitrarily and capriciously Goodell handled his disciplinary responsibilities. If there was a loss in the commissioner's authority in these types of matter it was not due to the union and the legal system altering the terms of the CBA; it was due to the fact that he destroyed his own credibility to act with a reasonable level of fairness. In other words he sabotaged himself. Arrogance combined with incompetence is a toxic mixture. This extended legal fiasco was a byproduct of that destructive mixture. RG's pursuing an appeal is not an example of his astuteness; it is a glaring example of his obtuseness. Indeed. It's not the CBA that is flawed ... it's the implementation of the CBA that is. Previous commissioners had no issues applying the rules of this CBA. Why? Because they did so in a fair and just manner. For whatever reason, this current commissioner has chosen a different course of action. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dibs Posted September 6, 2015 Share Posted September 6, 2015 ..... Previous commissioners had no issues applying the rules of this CBA. Why? ..... That must have been extremely hard for them to do since Goodall has been the only NFL Commissioner during this CBA. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheFunPolice Posted September 6, 2015 Share Posted September 6, 2015 regardless of your position on whether the cheating scum should have been punished for being cheating scum, I think everyone agrees on one thing: Roger Gooddell needs to go. The man has no credibility after the messes he made all last season, ending with this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. WEO Posted September 6, 2015 Share Posted September 6, 2015 I've read the whole opinion? Have you? You conveniently left out that Manning plays at least 9 games a year in a dome, which was explained by the study's original author. I read the opinion. That's why I'm certain you're wrong. Lots of dome teams didn't make the top 5 once, let alone twice... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pneumonic Posted September 6, 2015 Share Posted September 6, 2015 That must have been extremely hard for them to do since Goodall has been the only NFL Commissioner during this CBA. I am talking about the law requiring fundamental fairness in arbitration matters within this, or any, CBA. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fixxxer Posted September 6, 2015 Share Posted September 6, 2015 Nor should it be assumed that Brady is guilty ........ based on the assumptions culled from the findings of a seriously flawed "independent" report commissioned by the league. Sure thing, deflator. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
K-9 Posted September 6, 2015 Share Posted September 6, 2015 Nor should it be assumed that Brady is guilty ........ based on the assumptions culled from the findings of a seriously flawed "independent" report commissioned by the league. The court accepts the arbiter's findings as fact so if you have a problem with that, you should write Berman a letter. Based on all the circumstantial evidence gathered, only an unreasonable person wouldn't conclude a 51% probability that Brady offered compensation to McNally to circumvent the duty of game officials to ensure compliance with league rules. I'm not surprised you are unreasonable in that regard. Not at all. GO BILLS!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John from Riverside Posted September 6, 2015 Share Posted September 6, 2015 I just wonder if the brady rules are still going to be the brady rules now that Brady has pissed off the NFL brass........ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoSaint Posted September 6, 2015 Share Posted September 6, 2015 I just wonder if the brady rules are still going to be the brady rules now that Brady has pissed off the NFL brass........ Refs and nfl brass are very different - he may have also upset the refs despite primarily calling out Goodell (who also hasn't treated refs great) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prickly Pete Posted September 7, 2015 Share Posted September 7, 2015 The court accepts the arbiter's findings as fact so if you have a problem with that, you should write Berman a letter. Based on all the circumstantial evidence gathered, only an unreasonable person wouldn't conclude a 51% probability that Brady offered compensation to McNally to circumvent the duty of game officials to ensure compliance with league rules. I'm not surprised you are unreasonable in that regard. Not at all. GO BILLS!!! Players give signed merch and whatnot to team employees all the time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
K-9 Posted September 7, 2015 Share Posted September 7, 2015 Players give signed merch and whatnot to team employees all the time. Right. And team employees always threaten to give their QBs "phuckin' watermelons" if they don't come up with new kicks and other swag. "Friggin' rugby balls!" "Phuck Tom." And every team has an employee that calls himself "the deflator" because he's dieting and losing weight. GO BILLS!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tuco Posted September 7, 2015 Share Posted September 7, 2015 Players give signed merch and whatnot to team employees all the time. Especially the ones they don't even know. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattM Posted September 7, 2015 Share Posted September 7, 2015 (edited) Players give signed merch and whatnot to team employees all the time.Game worn jerseys like the Deflator got? Really? Don't you think if this was indeed a common occurrence Brady and the Pats* would have trotted out other low level flunkies who got such swag? I've been asking where those folks are for a while now and have yet to receive an answer. In fact, a poster on the main Deflategate thread way back claimed to have worked in PR or some such for a pro sports team and actually said the opposite--that it's all considered team property and very carefully collected and tracked by the team to be sold or donated to charity. Finally, how do you also explain McNally's request for straight up cash from Brady in one of the texts? Does Tommy go around handing out hundreds in the locker room? Edited September 7, 2015 by MattM Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pneumonic Posted September 7, 2015 Share Posted September 7, 2015 The court accepts the arbiter's findings as fact so if you have a problem with that, you should write Berman a letter. Based on all the circumstantial evidence gathered, only an unreasonable person wouldn't conclude a 51% probability that Brady offered compensation to McNally to circumvent the duty of game officials to ensure compliance with league rules. I'm not surprised you are unreasonable in that regard. Not at all. GO BILLS!!! Berman was there to rule on process only and not to rule on Brady's guilt/innocence. But he certainly judged it during the hearings when he made it abundantly clear that he had serious doubts that the evidence showed Brady to be guilty. Only an unreasonable person would conclude that Berman would find Brady guilty ... had he been asked to rule on guilt/innocence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter Posted September 7, 2015 Share Posted September 7, 2015 The Patriot way . . . . http://pagesix.com/2015/09/06/robert-kraft-deflategate-judge-chat-at-hamptons-media-party/ Why does this not surprise me? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattM Posted September 7, 2015 Share Posted September 7, 2015 The Patriot way . . . . http://pagesix.com/2015/09/06/robert-kraft-deflategate-judge-chat-at-hamptons-media-party/ Why does this not surprise me? Maybe because we're dealing with "ethically challenged" people here? Oh, don't worry, we'll be here again debating the Pats* next cheating scandal in a matter of months. The over/under is January. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelly the Dog Posted September 7, 2015 Share Posted September 7, 2015 Berman was there to rule on process only and not to rule on Brady's guilt/innocence. But he certainly judged it during the hearings when he made it abundantly clear that he had serious doubts that the evidence showed Brady to be guilty. Only an unreasonable person would conclude that Berman would find Brady guilty ... had he been asked to rule on guilt/innocence. That's not true if you read what he said closely. He said there is not proof that Brady was directly responsible for the championship game involvement. He said that because of the letter from Vincent about the punishment where the league said it was for the championship game stuff which didn't include any of the text stuff which implicates Brady. He was right and it was a mistake by the NFL to word it that way. If you included all of the previous stuff and the texts et al the judge would have had a completely different answer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
K-9 Posted September 7, 2015 Share Posted September 7, 2015 Berman was there to rule on process only and not to rule on Brady's guilt/innocence. But he certainly judged it during the hearings when he made it abundantly clear that he had serious doubts that the evidence showed Brady to be guilty. Only an unreasonable person would conclude that Berman would find Brady guilty ... had he been asked to rule on guilt/innocence. It must be disheartening to have a court accept the arbiters findings as fact. And your last sentence is the height of delusional thinking. But hey, if it helps to ease the pain of Tommy not being exonerated, I understand. GO BILLS!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PromoTheRobot Posted September 7, 2015 Share Posted September 7, 2015 (edited) Seems that Krafty Bob and Judge Deflategate run in the same circles. http://pagesix.com/2015/09/06/robert-kraft-deflategate-judge-chat-at-hamptons-media-party/ Edited September 7, 2015 by PromoTheRobot Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ALF Posted September 7, 2015 Share Posted September 7, 2015 Seems that Krafty Bob and Judge Deflategate runs in the same circles. http://pagesix.com/2015/09/06/robert-kraft-deflategate-judge-chat-at-hamptons-media-party/ Roger would really enjoy reading that article . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts