CommonCents Posted March 3, 2016 Share Posted March 3, 2016 I think it's about more than trying to get Brady suspended. Berman pretty much said "Hey, you know that binding arbitration you negotiated for? And the ability to act as a disciplinarian? You don't have that, thanks 'k bye." As it stands, it seriously limits the league's power, and is going to be the rallying cry for every player who ever gets suspended. So of course they are going to try. Nailed it. If I heard correctly the NFL brought in a high powered attorney who has been in front of the Supreme Court multiple times. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KD in CA Posted March 3, 2016 Share Posted March 3, 2016 I think it's about more than trying to get Brady suspended. Berman pretty much said "Hey, you know that binding arbitration you negotiated for? And the ability to act as a disciplinarian? You don't have that, thanks 'k bye." As it stands, it seriously limits the league's power, and is going to be the rallying cry for every player who ever gets suspended. So of course they are going to try. Exactly. The NFL is fighting against the precedent being set. Does anyone really think the league doesn't want Brady on the field or doesn't want this whole thing to go away as quickly as possible? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WhitewalkerInPhilly Posted March 3, 2016 Share Posted March 3, 2016 Exactly. The NFL is fighting against the precedent being set. Does anyone really think the league doesn't want Brady on the field or doesn't want this whole thing to go away as quickly as possible? I think that, after last year, and Brady trying his "revenge tour", and all the problems and questions that came with enforcing those PSI rules if Goddell could get his power back without kicking up a storm, he would. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GunnerBill Posted March 3, 2016 Share Posted March 3, 2016 The reason the NFL was overturned was because it failed to act based in the precedent it itself had set relating to disciplinary action in connection with ball tampering. If the NFL is suddenly worried about precedent their worry came too late in the day. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CommonCents Posted March 3, 2016 Share Posted March 3, 2016 From hearing some of the initial reaction from today it sounds like the judges got after Kessler hard and pointed out that Brady's explanations were not believeable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YoloinOhio Posted March 3, 2016 Author Share Posted March 3, 2016 (edited) @mccannsportslaw My inital take on the NFL appeal hearing: NFL's likely confident it will win 2 to 1. The judges focused on giving high deference to Goodell. Even if the appellate court reverses Judge Berman, they might remand it too, meaning everyone's back in Judge Berman's court for the sequel. @mikereiss Majority of those in courtroom seem to agree that 3 judges were more aggressive in questioning Brady/NFLPA lawyer. Edited March 3, 2016 by YoloinOhio Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CommonCents Posted March 3, 2016 Share Posted March 3, 2016 @mccannsportslaw My inital take on the NFL appeal hearing: NFL's likely confident it will win 2 to 1. The judges focused on giving high deference to Goodell. @mikereiss Majority of those in courtroom seem to agree that 3 judges were more aggressive in questioning Brady/NFLPA lawyer. Christmas in March!! I'm in Boston so this would be as sweet as it gets just to kick a little salt into those old wounds. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YoloinOhio Posted March 3, 2016 Author Share Posted March 3, 2016 (edited) @andrewbrandt These justices were very familiar with the facts of this case, and did not like the facts for Brady. Mentioned destruction of phone often. @deadspin Huh, the NFL might actually win its appeal on Tom Brady's suspension: http://deadspin.com/huh-the-NFL-might-actually-win-its-appeal-on-tom-brady-1762710604?utm_campaign=socialflow_deadspin_twitter&utm_source=deadspin_twitter&utm_medium=socialflow Edited March 3, 2016 by YoloinOhio Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuffaloBill Posted March 3, 2016 Share Posted March 3, 2016 Before everyone here gets overly excited go back and read the arbitrators decision. In shorthand, it did not exonerate Brady but it did say the lovely commissioner overstepped his bounds in the punishment. The court may absolutely now know Brady is a liar but this is not the issue the court is reviewing. The court can only look at a very narrow set of issues. The primary one being did the arbitrator reach a final decision on the issue he was asked to decide. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jerry Jabber Posted March 3, 2016 Share Posted March 3, 2016 I'm not going to get my hopes up until a decision is final. IMO, an employer has the right to discipline his/her employees for breaking the rules set forth by the company. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuffaloBill Posted March 3, 2016 Share Posted March 3, 2016 I'm not going to get my hopes up until a decision is final. IMO, an employer has the right to discipline his/her employees for breaking the rules set forth by the company. True but in this case there is a collective bargaining agreement that the employer is obligated to abide by as it disciplines employees. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BLizzyMeock Posted March 3, 2016 Share Posted March 3, 2016 NFL: Judge in appeal to restore Tom Brady's suspension says evidence of ball tampering "compelling, if not overwhelming" -via ESPN http://es.pn/app Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aristocrat Posted March 3, 2016 Share Posted March 3, 2016 i hope we play them in the first 4 games so we play them and have a chance Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thebandit27 Posted March 3, 2016 Share Posted March 3, 2016 Before everyone here gets overly excited go back and read the arbitrators decision. In shorthand, it did not exonerate Brady but it did say the lovely commissioner overstepped his bounds in the punishment. The court may absolutely now know Brady is a liar but this is not the issue the court is reviewing. The court can only look at a very narrow set of issues. The primary one being did the arbitrator reach a final decision on the issue he was asked to decide. Except that they didn't overstep, they are allowed to suspend him for failure to cooperate with an investigation via the destruction of his phone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jerry Jabber Posted March 3, 2016 Share Posted March 3, 2016 True but in this case there is a collective bargaining agreement that the employer is obligated to abide by as it disciplines employees. Understand. I didn't agree with the judge's explanation stating the NFL should have warned the Patriots and Tom Brady first before punishing them. IMO, that sets a bad precedent as it shows you can knowingly break/violate a rule first and expect to get away with it and just get a warning. So if that's the case, what's to stop the Patriots or any other team from coming up with other ways to cheat as players/teams can get away with it and the NFL has to give the said player/team a verbal/written warning to stop doing it first? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
machine gun kelly Posted March 3, 2016 Share Posted March 3, 2016 This is a spitting contest between the NFL and NFLPA or Brady. It's really not about Brady but authority on either side. Everyone is sick of it. I love the wiseass comment this morning about sunrise and sunset. That was funny. sorry mods, meant wisearss. typo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GunnerBill Posted March 3, 2016 Share Posted March 3, 2016 I'm sorry but that just isn't true. The NFL or any other employer has to act within the bounds of reasonableness within its own agreed disciplinary code. If it doesn't abide by its own code or apply it in a fair or reasonable way that is a decision reviewable in a court. The issue the NFL has with the Brady judgment is given it's previous punishments for similar ball tampering events, the Chargers incident springs to mind, had not involved suspensions for players to go immediately to a 4 game ban seems a clear departure from precedent and therefore it can and was successfully argued by Brady's people that the NFL did not apply it's own procedures in a fair or reasonable way. The issue of whether Brady did or did not tamper is largely irrelevant - that is not what is before the court. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. WEO Posted March 4, 2016 Share Posted March 4, 2016 I'm sorry but that just isn't true. The NFL or any other employer has to act within the bounds of reasonableness within its own agreed disciplinary code. If it doesn't abide by its own code or apply it in a fair or reasonable way that is a decision reviewable in a court. The issue the NFL has with the Brady judgment is given it's previous punishments for similar ball tampering events, the Chargers incident springs to mind, had not involved suspensions for players to go immediately to a 4 game ban seems a clear departure from precedent and therefore it can and was successfully argued by Brady's people that the NFL did not apply it's own procedures in a fair or reasonable way. The issue of whether Brady did or did not tamper is largely irrelevant - that is not what is before the court. Gunner is right again. The court will not decide on the facts of the case. Asking about cell phones is beside the point. They are there to decide if Brady was properly suspended given NFL policy and precedent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YoloinOhio Posted March 4, 2016 Author Share Posted March 4, 2016 (edited) Report: Tom Brady got 'hammered' in the Deflategate appeal hearing, and he might be in trouble http://www.businessinsider.com/report-tom-brady-destroyed-in-deflategate-appeal-hearing-2016-3 I'm sorry but that just isn't true. The NFL or any other employer has to act within the bounds of reasonableness within its own agreed disciplinary code. If it doesn't abide by its own code or apply it in a fair or reasonable way that is a decision reviewable in a court. The issue the NFL has with the Brady judgment is given it's previous punishments for similar ball tampering events, the Chargers incident springs to mind, had not involved suspensions for players to go immediately to a 4 game ban seems a clear departure from precedent and therefore it can and was successfully argued by Brady's people that the NFL did not apply it's own procedures in a fair or reasonable way. The issue of whether Brady did or did not tamper is largely irrelevant - that is not what is before the court. the one judge today seemed to focus on the cell phone destruction as "conduct detrimental" and the other that the CBA allows Goodell to have power in that case. http://www.bostonherald.com/sports/patriots/the_blitz/2016/03/tom_brady_takes_a_hit_in_fiery_deflategate_hearing Edited March 4, 2016 by YoloinOhio Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BADOLBILZ Posted March 4, 2016 Share Posted March 4, 2016 they have now spent $20,000,000 on deflategate. At this point in the history of the NFL and it's labor deal each negotiating chip can be worth hundreds of millions......perhaps billions........down the line. The people who say "we fans are sick of it!".........like that f*cking matters one bit ...........don't realize how valuable this discipline chip is going to be in subsequent negotiations. It's business........you don't give ground away without a fight and it doesn't matter if some JSP's find the process "unsavory". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts