l< j Posted March 22, 2016 Share Posted March 22, 2016 I'm well aware that the league is not giving back the picks. That's obvious. My point was that they should give back the picks because that is the right thing to do. What is the right punishment in a situation where a team employee steals game balls right before a game? And how does your proposed punishment disincentivize future behavior of that type? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tenhigh Posted March 22, 2016 Share Posted March 22, 2016 I honestly dont know how anyone who read those texts can come to the conclusion that the Pats weren't cheating. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Manther Posted March 22, 2016 Share Posted March 22, 2016 Leave it to Robert Kraft to make this public as you would think out of respect to the league he would keep it private. It is especially galling given that the appeals hearing further confirmed that rules were not followed by employees of the organization. The Cheats* have clearly owned the AFCE during Brady's reign. However I hope they continue to be exposed for their arrogant and dishonorable practices. http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap3000000645993/article/robert-kraft-sent-letter-to-goodell-about-draft-pick Unbelievable! just when I think I can't despise them anymore! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canadian Bills Fan Posted March 22, 2016 Share Posted March 22, 2016 I'd hope Pegula would do the same for his team. Yeah but not whine like a little #@! to the public CBF Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain Hindsight Posted March 22, 2016 Share Posted March 22, 2016 It doesn't matter whether Kraft forfeited his right to appeal. You are being legalistic in a system that is far from adhering to legalities. Kraft certainly has good reasons to ask for the draft picks to be restored: Nothing was proved and the process was contaminated. Kraft did volunteer to the punishment in order to put an end to the case that got out of hand from the league standpoint and presented the league with an opportunity to conclude the matter. There is an issue of fairness. Why should Kraft or any other owner and franchise be penalized when nothing was proved other than the commissioner in his investigation of this trivial issue acted corruptly? The court reviewed the issue and forcefully rebuked the league for not only its flimsy evidence but also for the unethical manner it pursued this case. The irony is that the side that acted corruptly goes without punishment and the side that was not proven to be guilty of anything loses draft picks. That is patently unfair. That's the point! Nothing was determined/proven by the investigation. It's not surprising when one acts like a fool one looks like a fool. Doing the right thing isn't always easy but doing the right thing is the right thing to do. Actually it does matter and he has no good reason to ask other than being a dick. Kraft took his punishment. There was no promise Brady wouldnt be suspended if he did. The Patriots were fined for disrupting the investigation, refusing to allow Wells to interview the weight loss champ and his associates and having been caught cheating before. For Kraft to ask for it back is arrogant, self righteous and insulting to the rest of the league Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canadian Bills Fan Posted March 22, 2016 Share Posted March 22, 2016 Actually it does matter and he has no good reason to ask other than being a dick. Kraft took his punishment. There was no promise Brady wouldnt be suspended if he did. The Patriots were fined for disrupting the investigation, refusing to allow Wells to interview the weight loss champ and his associates and having been caught cheating before. For Kraft to ask for it back is arrogant, self righteous and insulting to the rest of the league Not to mention that Kraft also said that he didnt fight the draft pick fine because Brady wasnt punished CBF Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnC Posted March 22, 2016 Share Posted March 22, 2016 Actually it does matter and he has no good reason to ask other than being a dick. Kraft took his punishment. There was no promise Brady wouldnt be suspended if he did. The Patriots were fined for disrupting the investigation, refusing to allow Wells to interview the weight loss champ and his associates and having been caught cheating before. For Kraft to ask for it back is arrogant, self righteous and insulting to the rest of the league Until this particular case there was never a case in which Goodell has been reversed and the punishment stood. Think about what has happened here without regard to who is involved. The judge ruled against the league based on insufficient evidence and a tainted process. Then part of the punishment still stands. How does that make sense? Where is the logic? It is constantly repeated that the Pats did what they were accused of doing. When it was taken to a legal authority outside of the league the court forcefully ruled against the league based on the evidence and tainted process..And still there are people who strenuously make the point despite the rulings the punishment should stand. That is an absurd position to take. What the majority of people are in essence saying is that although Goodell has acted capriciously as determined by the court his punishments should still stand because he has the authority to act in such a matter. That makes no sense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iinii Posted March 22, 2016 Share Posted March 22, 2016 Take another pick to show them that whining will not be tolerated! or winning for that matter Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
l< j Posted March 22, 2016 Share Posted March 22, 2016 Until this particular case there was never a case in which Goodell has been reversed and the punishment stood. Think about what has happened here without regard to who is involved. The judge ruled against the league based on insufficient evidence and a tainted process. Then part of the punishment still stands. How does that make sense? Where is the logic? It is constantly repeated that the Pats did what they were accused of doing. When it was taken to a legal authority outside of the league the court forcefully ruled against the league based on the evidence and tainted process..And still there are people who strenuously make the point despite the rulings the punishment should stand. That is an absurd position to take. What the majority of people are in essence saying is that although Goodell has acted capriciously as determined by the court his punishments should still stand because he has the authority to act in such a matter. That makes no sense. Please address the legality of the employee stealing game balls. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain Hindsight Posted March 22, 2016 Share Posted March 22, 2016 Until this particular case there was never a case in which Goodell has been reversed and the punishment stood. Think about what has happened here without regard to who is involved. The judge ruled against the league based on insufficient evidence and a tainted process. Then part of the punishment still stands. How does that make sense? Where is the logic? It is constantly repeated that the Pats did what they were accused of doing. When it was taken to a legal authority outside of the league the court forcefully ruled against the league based on the evidence and tainted process..And still there are people who strenuously make the point despite the rulings the punishment should stand. That is an absurd position to take. What the majority of people are in essence saying is that although Goodell has acted capriciously as determined by the court his punishments should still stand because he has the authority to act in such a matter. That makes no sense. The court ruled Brady shouldn't have been suspended. i.e no precedent. (Which looks like he might lose this round) Brady appealed his penalty. Kraft did not. if Kraft had appealed last year, I'd agree with you. But he didn't, he forfeited that right and now he wants to try to go around the rules. Think about it. What if, nearly a year later a player told the league he wanted his fine money back because circumstances changed. Everyone would say that's ridiculous Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. WEO Posted March 22, 2016 Share Posted March 22, 2016 Reports: 'Zero chance' Patriots get their first-round pick back This is all part of the theater NFL creates in the off season to keep the interest level high until the draft. Kraft publicly makes a hopeless request. Now Goodell, who could use an armadillo in his trousers at this point, gets to publicly deny his perceived puppetmaster. It's all staged for your viewing pleasure... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuffaloBill Posted March 22, 2016 Author Share Posted March 22, 2016 Until this particular case there was never a case in which Goodell has been reversed and the punishment stood. Think about what has happened here without regard to who is involved. The judge ruled against the league based on insufficient evidence and a tainted process. Then part of the punishment still stands. How does that make sense? Where is the logic? It is constantly repeated that the Pats did what they were accused of doing. When it was taken to a legal authority outside of the league the court forcefully ruled against the league based on the evidence and tainted process..And still there are people who strenuously make the point despite the rulings the punishment should stand. That is an absurd position to take. What the majority of people are in essence saying is that although Goodell has acted capriciously as determined by the court his punishments should still stand because he has the authority to act in such a matter. That makes no sense. Your position is very flawed. First, Brady's punishment and the overturning of it was an issue first subject to and decided upon by an arbitrator and not a court. That arbitration is a quasi court process and one subject to laws but it is not a court. Second, the NFL has sought court review of the arbitrators decision presumably because of a flaw in the arbitration process and the resulting decision. The appeal has nothing to do with what the broader team and org did or did not do. Third, the patsies* organizational actions are not subject to the CBA. They are held to league policy and standards. Finally, this is not the first violation on the part of the taintriots* organization. They we're caught filming previously in a clear violation of league policy. Now IMO they got off lucky in this situation. I also personally hope their persistent protests continue to reveal them for the cheating and rule bending organization they are. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
K-9 Posted March 22, 2016 Share Posted March 22, 2016 Your position is very flawed. First, Brady's punishment and the overturning of it was an issue first subject to and decided upon by an arbitrator and not a court. That arbitration is a quasi court process and one subject to laws but it is not a court. Second, the NFL has sought court review of the arbitrators decision presumably because of a flaw in the arbitration process and the resulting decision. The appeal has nothing to do with what the broader team and org did or did not do. Third, the patsies* organizational actions are not subject to the CBA. They are held to league policy and standards. Finally, this is not the first violation on the part of the taintriots* organization. The hey we're caught filming previously in a clear violation of league policy. Now IMO they got off lucky in this situation. I also personally hope their continued protests continue to reveal them for the cheating and rule bending organization they are. Precisely. I can understand why NE* fans would think it's all part of the same cloth, but the sanctions against the organization vs. that of a player, are completely separate issues resulting from completely different violations. The Pats*' steadfast refusal to cooperate combined with the quick firing of the employees in question rendered any potential cooperation a moot point as both employees became off limits upon their dismissal. This all occurred well before league investigators built their case against Brady. And again, Kraft agreed to the punishment handed down. Great point about the repeat offender status as well. We need to stop conflating the Pats*** organizational issue with the Brady legal issue. I keep seeing Kraft marching onto the field on opening night last season and getting caught saying, "Phuck 'em." That was meant for anyone outside Pats*** nation. He's a miserable phony bastard. GO BILLS!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NorthBuffaloKid Posted March 22, 2016 Share Posted March 22, 2016 YAWN! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnC Posted March 22, 2016 Share Posted March 22, 2016 (edited) Your position is very flawed. First, Brady's punishment and the overturning of it was an issue first subject to and decided upon by an arbitrator and not a court. That arbitration is a quasi court process and one subject to laws but it is not a court. Second, the NFL has sought court review of the arbitrators decision presumably because of a flaw in the arbitration process and the resulting decision. The appeal has nothing to do with what the broader team and org did or did not do. Third, the patsies* organizational actions are not subject to the CBA. They are held to league policy and standards. Finally, this is not the first violation on the part of the taintriots* organization. They we're caught filming previously in a clear violation of league policy. Now IMO they got off lucky in this situation. I also personally hope their persistent protests continue to reveal them for the cheating and rule bending organization they are. Judge Brewer is certainly a member of the court. The judge followed court rules just as all the claimants did. His ruling was appealed by the league and is now being reviewed by appellate judges. How does this process not fall under the purview of the judicial system? This aspect of your response makes no sense to me. Edited March 22, 2016 by JohnC Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdand12 Posted March 22, 2016 Share Posted March 22, 2016 (edited) Unbelievable! just when I think I can't despise them anymore! Burn her !! Shes a witch I tell you !! "I keep seeing Kraft marching onto the field on opening night last season and getting caught saying, "Phuck 'em." That was meant for anyone outside Pats*** nation. He's a miserable phony bastard. " < K-9 s quote how does he ever explain that one. Burn her and his Evil Cat Edited March 22, 2016 by 3rdand12 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattM Posted March 22, 2016 Share Posted March 22, 2016 Judge Brewer is certainly a member of the court. The judge followed court rules just as all the claimants did. His ruling was appealed by the league and is now being reviewed by appellate judges. How does this process not fall under the purview of the judicial system? This aspect of your response makes no sense to me. John--Judge Berman's ruling was on a very narrow issue--whether the NFL under the CBA had the power to sanction Brady by suspending him--and did not rule on the merits as to whether Brady actually did anything here. He simply found that the League had no authority because the CBA did not go into enough detail to say you could be suspended for deflating balls (which the League said was in fact covered unde other more general provisions). As I pointed out at the time (and it looks like at least 2 of the 3 appellate judges may agree with me) that's really a ridiculous line of reasoning, since the alternative is a 5000 page CBA going into what the punishment could be for every picayune eventuality. We'll see in the next few weeks, but my strong suspicion is that Tommy Boy* better get ready to ride some pine to start the season. The Pats*, in redoing Brafy's-* deal the way they did, seem to be preparing for that, too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
K-9 Posted March 22, 2016 Share Posted March 22, 2016 If Brady were to miss the first four games of the year, what are the odds that none of those games will be vs. an AFC east opponent? GO BILLS!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattM Posted March 22, 2016 Share Posted March 22, 2016 If Brady were to miss the first four games of the year, what are the odds that none of those games will be vs. an AFC east opponent? GO BILLS!!! High--kind of like a bunch of us knew they'd open with the Steelers as soon as we heard that Bell had been suspended for two games (helped further when Bryant later was tagged for the first four). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reed83HOF Posted March 22, 2016 Share Posted March 22, 2016 If Brady were to miss the first four games of the year, what are the odds that none of those games will be vs. an AFC east opponent? GO BILLS!!! It will be all of their NFC games and the Browns/Titans tossed in Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts