PromoTheRobot Posted May 23, 2016 Share Posted May 23, 2016 Lifetime ban over 2 psi? Lifetime ban over obstruction of a league investigation. Do you ever ask yourself why Brady would destroy a phone over an infraction that, at worst, is a $25K fine? What was on his phone must have been far far more incriminating. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hondo in seattle Posted May 23, 2016 Share Posted May 23, 2016 Lifetime ban over obstruction of a league investigation. Do you ever ask yourself why Brady would destroy a phone over an infraction that, at worst, is a $25K fine? What was on his phone must have been far far more incriminating. Maybe so. But since the phone was destroyed, it's not incriminating at all. Thus, no lifetime ban. I think Brady is fighting as much to protect his legacy as to avoid the suspension. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BaaadThingsMan Posted May 23, 2016 Share Posted May 23, 2016 Maybe so. But since the phone was destroyed, it's not incriminating at all. Thus, no lifetime ban. I think Brady is fighting as much to protect his legacy as to avoid the suspension. I think by fighting he is tarnishing his legacy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CommonCents Posted May 23, 2016 Share Posted May 23, 2016 He applied for an extension to file this appeal and got it, he is now waiting until the afternoon of the day of deadline to file the appeal. Delay delay delay seems to be the focus of his efforts. Then in a month if the appeal is denied they will file for another extension to appeal directly to the SC and delay it even further. At this point I'm just going to assume he plays week 4 against us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PromoTheRobot Posted May 23, 2016 Share Posted May 23, 2016 Maybe so. But since the phone was destroyed, it's not incriminating at all. Thus, no lifetime ban. I think Brady is fighting as much to protect his legacy as to avoid the suspension. No. He still obstructed the investigation. He merely prevented even more damming evidence from being revealed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BaaadThingsMan Posted May 23, 2016 Share Posted May 23, 2016 He applied for an extension to file this appeal and got it, he is now waiting until the afternoon of the day of deadline to file the appeal. Delay delay delay seems to be the focus of his efforts. Then in a month if the appeal is denied they will file for another extension to appeal directly to the SC and delay it even further. At this point I'm just going to assume he plays week 4 against us.More !@#$ery. Still looking for a way to cheat the system some how. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CommonCents Posted May 23, 2016 Share Posted May 23, 2016 More !@#$ery. Still looking for a way to cheat the system some how. I wonder the timeline will look if the en banc is denied. Say that happens around June 21st, how long does he have to attempt to get things push forwarded to the SC? How long does the SC take to issue a decision on that appeal? Could he realistically play this season even if he loses every step of the way in the judicial system? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John from Riverside Posted May 23, 2016 Share Posted May 23, 2016 He applied for an extension to file this appeal and got it, he is now waiting until the afternoon of the day of deadline to file the appeal. Delay delay delay seems to be the focus of his efforts. Then in a month if the appeal is denied they will file for another extension to appeal directly to the SC and delay it even further. At this point I'm just going to assume he plays week 4 against us. I will say the same thing I said last year Until we find a way to beat a Brady led patriots team....we are on the outside looking in. He is the agent Smith of this matrix. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KDIGGZ Posted May 23, 2016 Share Posted May 23, 2016 I wonder the timeline will look if the en banc is denied. Say that happens around June 21st, how long does he have to attempt to get things push forwarded to the SC? How long does the SC take to issue a decision on that appeal? Could he realistically play this season even if he loses every step of the way in the judicial system? I just read something that said he could play out all of 2016 of this is pending. I'm no legal expert but I thought there was no way around his 2016 suspension. Now they are saying he very well could play in 2016 no matter the outcome? Wtf?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PromoTheRobot Posted May 23, 2016 Share Posted May 23, 2016 I will say the same thing I said last year Until we find a way to beat a Brady led patriots team....we are on the outside looking in. He is the agent Smith of this matrix. Good analogy because Brady's skill extends beyond the field if you catch my drift. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wayne Cubed Posted May 23, 2016 Share Posted May 23, 2016 (edited) I wonder the timeline will look if the en banc is denied. Say that happens around June 21st, how long does he have to attempt to get things push forwarded to the SC? How long does the SC take to issue a decision on that appeal? Could he realistically play this season even if he loses every step of the way in the judicial system? Just by applying for the en banc Brady is not guaranteed a stay in the suspension. The 2nd Circuit has to approve his petition for an en banc, which is highly unlikely. If they deny it, then he can apply for a stay while he petitions the SCOTUS. He would have to apply for a stay from the Justice who oversees the 2nd circuit, which is Justice Ginsberg. But he has to show a probability that 4 of the judges would grant the stay AND he has to show that he has a possibility of overturning what the 2nd Circuit has ruled AND irreparable harm if he wasn't granted a stay. That's just to be granted a stay. And Ginsberg would decide that. Edited May 23, 2016 by Wayne Cubed Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thebandit27 Posted May 23, 2016 Share Posted May 23, 2016 Just by applying for the en banc Brady is not guaranteed a stay in the suspension. The 2nd Circuit has to approve his petition for an en banc, which is highly unlikely. If they deny it, then he can apply for a stay while he petitions the SCOTUS. He would have to apply for a stay from the Justice who oversees the 2nd circuit, which is Justice Ginsberg. But he has to show a probability that 4 of the judges would grant the stay AND he has to show that he has a possibility of overturning what the 2nd Circuit has ruled AND irreparable harm if he wasn't granted a stay. That's just to be granted a stay. And Ginsberg would decide that. Let's see: Union vs Billionaires; how would RBG rule on that? I think we know that answer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BaaadThingsMan Posted May 23, 2016 Share Posted May 23, 2016 Just by applying for the en banc Brady is not guaranteed a stay in the suspension. The 2nd Circuit has to approve his petition for an en banc, which is highly unlikely. If they deny it, then he can apply for a stay while he petitions the SCOTUS. He would have to apply for a stay from the Justice who oversees the 2nd circuit, which is Justice Ginsberg. But he has to show a probability that 4 of the judges would grant the stay AND he has to show that he has a possibility of overturning what the 2nd Circuit has ruled AND irreparable harm if he wasn't granted a stay. That's just to be granted a stay. And Ginsberg would decide that.If its delayed beyond the season start date keep his ass on the sideline during the appeal process, see how quickly he changes his tune. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snafu Posted May 23, 2016 Share Posted May 23, 2016 Let's see: Union vs Billionaires; how would RBG rule on that? I think we know that answer Ya never know -- she could be a Jets fan. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wayne Cubed Posted May 23, 2016 Share Posted May 23, 2016 Let's see: Union vs Billionaires; how would RBG rule on that? I think we know that answer Yea, I suppose that's Bradys light of hope, that it's Ginsberg ruling on it, she could grant him the stay and the SCOTUS could decided to not here the case. Technically though, she's not ruling on how she see's the case, she should be ruling on the merits of it. I guess we will see because that's where I see it going. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain Hindsight Posted May 23, 2016 Share Posted May 23, 2016 Yea, I suppose that's Bradys light of hope, that it's Ginsberg ruling on it, she could grant him the stay and the SCOTUS could decided to not here the case. Technically though, she's not ruling on how she see's the case, she should be ruling on the merits of it. I guess we will see because that's where I see it going. Its a sad day when the SCOTUS needs to hear a case about deflated footballs Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BaaadThingsMan Posted May 23, 2016 Share Posted May 23, 2016 Its a sad day when the SCOTUS needs to hear a case about deflated footballs!@#$in a Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wayne Cubed Posted May 23, 2016 Share Posted May 23, 2016 Its a sad day when the SCOTUS needs to hear a case about deflated footballs Personally, I don't think they will ever hear the case but Brady is hoping that Ginsberg will grant him a stay because she notoriously sides with Labor over Management. But as I said, she should just be deciding on the merit of the case: if 4 judges think a stay would be granted; if Brady actually has a chance to overturn; if by not granting a stay it will cause irreparable harm to him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelly the Dog Posted May 23, 2016 Share Posted May 23, 2016 Yea, I suppose that's Bradys light of hope, that it's Ginsberg ruling on it, she could grant him the stay and the SCOTUS could decided to not here the case. Technically though, she's not ruling on how she see's the case, she should be ruling on the merits of it. I guess we will see because that's where I see it going. I think I read that in another NFL related case, the Maurice Clarette case, they asked for a stay and she almost immediately denied it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PromoTheRobot Posted May 23, 2016 Share Posted May 23, 2016 Its a sad day when the SCOTUS needs to hear a case about deflated footballsFor the one millionth time, it's about the authority of the commissioner to mete out discipline. The fact that you believe it's still about deflated balls is a tribute to Brady's team of media ballwashers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts