I'm going to be the sole voice of support for Theo here.
First, it's a bit of fantasy to believe that the judge will someone completely exonerate Brady of all wrongdoing and instead pin the entire mess on Goodell. Berman's job is not to uncover all the facts regarding the footballs; his job is determine whether the NFL followed proper procedures per the CBA and labor law and arbitration standards. So, realistically the best anyone can realistically hope for is that Berman vacates the suspension entirely, rips Goodell a new one, and creates a legal argument that will uphold upon appeal. Do we really want to bet on that? Does Brady?
Second, getting the NFL to say "Brady was not culpable" is a thing. Granted, the "Brady lied and cheated" bell cannot be unrung among the low information group of football fans and mediots. Felger, Mazz, CHB will clamor that Brady and Belichick and the Patriots all got off easy, legacy is tainted, et al. But fortunately, most HoF voters have slightly higher IQ's than those guys. And, when Brady's HoF candidacy is up for consideration, it would benefit Brady to have folks saying "Maybe something happened, but the NFL botched it so bad that we'll never really know, and the NFL essentially absolved him of guilt in the settlement" as opposed to "Brady was suspended once for cheating, in the AFCCG no less; does he really belong in the Hall?". I still think the Hall is a lock for Brady, but he does have a self interest in moving that discussion needle slightly to the right.
Gasper's rationales for settlement are indeed weak. His raising of Richie Incognito's cell phone as previously setting a precedent for Brady is absolutely ludicrous. Most of the local media have been out to get Brady from day one for reasons that will never be understood among those of us with IQ's above 70. And, yes, a settlement means most of us will be unhappy. But it's not entirely the worst strategy from a legal standpoint, especially given the uncertainties with respect to the outcome of the court case.