#DFG: Canceling the Noise

Is there any level of suspension that you would advise Tom to accept?


  • Total voters
    208

WayBackVazquez

white knight against high school nookie
SoSH Member
Aug 23, 2006
8,294
Los Angeles
BigSoxFan said:
Why would Vincent address Brady as "Tom" then? They presumably have had little interaction.
You don't think Troy Vincent and Tom Brady know each other? Okay guys, you win. Total slight.
 

pappymojo

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 28, 2010
5,241
ivanvamp said:
From the Bountygate story, this is regarding Tagliabue's ruling...
 
"to an extent, this case ties Goodell’s hands going forward. In several instances, Tagliabue argues that Goodell’s suspensions were unwarranted because, in prior cases, the NFL never punished players so severely. “The League has not previously suspended or fined  players for some of the activities in which these players participated,” Tagliabue writes,  “and has in the recent past imposed only minimal fines on NFL clubs — not players — of a mere $25,000 or less.
 
Tagliabue agrees with Goodell’s finding that former Saints defensive end Anthony Hargrove obstructed the NFL’s investigation by denying the bounty program’s existence — at the behest of his coaches. But, Tagliabue writes, “the context of previous NFL punishment for obstruction suggests that a seven-game suspension is unprecedented and unwarranted here.” The example that Tagliabue cites to back this up: the 2010 investigation into Brett Favre’s alleged sexual harassment of a New York Jets employee. “In December 2010, the NFL fined Brett Favre $50,000 — but did not suspend him — for obstruction of a League sexual harassment investigation,” he writes. “Although not entirely comparable to the present matter, this illustrates the NFL’s practice of fining, not suspending, players for serious violations of this type.”
 
From (http://keepingscore.blogs.time.com/2012/12/12/reading-between-the-lines-of-the-bountygate-ruling/)
 
So Tagliabue is saying that a penalty that is out of line with other penalties for the same infraction is totally unacceptable.  I find it hard to believe that Goodell would go right back to doing the same thing he did that Tagliabue overruled him on and chastised him for, not that long ago.
 
But it is Goodell, so…...
 
I hope the next arbiter/judge smacks Goodell down just as hard.
 
But it wasn't Goodell it was Vincent.  [/sarcasm]
 

epraz

Member
SoSH Member
Oct 15, 2002
5,702
WayBackVazquez said:
You don't think Troy Vincent and Tom Brady know each other? Okay guys, you win. Total slight.
 
Seriously, forget about the name, focus on the footnote:
 
 
We also note that one arbitrator has previously found that you, in particular, are unfamiliar with proper NFL discipline procedures and have no role in imposing discipline. Peterson Art. 46 Appeal at 7.
 

dcmissle

Deflatigator
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Aug 4, 2005
28,269
BigSoxFan said:
Why would Vincent address Brady as "Tom" then? They presumably have had little interaction.
It is no biggie, please trust us.

Meanwhile, I'm happy to leave the messaging on this entire matter up to the union folks and counsel rather than Tony Montana sitting up there in Foxborough.
 

Norm loves Vera

Joe wants Trump to speak
SoSH Member
Dec 25, 2003
3,206
Peace Dale, RI
I sure wish Goldberg posted only a few of the strongest rebuttals on the website and then something like this in the NFLPA letter, excluding the less impactful explanations:
 
 "the NFLPA  and Mr. Brady reserve their right to challenge the May 11 discipline on additional grounds"
 
edit, typo on phone
 

Morgan's Magic Snowplow

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 2, 2006
17,664
Philadelphia
ivanvamp said:
From the Bountygate story, this is regarding Tagliabue's ruling...
 
"to an extent, this case ties Goodell’s hands going forward. In several instances, Tagliabue argues that Goodell’s suspensions were unwarranted because, in prior cases, the NFL never punished players so severely. “The League has not previously suspended or fined  players for some of the activities in which these players participated,” Tagliabue writes,  “and has in the recent past imposed only minimal fines on NFL clubs — not players — of a mere $25,000 or less.
 
Tagliabue agrees with Goodell’s finding that former Saints defensive end Anthony Hargrove obstructed the NFL’s investigation by denying the bounty program’s existence — at the behest of his coaches. But, Tagliabue writes, “the context of previous NFL punishment for obstruction suggests that a seven-game suspension is unprecedented and unwarranted here.” The example that Tagliabue cites to back this up: the 2010 investigation into Brett Favre’s alleged sexual harassment of a New York Jets employee. “In December 2010, the NFL fined Brett Favre $50,000 — but did not suspend him — for obstruction of a League sexual harassment investigation,” he writes. “Although not entirely comparable to the present matter, this illustrates the NFL’s practice of fining, not suspending, players for serious violations of this type.”
 
From (http://keepingscore.blogs.time.com/2012/12/12/reading-between-the-lines-of-the-bountygate-ruling/)
 
So Tagliabue is saying that a penalty that is out of line with other penalties for the same infraction is totally unacceptable.  I find it hard to believe that Goodell would go right back to doing the same thing he did that Tagliabue overruled him on and chastised him for, not that long ago.
 
But it is Goodell, so…...
 
I hope the next arbiter/judge smacks Goodell down just as hard.
 
Tagliabue's ruling wasn't binding on Goodell in any way.  And reportedly Goodell was royally pissed by Tagliabue's decision and it substantially poisoned their relationship (which was already somewhat rocky).
 
I think all that episode did was convince Goodell not to appoint independent arbitrators in the future.
 

Ralphwiggum

Well-Known Member
Gold Supporter
SoSH Member
Jun 27, 2012
5,905
Needham, MA
I'm trying to think of a high-profile, highly paid executive who is more incompetent than Roger Goodell, but I can't come up with any examples.  He and his minions seem to have fucked this thing up in every conceivable way, and then keep fucking up.
 
You would think that at some point the group of billionaires that employ him would get sick and tired of his bullshit, but Kraft himself stood up in front of the world and gave him a vote of confidence less than a year ago.  I don't get it.
 

Leather

given himself a skunk spot
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
25,991
Yes, it's deliberate, in a "Hey, champ, mind stepping aside so the people who know what the fuck they are talking about can get something done? Thanks!" way. 
 

pappymojo

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 28, 2010
5,241
Morgan's Magic Snowplow said:
 
Tagliabue's ruling wasn't binding on Goodell in any way.  And reportedly Goodell was royally pissed by Tagliabue's decision and it substantially poisoned their relationship (which was already somewhat rocky).
 
I think all that episode did was convince Goodell not to appoint independent arbitrators in the future.I
 
Edit:  Oops.  Sorry.  I'm on a conference call and typing.  I'm stupid.  Ignore me.
 

ivanvamp

captain obvious
Jul 18, 2005
6,104
Morgan's Magic Snowplow said:
 
Tagliabue's ruling wasn't binding on Goodell in any way.  And reportedly Goodell was royally pissed by Tagliabue's decision and it substantially poisoned their relationship (which was already somewhat rocky).
 
I think all that episode did was convince Goodell not to appoint independent arbitrators in the future.
 
Oh I agree on both points you make here.  But Tags' logic was impeccable.  I mean, it's just not right to hand out punishment X to players A, B, and C for the same infraction, and then when player D comes along, you hand out punishment 10X, just…because.  That kind of capricious ruling has no place in any just world.
 

Harry Hooper

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jan 4, 2002
26,967
garzooma said:
The problem with this idea, which I'll bet Kraft himself has used with fellow owners, is that when the League brought up CameraPlacementGate, they basically obliterated the "moving on": "Just put this behind you Hester Prynne, but you still have to wear that scarlet letter."  This is especially egregious considering the "more probable than not" standard -- it doesn't even have to be proven you did anything wrong.  I wonder if one of the things Kraft will be after is a change in the bylaws to explicitly prohibit the NFL from considering past issues.
 
 
Michael Holley talked about Suh's suspension for stomping on Rodgers was lifted in part because he was treated as a first-time offender. You get a clean slate after 32 consecutive games. But Spygate lives on for years.
 

spy5007

lurker
Apr 23, 2010
27
Ralphwiggum said:
I'm trying to think of a high-profile, highly paid executive who is more incompetent than Roger Goodell, but I can't come up with any examples.  He and his minions seem to have fucked this thing up in every conceivable way, and then keep fucking up.
 
You would think that at some point the group of billionaires that employ him would get sick and tired of his bullshit, but Kraft himself stood up in front of the world and gave him a vote of confidence less than a year ago.  I don't get it.
Mark Emmert.
 

joe dokes

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
15,522
I've been beating the "general awareness" thing since the get-go.  I am glad that Kessler attacks it on two fronts: It's not even a "thing," legally, and, if it is, there isn't enough evidence to support finding it.
 

OnWisc

Microcosmic
SoSH Member
Apr 16, 2006
3,808
Chicago, IL
A very key point of emphasis here that I want to make sure isn't overlooked:

"Vincent went into the NFL before graduating from Wisconsin, but received a bachelor’s degree in 2007 from Thomas Edison State College, a distance-learning institution in his native Trenton, N.J."

Just wanted to make this clear.
 

DJnVa

Dorito Dawg
SoSH Member
Dec 16, 2010
40,734
 I find it hard to believe that Goodell would go right back to doing the same thing he did that Tagliabue overruled him on and chastised him for, not that long ago.
 
 
 

lambeau

Member
SoSH Member
Feb 7, 2010
1,160
Connecticut
So it sounds like Kessler et al instead of going to court to vacate Goodell's decision, will seek relief against him being the arbitrator?
 

johnmd20

figuratively like ebola
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 30, 2003
43,648
New York City
drleather2001 said:
Yes, it's deliberate, in a "Hey, champ, mind stepping aside so the people who know what the fuck they are talking about can get something done? Thanks!" way. 
 
Don't call me champ, sport.
 

joe dokes

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
15,522
ivanvamp said:
 
Oh I agree on both points you make here.  But Tags' logic was impeccable.  I mean, it's just not right to hand out punishment X to players A, B, and C for the same infraction, and then when player D comes along, you hand out punishment 10X, just…because.  That kind of capricious ruling has no place in any just world.
 
The problem is the "10X".  ..... it can't be that Goodell can *never* increase penalties as time goes by. The theory would be that "my older, weaker sanctions aren't having a deterrent effect."
 

Helmet Head

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
2,568
Central Mass
Kenny F'ing Powers said:
 
This is about right. The NFL fucked this thin gup so bad that there is no way Brady serves 1 minute of a suspension.
 
The draft picks, on the other hand, are such fucking garbage and because it's nearly impossible to get that punishment rectified, will stick (which is why RG did it to begin with).
This is exactly right. Goodell knew this Brady suspension wasn't going to stick. He just did it to say "I tried" so the public couldn't blame him. That is the exact opposite of how someone running multi billion dollar business should go about it. Roger fucked this up from the get go and now it is way too far gone. Any other commish would have swept this under the rug within the first few days in Janaury.

That being said, when Brady comes out in week one, it will produce monster ratings and the NFL will ultimately win.
 

Harry Hooper

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jan 4, 2002
26,967
It's hard for us laymen to imagine a more formal document than something related to discipline, hence the reaction to the informality of the salutation. Apparently lawyers think the shivs in the document are more palatable if you start out with a friendly greeting.
 

ivanvamp

captain obvious
Jul 18, 2005
6,104
joe dokes said:
 
The problem is the "10X".  ..... it can't be that Goodell can *never* increase penalties as time goes by. The theory would be that "my older, weaker sanctions aren't having a deterrent effect."
 
Right.  So let's compare….. (and we are pretending here that they have actually demonstrated the Pats did something wrong, which, of course, they haven't come close to doing, but work with me…)
 
SD tampers with the footballs.  No penalty for tampering.
Minnesota and Carolina tamper with the footballs.  No penalty for tampering.
NE tampers with the footballs.  $1 million fine, suspension of Brady for four games ($2 million penalty for him), loss of 1st and 4th round picks.
 
Favre doesn't cooperate with investigation.  $50k fine.
SD doesn't cooperate with investigation.  $20k fine.
NE/Brady don't cooperate with investigation.  $1 million team fine, suspension of Brady for four games ($2 million penalty for him), loss of 1st and 4th round picks
 
Denver is a multiple time offender.  No increase in penalties.
NYJ are a multiple time offender.  No increase in penalties.
NE is a multiple time offender, penalties go through the roof.
 
I mean, it's not hard to figure out that what Goodell/Vincent did to the Patriots is completely, utterly, incomprehensibly out of whack, no matter how you slice it.
 

joe dokes

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
15,522
Harry Hooper said:
It's hard for us laymen to imagine a more formal document than something related to discipline, hence the reaction to the informality of the salutation. Apparently lawyers think the shivs in the document are more palatable if you start out with a friendly greeting.
 
The reality is that the two are usually unrelated.  Kessler's didn't say "you are unqualified."  He said, "a prior ruling said you are unqualified." The former would be something of a personal attack.  The latter is strictly business.
 

Gambler7

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 11, 2003
3,415
Ed Hillel said:
 
Now we know that, beyond merely leaking an erroneous report, they sent an official NFL letter to the Patriots with deliberately false information that a football measured at 10.1 PSI, which was nowhere near any of the measurements. Shouldn't there be legal recourse to this issue, separate from Brady's appeal? IMO, knowing this information makes the whole idea of the Wells Report less credible, especially when you combine that with Wells apparently not investigating the NFL leaks/conduct at the NFL's behest, yet also adding into the report that he found no evidence of wrongdoing by the league (which he wasn't looking for!). Those are not the actions of an independent investigator, nor is banning Patriots' counsel from testimony of their accusers.
 
Exactly. The other question being, did NFL Security and/or Wells also use this false information (along with the PSI of the Colts balls which they said were not under 12.5 when 3 were) when they were questioning all of those involved as well?
 

soxfanSJCA

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 3, 2005
110
Outer Space
Whenever I am sustaining a multi-phasic effort to destroy a rivals reputation without any evidence,
I often worry that people might scrutinize my methods, the claims I made, and I most worry that they might find someway to 
escalate their case out of my sphere of influence.
And if that happens, i am not sure i will be able to retain the appearance that i was trying to uphold the integrity of anything while being cross examined.
 
Episodes like this botched sting & railroad job represent opportunities to explore new and creative ways to circumvent the current confines of legal recourse.
Kessler is perfectly suited for this, the word innovative is often used when describing him...
 
 
 

cshea

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 15, 2006
25,131
306, row 14
Goodell staying on to hear the appeal is great. This is like a civil case where the defendant gets to also serve as the judge.I wonder if Goodell is truly naive enough to believe that if he oversee's the appeal and offers Brady a reduced sentence as an olive branch, this thing goes away.

This reminds me of the Sobel/Winters dust up in the first episode of Band of Brother.

"Just take the punishment, Dick, you don't leave the base anyway."

"Your pen, please? Sir, I request trial by court marshal."
 

bsartist618

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 5, 2007
819
ElcaballitoMVP said:
Plot Twist: I am Jim McNally, you Dorito Dinks! It just sucks I decided to take a piss at the worst moment possible. Looks like I'm useless now, which takes the air right out of my balls  sails. 
Is this for real?
 

nighthob

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
8,650
lambeau said:
So it sounds like Kessler et al instead of going to court to vacate Goodell's decision, will seek relief against him being the arbitrator?
 
That would seem to be the way to go, to forestall the precedent that the Artless Roger gets to act as judge, jury, and executioner.
 

dhellers

Member
SoSH Member
Oct 31, 2005
1,967
Silver Spring, Maryland
Morgan's Magic Snowplow said:
 
I'm not sure this really washes.  The NFL had already made it a big deal.  They leaked the erroneous report that the balls were >2 psi under regulations and did nothing to correct that misapprehension, they let the narrative build that this was an egregious assault on the integrity of the game, they let a media discussion continue all week in which a fair number of voices were calling for Belichick and/or Brady to be suspended for the Super Bowl.  By doing so, they (a) boxed the Patriots into a corner in that initial week in which the team was forced to respond very forcefully and (b) made it 100% obvious to the Patriots that this was going to be an antagonistic process in which they were unlikely to get a fair hearing and in which none of the Patriots complaints about league conduct would get any traction whatsoever.
 
Once we've arrived at that point, subsequent decisions by the Patriots to offer less than full cooperation weren't going to help matters but the league was likely going to hammer them no matter what given the evidence discussed by the Wells Report. 
 
I don't see any scenario where Tom Brady hands over his cell phone (assume it contains nothing of interest) and McNally does a second interview focuses on his "deflator" text (assume he makes the weight-loss claim) and the league lets the Patriots off with a slap on the wrist because they fully cooperated.  That just doesn't square with the rest of the evidence.
 
This point is crucial, hence the repetition.
 
Imagine that Brady was indeed guilty of disrespectful behavior --having his minions tweak PSI after the refs had checked them. Given that this  is about an inconsequential tweak as exists in football (and anyone who argues otherwise is either indulging in his  inner sock puppet, malevolent, or giddy-stupid), what would a reasonable penalty be?  $25k is what precedent suggests..
 
However, if you are the Pats, you KNOW that precedent can not be assumed. How could you possibly admit guilt; when something harsh -- such as suspension from the super bowl -- was well within the realm of possibility.
 
Hence, the line of argument that the Pats (or Brady) should be punished harshly (for their effrontery in denying their sins) is based on a false premise -- that the admission of guilt would NOT of been used against them (rather than treated magnanimously).
 
BTW: since when is being found guilty (or, more probable than not of being guilty) grounds for being punished for perjury (since you must of lied about your innocence)?
 
 
BTW2: would it be fair to say that PSI rules are akin to MLB baseball bat rules? For some players a lot of pine tar is good, for others it's not -- but for reasons of yuckiness baseball limits the max coverage of pine tar
(and MLB is actually sane bout this, as they declare that too much pine tar discovered after the fact is NOT grounds for ejection,
http://www.baseball-bats.info/batregulations.php)
 

dcmissle

Deflatigator
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Aug 4, 2005
28,269
nighthob said:
 
That would seem to be the way to go, to forestall the precedent that the Artless Roger gets to act as judge, jury, and executioner.
It's not either/or.
 

joe dokes

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
15,522
ivanvamp said:
 
Right.  So let's compare….. (and we are pretending here that they have actually demonstrated the Pats did something wrong, which, of course, they haven't come close to doing, but work with me…)
 
[snip]
 
I mean, it's not hard to figure out that what Goodell/Vincent did to the Patriots is completely, utterly, incomprehensibly out of whack, no matter how you slice it.
 
I agree. I asked upthread, if the very same "generally aware" finding was made, and there had been a 25K fine -- as sort of a combination of the ball rules and the Favre fine -- would we be here?
 
It's as though they said, "Jeez, there really isn't much here.  Let's reeeealllly whack them so it looks like there is."
 

Rook05

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
2,669
Boulder, CO
Ralphwiggum said:
I'm trying to think of a high-profile, highly paid executive who is more incompetent than Roger Goodell, but I can't come up with any examples.  He and his minions seem to have fucked this thing up in every conceivable way, and then keep fucking up.
 
You would think that at some point the group of billionaires that employ him would get sick and tired of his bullshit, but Kraft himself stood up in front of the world and gave him a vote of confidence less than a year ago.  I don't get it.
I truly hope this becomes the general narrative going forward, and the owners recognize the damage that's this is causing to the league. The league doesn't need dozens of petty violation reporting clogging up every other franchise. Who will want to watch the 2020 NFL draft when only six teams have first rounders?

As an aside, I wonder if the NFLPA could have a case that eliminating draft picks reduces the total guaranteed compensation due to incoming players by a) removing a high salary slot in the early rounds and b) bumping late picks out of the draft entirely.
 

nighthob

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
8,650
dcmissle said:
It's not either/or.
 
Sorry, badly worded. I just meant that by challenging Goodell's standing to act in this capacity they get to circumvent the shop precedent which would be an additional hurdle if they went to court after his ruling.
 

soxfanSJCA

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 3, 2005
110
Outer Space
Rook05 said:
I truly hope this becomes the general narrative going forward, and the owners recognize the damage that's this is causing to the league. The league doesn't need dozens of petty violation reporting clogging up every other franchise. Who will want to watch the 2020 NFL draft when only six teams have first rounders?

As an aside, I wonder if the NFLPA could have a case that eliminating draft picks reduces the total guaranteed compensation due to incoming players by a) removing a high salary slot in the early rounds and b) bumping late picks out of the draft entirely.
This is a very creative angle of attack, and i hope this gets discussed by the NEP and TB's legal teams.
 

Average Reds

Dope
Staff member
Dope
V&N Mod
SoSH Member
Sep 24, 2007
28,255
Southwestern CT
I have said from the beginning that the suspension of Brady would be overturned because it was built on the quicksand of multiple assumptions that could not stand on their own.  What I didn't realize was that Goodell would make it easy on Brady by ignoring the procedure outlined in the CBA.
 
The lawyers here are correct in stating that Federal Courts are very reluctant to involve themselves in cases that are covered by contractually mandated arbitration.  However, they routinely do so when there is obvious evidence of bad faith or the issues are clearly outside of the scope of the CBA.
 
It seems obvious that Goodell has operated with both a clear disregard for the CBA ... again ... and multiple breaches of good faith.  Brady will get his day in court and he will win.
 

OnWisc

Microcosmic
SoSH Member
Apr 16, 2006
3,808
Chicago, IL
I'm trying to think of a high-profile, highly paid executive who is more incompetent than Roger Goodell, but I can't come up with any examples.  He and his minions seem to have fucked this thing up in every conceivable way, and then keep fucking up.
 
You would think that at some point the group of billionaires that employ him would get sick and tired of his bullshit, but Kraft himself stood up in front of the world and gave him a vote of confidence less than a year ago.  I don't get it.
Stanley O'Neal? Jimmy Cayne?
 

RIFan

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 19, 2005
2,176
Blackstone MA
There is an element that if Goodell wants to lose the battle, but win the war he will agree that due process was not followed, vacate the suspension, and impose a $50k fine similar to Favre. He could reduce the team penalties as well. The catch would be that he could claim that the Patriots and Brady are only getting off on a technicality and that the league firmly believes that there is a culture of cheating and they are on notice that any future instances will be dealt with severely. That would firmly brand Brady and the Patriots as what many already believe they are without allowing them their "day in court"* If legacy matters to Brady and Kraft enough, the idea that they only got off on a technicality without the chance to get an independent ruling of innocence may hurt more.

*hardcore haters will always hate, it's the more passive fans that will have their opinions affected by this.
 

nighthob

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
8,650
RIFan said:
There is an element that if Goodell wants to lose the battle, but win the war he will agree that due process was not followed, vacate the suspension, and impose a $50k fine similar to Favre. He could reduce the team penalties as well. The catch would be that he could claim that the Patriots and Brady are only getting off on a technicality and that the league firmly believes that there is a culture of cheating and they are on notice that any future instances will be dealt with severely. That would firmly brand Brady and the Patriots as what many already believe they are without allowing them their "day in court"* If legacy matters to Brady and Kraft enough, the idea that they only got off on a technicality without the chance to get an independent ruling of innocence may hurt more.

*hardcore haters will always hate, it's the more passive fans that will have their opinions affected by this.
 
I think I said either here or in the monster thread that if Goodell were smart he'd let Brady off the hook with a fine and let the slime cling. Fortunately for Brady and the Patriots Goodell isn't and he will probably allow a court to smack the NFL down. And once someone with clean hands looks at this the gig is up for the NFL. 
 

pappymojo

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 28, 2010
5,241
Rook05 said:
I truly hope this becomes the general narrative going forward, and the owners recognize the damage that's this is causing to the league. The league doesn't need dozens of petty violation reporting clogging up every other franchise. Who will want to watch the 2020 NFL draft when only six teams have first rounders?

As an aside, I wonder if the NFLPA could have a case that eliminating draft picks reduces the total guaranteed compensation due to incoming players by a) removing a high salary slot in the early rounds and b) bumping late picks out of the draft entirely.
 
The Jets.