Hopefully Brady is as innocent as he claims and wants complete exoneration of guilt and goes to court to get it. I want nothing more than for Goodell to burn in this. (no idea if this is possible but i just want it.)geoduck no quahog said:
#DFG: Canceling the Noise
- Thread starter nattysez
- Start date
Again, assuming Brady has no incriminating evidence on his phone, they should breeze right through the appeal and right to suing the NFL, because Goodell is likely to get slammed in court (or with a neutral arbitrator). Would love to see Roger's emails and phone along with the other incompetent NFL staffers. There is ZERO chance Brady is producing his phone in the appeal..NONE, thats a Goodell power play.
geoduck no quahog said:
You mean instead of having a neutral arbitrator make him look like a fool again? He will handle this himself before it gets to that point? I honestly don't think he is that smart
By the way, I would not assume that a court would grant either side the right to rifle through the other's files and phone records.
If I were the reviewing judge I would focus on five issues:
1. May RG delegate to Troy V and then be the reviewer?
2. What is the factual basis for TB's general awareness of the violations?
3. Legally, may TB be punished even if he knew of them?
4. May the NFL demand phone records in these circumstances?
5. Even if it may, did refusal to surrender them impair the investigation significantly?
Three of these five issues are very close to pure issues of law. The other two do not require broad ranging discovery to resolve.
If I were the reviewing judge I would focus on five issues:
1. May RG delegate to Troy V and then be the reviewer?
2. What is the factual basis for TB's general awareness of the violations?
3. Legally, may TB be punished even if he knew of them?
4. May the NFL demand phone records in these circumstances?
5. Even if it may, did refusal to surrender them impair the investigation significantly?
Three of these five issues are very close to pure issues of law. The other two do not require broad ranging discovery to resolve.
Sorry, can you describe what the "urgent goal" was, that Kraft's initial press conference accomplished? I had the impression that it was related to the super bowl.Myt1 said:
So the junk science never gets reviewed? Too bad. And, of course, neither do the pre-report leaks, but I already expected that.dcmissle said:
I guess that's still more than we have now.
The junk science not getting its day in court makes me sad. Is that right? Or is there a way by which the NFLPA and Kessler introduce that as well in hopes of blowing up the horseshit factory that is the league office?
It likely gets in. I am sure the union and TB will submit a blistering critique. That can importantly color the judge's assessment of the case. I do not expect the judge to hold a trial on whether there was deflation or not. Or to rule on that basis. There are easier decision points.Mugsy said:
If I am Brady's legal counsel I ask Goodell the following: You state that part of the reason that Brady was suspended was his lack of cooperation with Wells. What's the other part? Goodell has been very vague about this, make him put his cards on the table. I would think he would be required to give a clear answer.
Pretty good breakdown of the potential implications of Goodell naming himself arbiter by SI's Mike McCann, who continues to provide the most comprehensive yet digestible legal analysis on this subject for us non-lawyers out there:
http://www.si.com/nfl/2015/05/15/tom-brady-roger-goodell-deflategate-suspension-appeal
As an aside, is there anything more nauseating than the condescending "LOOK ME IN THE EYE!" demands made by Goodell, Collinsworth, and these other self-righteous "defenders of the shield"?
https://twitter.com/rapsheet/status/601847635893354496
Goodell seems to relish his role as ultimate disciplinarian a little too much, to the point where it wouldn't shock me if he gets off to this kind of shit in some sick way. He'll probably be flying at half-mast for the duration of Brady's appeal hearing.
http://www.si.com/nfl/2015/05/15/tom-brady-roger-goodell-deflategate-suspension-appeal
As an aside, is there anything more nauseating than the condescending "LOOK ME IN THE EYE!" demands made by Goodell, Collinsworth, and these other self-righteous "defenders of the shield"?
https://twitter.com/rapsheet/status/601847635893354496
Goodell seems to relish his role as ultimate disciplinarian a little too much, to the point where it wouldn't shock me if he gets off to this kind of shit in some sick way. He'll probably be flying at half-mast for the duration of Brady's appeal hearing.
https://twitter.com/rapsheet/status/601847635893354496J.McG said:
link to tweet
Goodell seems to relish his role as ultimate disciplinarian a little too much, to the point where it wouldn't shock me if he gets off to this kind of shit in some sick way. He'll probably be flying at half-mast for the duration of Brady's appeal hearing.
Brady's PR folks should issue statements about how they look forward to meeting with Goodell and Wells so they can 'look him in the eye' while they tell him they were impartial and honest, and that there was no sting and no other shenanigans, and also what the results of the internal NFL investigation were.
The power of 'look me in the eyes'?riboflav said:
It's a bullshit posturing phrase. I imagine that Brady has the power to issue countering bullshit posturing phrases to the media as well. It's not like Goodell is the Highlander or something.
As part of his appeal, can Brady's lawyers question Goodell about the extent of the NFL's investigation into itself (the sting aspect) in the Wells report? Or is that irrelevant to the appeals process at this level?
Looking at this from the over all league perspective let's assume the other 31 have an interest in punishing the Pats. At what point do they say "you know what this is now bad for the league and not the attention we really want or need after all the crap that went on this year?". I'm surprised some of the more level headed owners aren't there yet.
wutang112878 said:
It seems clear that the league is full of self-serving owners that cannot see beyond the end of their nose. There is clearly no leadership looking out for the long term good of the league. Anything that hurts the Pats is seen as a benefit to the remaining 31 teams.
Kraft did nothing except back his incompetent buffoon of a commissioner at every turn right up until it was his own franchise in the crosshairs, even as he was bungling his way through the Ray Rice thing which was way, way worse for long term good of the league. Why would anyone expect any if his fellow owners to give a shit about Kraft now?PayrodsFirstClutchHit said:
In this week's installment of "Tilting at Windmills", I tweeted the following question at a dozen or so local and national sports/NFL media members:
Who do you think leaked the "11 of 12 balls were 2 lbs under" information to Chris Mortensen, and why?
So far I've received only four responses, which in all fairness is four more than when I did something similar last weekend. I thought the responses were kind of interesting.
Greg Bedard, Sports Illustrated/MMQB columnist: https://storify.com/markfvita/mortensen-leak-bedard
Who do you think leaked the "11 of 12 balls were 2 lbs under" information to Chris Mortensen, and why?
So far I've received only four responses, which in all fairness is four more than when I did something similar last weekend. I thought the responses were kind of interesting.
Greg Bedard, Sports Illustrated/MMQB columnist: https://storify.com/markfvita/mortensen-leak-bedard
- Thinks it wasn't really a "leak", just likely some random NFL front office underling that "blabbed" to Mort (not sure I understood the distinction)
- Thinks the gross inaccuracies in the report were just an "honest mistake" by the leaker
- Is at least open to the possibility that the leaker had ill intent to inflame the story and embarrass the Patriots
- Agrees that the NFL should have issued a statement denying the report, and personally said so in a story he wrote back in February
- Didn't offer an opinion on why this aspect of the story seems so underreported nationally
- "Doesn't care" about the whole story, thinks it's a "joke"
- Thinks Brady is guilty but that the punishment was way over the top
- Thinks possible misconduct by the NFL in this case is not that important compared to stories that involve "painkillers, concussions, or abuse"
- Thinks both sides lied, leaked information
- Thinks I'm a Pats homer for even asking the question
- Couldn't say given both sides lied why only the Pats should be held accountable
- Declined to offer an opinion on whether it is media's job to report on possible NFL misconduct, or on whether this aspect of the story has been adequately reported upon by the national media
- Honestly has NO idea who leaked the info
- Didn't respond when asked if question was something the national media should be asking
- Has no clue who it was
- Doesn't know what the possible motivation could have been
- Didn't respond when asked why this aspect of the story hasn't received more scrutiny by the media
For some odd reason, the media protect their own. It's one of the few things they are consistent about. I doubt this will ever get any attention, unfortunately. TEC's article outlining how Goodell essentially lied to him and then the limp-wrtisted response from Greg Aiello should be something the media jumps all over. Not sure if its just laziness or not wanting to have to think too critically, but it is quite bizarre the major things that are getting passed over by the majority of the media.
"It is a capital mistake to theorize before one has data. Insensibly one begins to twist facts to suit theories, instead of theories to suit facts. -Arthur Conan DoyleGambler7 said:
Ed Hillel said:
Seriously. Personally, I'm gonna stick with the Pats as long as Brady is around (because I'm a hypocrite), but after that, the NFL can join the NBA as leagues I have completely given up on. In the NBA's case, it was stealing game 5 in the Heat series. Since then, I have watched somewhere around 5 hours of NBA basketball. I don't think I'll mind having the crooked bunch of fucks in the NFL join the crooked bunch of fucks in the NBA on my ignore list.
soxhop411 said:
Im sure Kraft is hoping and praying that the suspension is reduced and Brady accepts that, because if it gets into court, Kraft is in a very awkward position.
Average Reds said:
Because if it gets to court, it could very well make Goodell (who Kraft has lined up his support many times now), look incompetent again....or worse if this really was a sting and it can be proved. Kraft is an owner and he know the NFLPA is likely going to go full out here if it gets to court. On the other side, would want Brady to miss as few games as possible, that benefits his team.
I don't assume that Kraft dropped any appeal because he wanted to protect Goodell. I assume he realizes that he was unlikely to succeed and decided to save himself the time, money, aggravation and risk of failure.Sportsbstn said:
Beyond this, I don't see how Kraft is even involved other than pretending to be a good soldier among owners.
He's not really 'involved' in and active sense (although he could be now lobbying Goodell and the owners about what the smart business decision is unrelated a to the appeal) but the question is, what does he WANT to happen now?Average Reds said:
Speculation, of course;
He'd probably love to have Goodell drop the suspensions entirely. Best for the Patriots and for the NFL as a whole, this best for his pride /and/ his investment.
A reduction that Brady accepts is good for the NFL, and 'ok' for his investment in the team. Not sure what that means in terms of his pride.
Anything that ends up in court might be great for his pride, and good for his Patriots, but could damage the NFL (in terms of future CBA terms) and thus damage his investment.
(Note that I'm using 'pride' and 'damage' in general terms. I don't know exactly what his emotional investment is, but it's apparent that he's emotionally invested. And I don't know how to quantify the damage to his investment in terms of the Patriots or the NFL)
Goodell is incompetent. He targeted Brady to regain his power and authority, and it appears his basis for nailing Brady was as flimsy as possible, and vulnerable to repudiation from either an independent arbitrator or perhaps a Federal Judge.Sportsbstn said:
And the NFLPA is probably going to fight tooth and nail to regain some powers it bargained away regarding the disciplinary process. Either through this fight or the next CBA negotiations.
And Kraft was guilty of misplaced loyalty by supporting Goodell's earlier fuck-ups.I think Kraft will play nice, but IMO he would probably like to see RG go down in flames. Going back to point one, the guy is incompetent.
I
http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/category/rumor-mill/
Florio tries out his lawyer chops on Goodell's lack of competence to hear an appeal: " 'I want to hear directly from Tom'... if Goodell is considering 'new information,' he's not handling the appeal the way he should."
Tagliabue did in Bountygate--but I guess he did a "de novo" appeal? Roger appears to intend to half-ass it and make up the process as he goes along. What else is new.
Florio tries out his lawyer chops on Goodell's lack of competence to hear an appeal: " 'I want to hear directly from Tom'... if Goodell is considering 'new information,' he's not handling the appeal the way he should."
Tagliabue did in Bountygate--but I guess he did a "de novo" appeal? Roger appears to intend to half-ass it and make up the process as he goes along. What else is new.
Reiss pretty much sums up what I have been feeling:
"it is still amazing to me that Goodell has presided over a situation that has irreparably damaged the legacy and reputation of one of the greatest quarterbacks and ambassadors in the history of the game, relying on the anything-but-definitive Wells report in doing so, while failing to take any accountability from a league perspective for creating a swirling mess."
LINK
"it is still amazing to me that Goodell has presided over a situation that has irreparably damaged the legacy and reputation of one of the greatest quarterbacks and ambassadors in the history of the game, relying on the anything-but-definitive Wells report in doing so, while failing to take any accountability from a league perspective for creating a swirling mess."
LINK
Maybe this is wishcasting, but is there any chance at all Roger is laying track for an opportunity to go TV and say, "I spent all day talking with Tom. He was frustrated and passionate but respectful and open. What is clear to me now is that Tom is very particular about the balls he plays with and puts tremendous pressure on the Patriots staff to condition them to his liking. But it is also clear to me now that Brady has gone to great lengths to find a process within the rulebook that more often than not ensures he has the balls to his liking. It's also clear there have been a great number of games where Brady played, and played well, with balls that were not to his personal preference. Given our discussion, it does not appear to me that Tom was either interested in nor directly asked for the balls to be inflated under 12.5 psi. But the Wells report still concluded that these two knuckleheads tampered with the balls and I believe that tampering did occur but it was most likely a rogue act intended to please Tom, not one that he specifically asked for. I'm therefore vacating Toms 4 game suspension while still holding the team accountable for the indiscretion of their gameday employee. Tom Brady is a national treasure and a hero of our game and I look forward to him being honored as a 4 time Champion at our Super Bowl 50 anniversary event in February."
Doesnt everyone win in that scenario?
Doesnt everyone win in that scenario?
Your scenario, while nice to wish for, has almost no chance of coming true IMO. Fidel Goodell gets off on power & authority & I think the recent Kraft backdown (probably due to a lack of support from other owners which Fidel knows) has only empowered him more. At least in his own mind. I think it will take some kind of court ruling to stop or slow down the Fidel Goodell train right now. I think our best hope lays in a big legal smack down given to RG and/or the NFL. I think our fate is in the hands of the NFLPA right nownaclone said:
My thinking is that he elevates the "I looked Brady in the eye" test above all else.One Red Seat said:
so he gets to basically say, Ted Wells did his job - he proved there was tampering just like we all thought there was. But I am superhuman and where Ted was not capable of reading Brady's mind, when I looked him in the eye, his integrity was clear to me. So while Ted is a hell of an investigator, I'm damn near god-like in my ability to ascertain one's integrity merely by looking them in the eye.
Case closed. I am all powerful. Fear me and the divinity of my eyes.
This is fun stuff, compounded by the "thank you sir may I have another" reference. Mortensen's record as a "journalist" has been slayed frequently but has fallen mostly on deaf ears. Here's one I've chortled about for years and years:norm from cheers said:
“There’s a lot of reports out there,” Gruden said. “I just wish some of these reports were verified. (Mortensen) doesn’t have a (expletive) idea what he’s talking about. I can’t understand why he would say that unless he got the X-rays himself.”
http://awfulannouncing.com/2007-articles/jon-gruden-goes-off-on-espns-chris-mortensen.html
Gorton Fisherman said:
Scott Fujita put out a tweet of a pretty great comment posted on PFT, which basically said the following:
Imagine how this case would have proceeded if the initial leak was accurate, and it said this instead of what Mort originally put out there:
"Patriots balls 0.3 PSI under what would be predicted by ideal gas law on one of two pressure gauges. PSI within normal range on the gauge referee Walt Anderson claims to have used."
Anyone think this turns into a 4 game suspension, a million dollar fine, and the loss of two draft picks if Mort tweets the above instead of his false info about the balls being 2 PSI below the approved range? That kind of seems like a big deal, no? And that says just as much about Goodell and the league as it does about Mort. Facts be damned, let's give the people what they want. And they want blood.
I completely understand the fans of other teams who are getting sick and tired of the persecution complex that Pats fans can have over stuff like this. I think hardly any Pats fans would care if it were simply fans of other teams raking us over the coals and calling us Cheatriots. The problem is that Goodell and the league office listen to that noise and apparently make judgments based on the voices of those irrational fans. It's not that we think the NFL is out to get us so much as it's disheartening to see the league office seemingly not give a shit about facts at all and instead cater to the whims of the unwashed masses.
No, everyone wouldn't win. This is the kind of post that makes Pats fans look like homers. The truth doesn't matter as long as Brady gets to play.naclone said:
There are real world reasons people should care about this. A potentially innocent man getting crucified without due process (this isn't the government, but we should strive for fairness anyway). There's a commissioner of the most popular sport in the country that's able to just make everything up as he goes no matter how blind he is, and a national media so in love with its own power to write the narrative that they forgot to report the truth.
And somehow your scenario is a win/win? Brady gets to play, but the scrutiny is off Goodell, the media continues to be held unaccountable and two (potentially) innocent Doritos dinks will get harassed by drunken idiots every time they're recognized.
There's not likely to be any kind of mass vindication here, but ar the very least, this opens a gap large enough to let the nflpa make a move towards taking down the regime, and that may be the only good we're going to get. If we're lucky, Brady will also be able to play and a few people who prejudged might change their minds.
But this attitude where nothing else matters as long as Brady gets to play is blatant homerism.
The union will be more than happy to use this case to further weaken the Goodell regime, but who will show up in Roger's office: Easygoing Tom of contract negotiations, or Mad Dog Tom the field general?
you're not wrong, i'm a blatant homer. but i meant win/win from Roger's perspective. I'm only trying to make sense of his insistence to preside over the appeal and his "look me in the eye" business. I'm suggesting that from Roger's POV, the only thing missing from the proceedings thus far is his direct involvent - namely "getting a feel" for Brady's guilt or innocence by questioning him directly. He's all but saying he doesnt want anybody else hearing the appeal because his sniff test is the only possible variable worth entertaining at this juncture.drbretto said:
So I'm positing, is he doing this so he can ultimately - again from his perspective - create a win-win for him, Wells, Kraft and Brady. Maybe he and Kraft did come to some kind of agreement, maybe he just changed his mind and now feels like it's in the best interest of the shield for Brady to be exonerated.
But in my scenario he comes off magnanimus and stays out of court, Wells is heralded for doing his job, Brady was caught in the cross fire and probably didnt do anything wrong and his buddy Kraft gets the heavy end of the hammer but avoids costly and likely fruitless litigation.
From Roger's pov, everybody wins.
I understand your point but think/hope Brady and the NFLPA will not settle for any games missed and Roger has put himself in a position where vacating the suspension entirely is absolutely impossible for a PR standpoint, which is the only standpoint he really cares about.
See. You. In. Court.
See. You. In. Court.
I actually don't think it's a ridiculous theory. Goodell can reasonably save some face if he says, "I still believe something happened but I am confident Tom had nothing to do with this." That would allow him to leave the Patriots' penalty in place but look a bit magnanimous which heretofore has not been a quality associated with Goodell's leadership. The "look me in the eye" approach is also consistent with how he initially handled the Rice situation before the second tape came out.
I think it's possible especially when you consider that a lawsuit over something like this seems like a self-inflicted wound. It would also explain why Goodell and his minion lawyers are advising him to hear the appeal personally as it gives the NFL the most control over the outcome and ability to short circuit the process.
I think it's possible especially when you consider that a lawsuit over something like this seems like a self-inflicted wound. It would also explain why Goodell and his minion lawyers are advising him to hear the appeal personally as it gives the NFL the most control over the outcome and ability to short circuit the process.
