It was eight years ago. No one outside of New England is going to remember the exact details of it, other than BB was caught breaking the rules and was punished.
#DFG: Canceling the Noise
- Thread starter nattysez
- Start date
I don't disagree that it was awhile ago or that no one is going to give a crap more than N.E. fans, but that's a far cry from KNOWING WHAT IT WAS AT ALL. You're cutting allegedly knowledgable fans - and the media, who also don't know or willingly peddle misinformation - way too much slack.AB in DC said:
Edit: typo
They didn't know what it was a week or a month or a year after it happened/they were punished.AB in DC said:
Yeah, I really don't think it is a stretch to say that "Spygate" was the most overblown sports "scandal" in the last decade and that 99.9% of NFL fans have no idea what it is -- then, or now. And yet, it has single-handedly stained one of the best organizations in pro sports, so much so, that we are talking about the newest most overblown sports scandal potentially in history so far.Dahabenzapple2 said:
Prior to my invoking the Patriots 5th (KenTremendous quote) about this issue recently, not a single person was able to identify even remotely what Spygate was -- including other Patriots fans, and yet it is a large basis for their "they have a track record of cheating" meme that has convinced them that Brady hates babies.
He forgot: "And Goodell destroyed the tapes for his buddy Kraft so no one could ever see them!"Dahabenzapple2 said:
The Jets, Colts, Ravens and - to a slightly lesser extent - the Steelers are four of the biggest bellyaching sore loser franchises I've witnessed in my lifetime. And I don't mean just the fan bases, I mean the actual organizations, from management to coaches to players. And all of them have been like this over an extended period of time; even when there are changes in personnel the culture remains. It's ridiculous that they've escpaed public discussion of what insufferable whiners they all are, but I point it out to folks whenever I can.
Photo of Robert Kraft and Roger Goodell walking together yesterday in San Valley:
Also, Roger tells CNBC a decision is coming very soon.
Also, Roger tells CNBC a decision is coming very soon.
Good. Let's hope that Kraft's supposed friendship with and support of Goodell finally pays some dividends here.
The only outcomes that seem plausible to me are (a) a 1-2 game suspension with Brady agreeing not to sue or (b) no change in the suspension.
Kraft walking next to that piece of crap COULD signal that hey are talking about the former.
The only outcomes that seem plausible to me are (a) a 1-2 game suspension with Brady agreeing not to sue or (b) no change in the suspension.
Kraft walking next to that piece of crap COULD signal that hey are talking about the former.
This picture is a bad thing for the Brady. It brings back the specter that Kraft has influence. Goodell will feel like he must now react in the most irrational and demonstrative manner possible.
Everything about every decision in this entire sham has been PR driven. I have zero doubt that the NFL is sensitive enough that the reaction to a picture of Bob and Roger walking together will be considered and weighed as part of there next actions. Why am I so sure? Because NFL and irrational go hand in hand.
I am starting to think like a crazy person. Which is making the NFL office all make sense.
Everything about every decision in this entire sham has been PR driven. I have zero doubt that the NFL is sensitive enough that the reaction to a picture of Bob and Roger walking together will be considered and weighed as part of there next actions. Why am I so sure? Because NFL and irrational go hand in hand.
I am starting to think like a crazy person. Which is making the NFL office all make sense.
DrewDawg, I don't think the lines are that brightly drawn. Goodell could have made it clear to Kraft that he's only going to reduce the amount of games if Brady agrees not to sue. The intermediary between Goodell and Brady/NFLPA could be anyone and Kraft is a reasonably likely candidate given his interest in the outcome and his relationship with both Goodell and Brady.
Said differently, I don't see Kraft as a principal here. I see him as a potential facilitator.
Said differently, I don't see Kraft as a principal here. I see him as a potential facilitator.
That the appellate papers are either ready or substantially ready tells us little. Good lawyers prepare for all eventualities and it's not like Brady or the NFLPA is pinching pennies on the legal budget.
And it's indeed very possible, if not likely, that Brady will sue unless there is no suspension. Both Brady and the Union believe in principle and precedent, and both cannot be ignored given the preposterous and unprecedented suspension here.
But I disagree that it's a 100% certainty that Brady will sue if it gets knocked down to a game. I think one game is the point at which he will have to think very hard. On the one hand, one game is totally unjustified, makes winning harder for the Pats on that Sunday, has legacy implications for Tom and is generally pure BS. On the other hand, Brady's lawyers are telling him that the outcome in litigation is anything but certain and taking the one game de-risks the situation and allows him to focus exclusively on football. For a gym rat like Tom, that is not something you just ignore.
That's why it's binary in my view. Brady either gets a one game (or maybe two game) suspension with no litigation, as Goodell wont reduce it unless he knows Brady will not sue, OR it stays at four games.
And it's indeed very possible, if not likely, that Brady will sue unless there is no suspension. Both Brady and the Union believe in principle and precedent, and both cannot be ignored given the preposterous and unprecedented suspension here.
But I disagree that it's a 100% certainty that Brady will sue if it gets knocked down to a game. I think one game is the point at which he will have to think very hard. On the one hand, one game is totally unjustified, makes winning harder for the Pats on that Sunday, has legacy implications for Tom and is generally pure BS. On the other hand, Brady's lawyers are telling him that the outcome in litigation is anything but certain and taking the one game de-risks the situation and allows him to focus exclusively on football. For a gym rat like Tom, that is not something you just ignore.
That's why it's binary in my view. Brady either gets a one game (or maybe two game) suspension with no litigation, as Goodell wont reduce it unless he knows Brady will not sue, OR it stays at four games.
I disagree. This is only about Brady for Brady. Unlike Kraft and the Patriots who have other big picture things to think about and potentially compromise or relent on, to me, Brady doesn't. The guy did nothing wrong and is being penalized. He has been eviscerated in the media. His entire career's worth of accomplishment has been sullied. I would be absolutely STUNNED if Brady accepted a 1-game suspension. I also don't think he has much to lose if he sues -- worst case, the courts will uphold the penalty. You could argue that by the time the court case plays out the game could be more impactful or what not, but I think that is a risk that Brady should and deserves to take. Any capitulation by Brady to accept whatever final penalty that Goodell comes up with would be an acceptance of responsibility and admittance of guilt for something he didn't do. I just can't fathom Brady doing that for any reason.TheoShmeo said:
I see Brady suing regardless, and getting an injunction on the suspension pending the results...but I could see him dropping the lawsuit and accepting the appeal in, say, week 16 when the season is all wrapped up.
RGreeley33, You may be right but there are indeed reasons to make the deal.
The suspension could remain at four games. That is a "worst case" that is pretty bad. If your worry is his reputation, a four game suspension remaining on the books is a lot worse sounding than a one game negotiated solution. True, some people will take any suspension as a tacit admission of guilt but with time, a one game suspension, especially against the frequent 4-gamers for PEDs and pot, looks pretty tame.
It also costs him 4x as much, not that Tom and Wifey cannot absorb the financial hit. Still, money is money and everyone likes more of it.
Being suspended for four games also makes winning a Super Bowl more difficult this season, and anyone who has followed Tom knows how important winning is to him. I'm not suggesting anything noble here or that Tom is thinking beyond himself. Brady wants to win for Brady, and there's nothing wrong with that.
And a deal enables him to put this entire mess behind him and focus on the already difficult task at hand of getting ready for another season. Anyone who has ever been involved in litigation on any level knows how attractive finality is when you are in the middle of a potentially protracted fight.
Again, you may be right that Tom will not accept ANY deal with a suspension. That would seem to be very consistent with Brady's personality and who could blame him for fighting to the finish?
But I think it's naïve to believe that he's not at least considering his options in the event that Goodell goes down to one game (and maybe even two). I KNOW one thing. His lawyers and confidants are urging him to at least consider accepting that kind of deal...it there is a reasonable possibility that it exists.
Another wrinkle in all of this is that I bet Goodell wants some kind of admission of guilt if he goes down to 1-2 and I could see that being a deal breaker.
Last: The notion that Kraft and Goodell were not discussing DG as at least part of their conversation is laughable.
The suspension could remain at four games. That is a "worst case" that is pretty bad. If your worry is his reputation, a four game suspension remaining on the books is a lot worse sounding than a one game negotiated solution. True, some people will take any suspension as a tacit admission of guilt but with time, a one game suspension, especially against the frequent 4-gamers for PEDs and pot, looks pretty tame.
It also costs him 4x as much, not that Tom and Wifey cannot absorb the financial hit. Still, money is money and everyone likes more of it.
Being suspended for four games also makes winning a Super Bowl more difficult this season, and anyone who has followed Tom knows how important winning is to him. I'm not suggesting anything noble here or that Tom is thinking beyond himself. Brady wants to win for Brady, and there's nothing wrong with that.
And a deal enables him to put this entire mess behind him and focus on the already difficult task at hand of getting ready for another season. Anyone who has ever been involved in litigation on any level knows how attractive finality is when you are in the middle of a potentially protracted fight.
Again, you may be right that Tom will not accept ANY deal with a suspension. That would seem to be very consistent with Brady's personality and who could blame him for fighting to the finish?
But I think it's naïve to believe that he's not at least considering his options in the event that Goodell goes down to one game (and maybe even two). I KNOW one thing. His lawyers and confidants are urging him to at least consider accepting that kind of deal...it there is a reasonable possibility that it exists.
Another wrinkle in all of this is that I bet Goodell wants some kind of admission of guilt if he goes down to 1-2 and I could see that being a deal breaker.
Last: The notion that Kraft and Goodell were not discussing DG as at least part of their conversation is laughable.
TheoShmeo said:
As we have discussed many times, a legal appeal by Brady likely means that he won't serve any games this season, because if a court agrees to hear the appeal they will issue a temporary injunction until the process is completed.
As to the bolded, it defies credibility to believe that Jeffrey Kessler is urging Brady to consider accepting a reduction in suspension in exchange for dropping a legal appeal.
If indeed Brady is 100% innocent (which I believe), and if Goodell has some idea that the whole investigation was botched by the NFL and Wells, the power that Brady has in going to the public with his story has to weigh into this full equation given that the P.R. is all that Goodell cares about. I think everyone can agree that this entire thing from the start has been about Goodell restoring credibility in the public's eye ... if/when Brady starts talking, the media outlets will pay very close attention. Half or more will continue vilifying him as a cheat, but at some point I have to believe the general sports media outside of ESPN (a la Sally Jenkins) will start capturing the imagination of the general news outlets beyond that aren't in the tank for the NFL. Goodell has something real to lose there that seems to me is more than losing in federal court, which feels like a foregone conclusion. If Scheffer's sources are correct and Brady came out as very genuine and presuming Goodell paid attention and Brady was making sense to him .... what's it worth to Goodell for Brady NOT to sit on a couch with an Oprah-type and personally explain his side of the story, point by point? That to me is the biggest piece of ammunition that Brady has that Goodell will care about.
Or that he would drop the lawsuit, and accept the suspension, if a time during the season comes when he is somewhat dinged up where a week of rest might be the prudent thing physically.bsj said:
Average Reds, I know we have discussed the timing aspects many times but you are assuming too much.
Litigation by Brady and the NFLPA means that him sitting out games 1-4 is highly unlikely, I agree. The court process runs slowly and unpredictably and I think your assumption of the court knocking out the suspension during the pendency of the litigation is a good one. But you don't remotely know when it will end. It could, as you are apparently assuming, extend beyond the end of the season and the playoffs. But that is no guaranty. It depends on a lot of factors and it's possible that the process ends in November, for example. That's ANOTHER reason for Tom to consider taking a deal if he is offered a one game/no litigation deal by Goodell. Four games in November/December is worse, arguably, than four in September. Does anyone know if the penalty can be imposed in the playoffs?
As to Kessler, it defies credibility to think that his lawyer is NOT urging Tom to consider all of his options, one of which is to take a deal if one is offered. Good lawyers discuss ALL of the options and run through all of the potential and likely outcomes, and the pros and cons of each, with their clients. Good lawyers do not take options off the table. I think we can assume that Kessler is a good lawyer.
I don't know if your pronouncement comes from a view that Kessler will be operating out of his own self-interest in not suggesting that Tom at least consider doing a deal that trades a game for no litigation. If you are, I think that's nonsense. Kessler doesn't have to even favor that option, and he could present it in a way that encourages Tom not to take it. But Kessler and others are sure as hell going through the entire menu with Tom.
To be clear, I have no idea if that trade is on the menu. Goodell could be nowhere near a deal like that. But if he is, and if it has been messaged to Tom and the NFLPA as one of the options, someone on Tom's side has at least gone through the pros and cons of it with him very carefully.
Litigation by Brady and the NFLPA means that him sitting out games 1-4 is highly unlikely, I agree. The court process runs slowly and unpredictably and I think your assumption of the court knocking out the suspension during the pendency of the litigation is a good one. But you don't remotely know when it will end. It could, as you are apparently assuming, extend beyond the end of the season and the playoffs. But that is no guaranty. It depends on a lot of factors and it's possible that the process ends in November, for example. That's ANOTHER reason for Tom to consider taking a deal if he is offered a one game/no litigation deal by Goodell. Four games in November/December is worse, arguably, than four in September. Does anyone know if the penalty can be imposed in the playoffs?
As to Kessler, it defies credibility to think that his lawyer is NOT urging Tom to consider all of his options, one of which is to take a deal if one is offered. Good lawyers discuss ALL of the options and run through all of the potential and likely outcomes, and the pros and cons of each, with their clients. Good lawyers do not take options off the table. I think we can assume that Kessler is a good lawyer.
I don't know if your pronouncement comes from a view that Kessler will be operating out of his own self-interest in not suggesting that Tom at least consider doing a deal that trades a game for no litigation. If you are, I think that's nonsense. Kessler doesn't have to even favor that option, and he could present it in a way that encourages Tom not to take it. But Kessler and others are sure as hell going through the entire menu with Tom.
To be clear, I have no idea if that trade is on the menu. Goodell could be nowhere near a deal like that. But if he is, and if it has been messaged to Tom and the NFLPA as one of the options, someone on Tom's side has at least gone through the pros and cons of it with him very carefully.
Throughout this whole debacle, every announcement/decision/report, etc. has turned out worse than I hoped or expected. To that end, I predict Rog will reduce the suspension to 2 games and Brady will accept it.
Discussing settlement possibilities and encouraging a client to consider settlement are two different things. If the client has a reasonable objective (for example, protecting his reputation by refusing to accept a penalty), and he understands the risks of proceeding, there's no reason you have to encourage him to settle. You just have to make sure he understands the full range of options and the risks/rewards that they entail.
I am not particularly worried about TB serving a suspension late this season. I think it more likely that he loses at the outset or that he prevails for this season with the ultimate resolution delayed beyond season's end. If I am wrong, I would note that games at the beginning counts as much as those at the end. I do not believe a suspension would carry into the playoffs.
In any case, this is what I think TB owes Bob Kraft, the NEPs, his teammates and the fans on this matter: nothing. After 4 trophies, uninterrupted excellence, and team friendly contracts, he owes none of us a goddamn thing.
Wait until the douchebaggery breaks out on sports talk radio. It's likely to be epic.
In any case, this is what I think TB owes Bob Kraft, the NEPs, his teammates and the fans on this matter: nothing. After 4 trophies, uninterrupted excellence, and team friendly contracts, he owes none of us a goddamn thing.
Wait until the douchebaggery breaks out on sports talk radio. It's likely to be epic.
I am 100% OK as a Pats fan with Tom Brady turning down some deal to reduce the suspension (I think its not likely this is actually happening, but lets assume so), taking this to court, losing, and missing playoff games if that's how the timing works out.
AFAIK, this penalty could 100% be imposed for playoff games, but whatever, is what it is. If it comes to it, let the league go full farce by affecting playoff games then win the whole fucking thing anyways.
AFAIK, this penalty could 100% be imposed for playoff games, but whatever, is what it is. If it comes to it, let the league go full farce by affecting playoff games then win the whole fucking thing anyways.
TheoShmeo said:
If reports are to be believed, Kessler was retained by Brady specifically to litigate this case. Not to see the NFL-mandated appeals process through, but to use federal labor law to challenge the authority of Goodell to impose a single-track disciplinary process in court. If true, it would be a logical absurdity for Kessler to turn around and urge Brady to seriously consider dropping everything in exchange for a reduced suspension, since that decision has already been made. (It logically precedes the decision to bring Kessler in.)
This doesn't mean that Brady can't change his mind. But having been brought in for a specific purpose, Kessler's obligation is to see the strategy through, not to argue against the explicit wishes of the client who hired him.
dcmissle said:
The bolded sums it up for me.
If we assume Brady did nothing improper, the only thing that should matter to him is complete vindication. And again, the conversations about the options have happened long ago and Brady should already know his next step under any circumstances.
Earlier you said "I KNOW one thing. His lawyers and confidants are urging him to at least consider accepting that kind of deal". You've backtracked a bit now saying that Kessler is a good lawyer and a good lawyer will have their client "consider all of their options". These two aren't the same. Not even close. I agree with the second, but not at all with the first. I think that was Average Reds point.TheoShmeo said:
Marc, my intent was not to get too caught up in the extent to which anyone will encourage Tom to settle. The real point is that if Tom has a "1 or 2 game suspension with no litigation" option, Kessler and others on his team will make sure Tom fully considers the pros and cons of doing the deal. The extent to which Kessler advocates for any result in particular will depend on Kessler's own predilections and view of the strength of the legal option (among other things), the strength of Kessler and Brady's relationship and the extent to which Tom is the kind of client who takes advice. In short, there are too many variables for us to really know how much Kessler is going to be advocating anything. What I was trying to convey, and maybe did not do so clearly, is that I seriously doubt that if Tom has that kind of option, that it's being summarily rejected.
DC, games count the same amount at any time, of course. But if the Pats are in the thick of the race in November, I think human nature would make it tougher to sit out then as opposed to games early on when there's a lot more season on the horizon. Did anyone suggest that Tom owes us anything here? Not that it matters. Tom will do what Tom perceives to be in Tom's best interests. Nothing more, nothing less.
DC, games count the same amount at any time, of course. But if the Pats are in the thick of the race in November, I think human nature would make it tougher to sit out then as opposed to games early on when there's a lot more season on the horizon. Did anyone suggest that Tom owes us anything here? Not that it matters. Tom will do what Tom perceives to be in Tom's best interests. Nothing more, nothing less.
Big Red, there isn't much daylight between me knowing that they are urging Tom to consider that kind of deal and what I said about good lawyers having their clients consider all of their options. In fact, there is no daylight.
No matter, the point remains the same. Brady's side will ensure that he considers all of his options. If he is inclined to summarily reject it, someone on his side -- his lawyers, his friend, Giselle, or a combo -- will prevail upon him to consider the pros and cons. I don't think this is a controversial point.
Average Reds, any lawyer who is hired to litigate is not actually hired for so narrow a mandate. Lawyers are hired to be advisors, counselors and litigators, all in one. Almost every good litigator is also good at settling cases and helping clients to get there. That doesn't mean that they want to settle or think it's a good idea in every case. But no lawyer's mandate is so narrow as to be a one trick litigation pony. Kessler's job is to prepare for litigation, explain the risks, handicap the odds of success, counsel his client and litigate or settle.
I don't know a single lawyer who has tried a case or argued in front of a court or tribunal of any kind who has not discussed settlement options with his client at some point between inception and getting on his feet to argue and often thereafter before the ruling. What Tom owes us is a red herring. I agree, he owes Pats fans nothing.
No matter, the point remains the same. Brady's side will ensure that he considers all of his options. If he is inclined to summarily reject it, someone on his side -- his lawyers, his friend, Giselle, or a combo -- will prevail upon him to consider the pros and cons. I don't think this is a controversial point.
Average Reds, any lawyer who is hired to litigate is not actually hired for so narrow a mandate. Lawyers are hired to be advisors, counselors and litigators, all in one. Almost every good litigator is also good at settling cases and helping clients to get there. That doesn't mean that they want to settle or think it's a good idea in every case. But no lawyer's mandate is so narrow as to be a one trick litigation pony. Kessler's job is to prepare for litigation, explain the risks, handicap the odds of success, counsel his client and litigate or settle.
I don't know a single lawyer who has tried a case or argued in front of a court or tribunal of any kind who has not discussed settlement options with his client at some point between inception and getting on his feet to argue and often thereafter before the ruling. What Tom owes us is a red herring. I agree, he owes Pats fans nothing.
I don't understand why he would ever accept a reduction with a promise not to take it to court? Wouldn't Kessler see that and immediately think the NFL knows it's fucked and is trying to save face and prevent even more dirt about what a farce this has been from leaking out? I'm at the point where I want him to take this as far as it'll go. I understood Kraft's reasoning for backing down but Brady has nothing to lose here by going as far as it takes to clear his name.
TheoShmeo said:
That's not what I'm saying. I'm saying that if reports are to be believed, that discussion occurred at the time Kessler was hired.
Probably the biggest issue I have with the entire topic is that I don't accept the premise of a contingent offer. My recollection is that one or more of the lawyers here already indicated that Goodell cannot make a reduction in Brady's suspension contingent on Brady agreeing not to challenge it. He has to rule one way or another on the case and then Brady decides whether to accep that ruling or not. But even if this was wrong, I don't see any logic in Brady even considering such an offer.
A contingent offer would be an incredible show of weakness on the part of Goodell. If I were Brady and (this is very important) I was absolutely innocent, such an offer would only harden my resolve to see it through to the end. Any other course of action feels like letting Goodell off the hook.
It's not that Brady shouldn't consider all of his option. I just can't believe that he hasn't already discussed these options with his lawyers, the NFLPA, his advisers and Kessler back in May and their path is now set.
Allstonite, Tom would do it for the reasons I mentioned earlier and IF he thought that the only way he could get a negotiated reduction at this time would be with the agreement not to fight in court.
I also think Brady and Kessler would see that from Goodell's perspective, reducing the sentence only to see Tom still litigate is sub optimal PR wise.
Not that it's impossible and I can see the other side of that too. Goodell: "I was being fair and Tom is STILL appealing."
But having Tom turn it down and litigating does, I think, make Goodell look a bit weak. He would have met Tom halfway -- so to speak and from his twisted perspective -- only to have Brady spurn him.
Make no mistake, I am not predicting that Tom will settle. My guess is that he will fight any suspension in court and there will be no reduction in the penalty.
I also think Brady and Kessler would see that from Goodell's perspective, reducing the sentence only to see Tom still litigate is sub optimal PR wise.
Not that it's impossible and I can see the other side of that too. Goodell: "I was being fair and Tom is STILL appealing."
But having Tom turn it down and litigating does, I think, make Goodell look a bit weak. He would have met Tom halfway -- so to speak and from his twisted perspective -- only to have Brady spurn him.
Make no mistake, I am not predicting that Tom will settle. My guess is that he will fight any suspension in court and there will be no reduction in the penalty.
There's what is best for Brady and the Patriots and then there is what Brady has to do as a member of the NFLPA. At this point they are not necessarily the same. There may be very good reasons why it would make sense to "settle" on a one or two game suspension for both Brady and the team, but the NFLPA may want to push this to appeal and there may be strong reasons for Brady, as a loyal union member, to go along with them (beyond his belief that he did nothing against the rules).
Likewise, Brady not turning over his phone to me proved nothing other than the fact that NFLPA doesn't feel that the NFL has a right to players' phones and Brady wasn't going to go against the union even if his text messages were harmless.
Edit: in fact, I would say it is likely that Kraft's and Brady's interests and strategies on this matter are not exactly aligned right now.
Likewise, Brady not turning over his phone to me proved nothing other than the fact that NFLPA doesn't feel that the NFL has a right to players' phones and Brady wasn't going to go against the union even if his text messages were harmless.
Edit: in fact, I would say it is likely that Kraft's and Brady's interests and strategies on this matter are not exactly aligned right now.
Average Reds, I think the contingent offer gets conveyed privately and likely not directly.
To me, the time to discuss that offer was between the hearing and the ruling. In other words, now. That's the time for RG to be able to say that he considered it all, and he's prepared to reduce it to X but only if Tom agrees not to fight.
To be clear, this is not something that I think would be done publicly and "officially". And if a deal got done, it would be presented as an agreed solution...there would be no discussion of how the offer was first presented to Tom. The result would be a reduction to X and no more litigation, but we would not hear that Tom could have only had that deal if he so agreed. At least, not until that gets leaked down the road.
To me, the time to discuss that offer was between the hearing and the ruling. In other words, now. That's the time for RG to be able to say that he considered it all, and he's prepared to reduce it to X but only if Tom agrees not to fight.
To be clear, this is not something that I think would be done publicly and "officially". And if a deal got done, it would be presented as an agreed solution...there would be no discussion of how the offer was first presented to Tom. The result would be a reduction to X and no more litigation, but we would not hear that Tom could have only had that deal if he so agreed. At least, not until that gets leaked down the road.
allstonite said:
What he has to lose is that he loses in court AND ends up sitting 4 games.
Average Reds said:
When litigants start to take it personally like that ",I'll show him!!!!", they make decisions for the wriong reasons. If there's some sort of backchannel 1 game offer, "letting Goodell of the hook" is likely to be far down the list of reasons to reject it. At least that's what a good lawyer would tell him.
It is possible - maybe even likely -- that such discussions between Brady and Kessler took place in May. But this is July. It's one thing to say at the beginning of a case, "no way no how." It's another, when the check for 75% of your demand is placed on the table TODAY, to walk away, even if you think you have a 95% chance of getting 100% down the road. An actual offer is a change in the dynamic. None of us knows what's in Brady's head. But no matter what Brady told Kessler in May, he is duty-bound to relay any settlement offers, even if he has no authority to negotiate (per his client).
Ultimately, though, I doubt there will be any negotiations. And since Goodell probably thinks Brady is going to court no matter what, he'll just leave it at 4 games, otherwise he faces the prospect of reducing the suspension to 1 game AND getting dragged into court.
joe dokes said:
I understand that this can be a tone-deaf medium, so it's clear to me that I'm not communicating well. I say this because I was not meaning to imply that there would be anything personal about the analysis. When I said that a contingent offer would be a sign of weakness, I meant that in terms of the strength of Goodell's case, not anything personal.
As to the bolded, I have been involved in litigation before (as a client) and fully understand Kessler's obligations. I just don't believe that there will be any contingent offer presented to Brady because it doesn't make sense to me.
Let me ask this - if Goodell did make such an offer, couldn't the offer itself (and any communications between the parties) be used as evidence of the arbitrary nature of the NFL's disciplinary process in court?
I'm all for trying to screw Roger and the NFL but I'm getting to the point that I just don't give a shit anymore. At this point, I feel like he should just take the 1 or 2 games if offered and get this whole shitshow over with. It's dragging on forever.
Attention span? This has been going on since January. It's now July 9th. It's gone on almost 6 months.kartvelo said:
joe dokes said:
That is true. I like his chances and I personally would want him to risk serving the 4 just to try and shove it in Roger's face but I guess I see the argument.
But I don't even think this would be an option, at least publicly. Would we ever even hear about a conditional reduction like this? I don't think we'll here on ESPN "Suspension reduced to 2 games contingent on Brady not fighting anymore" Wouldn't that be just as bad PR for Roger? Isn't the next logical question by everyone "why doesn't Roger want him to fight?" If this were to happen behind the scenes I have to think Yee would run not walk to the media saying "Roger wants us to drop the appeal he must be hiding something"
I feel totally opposite. Brady will always be branded a cheater if he accepts 1 or 2 games unless it is made very clear in the decision that the NFL believes that, after an exhaustive review of the Wells report and the rebuttals, that there is no evidence that Brady had any knowledge of intentional deflation of the footballs, but nevertheless we are suspending him for noncooperation. That result would be idiotic, but the NFL front office is run by the King of idiots. It is at that point where I think Brady could tell Kessler: "You know what, I really don't give a shit about the NFLPA principal of not having to share phone records per the CBA, etc. I'll take the 1 game (2 games) b/c there's no finding I did anything wrong with those footballs."RedOctober3829 said:
Now for clarity's sake, 90% of all fans outside of NE will still accuse Brady of cheating, because he accepted a reduced penalty. We'll live with that forever (even if he gets the suspension totally vacated). It is about those fans that I truly do not give a shit about. And neither should Brady
As for the picture of Kraft with Goodell....as a fan, it makes me sick.
Average Reds, The settlement offer would not be used as evidence against Goodell or the NFL for a number of reasons. One, if one is made, it would likely be floated by an intermediary rather than made directly by Goodell. Two, even if that was not the case, Federal Rule of Evidence 408 (and there are state law analogs) makes such offers inadmissible. Now it's true that FRE 408 may not be applicable yet in that there is no pending litigation, but if the NFL had its finger prints on an offer, it would likely be said orally or in writing (if there was a writing) that the offer is not admissible under FRE 408 and analogous state law, etc. Attorneys rarely try to introduce offers as indicators of guilty or liability, and most judges will shut that down right away.
I don't know why that contingent offer doesn't make sense to you (or anyone else). In Goodell's shoes, if I was inclined to reduce Brady's sentence, the last thing I would want would be for Brady to still fight me in Court. AND I would rather end this embarrassing part of their history now than allow it to fester, if I possibly could. AND, much more importantly, unless I had my head firmly up my ass (a definite possibility), I would realize that there is a better than 0% possibility of things going very badly in court.
I don't know why that contingent offer doesn't make sense to you (or anyone else). In Goodell's shoes, if I was inclined to reduce Brady's sentence, the last thing I would want would be for Brady to still fight me in Court. AND I would rather end this embarrassing part of their history now than allow it to fester, if I possibly could. AND, much more importantly, unless I had my head firmly up my ass (a definite possibility), I would realize that there is a better than 0% possibility of things going very badly in court.
Bleedred said:
I want nothing but vacated or court now, this has been a complete embarrassment by the league and a clear agenda driven smear job on one of it's top athletes. There is 0% of me that wants this to continue on and on as it's obnoxious, however at this point I'm 100% in the if Brady did nothing take it all the way camp. Anything other than that will ding his legacy, and he needs to be in full Brand preservation mode. In short I don't care if Brady get's this to be in the legal system for the next 2 years and all punishment is held pending the courts findings. Bring on all the circus and BS, I have a good supply of beer and popcorn and want to see the NFL tarred and feathered for the handling of this and I hope all their internal records(at least those that haven't already been destroyed) get exposed in court.
How can the NFL make a truly back-door offer to Brady offering a reduced suspension? If it's really off the books, what's to stop Brady from "accepting" behind the scenes, getting the reduced penalty, and taking the NFL to court anyways? The NFL wouldn't even be able to call him on it publicly.
With the railroading Brady's gotten, why would the NFL think he'll play nice with them?
With the railroading Brady's gotten, why would the NFL think he'll play nice with them?
I've got a couple of logistical legal questions.
A logistical question around the suit, if he does indeed sue is there any chance the case is finalized during the season? Reason being, say the suspension isnt changed, Brady sues, they get the court ruling in mid November and they rule against Brady, then I'm assuming he would have to immediately serve his suspension and that really blows for this team. Now I'm not sure if Brady would even go for this, but would it be possible for him to sue and serve his suspension at the start of the season and ultimately all he would get in court would possibly be the exoneration but it doesnt completely screw up our season in Nov/Dec.
An alternative question, is there anyway that Kessler can drag this out so that the ruling wont ever come down during the season. Take my example above if they get the ruling in November, is there any way for him to appeal thus delaying the suspension and then in March they could just drop it and accept the ruling?
A logistical question around the suit, if he does indeed sue is there any chance the case is finalized during the season? Reason being, say the suspension isnt changed, Brady sues, they get the court ruling in mid November and they rule against Brady, then I'm assuming he would have to immediately serve his suspension and that really blows for this team. Now I'm not sure if Brady would even go for this, but would it be possible for him to sue and serve his suspension at the start of the season and ultimately all he would get in court would possibly be the exoneration but it doesnt completely screw up our season in Nov/Dec.
An alternative question, is there anyway that Kessler can drag this out so that the ruling wont ever come down during the season. Take my example above if they get the ruling in November, is there any way for him to appeal thus delaying the suspension and then in March they could just drop it and accept the ruling?
Unlikely. With some extremely rare exception, the Federal Rules of Evidence make settlement offers inadmissible in civil litigation.Average Reds said:
People settle cases for a million reasons. Sometimes its because they have crappy cases. Sometimes its just to END. IT. NOW. If Goodell made that sort of back-channel offer, yes, I suppose its some indication that Goodell thinks he has a chance at losing later. And, as I'm sure Kessler has explained to him, Brady also has a chance to lose later. Goodell might be inclined to resolve this before the season so it's no longer part of the NFL conversation.