It's hard to square that with Goodell saying (in
his letter to the NFLPA): "I did not delegate my disciplinary authority to Mr. Vincent; I concurred in his recommendation and authorized him to communicate to Mr. Brady the discipline imposed under my authority as Commissioner." Goodell has been pretty clear that he will consider new evidence and speak to Brady. If he decides the initial punishment was too severe, that means that he didn't levy the initial punishment, which is a violation of the CBA. So I think he's sticking to his guns absent new evidence.
I assume Brady doesn't have anything new, which makes the real question whether Goodell will consider the analysis of AEI et al to be relevant. The smart money is on him doubling down on the Wells report, with something like, "We understand that the science is complex, which is why we hired others to analyze it. We stand by their conclusions, which match the other evidence (texts, etc.)" Why open the can of worms that suggests he should re-visit the team penalties?
I just don't understand what incentive Goodell has to compromise here. Public opinion is squarely against the Patriots, regardless of the occasional Sally Jenkins or science professor that comes out against the Wells report. He hasn't been afraid of going to court in the past; why would he be afraid now? Then again, nothing about this whole saga has made any sense.