#DFG: Canceling the Noise
- Thread starter nattysez
- Start date
WTF are Brady/NFLPA waiting for? Lawyers, is there some sound tactical reason for letting the league get out in front on everything that my lay-man's mind doesn't grasp?
Mooch said:
How? The league probably filed suit at the exact same time they upheld the suspension.
cornwalls@6 said:
The NFL had its complaint already drawn up and ready to file when it released the opinion. It was literally a matter of pushing a button. There's no way around the league filing first if it wants to.
Where are they going to file it?
The vast majority of federal courts in the US have no personal jurisdiction over TB, an indispensable party to the case. He can he subject to process in Massachusetts, where he lives, or Minnesota (per the union agreement). So far as I know, no place else.
The vast majority of federal courts in the US have no personal jurisdiction over TB, an indispensable party to the case. He can he subject to process in Massachusetts, where he lives, or Minnesota (per the union agreement). So far as I know, no place else.
wibi said:
It is not clear this is a good idea; I also fail to see the relevance of it to Brady's situation. You and coworkers have a lot of different motivations (including protecting yourself from false accusations, showing what you were instructed, etc.) than Brady would. What do see you as the connection?
Wouldn't that also mean that the NFL couldn't file until they had issued the ruling?DrewDawg said:
wibi said:
I mean, isn't it fairly easy to understand why mega celebs would do this? Again, for me, it's the timing that's a major issue. However, if there was never any Deflategate and I found out that Brady cycles through phones and destroys SIM cards, would I blink an eye? No, it seems pretty smart, actually. I'd probably do the same thing in his position.
Wait, it may have been a matter of a minute or two, but why didn't the NFLPA already have their appeal ready to go as well?WayBackVazquez said:
To this point it hasn't been filed yet (as far as we know) which does appear to be a major blunder.
So the whole thing was a set up? They had this strategy to pre-empt the NFLPA all along and had the advantage to get all of their legal ducks lined up, release the ruling, then file suit immediately after?
Anyone who thinks the NFL doesn't have it in for Brady and Pats is fucking crazy.
Anyone who thinks the NFL doesn't have it in for Brady and Pats is fucking crazy.
HomeBrew1901 said:
NFL had its document teed up (as it controlled timing of decision release). NFPLA had no time to prep a substantive document and file.
I cannot believe even NFL would be this dumb, but:
@McCannSportsLaw: If NFL is wrong about Brady destroying his cell phone, it would likely be defamation per se. Even as public figure, Brady could win lawsuit.
@McCannSportsLaw: If NFL is wrong about Brady destroying his cell phone, it would likely be defamation per se. Even as public figure, Brady could win lawsuit.
Mooch said:
It's unclear it will be successful--Doty, certainly, will not be amused by this.
Also, while Doty is a great forum for this, there are also SDNY judges I am sure will not be impressed by the NFL and will rule on the merits; this is not the minor leagues
If there is a binding agreement that directs these cases to Doty, I would think that trumps all.dcmissle said:
Jim Trotter @JimTrotter_NFL 2m2 minutes ago
Tom Brady has authorized the NFLPA to appeal his case in federal court, per source.
Tom Brady has authorized the NFLPA to appeal his case in federal court, per source.
PedroKsBambino said:
My point was that its not as common to destroy cellular phones (or SIM cards) as people want to believe it is.
Even if I'm Tom Brady why dont I just take the phone and put it into a safe instead of destroying it ... especially if I'm under investigation from the NFL.
Eddie Jurak said:
The nfl said that Brady's team represented he destroyed the cell phone, didn't they?
Gotcha. And thanks. As aside, this fucking league is seeming more and more like organized crime to me. I've generally rolled my eyes at the posts that claim to be finished with it because of this entire, laughable, shit storm. I'm now honestly starting to wonder how much longer I want to support this crap with my time and money.WayBackVazquez said:
Well, then is the best news I’ve received all day. Thanks, DC. I hope this is the case.dcmissle said:
HomeBrew1901 said:
Thnk about what you just wrote? I know it's hard becuase the radio hasn't explained it to you yet. But really try to think about it.
Yes, it would have to be some sort of blatant misinterpretation of that.PedroKsBambino said:
It is very obvious that this verdict that came down today, Goodell could have made the day after the appeal hearing if he didn't believe the science.This five week delay was all about them preparing their 20 page report to take to court.
wibi said:
The arguments people made were about a celebrity and why he is unique in this regard.
When he has no obligation to keep his phone, it's really hard to argue he should do something more burdensome than he did, I think.
wibi said:
What's the motivation for a celebrity to keep their SIM card in a safe, as opposed to destroying it? If it's just conversational material and some nude pics, why keep it? The under investigation part is obviously the problem here, I just don't understand what's so unbelievable about any celeb trashing a SIM.
The NFL has never, ever handled a situation like this before. If this was simply about the truth and the integrity of the game, they'd be handling it in a normal fashion. If it was about the "integrity of the game" in the beginning, it sure as hell isn't anymore. And it's absolutely transparent.
Eddie Jurak said:
That makes McCann's comment ridiculous doesn't it? Happy to hear I'm the one missing something, but I suspect this is another example of McCann not really fully understanding what is going on
It's still important to note that there's still no evidence of deflation or Brady ordering deflation or Brady aware of it. The NFL is treating the fact that they cannot find said evidence as evidence.
That's fucked up. "We can't find it, so you must be hiding it."
Think about that. I'd say it's akin to the old "When did you stop beating your wife" but that's a little too on the nose for the NFL.
That's fucked up. "We can't find it, so you must be hiding it."
Think about that. I'd say it's akin to the old "When did you stop beating your wife" but that's a little too on the nose for the NFL.
The NFL is trying to paint Brady as Stringer Bell with the phone paranoia. At this point, I don't even give a shit if Brady put a needle to those footballs and deflated them himself, they have crossed every line imaginable to drag the man's name through the dirt.
Is it possible that the response and filing occurred simultaneously? Only the NFL knew when the report would be released so I'm not sure how the NFLPA could have been better prepared.Mooch said:
dcmissle said:
SDNY. NFLPA--not Brady--appears to be the defendant. No idea if that flies jurisdictionally.
I enjoyed this at the end of Section II, page 5, where RG notes how his experience informs his decision making: "I have drawn upon my experience of more than thirty years with the National Football League, including nearly nine years as Commissioner."
As I said, it was filed in SDNY, and Brady is not named as a party.dcmissle said:
I assume Akin Gump's associates did research that says an employee is not an indispensable party in the Second Circuit. Quick googling says that's the case in the Fourth. “An individual employee represented by a union . . . generally does not have standing to challenge, modify, or confirm an arbitration award because he was not a party to the arbitration.” Bryant v. Bell Atl. Maryland, Inc., 288 F.3d 124, 131 (4th Cir. 2002).