#DFG: Canceling the Noise

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


  • Total voters
    208

Average Reds

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 24, 2007
35,413
Southwestern CT
The presence of Mara ensures entertainment if nothing else.
 
My guess (and it is most certainly a wild-ass guess) is that Berman may want to hear from Mara himself why he did not accept the Judge's suggestion that he become part of the negotiations. 
 

Mooch

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
4,535
If the rumors that Mara (and a few other powerful owners) are pressing Goodell to refrain from settling, Berman's request to have Mara attend could signal that he is about to rule against the NFL and is giving the NFL powerbrokers one last chance to save face here.
 

Stitch01

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
18,155
Boston
"Hey John, Roger here is telling me he's having a hard time settling this because owners want him to take a hard line here because the integrity of the game is so important. Ive read your public comments that you are sick of deflategate and want this to go away. Your instincts are correct, you want this to go away. The Patriots have already lost a first round pick here, so they aren't going unscathed right? Talk with Roger. Get this over with today. I don't think anyone is going to be happy if I have to rule, especially the NFL"
 

dcmissle

Deflatigator
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Aug 4, 2005
28,269
If a judge wants you there, you go. You may have good reasons why you cannot negotiate on behalf of the NFL, but you cannot duck going to at least lay those reasons out.

These owners are not used to this. Their teams earn at least 100 x what Berman earns. They are worth probably 1000 x what Berman is worth.

None of that matters. The judge has the hammer. This is lovely in every imaginable way.
 

RG33

Certain Class of Poster
SoSH Member
Nov 28, 2005
7,224
CA
Stitch01 said:
"Hey John, Roger here is telling me he's having a hard time settling this because owners want him to take a hard line here because the integrity of the game is so important. Ive read your public comments that you are sick of deflategate and want this to go away. Your instincts are correct, you want this to go away. The Patriots have already lost a first round pick here, so they aren't going unscathed right? Talk with Roger. Get this over with today. I don't think anyone is going to be happy if I have to rule, especially the NFL"
Why would the NFLPA settle if he said this though?
 

Average Reds

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 24, 2007
35,413
Southwestern CT
dcmissle said:
If a judge wants you there, you go. You may have good reasons why you cannot negotiate on behalf of the NFL, but you cannot duck going to at least lay those reasons out.

These owners are not used to this. Their teams earn at least 100 x what Berman earns. They are worth probably 1000 x what Berman is worth.

None of that matters. The judge has the hammer. This is lovely in every imaginable way.
 
This was said far more elegantly than my post. 
 

Valek123

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 13, 2005
982
Upper Valley
RedOctober3829 said:
Is Mara's presence any way bad for the NFLPA?
 
The logical side of my brain says no, but the way this entire thing has unfolded completely against everything that I believe follows the logical conclusion I can only imagine how this will go badly.  I half expect Judge Berman to uphold the suspension, then peel off his mask revealing Arlen Specter back from the dead who then proceeds to run around high fiving Mara, Rog, Vincent and all.
 
In short get your popcorn ready...
 

Jed Zeppelin

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 23, 2008
51,502
RedOctober3829 said:
Is Mara's presence any way bad for the NFLPA?
The last time the league really didn't want something that got out there was when the transcripts went public and they were badly exposed. Hoping this goes the same way.
 

twothousandone

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jan 18, 2001
3,976
Berman knows the process and penalty are a sham, and unjust, but believes his hands are tied, legally. He's pushing so hard for a settlement because he believes it will be more "just" than the legally correct decision he is going to make in the absence of a settlement.
 

Average Reds

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 24, 2007
35,413
Southwestern CT
twothousandone said:
Berman knows the process and penalty are a sham, and unjust, but believes his hands are tied, legally. He's pushing so hard for a settlement because he believes it will be more "just" than the legally correct decision he is going to make in the absence of a settlement.
 
Lester?  Is that you?
 

Jed Zeppelin

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 23, 2008
51,502
twothousandone said:
Berman knows the process and penalty are a sham, and unjust, but believes his hands are tied, legally. He's pushing so hard for a settlement because he believes it will be more "just" than the legally correct decision he is going to make in the absence of a settlement.
Or he's pushing so hard for a settlement because that would end it immediately and never bring it back to court, which would be inevitable following a ruling.
 

Hoya81

Member
SoSH Member
Feb 3, 2010
8,494
twothousandone said:
Berman knows the process and penalty are a sham, and unjust, but believes his hands are tied, legally. He's pushing so hard for a settlement because he believes it will be more "just" than the legally correct decision he is going to make in the absence of a settlement.
I think he wants a settlement because without one, this is going to clog up the appeals court docket for years.
 

DennyDoyle'sBoil

Found no thrill on Blueberry Hill
SoSH Member
Sep 9, 2008
42,848
AZ
Best guess is that Mara is there so that Berman can put more pressure on Goodell.  Here's a possible scenario -- at some point in the settlement discussions to date, the judge was leaning heavily on the NFL and Goodell and they did what you sometimes do when a mediator is putting you under pressure.  They pointed the finger to try to suggest the decision wasn't completely theirs alone -- "I have owners to answer to, your honor."  So, Berman says, fine, let's hear from them.  And now he gets one of them to say, in Roger's presence -- "your honor, we've delegated this power to the commissioner and so I have no role to play to here, plus I'm an interested party because my team could theoretically benefit from a Brady suspension.  So we'll support whatever the commissioner does."  
 
So, that's all Berman really wants or needs.  Now, he's stripped away Goodell's defense that "I have owners to answer to" and can say, "you hear Mr. Mara -- you have complete authority to settle here, don't give me the 'have to answer to the owners' answer anymore."
 
Today should be interesting and give us something in the way of tea leaves one way or the other.  NFLPA has been pretty low key about an injunction, but they're really at the point where they are close to needing one, and so either Berman should give some indication of how he's likely to rule or he'll have to do at least some analysis of "likely success on the merits" in order to decide whether an injunction is necessary.  
 

Eddie Jurak

canderson-lite
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 12, 2002
44,672
Melrose, MA
twothousandone said:
Berman knows the process and penalty are a sham, and unjust, but believes his hands are tied, legally. He's pushing so hard for a settlement because he believes it will be more "just" than the legally correct decision he is going to make in the absence of a settlement.
if Berman upholds, isn't he, in effect, saying that Article 46 gives Goodell the right to haul any player before him, suspend that player for any length of time based on any real or merely imagined offense, and then uphold his own suspension on appeal?

I think upholding creates a far more damning precedent and I can't imagine Berman going that far.
 

mwonow

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 4, 2005
7,124
dcmissle said:
If a judge wants you there, you go. You may have good reasons why you cannot negotiate on behalf of the NFL, but you cannot duck going to at least lay those reasons out.

These owners are not used to this. Their teams earn at least 100 x what Berman earns. They are worth probably 1000 x what Berman is worth.

None of that matters. The judge has the hammer. This is lovely in every imaginable way.
 
Thanks, DC - made my morning.
 
Mara's presence at least explains that shit-eating Newsday piece about how the NFL is poised to win but might consider settling anyway...they are trying to spin Mara's appearance as smething that they're doing out of the kindness of their hearts, rather than as something that the judge insisted upon.
 
I have to believe that Mara - despite his ongoing role as defender of the sheriff/rat in the background - is highly unamused by this turn of events. If the judge hints that he and more of his cronies might be drawn into the case, I'd guess that "settlement" is going to look like a preferred option...
 

MarcSullivaFan

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 21, 2005
3,412
Hoo-hoo-hoo hoosier land.
DennyDoyle'sBoil said:
Best guess is that Mara is there so that Berman can put more pressure on Goodell.  Here's a possible scenario -- at some point in the settlement discussions to date, the judge was leaning heavily on the NFL and Goodell and they did what you sometimes do when a mediator is putting you under pressure.  They pointed the finger to try to suggest the decision wasn't completely theirs alone -- "I have owners to answer to, your honor."  So, Berman says, fine, let's hear from them.  And now he gets one of them to say, in Roger's presence -- "your honor, we've delegated this power to the commissioner and so I have no role to play to here, plus I'm an interested party because my team could theoretically benefit from a Brady suspension.  So we'll support whatever the commissioner does."  
 
So, that's all Berman really wants or needs.  Now, he's stripped away Goodell's defense that "I have owners to answer to" and can say, "you hear Mr. Mara -- you have complete authority to settle here, don't give me the 'have to answer to the owners' answer anymore."
 
Today should be interesting and give us something in the way of tea leaves one way or the other.  NFLPA has been pretty low key about an injunction, but they're really at the point where they are close to needing one, and so either Berman should give some indication of how he's likely to rule or he'll have to do at least some analysis of "likely success on the merits" in order to decide whether an injunction is necessary.  
He said at the last hearing that he'd rule by the 4th if no settlement. He left himself an out (I'm the judge so I can change my mind), but I don't see why he wouldn't be able to rule by then. He can always rule and then issue the opinion later.
 

loshjott

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 30, 2004
14,987
Silver Spring, MD
Average Reds said:
The presence of Mara ensures entertainment if nothing else.
 
My guess (and it is most certainly a wild-ass guess) is that Berman may want to hear from Mara himself why he did not accept the Judge's suggestion that he become part of the negotiations. 
 
Or maybe the judge wants to upgrade his Giants season tickets.
 

edmunddantes

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 28, 2015
4,737
Cali
It is nice to finally see the NFL run into someone that has more power than them, and isn't cowed by their nature.
 
"We respectfully decline to Mr. Mara involved"
 
<Judge glares>
 
"He will be here on Monday"
 

DJnVa

Dorito Dawg
SoSH Member
Dec 16, 2010
54,053
RGREELEY33 said:
Why would the NFLPA settle if he said this though?
 
Depends on the terms. No suspension, just a fine, and you settle and move on. You weigh that against maybe a win with Berman but an NFL appeal.
 
 

bankshot1

Member
SoSH Member
Feb 12, 2003
24,760
where I was last at
DennyDoyle'sBoil said:
Best guess is that Mara is there so that Berman can put more pressure on Goodell.  Here's a possible scenario -- at some point in the settlement discussions to date, the judge was leaning heavily on the NFL and Goodell and they did what you sometimes do when a mediator is putting you under pressure.  They pointed the finger to try to suggest the decision wasn't completely theirs alone -- "I have owners to answer to, your honor."  So, Berman says, fine, let's hear from them.  And now he gets one of them to say, in Roger's presence -- "your honor, we've delegated this power to the commissioner and so I have no role to play to here, plus I'm an interested party because my team could theoretically benefit from a Brady suspension.  So we'll support whatever the commissioner does."  
 
So, that's all Berman really wants or needs.  Now, he's stripped away Goodell's defense that "I have owners to answer to" and can say, "you hear Mr. Mara -- you have complete authority to settle here, don't give me the 'have to answer to the owners' answer anymore."
 
Today should be interesting and give us something in the way of tea leaves one way or the other.  NFLPA has been pretty low key about an injunction, but they're really at the point where they are close to needing one, and so either Berman should give some indication of how he's likely to rule or he'll have to do at least some analysis of "likely success on the merits" in order to decide whether an injunction is necessary.  
If Berman rules against NFLPA, and upholds the award, isn't it unlikely he would then issue an injunction for Brady (in essence saying his ruling is likely to be overturned)?
 
Second question: If Berman does not issue an injunction, whats the pecking order for Brady to get one, does it have to be a senior Judge/court to Berman or could any Federal Judge issue the injunction?
 

DennyDoyle'sBoil

Found no thrill on Blueberry Hill
SoSH Member
Sep 9, 2008
42,848
AZ
MarcSullivaFan said:
He said at the last hearing that he'd rule by the 4th if no settlement. He left himself an out (I'm the judge so I can change my mind), but I don't see why he wouldn't be able to rule by then. He can always rule and then issue the opinion later.
 
I read it as much more equivocal than you did.  "But one prerogative of being the judge is you can't hold me to it necessarily," is what he said.  I interpreted this as judge speak for, "I'll do what I can, but I'll do whatever I want," and "we may need to discuss an injunction after all," and "if I think settlement talks are progressing, I'm not going to rule if it would hinder them."
 

DennyDoyle'sBoil

Found no thrill on Blueberry Hill
SoSH Member
Sep 9, 2008
42,848
AZ
bankshot1 said:
If Berman rules against NFLPA, and upholds the award, isn't it unlikely he would then issue an injunction for Brady (in essence saying his ruling is likely to be overturned)?
 
Second question: If Berman does not issue an injunction, whats the pecking order for Brady to get one, does it have to be a senior Judge/court to Berman or could any Federal Judge issue the injunction?
 
Even if he rules for the NFL, he could still issue an injunction pending appeal if he thinks the case is close -- that the appeal presents a substantial question and there is irreperable harm.  
 
If he declines an injunction, only the second circuit or supreme court could issue one.
 

teddykgb

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 16, 2005
11,068
Chelmsford, MA
I think the hard part about considering a settlement from the NFLPA's perspective would be the possibility of defeating the NFL in a different court.  Beating up on the NFL in a 2nd court under a different judge (in a venue the NFL essentially selected) would be very powerful and start to establish a track record that would make future NFL cases endure even more scrutiny.  Even if the previous decisions have been narrow -- largely focusing on what are honestly repairable procedural issues (even if the NFL can't seem to properly repair them) -- you start to notice a pattern of judges really not enjoying the NFL's version of justice.
 
To accept a settlement would of course remove the risk of the inverse of this happening, which is why they'd consider it.  But if they think they're going to win this you'd have to think they'd be salivating at the prospect of two wins in two different courts under two judges, which would remove the idea that Doty was just out for them previously.
 

dcmissle

Deflatigator
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Aug 4, 2005
28,269
MarcSullivaFan said:
He said at the last hearing that he'd rule by the 4th if no settlement. He left himself an out (I'm the judge so I can change my mind), but I don't see why he wouldn't be able to rule by then. He can always rule and then issue the opinion later.
If he needs more time, the PI will issue. It may be as simple as Berman saying, "I need more time, please move for a PI". Kessler does so, then Berman turns to Nash and says, "you don't have a problem with that, do you?"

If Nash gives any answer other than a quick "no", he may as well light himself on fire. Entitlement to a PI in these circumstances is not fairly debatable.
 

OnWisc

Microcosmic
SoSH Member
Apr 16, 2006
6,908
Chicago, IL
Given how certain owners are claiming they just want Deflategate to go away, I just can't imagine that they'd even consider an appeal in the case the NFLPA prevails.

But seriously, how concerned should Mara be here? I mean, if the description of how Goodell turned down Berman's request to get Mara involved is actually true, and Mara hasn't had lengthy discussions behind the scenes to maintain a hard line with Brady, then I don't think there's much to worry about. But if his conflict of interest protestation doesn't hold water, or if he turned down Berman's request himself and just told the league to claim they did it unilaterally, I'd be a little unsettled on how to proceed if Berman asked a few uncomfortable questions. He's not going to be under oath, but an answer given to a judge's question probably needs to have a lot more truth to it than something leaked to Mortensen.
 

DennyDoyle'sBoil

Found no thrill on Blueberry Hill
SoSH Member
Sep 9, 2008
42,848
AZ
dcmissle said:
If he needs more time, the PI will issue. It may be as simple as Berman saying, "I need more time, please move for a PI". Keasler does so, then Berman turns to Nash and says, "you don't have a problem with that, so you?"

If Nash gives any answer other than a quick "no", he may as well light himself on fire. Entitlement to a OI in these circumstances is not fairly debatable.
 
Right -- though I think his style is probably such that instead of asking for a motion, he would simply state he could not rule by the 4th, or wants to keep settlement talks going so will hold off from ruling, and then ask the parties whether they will agree to hold off on the suspension to allow that to happen.  I would think Kessler at that point would agree, but would probably want some ground rules -- about how much notice the team would team would have when it gets lifted, etc.  But I think you're right about what happens next -- if the league says "no, we're not willing to do that," at that point, the Judge probably says, "Mr. Kessler do you have a motion"?
 

DennyDoyle'sBoil

Found no thrill on Blueberry Hill
SoSH Member
Sep 9, 2008
42,848
AZ
OilCanShotTupac said:
 
That's funny, but it's terrible that this poor woman took any abuse.
 
It's really bizarre that anyone cared.
 
The reality if you're a courtroom sketch artist, though, is that you probably would like to stay out of the news as much as possible.  Because every time people see courtroom sketches -- good, bad, accurate, not accurate -- you run the risk they will start asking, "why the hell can't we have cameras in court again?"  And that's not a question you want in her profession.
 

dstunbound

New Member
Nov 21, 2005
24
Stephen Brown ‏@PPVSRB  20s20 seconds ago
Final push by both sides yields no settlement in#deflategate case. Berman to rule in next day or two.
 

natpastime162

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
2,958
Pennsylvania
mwonow said:
Shorter: Spygate was in 2007.
 
PLEASE GET OVER IT NOW. There are enemies enough at today's gate without rehashing past injustices.
 
Yes, Spygate started the Cheatriots meme, yada yada. Enough. Rehashing why the Pats are seen as cheaters doesn't add any new context to the discussion. Lamenting the fact that "even motivated observers (such as Pats fans) can get certain parts of Spygate wrong years later" restates the obvious without moving anything forward.
 
Please, turn the page now, or start another thread about how unfair it is that past injustices aren't seen in the cold light of logic. It's 2015. This thread is about a different injustice. Tomorrow, we get (hopefully) more evidence that Goodell is a lying sack of sh*t. Let's please focus the rant here on the problems with #Framegate and the board-wide desire to see Berman feed RG a very-well-deserved public spanking.
 
I made a 6 word comment in response to someone else.  I'm not lamenting, ranting, or rehashing anything, nor do I appreciate being used as a launching pad to do the same.
 

edmunddantes

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 28, 2015
4,737
Cali
Damn. No ruling from the bench.
 
That would have made this epic.
 
Now, just keep fingers crossed, and hope this doesn't take a final twist away from Brady.
 

DJnVa

Dorito Dawg
SoSH Member
Dec 16, 2010
54,053
So, if he's saying he may issue ruling today, his mind is made up right? In that case, do we lean back on that last transcript?
 

DJnVa

Dorito Dawg
SoSH Member
Dec 16, 2010
54,053
jsinger121 said:
Sticking point per 98.5 via Sal Pal is the NFL still wants Brady to admit guilt. 
 
I love this.
 
Even if Brady loses with Berman he doesn't admit guilt. Yet, for a settlement, the NFL wants him to go above and beyond.
 

dcmissle

Deflatigator
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Aug 4, 2005
28,269
I think his mind has been made up for some time, and the opinion has been in the works for several weeks.

One outcome or another, I expect the ruling sooner than later. Tom Brady did not waste his time, and I expect Judge Berman to return the courtesy.