I was hoping capitalizing NO and using way too many ? would be the giveaway.....dcmissle said:I hope you are in touch with your ironic side.
I was hoping capitalizing NO and using way too many ? would be the giveaway.....dcmissle said:I hope you are in touch with your ironic side.
It probably is right to guess that Union lawyers are just having some fun with League lawyers. And that they believe what they are saying and are doing this reporter a favor in the process.Omar's Wacky Neighbor said:Would it be way wrong to guess that Stephen Brown from the NYDN has bought enough people in that building a cup of coffee to get a quick "Psssst, you may wanna hit F5 over the next few minutes..." ?
Corsi said:
What is objectionable about what they told to Anderson? Not like Berman's going to be like " Those bastards restating their case and citing my history I'm siding with the NFL over this." Don't think it makes any difference at all.DennyDoyle'sBoil said:
FFS. Whomever is in the "Brady Camp" talking to Anderson should really give some serious consideration to shutting up.
Yee has been a bit of a weak link here. Maybe it's he.
dcmissle said:It probably is right to guess that Union lawyers are just having some fun with League lawyers. And that they believe what they are saying and are doing this reporter a favor in the process.
DennyDoyle'sBoil said:
Yee has been a bit of a weak link here. Maybe it's he.
jimbobim said:What is objectionable about what they told to Anderson? Not like Berman's going to be like " Those bastards restating their case and citing my history I'm siding with the NFL over this." Don't think it makes any difference at all.
jimbobim said:What is objectionable about what they told to Anderson?
I think all four of our arguments are strong. It would not surprise me if we win on all four. It's not like we have a really good one and then the other ones are not so good. It’s one of the reasons why I think we have such a good chance of winning because we only have to win on one of the four, but I think they are all very good.
Yee might be the smartest guy in the room. Having Brady destroy his phone as soon as Wells indicated it wouldn't make a difference was genius. He rightly anticipated that the NFL would use the phone issue as justifying Brady's punishment, and that if the punishment were overturned in court, the fact that the phone couldn't be un-destroyed would mean that the NFL wouldn't just get a do-over. He outsmarted Wells and read Goodell like a book. This was all intentional.DennyDoyle'sBoil said:
FFS. Whomever is in the "Brady Camp" talking to Anderson should really give some serious consideration to shutting up.
Yee has been a bit of a weak link here. Maybe it's he.
That is at least a plausible outcome.SeoulSoxFan said:
Well, now it's settled.
@BillSimmons My Deflategate prediction: Brady gets off, NFL vows appeal, Goodell slowly distances himself (makes Pash/Vincent fall guys), appeal dropped.
@BillSimmons PS: Goodell's out is "I wouldn't have handled this so poorly if the people underneath me didn't fail me." Easily leakable to media cronies.
If this case ends with Pash getting pushed out, forget Brady, Goodell and discipline-- if Pash was a hardliner in the CBA negotiation, pushing him out will likely be worth the cost of litigation to the NFLPA.SeoulSoxFan said:Well, now it's settled.
@BillSimmons My Deflategate prediction: Brady gets off, NFL vows appeal, Goodell slowly distances himself (makes Pash/Vincent fall guys), appeal dropped.
@BillSimmons PS: Goodell's out is "I wouldn't have handled this so poorly if the people underneath me didn't fail me." Easily leakable to media cronies.
SeoulSoxFan said:
Well, now it's settled.
@BillSimmons My Deflategate prediction: Brady gets off, NFL vows appeal, Goodell slowly distances himself (makes Pash/Vincent fall guys), appeal dropped.
@BillSimmons PS: Goodell's out is "I wouldn't have handled this so poorly if the people underneath me didn't fail me." Easily leakable to media cronies.
SeoulSoxFan said:
Well, now it's settled.
@BillSimmons My Deflategate prediction: Brady gets off, NFL vows appeal, Goodell slowly distances himself (makes Pash/Vincent fall guys), appeal dropped.
@BillSimmons PS: Goodell's out is "I wouldn't have handled this so poorly if the people underneath me didn't fail me." Easily leakable to media cronies.
The owners just saw one of their own called before a judge. I think that may work to convince some of the owners that a hardline stance may not be the path of least resistance.Harry Hooper said:
Seems like the only way the NFL would drop the appeal is if Goodell is besieged by owners telling him to end all this. That doesn't seem likely to me since the story will be starved for oxygen in the coming months as the appeal process will take considerable time to evolve.
MetSox1 said:The owners just saw one of their own called before a judge. I think that may work to convince some of the owners that a hardline stance may not be the path of least resistance.
DennyDoyle'sBoil said:So Berman is effectively taking non-oath, eyewitness testimony on a specific issue raised by the NFLPA in its complaint in chambers in the context of settlement discussions?
This is really something. I wonder if there was a court reporter there. I also wonder if the parties have been objecting to any of this stuff to set up an argument for appeal.
Mr. Hicks (aka Baghdad Bob), please write a tell-all; pretty please with Kensil tears on top.soxhop411 said:
ProFootballTalk @ProFootballTalk 40m40 minutes ago
P.R. chief Paul Hicks leaves the NFL, and the news emerges on the same day a #DeflateGate ruling is expected http://wp.me/p14QSB-9Q4a
E5 Yaz said:
Bob Kravitz @bkravitz Aug 31
I believe the NFL has once again miscalculated by failing to reach an agreement with Brady. Won't be surprised if it's vacated. IMO
ifmanis5 said:Mr. Hicks (aka Baghdad Bob), please write a tell-all; pretty please with Kensil tears on top.
DavidTai said:
It sounds more like a question towards 'rule of shop', as to how the NFL has handled similar situations in the past was answered.
crystalline said:If this case ends with Pash getting pushed out, forget Brady, Goodell and discipline-- if Pash was a hardliner in the CBA negotiation, pushing him out will likely be worth the cost of litigation to the NFLPA.
More like he's leaving North Korea to join China.SeoulSoxFan said:
Well, he's joining the firm that's been doing the PR for the NFL, so it's like Baghdad Bob moving from bunker 1 to bunker 2.
@ProFootballTalk: After years of letting gloves get stickier right under its nose, NFL may now look at whether they're too sticky http://t.co/DLGhYi2Q7R
@StephStradley: Best way to handle this is to pick one star WR, do a $$$ investigation of his gloves, and then suspend him 4 games. https://t.co/qLtcLKm6U4
Still think it's getting affirmed? I suppose it could be for some explosive dicta, but I think the plain reason is more likely.DennyDoyle said:So Berman is effectively taking non-oath, eyewitness testimony on a specific issue raised by the NFLPA in its complaint in chambers in the context of settlement discussions?
This is really something. I wonder if there was a court reporter there. I also wonder if the parties have been objecting to any of this stuff to set up an argument for appeal.
Van Everyman said:A bit off topic but something to amuse us while our thumbs get tired hitting refresh:
Harry Hooper said:
Hard to see owners being relevant to an appeals court considering whether Judge Berman acted appropriately in vacating arbiter Goodell's decision. I can be convinced otherwise, however.
Ed Hillel said:Still think it's getting affirmed? I suppose it could be for some explosive dicta, but I think the plain reason is more likely.
Average Reds said:
The owners opinions aren't relevant to the court once the case is filed. But they are the ones who will decide whether to appeal or not.
Right. But I think the comment is more getting at the fact that the owners' decision won't be affected by fear that some of them may get called into court if they appeal.Average Reds said:
The owners opinions aren't relevant to the court once the case is filed. But they are the ones who will decide whether to appeal or not.
DennyDoyle'sBoil said:Fuck, I don't want to be the poster child on the "thinks it's getting confirmed" side of this thing.
DennyDoyle'sBoil said:
Fuck, I don't want to be the poster child on the "thinks it's getting confirmed" side of this thing.
tims4wins said:Man, I am going into a meeting in 1 minute, this is definitely going to drop sometime in the next hour or two isn't it
This part always confused me a bit. The rule is that when a player is taken out of a baseball game he can't come back in. We all agree to that. So if a manager takes out a relief pitcher, then that guy goes in the dugout, puts on a crappy fake beard, crosses his number out with marker and writes another one in it's place then comes back in claiming that his name is not, in fact, Joe but it's Jose can the manager then say, hey, we all agreed to the rules, I'm allowed to put this "new" guy in? What is the tipping point when it comes to being a shitbag as an arbiter? One lie? Ten? What about when the whole case is made up?DennyDoyle'sBoil said:
Fuck, I don't want to be the poster child on the "thinks it's getting confirmed" side of this thing.
My position is pretty simple. I want very much to believe that Berman's comments, and the way they've been reported, is an indication of which way he is leaning. But my approach to all that is the approach I took while lying in bed at night on December 24 -- hope, don't expect. But if the reports of the hardline position the NFL has been taking are true, an equally plausible way to interpret what has happened to date is that Berman saw them as the recalcitrant party in settlement and wanted to work them over harder and put public pressure on them.
In the end, on the merits, the NFL starts on third base, and that's a problem. I think the NFL has way overstated its case -- claiming that the NFLPA agreed to a non-neutral arbitrator and trying to equate industrial customs and law of the shop with mere precedent. But while I disagree with both of those arguments, the NFLPA's argument that the change from general awareness to a more active participation finding is equivalent to what happened in Peterson just isn't sitting well with me. And, though the NFL dramatically overstates it, and Kessler did a masterful job at crafting arguments to avoid it, that the NFLPA agreed to let Goodell sit does present some problems.
Harry Hooper said:
Yes, but the claim being made is owners would tell Goodell to drop the appeal because the owners were afraid of being dragged personally into the appeals court process. I don't think that's likely, and it's more likely they'd be dragged in under a Brady appeal. Yet to date the NFL has not settled = owners are not scared
OnWisc said:Right. But I think the comment is more getting at the fact that the owners' decision won't be affected by fear that some of them may get called into court if they appeal.
pedroia'sboys said:What would be the latest this would be announced? 4?