Yeah, that is what I was getting at.To turn public opinion against Brady as much as possible so Goodell's punishment of him would be accepted. When you're involved in carrying out a witch hunt you don't worry about methods, only results.
Yeah, that is what I was getting at.To turn public opinion against Brady as much as possible so Goodell's punishment of him would be accepted. When you're involved in carrying out a witch hunt you don't worry about methods, only results.
Absolutely, yes. That was the end game once the NFL realized it knew nothing about the ideal gas lawThat seems strange. Isn't is obvious that Goodell's motivations are to force the court to rule on his absolute power to implement any punishment he wants through his role as arbitrator regardless of the specific rules and punishments outlined in the CBA?
AKA the Eagles gameThis felt like taking a 20-0 lead into the half, only to see the other team get a kickoff return for TD to open the 2H, followed by a pick-6 and then a fumble recovered in the endzone on the ensuing play from scrimmage.
Not necessarily a bad sign. The solicitor general got batted around by the justices during the first ACA case before the SC.Well, sounds like it was pretty rough. Hard to tell from tweets without a transcript, but it certainly doesn't sound like Kessler had a dominating day.
And that would be correct.Isn't this where one of our resident lawyers says you can't read into the questions too much, even if Parker/Chin seemed more "pro-NFL" leaning today? Right?
Right!?
It gets said a lot, but it isn't my experience -- maybe in district court but not in the court of appeals. I usually know whether I'm going to win or lose. If it was bad, sometimes I convince myself that it wasn't as bad as I thought, but I'm rarely surprised. That said, I haven't practiced in the Second Circuit.Isn't this where one of our resident lawyers says you can't read into the questions too much, even if Parker/Chin seemed more "pro-NFL" leaning today? Right?
Right!?
I liked drleather's commentary better, so I'm just going to pretend his was the only reply.It gets said a lot, but it isn't my experience -- maybe in district court but not in the court of appeals. I usually know whether I'm going to win or lose. If it was bad, sometimes I convince myself that it wasn't as bad as I thought, but I'm rarely surprised. That said, I haven't practiced in the Second Circuit.
I've been the board pessimist on this pretty much from the beginning, so don't take me too seriously. I was really hoping for a Kessler victory lap today, but from one guy's twitter, it doesn't seem like that's what we got. Just have to wait and see.I liked drleather's commentary better, so I'm just going to pretend his was the only reply.
Matches Goodell's approach as arbitrator.I liked drleather's commentary better, so I'm just going to pretend his was the only reply.
Basically according to Hurley Clement put out that Brady lied about conversation with Jastremski, but we know from transcript that he didn't lie.
It's really up to the judges to dig into the record that Brady didn't lie otherwise Clement is stating he did (per I'm assuming Goodell's award letter)
It's going back to Berman on remand and we get to keep doing this, yay!Shit, this is going NFLs way isn't it?
This is pretty damn discouraging considering that the NFL admitted they had "no such direct evidence" before Judge Berman.Max Stendahl @MaxLaw360 8s9 seconds ago
Woah. Judge Chin says evidence of ball tampering was "compelling, if not overwhelming."
Right, but remember that even circumstantial evidence can be compelling. You can convict someone of murder without direct evidence.This is pretty damn discouraging considering that the NFL admitted they had "no such direct evidence" before Judge Berman.
No, they will just let the owners take more $$ from the pool. This is exactly what the owners want - the players now have to negotiate something they never should have had to, in exchange for $$. It is sickening, frankly. Just another reason why a lot of people are likely done with the NFL in the not so distant future.If Brady loses this case, guaranteed work stoppage is in the future for the NFL (already highly likely for other reasons) since Goodell will have carte blanche in regards to Article 46 as currently written, and I doubt the Union will like that going forward.
....and even worse ..going into the regular season with no clarity, and wondering when a 4 game suspension may start.I can't believe we're going to have another offseason of debating what side a court is going to come down on this case.
This is how Kessler's time ended. KESSLER: OK next one Katzmann: That's enough.
I agree though I would be in favor of a league wide player walk out in training camp if Brady comes down on the wrong end of this.If Brady loses this case, guaranteed work stoppage is in the future for the NFL (already highly likely for other reasons) since Goodell will have carte blanche in regards to Article 46 as currently written, and I doubt the Union will like that going forward.
Reminds me of that trial in Animal House.From Hurley's notes...
You guys realize that the average NFL career is now less than three years long, so how many of the fringe players will actually vote for a work stoppage?If Brady loses this case, guaranteed work stoppage is in the future for the NFL
I'm almost positive that reads worse than it sounds. Katzmann's not that type of fella.From Hurley's notes...
Most of the takeaways coming from lawyers in the room and on Twitter are that the NFLPA faced tougher legal questions overall and are now leaning toward reversal.How much of the hand-wringing can be chalked up to the fact that Kessler went last so his grilling is fresher in everyone's mind? Especially since the whole hearing was so quick
This.If the NFL wins the appeal and Brady gets suspended after all of this crap, I'd want Kraft to go rogue and sue the league. This is beyond ridiculous at this point.
If that's where we're headed, it's pretty sad that the league faced tougher factual questions that ultimately don't matter in the face of legal matters. And yes, I know facts have never mattered in this case, but it would suck to see it played out at this level.Most of the takeaways coming from lawyers in the room and on Twitter are that the NFLPA faced tougher legal questions overall and are now leaning toward reversal.
And it's not just factual matters. There was a prejudiced hearing and disciplinary process, which seems like it may not matter either.If that's where we're headed, it's pretty sad that the league faced tougher factual questions that ultimately don't matter in the face of legal matters. And yes, I know facts have never mattered in this case, but it would suck to see it played out at this level.
Goodell never having to answer for his outright lie about Brady's testimony and the mind-boggling jump from generally aware to active participant are particularly irksome.And it's not just factual matters. There was a prejudiced hearing and disciplinary process, which seems like it may not matter either.
Meanwhile, we end up on Kessler's side with things like:Judge Katzmann opens hearing by asking how NFL can justify penalty based on "new factual findings" after Wells report.
Judge Chin: Shouldn't Brady have been given notice re destroying cell phone?
NFL lawyer Clement: destruction of cell phone amounted to "out and out obstruction."
Judge Parker says some might call suspension "draconian." "Why is the inflation level so critical in these games?"
Parker questions whether you get "any advantage on the field" from under inflated footballs.
Judge Chin notes that first offenses for uniform and equipment violations result in fines. Clement: suspension was for "conduct detrimental"
Judge Katzmann: "As you know, stickum is prohibited..." Notes "gross disparity" between stickum penalty and Brady's punishment.
Katzmann: Could Goodell have suspended Brady for a year? Clement: Yes, though that would have been "excessive."
Katzmann says he can't find evidence in record that Brady's alleged gifts to ball boys were "inducements" to engage in scheme.
(Stendahl): That's it for Clement. Some TOUGH questions from the panel. Jeff Kessler up next for Brady.
I respect judges, but they are human. I find it completely plausible that one of them, after a full year of constant media bombardment about the Patriots and deflategate (in NYC, no less), has kind of just made up his mind (as 95% of the US population has). You live in an echo chamber with that stuff, and since the matter won't be decided on whether or not the balls were actually deflated, Chin has no motivation to dig into it. I mean, judges read the papers and yak around the water cooler, too, but that's not the stuff that this case is being decided on.Max Stendahl @MaxLaw360 8s9 seconds ago
Woah. Judge Chin says evidence of ball tampering was "compelling, if not overwhelming."
I am amazed that two learned men appear to have no understanding of science and the Ideal Gas Law.