They could have waited until August to drop this decision, and that would not have been a lot of time as these appeals go. So the panel was responsible from that standpoint.There's a chance this happens. That is, of course, a far cry from "its best for the long-term" which is what the original post (not yours) argued and the most likely outcome is Jimmy G pretty much sucks in those four games.
The original post also said the Pats don't need Brady to go 3-1 or 2-2. Honestly, if I could sign up for 1-3 with a division win right now I would. Team could go 2-2 or 3-1....but going 0-4 while burning three home games and all but killing the season is in play.
Calm down, for crying out loud. Belichick went 11-5 with Matt Cassell at the helm. I think he's got this.There's a chance this happens. That is, of course, a far cry from "its best for the long-term" which is what the original post (not yours) argued and the most likely outcome is Jimmy G pretty much sucks in those four games.
The original post also said the Pats don't need Brady to go 3-1 or 2-2. Honestly, if I could sign up for 1-3 with a division win right now I would. Team could go 2-2 or 3-1....but going 0-4 while burning three home games and all but killing the season is in play.
Welcome to the machine.What I find amazing is that the interpretation of the law can be so different between these judges, with the senior judge voicing a different viewpoint than the other two.
As others noted, the national narrative has changed in interesting ways here---I honestly don't know a single fan of another team with a three-digit IQ who actually believes Brady cheated at this point. All that is left saying that are mouth-breathers and NFL apologists who feel they 'have' to say he did something (while not really believing it)...this second group has a lot of media members.The fact that fans of other teams are like "fuck, we have in week x (after the suspension)" tells you immediately that they know he didn't cheat.
I think they were ruling based on whether or not Brady knowingly or unknowingly participated in the deflating of game balls. The appeal was pretty clear that their job was not to determine whether or not Brady was innocent or guilty, but whether or not he was given a suspension and appeal process within guidelines of the CBA. He was.If it were that simple and clear-cut, all four judges who heard the case would have agreed. But Katzmann and Berman clearly thought otherwise.
Right, and as selfish as that is to say considering the team has a lesser chance of winning these games, I'm glad for it.As others noted, the national narrative has changed in interesting ways here---I honestly don't know a single fan of another team with a three-digit IQ who actually believes Brady cheated at this point. All that is left saying that are mouth-breathers and NFL apologists who feel they 'have' to say he did something (while not really believing it)...this second group has a lot of media members.
None of this gets the 4 games back, but probably means the long-term impact of this on his legacy is close to zero
In the time that this has hung over his and the team's head they've won one Super Bowl and made it to the AFC title game the next year. I'd say it seems to distract us a lot more than the team.The options are letting this hang over Brady and the team for another season in exchange for a minuscule chance of this decision being overturned..
If anything, this case has been a great introduction to the way the legal system works.What I find amazing is that the interpretation of the law can be so different between these judges, with the senior judge voicing a different viewpoint than the other two.
I get hat the odds are long but if you're Brady and the NFLPA you need to keep trying. Two reasons. First, because Brady is totally being railroaded here. And second, because this now sets the legal precedent that the commissioner can totally screw NFL players at will. And the NFLPA cannot have that.Effectively, none
I'll have to read it, but the Chief Judge dissenting in a two-to-one is unusual. That said:
1. The Second Circuit almost never rehears a case before the full Court -- what's called a rehearing en banc.
2. As things stand right now, this is not particularly worthy of Supreme Court review, which is a long shot in any case.
It's probably time to move on.
I predict that narrative will gain a lot of steam in the wake of this decision. Whether the people uttering it will have IQs over 99 is another question but now that the Second Circuit has ruled against Tom, it will add fuel to the Tom as Cheater narrative for opportunists and those who just subscribe to "where there's smoke, there's fire."As others noted, the national narrative has changed in interesting ways here---I honestly don't know a single fan of another team with a three-digit IQ who actually believes Brady cheated at this point. All that is left saying that are mouth-breathers and NFL apologists who feel they 'have' to say he did something (while not really believing it)...this second group has a lot of media members.
None of this gets the 4 games back, but probably means the long-term impact of this on his legacy is close to zero
All four judges were ruling on the same issue(s) about the CBA.I think they were ruling based on whether or not Brady knowingly or unknowingly participated in the deflating of game balls. The appeal was pretty clear that their job was not to determine whether or not Brady was innocent or guilty, but whether or not he was given a suspension and appeal process within guidelines of the CBA. He was.
Goodell is judge, jury, and executioner. That's the bottom line. It doesn't change until the next CBA comes up.
Mad-libs, just one more thing the NFL sucks at.
None, so long as Tom doesn't invest a lot of emotional energy in this. We're likely to get two one-sentence orders barring a lightning strike:I get hat the odds are long but if you're Brady and the NFLPA you need to keep trying. Two reasons. First, because Brady is totally being railroaded here. And second, because this now sets the legal precedent that the commissioner can totally screw NFL players at will. And the NFLPA cannot have that.
Money is not a problem here so they should just keep trying every possible option. What's the downside at this point?
It's all water under the bridge now, but, no, he didn't get a suspension and appeal process within the guidelines of the CBA, see Katzmann's dissent.I think they were ruling based on whether or not Brady knowingly or unknowingly participated in the deflating of game balls. The appeal was pretty clear that their job was not to determine whether or not Brady was innocent or guilty, but whether or not he was given a suspension and appeal process within guidelines of the CBA. He was.
Paul Hornung was suspended for an entire year and is in the HoF.thanks.. I was certain Ray Lewis was suspended, but Google showed otherwise.. and I forgot about Irvin.
Honestly have no idea why you quoted me here.They could have waited until August to drop this decision, and that would not have been a lot of time as these appeals go. So the panel was responsible from that standpoint.
In addition to the media cycle, this timing is best because the Pats have 4 months plus to focus on those first four games. And the NFL schedule makers certainly could have been harder on us those first four than they were.
If he had to sit this year, it unfolded as well for us as it could have.
Now that it looks about 95-98 percent likely that he will have to sit for 4 games, I think you have to start thinking pretty strategically. Let's say he petitions for cert and gets a stay, and the Supreme Court denies in November and he has to start serving the suspension then?In the time that this has hung over his and the team's head they've won one Super Bowl and made it to the AFC title game the next year. I'd say it seems to distract us a lot more than the team.
Now, once he starts sitting out games, that all changes of course.
Nope. The players will fold, like they always do. Average career expectancy of 3-4 years will have them in a perpetual position of weakness against the fat, old, rich guys who own the teams and won't feel an ounce of pain from a strike.The next round of CBA negotiations ought to be a hoot.
Paul Hornung and Alex Karras were both suspended for the entire 1963 season for betting on games; both later made the HOF.Will TB be the only player that served a suspension voted into the NFL Hall of Fame?
The downside would be Brady getting his appeal stayed and having the stay end in January.I get hat the odds are long but if you're Brady and the NFLPA you need to keep trying. Two reasons. First, because Brady is totally being railroaded here. And second, because this now sets the legal precedent that the commissioner can totally screw NFL players at will. And the NFLPA cannot have that.
Money is not a problem here so they should just keep trying every possible option. What's the downside at this point?
Two things:I do suspect the NFLPA will revisit this issue by or before the next CBA; players who are paying attention are going to be asking them why they agreed to this deal starting right about...now.
We've moved on to the practicalities.Honestly have no idea why you quoted me here.
This was well doneI'd sight Bush v Gore in the cert petition.
Make sure you yell "Land Ho!" when you sight it.I'd sight Bush v Gore in the cert petition.
That's a pretty good summary for the entire mess.He was targeted and deliberately fucked over by the league because 1) 31 owners wanted it to be that way and 2) the lone dissenting owner was just peachy with NFL abuse of power... So long as it was directed at other teams and players.
Karras isn't in the Hall of Fame.Paul Hornung and Alex Karras were both suspended for the entire 1963 season for betting on games; both later made the HOF.
Huh? I think the Pats have a very good team this year with Brady playing, so Id take 1-3 with tiebreakers not dead and go from there. I think people here are being a little too casual about what having a total wild card at quarterback for four games means, the expectation should not be "well the Pats will probably go 2-2 or 3-1". Particularly with @ Arizona as the opener.Calm down, for crying out loud. Belichick went 11-5 with Matt Cassell at the helm. I think he's got this.
I'm a fan of another team and I have a three digit IQ. All I can say is that I don't know what Brady did or didn't do. He might have done it, might not have. However, to punish a player, there should be a standard of proof and whatever the threshold is, it was clearly not met here. You should not be able to punish a player because they might have done something, you need to prove it within a reasonable doubt. That certainly did not happen here. There is not a single piece of tangible evidence to prove that Brady asked for those balls to be deflated (if in fact they were even deflated).As others noted, the national narrative has changed in interesting ways here---I honestly don't know a single fan of another team with a three-digit IQ who actually believes Brady cheated at this point. All that is left saying that are mouth-breathers and NFL apologists who feel they 'have' to say he did something (while not really believing it)...this second group has a lot of media members.
None of this gets the 4 games back, but probably means the long-term impact of this on his legacy is close to zero
Would this really be a downside? I for one would LOVE to see a situation where the Pats are 12-3 or whatever and then the stay ends, and Brady is suspended for week 17 + the next 3 games. Imagine the public outcry if the NFL tried to force him to miss playoff games. Talk about an impact on the integrity of the game. It would be a shitshow. I'd love it.The downside would be Brady getting his appeal stayed and having the stay end in January.
The NFL has already begun discussions with NFLPA on this issue (according to a bunch of reports) so I think your 1 is just not correct. I don't know that they'll reach a deal, but there are a lot more reasons for NFL to explore this than you seem to think. At least some parts of NFL leadership recognize this is an issue that can generate concessions on things the league cares more about, and they need to evaluate whether they do best playing that card now or in the next CBA negotiations; just saying "ha ha, you're stuck with it now!" is not how serious entities handle labor negotiations, even when run by clowns like Goodell.Two things:
1. The NFLPA might revisit this before this CBA expires, but their partner, the NFL, won't. This works for them in both parts: it gives Goodell unquestioned, legally reinforced authority to render discipline with no recourse for players, so long as Vincent "issues" the initial discipline. Then, when the CBA expires, as others have pointed out, the NFL may give in to PA demands for a truly neutral arbitrator to hear appeals, but at the cost of something the PA doesn't want. And that's assuming...
2. Who knows if the players are paying attention in high enough numbers to move the needle towards arbitration reform for the next CBA? And will the momentum that those few players gain for arbitration change be enough to keep it on the front burner in 5 years? Too many members of the NFLPA live day-to-day with contracts that disappear once you're cut. Only a minority of the PA's membership would have the stomach to fight out a lockout/strike that costs games, and how many of them will care that Brady got hosed in 2016 by the system?
You'd love him being suspended for the playoffs on the hope that there is public outcry making RG look bad. Umm....Would this really be a downside? I for one would LOVE to see a situation where the Pats are 12-3 or whatever and then the stay ends, and Brady is suspended for week 17 + the next 3 games. Imagine the public outcry if the NFL tried to force him to miss playoff games. Talk about an impact on the integrity of the game. It would be a shitshow. I'd love it.
Yep. In that scenario I wouldn't care whether he plays or doesn't play. It'd be fantastic theater.You'd love him being suspended for the playoffs on the hope that there is public outcry making RG look bad. Umm....
That's the dumbest thing I've seen in this whole DG saga, which is saying something.Yep. In that scenario I wouldn't care whether he plays or doesn't play. It'd be fantastic theater.
We just like different kinds of theater, I guess.Yep. In that scenario I wouldn't care whether he plays or doesn't play. It'd be fantastic theater.
No. There would be no theater.Yep. In that scenario I wouldn't care whether he plays or doesn't play. It'd be fantastic theater.
Most of the players are short-sighted, selfish, morons....which doesn't help.I suspect that the NFL will be willing to give away the power for the Commissioner to act as all powerful arbitrator in the next CBA, but they will demand money for it, lots and lots of money. The big issue is that the NFLPA is an incredibly shitty union that can't hold its members together. It's the most dangerous sport of the four bigs, and they have the least protection. They suck.