What is your idea of Settlement? Serious replies (moderated!)

[amfootball]

They are used to judges vacating player punishments. They won't lose any sleep over it would be my opinion.

I disagree. They came after Brady this time over ball deflation of all things and they want to nail him big time. As Omar Little said, "When you come at the King, you best not miss."

[Gramz]

At this point I don't even care if it's vacated. Im tired of hearing about it

And I don't believe public opinion on either side changes, no matter the outcome at this point.

I'm ready to see what happens on the field. It should be an interesting season.

[NewColtsFan]

Seriously? Albert Breer, who works for the NFL Network?

 

ALBERT Breer I know.

 

BERT Breer I didn't recognize.

 

No biggie.

 

Either way,  it's the lead story on the ESPN football shows today.....

[dw49]

I disagree. They came after Brady this time over ball deflation of all things and they want to nail him big time. As Omar Little said, "When you come at the King, you best not miss."

 

 

That's not bad... 

[Gramz]

I'm just curious here.... let's say for instance no settlement is reached (a real possibility) how many of you will trust and accept the Judge's ruling, no matter what it is? Be honest.

[Johnhenry]

I was in San Antonio today listening to sports radio. They said the judge was obviously pro-Brady and spent a lot of time demeaning the NFL's case and how it was presented. They all predicted the suspension would be vacated by the judge if the NFL does not come off its high horse and work out a settlement.

[ColtRider]

Oh dear god.

No, they're not. Not even close.

Oh dear God, pray tell, they are. Explain to me how both infractions are not a balanced competitive edge as you state, "Not even close", when it comes to PEDs and adjusting football air pressure below legal limits. Are they not both cheating? Are they not competitive edges? Are they not premeditated illegal acts? Are they not gainful forms of achieving personal and team wins through disception?

C'mon. This is not kindergarten, where in some parts of the country 2 + 2 = 5.

[Gramz]

I'm just curious here.... let's say for instance no settlement is reached (a real possibility) how many of you will trust and accept the Judge's ruling, no matter what it is? Be honest.

Well, no one has answered my question. I think the general consensus from all of us is, we'll think the judges decision is great if it goes the way we want, and a crock if it doesn't. That's how I feel, and at least I'm honest about it.

[pacolts56]

I'm just curious here.... let's say for instance no settlement is reached (a real possibility) how many of you will trust and accept the Judge's ruling, no matter what it is? Be honest.

Same as jvan1973....I'll be glad its over no matter what the judge rules.

[chad72]

I'm just curious here.... let's say for instance no settlement is reached (a real possibility) how many of you will trust and accept the Judge's ruling, no matter what it is? Be honest.

 

I will accept it for what it is. The reason I am saying this is that if the NFL truly had text message evidence to incriminate Tom from the equipment guys, this would have been the time to produce it. If they did not have hard evidence and could not convince a judge that they chose feeling that they would at least get a fair shake, the NFL would have no one else but themselves to blame.

 

Yeah, we Colts fans may want the Patriots and/or Belichick and/or Brady to fall flat on their face exposed once again. But wanting those things is one thing and refusing to accept legal proceedings where every party was given plenty of chances to substantiate their position is another.

[Nadine]

Well, no one has answered my question. I think the general consensus from all of us is, we'll think the judges decision is great if it goes the way we want, and a crock if it doesn't. That's how I feel, and at least I'm honest about it.

It won't change anything for me.  I am sure Tom Brady did this and refused to own up to it.  The rest of it is just what it is.

My life will continue with the belief that Tom Brady did this and didn't own up to it.  

I'm not going to lose any sleep over it but I'll never change my position on it

[amfootball]

Here is a great synopsis of today's proceedings from Dan Wetzel, Yahoo, http://sports.yahoo.com/news/deflate-gate-judge-hammers-nfl-s-case-against-tom-brady---your-honor-is-spot-on---defense-crows--192153861.html?soc_src=mail&soc_trk=ma

 

Lawyers are meeting privately this afternoon to discuss settlement talks again ...

[amfootball]

Well, no one has answered my question. I think the general consensus from all of us is, we'll think the judges decision is great if it goes the way we want, and a crock if it doesn't. That's how I feel, and at least I'm honest about it.

My overall feeling is one of thankfulness. Thankful that this case got to federal court and that the appeal was made public for everyone to see Brady categorically and unequivocally deny his involvement. I am also thankful that Berman with his line of questioning to the NFL has brought to surface every single thing Pats fans have been saying from day one - the Wells report does not prove his involvement in the AFCCG in any way shape or form or any scheme to deflate footballs and the league's proceedings have been a sham in terms of due process and fairness. No matter how he rules, the league has been shown to be incompetent, vindictive and liars and the national media has called them out for such. That has made me the most happiest whether Brady serves a suspension or not.

[ColtRider]

If that was the case then why has ball tampering in the past been punished only by a verbal warning or fine while PEDs have always been a four game suspension for first offense?

You're slicing and dicing "cheating" into micromanagement, as it were two different things. It's not. Neither are the penalties for such infractions based upon the Commissioner's discretion of fines, games, draft picks, et.al.

[amfootball]

You're slicing and dicing "cheating" into micromanagement, as it were two different things. It's not. Neither are the penalties for such infractions based upon the Commissioner's discretion of fines, games, draft picks, et.al.

You are ignoring both precedent and level of competitive advantage gained which matters in terms of how the league has punished.

 

If ball tampering were the same as PEDs than surely in its 91 year existence the NFL would have punished as such yet they never have. Just a warning or a fine. So that begs the question as to why now? And this harkens back to competitive advantage. There is nowhere near the same level of advantage to a half of pound of air pressure versus PEDs. That is why the judge brought up the fact that Brady actually played better and scored more points in the second half with inflated balls. He is basically asking what is the competitive advantage that rachted this up from a fine to a 4 game suspension? Or to think of it another way. Would I punish my 10 year old daughter the same as cheating on her math test as I would my husband for cheating on my marriage? Of course not and that is what the judge is getting at here. Precedent and competitive advantage gained.

[chad72]

The only thing the NFL may have a leg to stand on is a failure to co-operate based on destruction of the cell phone if it cannot come up with anything else. Brady's lawyer probably wishes he dealt with the situation a different way in retrospect on that aspect.

 

I am certain the whole league is ready for this to get over with. Push has come to shove and now we truly get to see if the NFL really has any trump cards, IMO.

[ColtRider]

You are ignoring both precedent and level of competitive advantage gained which matters in terms of how the league has punished.

 

If ball tampering were the same as PEDs than surely in its 91 year existence the NFL would have punished as such yet they never have. Just a warning or a fine. So that begs the question as to why now? And this harkens back to competitive advantage. There is nowhere near the same level of advantage to a half of pound of air pressure versus PEDs. That is why the judge brought up the fact that Brady actually played better and scored more points in the second half with inflated balls. He is basically asking what is the competitive advantage that rachted this up from a fine to a 4 game suspension? Or to think of it another way. Would I punish my 10 year old daughter the same as cheating on her math test as I would my husband for cheating on my marriage? Of course not and that is what the judge is getting at here. Precedent and competitive advantage gained.

So, based upon your logic, you're saying that with the history of cheating from the Patriots (SpyGate, et.al), all cheating regardless of past penalties does not come into play because of "precedent"? Precedent has already been achieved by this organization with it's history of not complying to the rules of the NFL, i.e. "cheating". Doesn't make any sense whatsoever.

[Yehoodi]

You're slicing and dicing "cheating" into micromanagement, as it were two different things. It's not. Neither are the penalties for such infractions based upon the Commissioner's discretion of fines, games, draft picks, et.al.

 

That is part of the problem and why we are in federal court, is that the Commish is not following past actions by players and teams. 

 

No matter how you spin it, or try to complain about recent posts by VL or AM, or how you try to categorize things, the bottom line what we have in this case, if it happened, is a change to the interaction of a person's body parts with a football.   Plain and simple.  And as such, any other actions which effect said interaction between a person's body parts and a football are the same.  This is a point that so many people miss or miss intentionally in such a manner to conveniently miss lesser imposed penalties to enforce greater ones.

 

In short, we have a 6th grade which one does not belong with the others exercise:

 

1) After the balls leave the locker room a team employee alters the ball by releasing air in the ball

2) After the balls leave the locker room a team employee alters the ball by adding air to the ball.

3) After the balls leave the locker room a team employee alters the ball by heating it to room temperature on a cold game day

4) After the balls leave the locker room a team employee or player alters the ball by rubbing it with a tacky towel thereby having the tacky material added to the ball.

5) After the balls leave the locker room a team employee alters the ball in a manner that is against league rules for the benefit of the kicker.

6) After the balls leave the locker room a quarterback sprays his glove with illegal stickem and plays the game. 

7) For a time period of 4-6 months a quarterback has been taking injections of performance enhancing drugs.

  

Now ColtSense, honest question: Which one of those does not belong with the rest?  Or perhaps phrase in a different manner which ones are in the same family. 

 

For me the first 5 are in the same family with the 6th being a half brother.  Number 7 is not in the same class as the first 6.  But most critically, when one is trying to figure what is the opinion of the NFL with respect to #1 and any accompanying penalty, one will look to items 2-5 for reference and not number 7 as the former are in the same family of actions.  #6 is a close relative and carries a $8600 fine and the others, except #2, do not involve a suspension (other than team personal in #5).   

 

It is a legal fallacy to try to leap frog from #1 to #7 when the others are present.   

[ColtsBlueFL]

I don't know DW when a judge says not letting the PA interview a key witness is reason for vacating the appeal that is a bomb IMO. So far we have had two hearings with Berman and both times he has grilled the NFL - first on the merits of the case/Brady's guilt and now today the process which was worse than last week and the CBA is supposedly the NFL's biggest stake in this.

 

What would you do if you were the NFL right now? I would be on the phone with Kessler and ask him what Brady is willing to take, probably a big fine and get ou at of town. They still slammed the team so they have that in their pocket.

 

If I were the NFLMC, I would make one good faith *let's end this* offer, one and only one, to NFLPA/Brady/Kessler.  2 games suspension with $50,000 fine for obstruction of an official NFL investigation for potential on field infractions.

 

If the NFLPA choose to not accept and push on for vacating the award, I would pursue this appeal to it's ruling.  All the while preparing the appeal brief.  Especially if Nash and team has to report on every little item brought up in NFLPA brief on grounds the case was re-litigated. And the case did not determine the process and whether Goodell was within his power to act as he did.  And I would also be sure to bring up the Supreme Courts decision in MLB vs. Steve Garvey in addition to the one's they have already alluded too.

[ColtRider]

That is part of the problem and why we are in federal court, is that the Commish is not following past actions by players and teams. 

 

No matter how you spin it, or try to complain about recent posts by VL or AM, or how you try to categorize things, the bottom line what we have in this case, if it happened, is a change to the interaction of a person's body parts with a football.   Plain and simple.  And as such, any other actions which effect said interaction between a person's body parts and a football are the same.  This is a point that so many people miss or miss intentionally in such a manner to conveniently miss lesser imposed penalties to enforce greater ones.

 

In short, we have a 6th grade which one does not belong with the others exercise:

 

1) After the balls leave the locker room a team employee alters the ball by releasing air in the ball

2) After the balls leave the locker room a team employee alters the ball by adding air to the ball.

3) After the balls leave the locker room a team employee alters the ball by heating it to room temperature on a cold game day

4) After the balls leave the locker room a team employee or player alters the ball by rubbing it with a tacky towel thereby having the tacky material added to the ball.

5) After the balls leave the locker room a team employee alters the ball in a manner that is against league rules for the benefit of the kicker.

6) After the balls leave the locker room a quarterback sprays his glove with illegal stickem and plays the game. 

7) For a time period of 4-6 months a quarterback has been taking injections of performance enhancing drugs.

  

Now ColtSense, honest question: Which one of those does not belong with the rest?  Or perhaps phrase in a different manner which ones are in the same family. 

 

For me the first 5 are in the same family with the 6th being a half brother.  Number 7 is not in the same class as the first 6.  But most critically, when one is trying to figure what is the opinion of the NFL with respect to #1 and any accompanying penalty, one will look to items 2-5 for reference and not number 7 as the former are in the same family of actions.  #6 is a close relative and carries a $8600 fine and the others, except #2, do not involve a suspension (other than team personal in #5).   

 

It is a legal fallacy to try to leap frog from #1 to #7 when the others are present.

I appreciate what you're trying to accomplish here. But one word is left out (from, it seems, all Pro-Brady advocates), _ intent _ ! And judging from all priors (which is considered in a court of law when disciplining) concerning the Patriots and their background since 2007 (and more likely earlier than that) referencing rules of the NFL and breaking them without a second thought, it just doesn't surprise me that Goodell ruled his discipline in the shape of four games for Brady, the loss of draft picks to the organization, and the $1 million fine.

[Yehoodi]

For me a good settlement would be no suspension, no finding of wrong doing for the underlying crime but sanctions for the act of not handing over the cell phone.  The fact that Brady broke the phone does not matter to me.  For me the non cooperation happened when he initial refused to not hand over his cell.  What happened after that is not relevant to me.

 

I believe that Farve got 50K for not handing over his cell phone.  If the fine is in relation to that, then I would be okay that as being a reasonable settlement.  50K, 100k, 150K, one of those would be okay with me.

 

I think it is bad precedent for a person settling or the court ruling to allow the NFL to come out of the blue and impose something that has never been imposed before for said crime.

 

For me the NFL did not learn its lesson with the Rice case when it tried to impose a larger fine on Rice than has ever been done before.  True that fell on a principle similar to an expo facto application of a new rule, but it not change the point and most critically not different than the principle of imposing a larger penalty than what was expected at the time one commits an infraction.  I see no difference between the Commish establishing a "new rule" and then imposing a larger fine or simply imposing the larger fine.  Both are post infraction larger fines that expected at the time of the infraction. They fall on the same footing for me.  i.e you can not hide behind not established a new rule and just impose the same sanction as if you establish a new rule. 

 

With the above said, this is nothing wrong with the NFL merely following precedent in an instant case, imposing the fines on the books and then thereafter making it known that moving forward we want it to be known that we are going to impose X for Y.  (assuming this would survive a legal challenge).  (i.e. NFL could likely not hold up a rule that stated you will be suspended for life for a sock violation).

 

The bottom line problem is the NFL has never EVER EVER imposed a suspension for non cooperation, and in the 75 plus year history I find no reason to start unannounced in Jan. 2015.  PERIOD.  

 

With respect to the underlying crime I have already made my points on the penalty in my prior post #166.  The crime in question and its closely related relatives do not impose a suspension but merely a fine.  So even if the underlying act was committed by Brady, or proven that he was part of a conspiracy to do so with the two employee and thus be guilty of the underlying crime in this manner, it too does not carry a suspension.

 

As Lady Justice is blind, one, including arbitrators, need to act in this manner and not in a manner that seems to be biased against a given defendant.  And for me one who imposes a penalty that is not in line with prior actions then one can only conclude that the person administering the penalty is doing so in a bias manner.   

[GoColts8818]

I don't think the issue is the suspension because I think both sides can find common ground there. The issue is having or not having to accept the findings of the Wells report as true. There is no middle ground there and which is why I think it's nearly impossible that we are going to see a settlement.

[ColtRider]

For me a good settlement would be no suspension, no finding of wrong doing for the underlying crime but sanctions for the act of not handing over the cell phone.  The fact that Brady broke the phone does not matter to me.  For me the non cooperation happened when he initial refused to not hand over his cell.  What happened after that is not relevant to me.

 

I believe that Farve got 50K for not handing over his cell phone.  If the fine is in relation to that, then I would be okay that as being a reasonable settlement.  50K, 100k, 150K, one of those would be okay with me.

 

I think it is bad precedent for a person settling or the court ruling to allow the NFL to come out of the blue and impose something that has never been imposed before for said crime.

 

For me the NFL did not learn its lesson with the Rice case when it tried to impose a larger fine on Rice than has ever been done before.  True that fell on a principle similar to an expo facto application of a new rule, but it not change the point and most critically not different than the principle of imposing a larger penalty than what was expected at the time one commits an infraction.  I see no difference between the Commish establishing a "new rule" and then imposing a larger fine or simply imposing the larger fine.  Both are post infraction larger fines that expected at the time of the infraction. They fall on the same footing for me.  i.e you can not hide behind not established a new rule and just impose the same sanction as if you establish a new rule. 

 

With the above said, this is nothing wrong with the NFL merely following precedent in an instant case, imposing the fines on the books and then thereafter making it known that moving forward we want it to be known that we are going to impose X for Y.  (assuming this would survive a legal challenge).  (i.e. NFL could likely not hold up a rule that stated you will be suspended for life for a sock violation).

 

The bottom line problem is the NFL has never EVER EVER imposed a suspension for non cooperation, and in the 75 plus year history I find no reason to start unannounced in Jan. 2015.  PERIOD.  

 

With respect to the underlying crime I have already made my points on the penalty in my prior post #166.  The crime in question and its closely related relatives do not impose a suspension but merely a fine.  So even if the underlying act was committed by Brady, or proven that he was part of a conspiracy to do so with the two employee and thus be guilty of the underlying crime in this manner, it too does not carry a suspension.

 

As Lady Justice is blind, one, including arbitrators, need to act in this manner and not in a manner that seems to be biased against a given defendant.  And for me one who imposes a penalty that is not in line with prior actions then one can only conclude that the person administering the penalty is doing so in a bias manner.

I understand all that. However, I'll pose a question to you and all Patriot fans who side with the notion that only a fine should be inflicted upon Brady.

Why do you think the NFL and the Commissioner destroyed all evidence of SpyGate? (it's relative to DeFlateGate 100%)

[da_pats_troll]

Well, no one has answered my question. I think the general consensus from all of us is, we'll think the judges decision is great if it goes the way we want, and a crock if it doesn't. That's how I feel, and at least I'm honest about it.

 

The appeal is based mostly on technicalities of the process the NFL employed in upholding the suspension. It probably wont touch on if Brady did or did not "do it". I dont suspect it will change anyones minds. They are pretty much made up at this point.

[da_pats_troll]

I understand all that. However, I'll pose a question to you and all Patriot fans who side with the notion that only a fine should be inflicted upon Brady.

Why do you think the NFL and the Commissioner destroyed all evidence of SpyGate? (it's relative to DeFlateGate 100%)

 

 

After seeing the circus that has become Deflategate...its because The Commissioner is a clueless clown and has no idea what he is doing. Conspiracy theorists will say it was to protect the patriots. At one time, I may of listened to that argument, as it was a possibility that could be at least debated.

 

Now I think it was just absolute incompetence.  

[da_pats_troll]

You're slicing and dicing "cheating" into micromanagement, as it were two different things. It's not. Neither are the penalties for such infractions based upon the Commissioner's discretion of fines, games, draft picks, et.al.

 

My take of the judge asking that question is different then yours and others I think. I dont think the judge was saying they were different. In the NFL's brief, they compared the two. I see the judge looking at that, and as judges to, play devils advocate. He asked the NFL defend their position that it was. If they could (I dont know if they did or not), then he may accept that argument. If they could not, then he would have to consider that in his decision also.

[ViriLudant]

I understand all that. However, I'll pose a question to you and all Patriot fans who side with the notion that only a fine should be inflicted upon Brady.

Why do you think the NFL and the Commissioner destroyed all evidence of SpyGate? (it's relative to DeFlateGate 100%)

Because the evidence of SpyGate was a series of boring videos that showed the same thing over and over ?

Or do you mistakingly believe that some of the videos were never shown to the public ?

[Flying Elvis]

Goodell said this about the Patriots in 2007, "I don't think it Saints their accomplishments, it probably had a limited affect, if any affect on the outcome of any game." http://www.nfl.com/videos/new-england-patriots/09000d5d8066ccba/Commissioner-s-News-Conference

[Yehoodi]

I appreciate what you're trying to accomplish here. But one word is left out (from, it seems, all Pro-Brady advocates), _ intent _ ! And judging from all priors (which is considered in a court of law when disciplining) concerning the Patriots and their background since 2007 (and more likely earlier than that) referencing rules of the NFL and breaking them without a second thought, it just doesn't surprise me that Goodell ruled his discipline in the shape of four games for Brady, the loss of draft picks to the organization, and the $1 million fine.

 

Thank you for your response and comments.  And I have a few thoughts if I may.

 

First off, Lady Justice is blind.  Bottom line, regardless of who the defendant or plaintiff (or State) is in front of you courts are required to administer justice without regard for who is in front of them.  And the courts must act the same with respect to doling out punishment.  Simply put, an African American who has one prior two years ago for A&B should receive a similar sentence for a crime in the present day that is similar to a present day crime of a Caucasian who has a similar A&B two years ago.  In another words, if two guys, each have A&B convictions for say a single punch to a store clerk two years ago, should receive a similar sentence if they get convicted today for an A&B on their wives if they each punch their wives once.  One can not pile on one guy and not the other.

 

Second, not sure what you are getting at with intent and prior actions.  Correct me if I am wrong but the only violation that I am aware of in the BB era is Spygate, no?  If so then we only have one prior act, committed by employees of the team and is some 8 years old by now.  Are you seriously trying to say this action should be held against the individual Brady in the instant case?  I am not sure that I follow your line of thinking.  I can understand some taking it into consideration for a penalty against the team in the instant case, which indeed happened.

 

Third, in line with the above and Lady Justice, if one wants to throw the book at someone with a given level of force you must remember to do so consistent with how the book was thrown to prior individuals with the same instant act and prior history and furthermore in the future must act the same if someone comes before you in a similar situation. 

 

It is this third principle that anti-patriots fans seem to miss and can not answer.

 

Just a few examples off the top of my head.

 

In the late 90s the Denver Broncos were heavily penalized not once but twice for circumventing the salary cap in an unfair advantage to keep a few key players.  So because the Denver Broncos team committed acts which gain them an unfair advantage should any individual player who is penalized with a PED violation since then be given a harsher penalty than others because the sins of their team years prior?  Btw, none of them have, so why start with Brady then?

 

In the late 2000s we had Bountygate and the intent to injury by the Saints and the team adoption of the same.  Are you prepared to invoke a harsher penalty on a Saints player who say in 2018 commits a hard hit that requires a standard penalty.  Are you ready to add to that penalty due to the sins of his team in 2010? If not then why Brady?

 

Similar the recent scandal with Noisegate and the Falcons which team was found to pumped crowd noise in for at least three years.  Should we hold a Sword of Damocles over the heads of all Falcons player for the next 10 years and if they are caught with PED, should we add to the standard 4 games suspension because the sins of their team in 2014?  If not they why Brady?

 

See once you and I put on our Lady Justice outfit which includes a blindfold, we are not entitled to take a peak at the color of the jersey.  And since we have seen in the past (Broncos), and likely prepared in the future (Saints and Falcons), not to hold the past sins of the teams against the individual we can not therefore do this when a person happens to walk into our court one day.   Plain and simple.  Either we have justice administered fairly or not, the former of which is the foundation of our country.   Bottom line, never before has a player been fined heavier for the past sins of this team or teammates.  Period.

[Yehoodi]

I understand all that. However, I'll pose a question to you and all Patriot fans who side with the notion that only a fine should be inflicted upon Brady.

Why do you think the NFL and the Commissioner destroyed all evidence of SpyGate? (it's relative to DeFlateGate 100%)

 

Please see my last post, its answer your question.

 

And quickly with respect to the destroying of the tapes, which has less relevance to the instance case, VL already answer the question.  But to add to his answer, once Goodell made an adjudication that the pats illegally taped defensive signals, the tapes were moot.  Just as once a defendant is guilty of possession of cocaine there is not need to hold on to the cocaine (once the Defendant has finished his appeals).   Courts, ADA offices do not hold on to cocaine evidence for the public to review.  

[jvan1973]

Because the evidence of SpyGate was a series of boring videos that showed the same thing over and over ?

Or do you mistakingly believe that some of the videos were never shown to the public ?

That isn't a reason to destroy the tapes

[-JJ-]

I disagree. They came after Brady this time over ball deflation of all things and they want to nail him big time. As Omar Little said, "When you come at the King, you best not miss."

LOL. I just started watching that series "The Wire". So addicting I'm half way thru season 5 in 2 weeks

 

Good stuff. Reading ahead unfortunately looks like the King gets it in the end.

[ColtsBlueFL]

From where I sit, this stopped being about deflated footballs and $25k fines when all personnel, not just Brady, quickly denied any culpability in the under-inflated football scenario.  The league likely heard rumors they never acted upon over the years.  But when the balls were shown to be deflated, and one Patriots personnel illegally took them into a bathroom, but denied most things concerning it,  then it became about two things, power, and what to do about an organization bent on skirting any and every rule to upset the balance of the playing field  and concealing their intentions while doing so; and has likely done so for many years.  The owners do not want the participants to steal any of their power in their league.  They will protect their power, and use integrity of the game in order to do so.

 

The last CBA was about money for the NFLPA, at the expense of judicial procedure deferred to the league.  Next CBA will be all about power for the NFLPA.  In the interim, they will try to get the courts to give them the power they gave up to have more money.  The League and owners will not relent that power easily.  Over the upcoming years, and not in the next CBA negotiations.  The Federal courts will be littered with appealed filings on league arbitrated cases.  And the NFL will get better at administering punishment and preparing for the court fights with each and every loss. They wont lose them all, and may even win some under appeal currently!.

 

Fortunately we have a good 6 or 7 years before the next round of lockouts and possible replacement Players / Refs become part of the conversation again.  And once Judge Berman rules, this case will slip into the bowels of the U.S. legal system and we will not hear of it for many months.

 

So the good thing, football starts soon and deflategate will go on the back burner.

[BloodyChamp]

In the last year people have gotten away with murder for heck's sake...in the courtroom I mean, not by managing to hide the body! This is small potatoes. If you have money and the ability to throw temper tantrums you can get away with anything in this country.

[ColtRider]

Because the evidence of SpyGate was a series of boring videos that showed the same thing over and over ?

Or do you mistakingly believe that some of the videos were never shown to the public ?

Boring evidence, eh? I guess that's why they were destroyed. As far as videos never shown, that is exactly why the tapes were burned in effigistic defense of the league and the New England Patriots. To save loyalty. To save embarrassment. To essentially, save face to the NFL and the New England Patriots. And, to ensure the unprecendented climbing number of fans into the NFL arena. That, especially that.

[ColtRider]

Goodell said this about the Patriots in 2007, "I don't think it Saints their accomplishments, it probably had a limited affect, if any affect on the outcome of any game." http://www.nfl.com/videos/new-england-patriots/09000d5d8066ccba/Commissioner-s-News-Conference

Thank you for your response and comments.  And I have a few thoughts if I may.

 

First off, Lady Justice is blind.  Bottom line, regardless of who the defendant or plaintiff (or State) is in front of you courts are required to administer justice without regard for who is in front of them.  And the courts must act the same with respect to doling out punishment.  Simply put, an African American who has one prior two years ago for A&B should receive a similar sentence for a crime in the present day that is similar to a present day crime of a Caucasian who has a similar A&B two years ago.  In another words, if two guys, each have A&B convictions for say a single punch to a store clerk two years ago, should receive a similar sentence if they get convicted today for an A&B on their wives if they each punch their wives once.  One can not pile on one guy and not the other.

 

Second, not sure what you are getting at with intent and prior actions.  Correct me if I am wrong but the only violation that I am aware of in the BB era is Spygate, no?  If so then we only have one prior act, committed by employees of the team and is some 8 years old by now.  Are you seriously trying to say this action should be held against the individual Brady in the instant case?  I am not sure that I follow your line of thinking.  I can understand some taking it into consideration for a penalty against the team in the instant case, which indeed happened.

 

Third, in line with the above and Lady Justice, if one wants to throw the book at someone with a given level of force you must remember to do so consistent with how the book was thrown to prior individuals with the same instant act and prior history and furthermore in the future must act the same if someone comes before you in a similar situation. 

 

It is this third principle that anti-patriots fans seem to miss and can not answer.

 

Just a few examples off the top of my head.

 

In the late 90s the Denver Broncos were heavily penalized not once but twice for circumventing the salary cap in an unfair advantage to keep a few key players.  So because the Denver Broncos team committed acts which gain them an unfair advantage should any individual player who is penalized with a PED violation since then be given a harsher penalty than others because the sins of their team years prior?  Btw, none of them have, so why start with Brady then?

 

In the late 2000s we had Bountygate and the intent to injury by the Saints and the team adoption of the same.  Are you prepared to invoke a harsher penalty on a Saints player who say in 2018 commits a hard hit that requires a standard penalty.  Are you ready to add to that penalty due to the sins of his team in 2010? If not then why Brady?

 

Similar the recent scandal with Noisegate and the Falcons which team was found to pumped crowd noise in for at least three years.  Should we hold a Sword of Damocles over the heads of all Falcons player for the next 10 years and if they are caught with PED, should we add to the standard 4 games suspension because the sins of their team in 2014?  If not they why Brady?

 

See once you and I put on our Lady Justice outfit which includes a blindfold, we are not entitled to take a peak at the color of the jersey.  And since we have seen in the past (Broncos), and likely prepared in the future (Saints and Falcons), not to hold the past sins of the teams against the individual we can not therefore do this when a person happens to walk into our court one day.   Plain and simple.  Either we have justice administered fairly or not, the former of which is the foundation of our country.   Bottom line, never before has a player been fined heavier for the past sins of this team or teammates.  Period.

I understand where you're coming from. I really do. But beholding to past "sins" as you state, the Commissioner drew a line in the sand years before with the Pats. They walked over it. Goodell called them on it. They cried "foul". Received their punishment. Now, we're in court about it. Ridiculous. That's just the way things have happened. The Pats screwed up, again. Paid for it this time. Accept it for what it is and move on. The organization did. Brady did not. Sad.

[ColtRider]

From where I sit, this stopped being about deflated footballs and $25k fines when all personnel, not just Brady, quickly denied any culpability in the under-inflated football scenario.  The league likely heard rumors they never acted upon over the years.  But when the balls were shown to be deflated, and one Patriots personnel illegally took them into a bathroom, but denied most things concerning it,  then it became about two things, power, and what to do about an organization bent on skirting any and every rule to upset the balance of the playing field  and concealing their intentions while doing so; and has likely done so for many years.  The owners do not want the participants to steal any of their power in their league.  They will protect their power, and use integrity of the game in order to do so.

 

The last CBA was about money for the NFLPA, at the expense of judicial procedure deferred to the league.  Next CBA will be all about power for the NFLPA.  In the interim, they will try to get the courts to give them the power they gave up to have more money.  The League and owners will not relent that power easily.  Over the upcoming years, and not in the next CBA negotiations.  The Federal courts will be littered with appealed filings on league arbitrated cases.  And the NFL will get better at administering punishment and preparing for the court fights with each and every loss. They wont lose them all, and may even win some under appeal currently!.

 

Fortunately we have a good 6 or 7 years before the next round of lockouts and possible replacement Players / Refs become part of the conversation again.  And once Judge Berman rules, this case will slip into the bowels of the U.S. legal system and we will not hear of it for many months.

 

So the good thing, football starts soon and deflategate will go on the back burner.

E X A C T L Y !

[ColtRider]

Please see my last post, its answer your question.

 

And quickly with respect to the destroying of the tapes, which has less relevance to the instance case, VL already answer the question.  But to add to his answer, once Goodell made an adjudication that the pats illegally taped defensive signals, the tapes were moot.  Just as once a defendant is guilty of possession of cocaine there is not need to hold on to the cocaine (once the Defendant has finished his appeals).   Courts, ADA offices do not hold on to cocaine evidence for the public to review.

But, there is a need to hold a record of said offender for the public and courts, in terms of possible future violations and punishment.

i.e. Patriots organization

[amfootball]

If I were the NFLMC, I would make one good faith *let's end this* offer, one and only one, to NFLPA/Brady/Kessler.  2 games suspension with $50,000 fine for obstruction of an official NFL investigation for potential on field infractions.

 

If the NFLPA choose to not accept and push on for vacating the award, I would pursue this appeal to it's ruling.  All the while preparing the appeal brief.  Especially if Nash and team has to report on every little item brought up in NFLPA brief on grounds the case was re-litigated. And the case did not determine the process and whether Goodell was within his power to act as he did.  And I would also be sure to bring up the Supreme Courts decision in MLB vs. Steve Garvey in addition to the one's they have already alluded too.

I would make a deal too if I was the NFLMC. But the issue is they don't want to come off the Wells report and Brady would agree to maybe one game but at this point, they way the proceedings are going, I doubt he even agrees to one game. I would not if I was him.

 

Also Kessler dropped off 18 cases to Berman similar to this one in terms of process that were vacated by federal court.

[ViriLudant]

Boring evidence, eh? I guess that's why they were destroyed. As far as videos never shown, that is exactly why the tapes were burned in effigistic defense of the league and the New England Patriots. To save loyalty. To save embarrassment. To essentially, save face to the NFL and the New England Patriots. And, to ensure the unprecendented climbing number of fans into the NFL arena. That, especially that.

Except that the videos were shown during a press conference .

They were boring. Showed the same thing, repeated ad naseum, of something that 70,000 people could see from their seats.