starrymessenger

As a practical matter, I see that JG is now getting the majority of the first team reps in NE. I suspect that this is more Kessler's call than Bill's.

You're right the case is about whether the Commissioner and the League had the right to do the things that they did. Seems to me like there are two different ways to challenge the League's decision. One is, as you say, bias. I would expect that to be hard for Brady to establish. It requires bad faith on the League's part. While you might not like the appointment of Wells, the presence and participation of his colleague at the appeal hearing etc...I doubt that is sufficient to establish bias. Another and perhaps more promising avenue for Brady is to say that the League's action is wholly outside the terms of reference of the CBA (which is after all the governing document), including how it has previously been interpreted and applied. I don't know whether in considering this ground of appeal you can avoid getting into exactly what Brady is being punished for. Clearly the League believes he is being punished for more than a minor and immaterial equipment violation judging from the severity of the punishment. They have come to the conclusion that he knowingly participated in some way in a scheme to deflate game balls. They also believe that his subsequent denials are disengenuous and that he failed to fully cooperate with the investigation. Noncompliance is generally viewed in any judicial or quasi-judicial proceeding as extremely serious misbehavior. So maybe the case boils down to whether there was any reasonable basis on the evidence for the League/Commissioner coming to the conclusion that it did concerning Brady's involvement and behavior. Remember it is not necessary for the judge to agree with the decision for him to affirm it. He might have himself come to a different conclusion on the facts and still dismiss the appeal. Was there enuf evidence to enable the Commissioner to decide as he did (whether you agree him it or not)? I believe there was. But then of course he would have to admit to something and he is congenitally incapable of doing that.

It's Brady's appeal. Hardly surprising that he would be questioned concerning his reasons for saying that the investigator's conclusions should be set aside. That doesn't mean that the person hearing the appeal is introducing new or additional evidence. On the other hand there was nothing stopping Brady and his team from coming forward with new or additional evidence that might exculpate him. Presumably if they had such evidence they would have done so and it's production would have been allowed. The Commissioner evidently thought their decision not to have the employees participate in the appeal hearing gave rise to a negative inference relative to Brady's credibility. Whether or not he was right in doing so, it was not inconsistent with his role in the proceedings. It's possible too that an aggregate of facts and circumstances may have influenced and, in his mind at least, added weight to his judgement in coming to this particular conclusion, for example the destruction of the cell phone, the fact that three communications with Jastremski were not recoverable etc...

Agree. Doormats no more. The franchise has turned a big corner and is headed in the right direction, maybe even the Promised Land. The chains are off. All hail the Pegulster.

Right. Someone sitting in appeal would not initiate the production of evidence. That was Well's job.

That's right. Wells and Goodell are not supposed to think Tom did anything wrong. Jastremski specifically told Tom in his text message that it was "unrealistic" to believe that Tom actually did it himself.

You're right. It's sure not like wearing the wrong colour socks. Maybe the judge will have to opine on the meaning of "equipment violation".

Thanks. These CBA based grounds look to me to be more promising (for TB) than any argument based on bias. I would not be surprised if that's why counsel has asserted them. I have no idea whether or how they impact the Commissioners supervisory jurisdiction and responsibility to protect (as he sees it) the integrity of the game, which I would imagine pretty much to be job one for him. Arguing successfully that the penalty was the wrong one and not sanctioned by the CBA (which therefore limited the Commissioner's decision making powers) might have the practical effect of reversing the suspension but it would not rehabilitate Brady's image given that he has denied knowledge/responsibility categorically. I suppose that he could agree to pay the fine while saying that it should never have been levied in the first place.

That's interesting. In effect they would be asserting that the CBA actually prohibited the specific penalty imposed on the player. Intuitively I would expect this to be a legitimate ground for the appeal, if established to be the case. On the other hand I don't see how that would have anything to do with the issue of bias, which has been widely reported to be the sole matter to be considered in the appeal. JMO but I would expect that the League's general supervisory authority would be such as to negate Brady's arguments regarding adequate notice/precedent but i don't know.

Possible I guess but I'm not so sure. I would expect that encouraging the parties to come to a negotiated settlement is procedurally part of any labour dispute that comes before the court. So I don't know how much importance can be given to a pre-trial conference of the type that will occur on Aug 12. Not to mention that there is no evident middle ground here given the positions that have been taken by the participants and the importance of the issues that are at stake from a league governance perspective. I agree the judge would probably want Brady and the league to settle this, unless he's the kind of guy who enjoys the profile.

The only substantive issue before the judge, as I understand it, is whether due process was observed. In order to succeed Brady must establish bias on the part of the Commissioner. That can happen even when the properly appointed arbitrator is an interested party, in other words it can happen whether the decision maker is an interested or a third party. That makes sense since any arbitrator, whether "interested" or not, can hypothetically be biased.

Odd then that Brady's advisors should have tried to institute the action in Minnesota when they would have been so better served in New York, and surprising too that the league's advisors should have sought New York rather than Minnesota. I guess the author is the only lawyer in the world who knows what he's doing. And far be it from me to suggest that Brady's attempt to have the case heard in Minnesota where a Minnesota judge said the matter had absolutely no legal, factual or logical connection, was a brazen example of jurisdiction shopping.

Ha. I don't know if I'm any wiser after reading your post but I am certainly better informed. Had no idea who their # 3 was or if they even had one. Maybe we should trade for him.

From those you mention, Glennon strikes me as the best option. Over 19 games his performance in just about every statistical category is quite impressive for a young QB playing behind a bad line and without a strong backfield. He has a big arm that Ds have to respect. He distributes the ball effectively to his skill position players and he is good at not blowing himself up with mistakes, again something you have to like in a young QB. Don't know how high his ceiling is but looks to be a quality guy. And that's why the Bucs will probably not move him. Can you imagine going into the season with a raw first round rookie without a suitable backup. Who does that?

Always thought Chip was angling for Mariota with Bradford as possible trade bait. Don't think Bradford is a bad choice to run his offence though. Bradford has a quick release, gets the ball out fast and makes decisions quickly. Whether he can stay healthy is anyone's guess however. Chip reminds me a lot of his friend Belichek. His way or the highway. I'll be watching him and his team with interest.

On the other hand Daniel Jeremiah and Jamie Dukes said yesterday that EJ would start but that both TT and MC would see plenty of playing time come September. Sounded to me like the least encouraging of possible scenarios.

Glennon might be a string bean but at times he throws a really good ball. He is capable of making all the throws question is whether consistently enough. He's like 6'7 or something like that. The thought of Glennon having enuf to really light it up with the skill position players at his disposal is not far fetched.

Can't say that my reaction is to wish he was a better person. It just is what it is. The essence of tragedy (where more is usually at stake than football) is the fatal character flaw that brings down the superhero. Tom Brady is a great football player. He is also a person of weak character. They may not be famous but I'm sure we have all known people in our ordinary lives who are better and bigger than him. Tom Brady: Prince of secondary men.

Nixon lost the White House because he lied. Martha Stewart went to jail (and lost lots of money) because she refused to admit fault when she could have gotten off with a slap on the wrist. Federal prosecutors will clean your clock if you refuse to cooperate. Judges can find you in contempt. Obstruction of justice is a serious offence in both civil and criminal matters and is accompanied by potentially onerous penalties. Nothing new here. The League is right in taking exception to Brady's disengenuous behavior, and being played for fools. The shield and the integrity of the game requires more and better, especially from its highest profile marquee player.

We will never have verifyably truthful answers to all of the questions we might want to ask. We can only use our reasonable judgement in deciding what we think is reasonably probable, bearing in mind that different people might come to different conclusions. IMO Tom Brady never instructed the assistants to deflate game balls. This accounts for the Kraft/Brady position that there is no direct evidence of Brady breaking the rules. What he probably did instead was give the assistants a hard time until the game balls were to his liking which just happened to be below regulation psi. This is consistent with the texting we have seen. Everybody knew and understood what the game was but it was important to not leave any crumbs on the table because, after all, deflating the game balls was an infraction. Brady and Manning successfully lobbied the league to allow QBs to doctor up game balls (but not psi) so that the grip etc... would be more to their liking. Air pressure probably affects grip more than weathering and it's hard to believe that a perfectionist control freak like Brady would be unaware of or indifferent to this. So Brady can claim that he has done nothing wrong but to me his position is actually more along the lines of "you can't prove it" -(because I have been careful to ensure that you can't prove it). In my view, his probable course of conduct likely provides as much evidence of his realized intention as would the spoken word. As for Kraft, he (like Brady and most of PatsNation) seems totally oblivious to their basic sleezyness, even when he unwittingly puts it on full display. So the team and organization took their punishment with the expectation that Brady would then only pay a fine and avoid a suspension. Talk about arrogance and a sense of entitlement! There was no such "deal" on the table with the League or anyone else to this effect. Brady's suspension had to do with his perceived wrongdoing and noncooperation, not the team's. Kraft probably concluded that losing a pick or two and paying the team fine was better (for him that is) than losing his QB for 25% of the season. So his magnanimous gesture actually reeks of self interest. Similarly, Brady and his agent have been brandishing a letter from his cell phone provider showing that they inquired about retrieving the messages on the phone that was destroyed. But before sourcing this document they probably knew and certainly could have easily found out what the relevant policy on retentions was. Mine is actually in the service agreement. If not, a phone call is all it takes to find out. The Patriots are (more likely than not) a morally imbecilic organization. I sure wouldn't buy a used car from either Kraft or Brady.

Brady got off easy. Didn't Ahern, also a Patriot, destroy his phone and get life in prison?

Pats will implode in 2015. Fun to watch.

One of the things the naysayers in Philly say is precisely that his cuts are not as crisp and that his quickness has gone down a notch. What he needs to show now is that he is indeed a Martin/Faulk type player. If he can do that into his early 30's he is likely headed to Canton, especially if the Bills win a championship with him leading the way.

He had a good 2013 before flaming out last year playing on a bad knee. Said to be good to go after surgery. This was mostly about money. They wanted to restructure his contract but he refused.

Although you have to take it with a grain of salt given that he has left the team and with some bad feeling besides, many observers in Philly feel that McCoy had started to show a slow decline last year. His yards per carry were down from the year before and he was outperformed by Sproles running behind the same O-line. Something that puzzles me is how Shady fits into a north-south ground and pound that both Rex (with Ivory) and Roman (with Gore) seem to have favoured. How will they (and the fans) react when he (like CJ) refuses or is unwilling or unable to hit the hole? Hoping for the best from McCoy of course and maybe that's what we will see but I think there are some questions/issues there that will have to be addressed.