JohnC

Both Dez and Harvin are ferocious competitors on the field, exhibiting some volatility. I got the sense from the article that Harvin is more mature outside of the football world whereas Dez has more problems with life skill behavior outside of football. Both players, moreso with Dez, have tremendous football (physcial) talents. You hate to see such special talents squandered due to a lack of emotional control and maturity. Chris Carter's football and life turnaround is a positive example for these type of talented but troubled players.

Miller could turn out to be the best value pick in this draft for us. He has demonstrated even at this very early stage that he is not overwhelmed by the pro game and that he can become an immediate credible starter. With the addition of Incognito our guard play has dramatically improved from last year. It should elevate the play of the linemen playing next to them. Getting credible qbing play was the most important issue for this team to address in the offseason. Next in priority was improving the OL in starting talent but also in depth (as you smartly noted). So far it appears that the front office accomplished what they had to do to address that critical OL problem.

Thanks for the link. An excellent read. After reading the piece on him I got the sense that this was more of a psychological profile than a football profile. My takeaway from the article is that Harvin is not a bad guy but he is also not an easy person to deal with. Some players are very resilient and self-contained. You don't have to worry about them because they are mature enough to work out the unavoidable trials and tribulations that they will encounter in their line of work. That's not the case with him. With Percy there is a multi-layer of volatility and insecurity that will constantly need to be addressed. Harvin has been at a number of places, and at each location he had the same type of issues with players. Even if he isn't the instigator or the cause of the problems in the interactions he hasn't learned how to maturely handle those types of challenging interactions. My worry is that he is on a team with mediocre qbing. He certainly will not be the primary receiver. How will he handle his diminished role and productivity because of the limitations of the qbs? There is no doubt that he is a talent. The bigger challenge for him is fitting in and accepting the role he has with the offense. The Bills have a more positive team support environment than where he came from. If it doesn't work out the onus will be on him. Again, I think he is a good person who has a good heart. But my sense after reading that article is that he needs to learn how to tame his passions when dealing with others.

Gotham Bill, What gets your goat more: the Spiller pick, the Whitner pick or the tandem of Jauron/Levy? I know your answer before you give it: the Jauron/Levy tandem.

Dave Mcbride/Saint. http://www.si.com/nfl/2015/08/14/tom-brady-filing-roger-goodell-deflategate-federal-case-analysis The above link is a good summary by Andrew Brandt of the last legal proceeding between the parties, including some of the filings. The league's position is that it has a right to make a ruling regardless of the quality of the evidence or the deviation from the normal disciplinary process. It's apparent (to me) that there is not going to be an agreement between the two combatants. The judge is going to make his own determination. I think the judge is getting a kick out of exposing the dirty underbelly and heavy handedness in which the NFL goes about its business. Because Roger Goodell lacked common sense and good judgment in handling a manageable trivial issue the ultimate winners are going to be the lawyers on both sides: billable hours!

Thank you for the above link. The bottom line is what legal issue(s) is the judge going to emphasize. There are some people who think the arguments are clear and one sided. It's not. You know which side I am standing one. But I still believe that Brady has the higher hurdle. One legal analyst who teaches sports law, Michael McCann is teaching a course centering on this case and the legal issues associated with it. http://www.csnne.com/new-england-patriots/legal-analyst-it-was-a-good-day-for-new-england-patriots-tom-brady

He talked to a number of people who follow the legal scene in that jurisdiction. The judge's history is not out of the ordinary. In arbitration cases or cases coming out of management/labor agreements the courts usually give deference to the results of the established process. Mortonson made the point that it would be wrong to read too much into the judge's pointed questions to both sides. That is more of a prod to get the parties to settle. Ultimately his focus will be on the process rather than the facts of the case. As I said in the prior post Brady has the higher hurdle to overcome.

Chris Mortonson stated on a radio interview yesterday that this judge has a history in arbitratiion cases of ruling for the arbitrator. He nearly unanimously (66 out of 68) ruled in favor of those authorized to make an in-house determination (outside of the formal legal system). The judge is strenuously trying to get the parties to work out an agreement. If they can't then his inclination (as evidenced by his record) indicates that Brady has a higher legal hurdle to overcome.

If you look at the totality of observations of radio, TV, newspaper, in-house staff, outside analysts not one observer, considered credible or not, has given an opinion that he is accurate, makes good decisions and looks like he is capable of being a franchise qb. There have been some observations that he had a good day or two but there has been no commentary that he has sustained his good outings with another good outing. I have not read of an account where anyone said something bad about his character or work ethic. As a person he is praised; he is someone that everyone roots for. Even with someone who has such a sterling personal reputation I have not found anyone who has regularly watched him who would conclude that he is capable of being a franchise qb. His own players are very fond of him. However, last year there was a near revolt by the offense, especially the receivers, to have him replaced by a pedestrian ill-prepared and taken off the street veteran qb who at least knew how to play. Whaley was candid about our qb situation and its general level of medocrity. What's obvious is obvious. There is a good chance that EJ might not even make this year's roster. If he does it would be as a third string qb. It's probable that he won't be on next year's roster because he has no future as a starter for us or for any team in the league.

Cassel is the starter because he is the safest choice with TT backing him up. Rex seems to have an affinity for TT and is intrigued by him. I see EJ falling by the wayside. I'm starting to have some doubts that he will even make it on the roster. This offseason the organization is going to put a lot of effort in the draft trying to secure a franchise qb. They will also be putting a lot of effort in finding a good qb who is already in the league because the team is built to win now. Wishful thinking on my part: If the Bills could have acquired a Foles or even Bradford this offseason there would have been some serious SB talk that wouldn't have sounded outlandishly.

I agree with your position. The overriding legal issue is whether the league has the authority to make a determination regardless of its reasonableness or fairness. If the disciplinary system is heavily tipped toward management then that is the system you work in. Especially in civil cases judges, as you are noting, put in a lot of effort into getting the parties to come to some accord before he has to make his own ruling. His job deals not only with the details of the law but also dealing with combative contestants and trying to steer them into some reasonable resolution. Again, I appreciate your contribution on clarifying the issues on this topic.

There are no angels sitting in the pews. Both sides manned the barricades instead of sitting down and working things out. Instead of commissioning a multi-million $$$ investigation and elevating the profile of the situation this issue got magnified. My position has been stated many times over. I don't doubt that a transgression occurred. But the transgression that happened was inconsequential as evidenced by how it affected the game i.e. it didn't. If the league would have handled it similarly to other equipment tampering cases this manageable problem could have been dealt with more quickly and simply. In my opinion Goodell was ingratiating himself with a faction of league owners who have felt that New England has a history of stretching the boundaries. It is this undercurrent of resentment that fueled this fury. Goodell played to that sentiment by the way he handled this issue. There is nothing unusual to have tension in a personal or working relationship. When relations are at a normal level minor issues can be satisfactorily worked out. But when the relations are poisonous and there is distrust a small and inconsequential act can spark an avalanche of a response that damages both sides. That's what happened here.

I don't disagree with your point that the judge is attempting to put pressure on both sides by pointing out weaknesses to each sides arguments. The judge has asked how did the league conclude that there was a consipirancy when there was no specific evidence that suports that conclusion. He also asked how can it be believed that the more deflated balls had an affect on the game when it was the opposite, that Brady performed better with the reinflated balls. The judge has also asked the Brady side very pointed questions regarding the phones and its destruction. The problem that the league has is that they "over punished" (in my opinion) for a transgression involving his participation that has not been clearly proven. If the league would have punished Brady for two games, with a possible reduction to one game under appeal, their position would have been much stronger.

Thank you for your involvement on this issue. You have been very illuminating. The people on either side of the battlelines who think this is simple clear cut case are wrong. The judge has directed pointed questions to both sides of the aisle that have left both sides squirming. In general it has demonstrated (at least to me) that the league has acted out of proportion to the offense and that their evidence is sketchy. That is not to assume that he is going to eventually side with Brady because the looming issue for him is RG's authority to rule. In your limited posting you have brought a lot of clarity to an issue that has attracted a lot of noise. Agan, thank you and keep posting as the proceedings go on.

Unless there is a settlement between the parties (which I don't see) I don't see a quick settlement. If you disagree I can respect your view.

If this case goes to trial an injunction would be granted by the judge.

This case is going to be tried in a civil court. The time lines are very long, especially with the pre-trial requirements. This case is not going to be a priority case for him. Civil trials can end up taking years before they get to the actual trial stage. I was victimized by a credit card theft case more than a year ago. Arrests were made more than nine months ago. The case still has not gone to trial. That was a criminal case in which scheduling is quicker than civil cases. In the Brady case you have two sides with high powered attorneys who are involved in a scorched earth strategy. If you think this case is going to go to trial sooner than a year you are wrong. It is not unusual for civil cases with numerous motions filed can take years before they are heard in a trial setting. Your an idiot. Your childish response is not surprising.

On this issue I am almost diametrically opposed to your position. However, I agree with your assessment that the judge is strenuously doing his best to get the parties to settle to avoid a trial. If this case gets to a trial the terms of the CBA, imbalanced as they are, would compel the judge to side with the league. The judge is signalling to the league that although they might be in a stronger position because of the CBA he can punish their side by delaying their punishment and then take his time scheduling and re-scheduling the trial dates. The reason that the judge is directing a little more attention to the league is not because they are in a weaker legal position but because they are in a stronger position from the legal procedural standpoint. He is indirectly telling them that although your bargaining position is stronger that doesn't mean that your case isn't flawed. This is not a criminal case where trial dates are scheduled on a faster pace. This is a civil issue that could result in trial dates years down the road. Even if a date is scheduled within a year or so the preliminary proceedings could result in the actual trial being scheduled years down the road. This judge is a no nonsense judge who is dealing with two entrenched sides who are willing to take a scorch earth approach.He is not going to be party to such foolishness, at least not in his court. This savvy judge can't make the parties come to an agreement. What he can do and is clearly signal to them that if they don't come to an acceptable agreement he will punish both recalcitrant sides with an open ended process that benefits no one.

Bill, The Levy/Jauron set this franchise back by years. I thought that Whitner was a dedicated and full effort player who had a good career . Compared to some of the horrible picks in the Bills' history of making odd picks Whitner was an acceptable selection (at least by our perplexing drafting standard). I always felt that his performance was unfairly downgraded because he played for a dysfunctional organization. Worst first round pick: Phil Doaks DT OK ST.

Pash is not some bumbling and meddling lawyer. He is at the near top of the league office. He was the primary negotiator for the league when the CBA was being fought over. He is a smart and tough hombre. Roger Goodell is not a lawyer. When it comes to legal strategy he is out of his element. It is not a stretch to believe that on this legal battle that Pash has more influence than RG. When RG made his appeal ruling it was prearranged by his legal team (headed by Pash) to run to a more favorable jurisdiction to get his ruling affirmed. It wasn't a haphazard decision. It was a well thought out and planned strategy. The point I''m making is that Pash being involved in the crafting of the report is a calculated action to modify the report so that it strengthens their hand in the legal battle. Wells allowing his report to be adjusted by the league office is an obvious demonstration that it was not only not an independent report but that the conclusions were predictable.

Who is Incognito going to appeal to? Goodell. Let's get serious. You know my position on this issue. I don't give a dam what Brady did or did not do because that is not the primary issue for me. The disciplinary process directed by Goodell is a flawed/tainted process. He has a tendency to make erratic rulings not based on facts and the degree of the transgression (in this case I consider it inconsequential) but makes predetermined judgments based on how he will be perceived. The Ray Rice case is a good example of my point that Goodell makes disciplinary decisions based on the perception of how he is going to be perceived. He raised the punishment level for Rice because there was a public outcry over his leniency. So he raised the punishment based on the claim he now had additional information. When the arbitrator reviewed the case it was determined that Goodell had no new evidence to justify altering his original punishment. In other words Goodell lied at the expense of the easy target, the vilified Ray Rice, in order to make himself look better. The problem isn't that they left out material so much as that the material they had was not solid in telling them what really happened. Why do you think that the report was replete with qualifying language? They made questionable assumptions based on their preconceived notions. There is nothing wrong in conducting a highly resourced and high profile investigation and determing that what happened can not be conclusively determined. It is not unusual for that to happen. But in this case it wasn't going to happen because Wells was very attuned to the outcome that Goodell wanted. You said it very succinctly before: Impasse.

I'm exhausted! I need a break holding the fort. There are more of them than us. Stop poking the already antagonizedf bear. It's already aggravated and wanting to do damage.

Very often when an objective set of eyes review facts and process issues related to Goodell rulings his rulings get altered. You and I both have the same perspective that the disciplinary process and how it adjudicates cases is even more important than the infraction. In this case a probable infraction that had zero impact not only on the game but on the performance. It's my view that Wells is far from being a neutral investigator. He is blatanting working on behalf of the commissioner and doing its bidding at the expense of carrying out his responsibilities in a fair and measured way. Incognito's claim that Wells left out a lot of supporting material for him because it didn't comport with the narrative that the commissioner's office wanted. He felt that the determination of what happened was determined prior to the investigation. There is merit to his position. He should know because he was victimized by it. http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/13409212/jim-turner-former-miami-dolphins-ol-coach-file-defamation-lawsuit-attorney-ted-wells

Odds are that he will stay with the Chargers. The few stories that I have read regarding his contract situation indicate that if he were to leave it would be to a team in the south and closer to his and his wife's families. Tennessee's drafting of Mariota closed out one of his preferred locations. Wishful thinking but if he was our qb this year the Bills would be serious SB contenders.

Goodell claimed that the investigation was independent when he received the report. The NFLPA challenged that claim in its legal briefs to the court. They documented that there was an intermingling between Wells's staff and the commissioner's office during the investigation to the extent that the league office and Wells''s team were both involved with the writing and editing of the report. When Wells was asked about his communication with the commissioner and his office he invoked the lawyer-client priviledged relationship in order not to comment on that issue. So much for independence! Roger Goodell is now changing the argument that the relationship between the two entities that he previously claimed were independent, now demonstrated not to be true, is irrelevant. Of course it is relevant because it makes no sense that if he was to an extent involved in the report's creation he is not going to rule against his own report. Maybe the best approach to this manufactured and extended fiasco is to have the court have the parties agree to have a respected arbitrator review all the evidence and handling of the case (process) and then make a binding judgment. The process is so tarnished that someone with more neutrality and credibility other than the erratic Goodell should take control of this monstrosity.