devldog131 Posted May 12, 2015 Share Posted May 12, 2015 What King seems to be hinting at is Brady could sue the league, which would likely cause this to drag into the season... If his uncrossable line in the sand is turning over his cell phone and email, suing the league is the last thing Brady is going to do. Assuming he gets past an NFL motion to dismiss, the first thing the judge will tell him to do is turn over his cell phone, email, and all other pertinent documentation to the NFL as part of the pre-trial discovery process. He won't be able to refuse then, or he'll end up in jail for contempt. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chuck Wagon Posted May 12, 2015 Share Posted May 12, 2015 (edited) He may have stumbled upon doing the right thing here though. And frankly, I think the bigger the punishment Brady* and the Pats** get the better it is for the league. Most fans of the league hate the Pats** and Brady* and think they cheat. The prevailing thought yesterday seemed to be more, "Wow, I didn't think they had the guts to do this" more than the Pats** and Brady* got too little or got too much. It's theory that the league suffers from the suspension of its star player on its SB winning team (I'm talking after the fact that this all happened and something had to be done about it.) in reality, I suspect the league benefits on PR and in its pocketbook the bigger and harder they come down on the Patriots** because most fans think there is favoritism because of Kraft, and Belichick** and Brady*. I completely agree that in a not so obvious way it was in the league's best interest to drop the hammer. Everyone viewed Goodell and Kraft as having a relationship that was a little too close for comfort for the other 31 teams and most importantly the fans. If the punishment came off as a slap on the wrist, you'd have angry fans for 31 teams instead of just angry fans for 1 and the mock outrage crowd from the media (you'd have that group either way). People are making too much out of "permanently tarnishing Brady" and his suspension. Lets not pretend if Brady returns in week 6 against the Colts in prime time it's got very good odds to be the highest rated game of the season. No one is going to say "well I would have watched that game, but Tom Brady is a cheater". Unless Garoppolo is complete garbage, they'll still likely start the season around 2-2 without Brady, which is exactly where they were last year. This is the same league that idolizes Joe Namath and allows him to give drunken interviews. They put Ray Lewis front and center on ESPN's coverage. They'll use Ben Roethlisberger to hype the first game of the year. There might be a few people who didn't hate Tom Brady before but now do, but he was not the most popular guy to begin with and this isn't exactly an OJ Simpson like fall from grace. Edited May 12, 2015 by Chuck Wagon Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lurker Posted May 12, 2015 Share Posted May 12, 2015 I suspect the league benefits on PR and in its pocketbook the bigger and harder they come down on the Patriots** because most fans think there is favoritism because of Kraft, and Belichick** and Brady*. Yeah, Roger has to put his foot down and stop this in the bud--or have the public perception of the NFL drift further and further toward having Vince McMahon be named the next commissioner... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoSaint Posted May 12, 2015 Share Posted May 12, 2015 If his uncrossable line in the sand is turning over his cell phone and email, suing the league is the last thing Brady is going to do. Assuming he gets past an NFL motion to dismiss, the first thing the judge will tell him to do is turn over his cell phone, email, and all other pertinent documentation to the NFL as part of the pre-trial discovery process. He won't be able to refuse then, or he'll end up in jail for contempt. in theory, the first thing that would happen is deciding how far reaching the nfls right to demand personal texts/emails are, and whether they reasonably punished the non-compliance --- not turning in his phone on day 1.... no? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelly the Dog Posted May 12, 2015 Share Posted May 12, 2015 in theory, the first thing that would happen is deciding how far reaching the nfls right to demand personal texts/emails are, and whether they reasonably punished the non-compliance --- not turning in his phone on day 1.... no? I imagine the first half would be the actual crime and everything it entailed and the second half would be the cover up. So I doubt the first thing would be about the phone at all. That may not be dug into until halfway through. I don't think there is a chance he takes it to court. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
starrymessenger Posted May 12, 2015 Share Posted May 12, 2015 The NFL has basically come out and said that Brady and the Pats are liars and cheaters. It's the sport itself saying this about its star player and most successful franchise. That has turned this into a player and franchise legacy issue more than anything else. The stakes are actually sky high. That's why TB can't do the honourable thing, admit guilt and accept the discipline. It's too late. That's why Kraft (and Yee) has now come out with guns blazing. I don't see any common ground here for a compromise as between NE and the league. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
devldog131 Posted May 12, 2015 Share Posted May 12, 2015 I imagine the first half would be the actual crime and everything it entailed and the second half would be the cover up. So I doubt the first thing would be about the phone at all. That may not be dug into until halfway through. I don't think there is a chance he takes it to court. Except for the fact that pre-trial discovery is the process in which all evidence pertinent to the entire case is disclosed to the opposing council before the trial begins. Hence "pre-trial" discovery. The league would immediately request that I formation as part of the process, and they have a pretty good case for it, seeing as text messages and phone calls involving Marsha were the crux of the investigation that resulted in the suspension. So, before the opening day of the civil trial, the league would have the information they requested from Marsha during the investigation and that he refused to provide. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelly the Dog Posted May 12, 2015 Share Posted May 12, 2015 The NFL has basically come out and said that Brady and the Pats are liars and cheaters. It's the sport itself saying this about its star player and most successful franchise. That has turned this into a player and franchise legacy issue more than anything else. The stakes are actually sky high. That's why TB can't do the honourable thing, admit guilt and accept the discipline. It's too late. That's why Kraft (and Yee) has now come out with guns blazing. I don't see any common ground here for a compromise as between NE and the league. If there is more that we don't know about the cheating that could and would be exposed if this case went to trial than surely Brady* can do the (still dishonorable) honorable thing and accept the discipline. He will appeal but he won't go to court. Yee and the Pats** may very well threaten to and do it loudly, but I would bet anything they don't go to court. They can't afford it. Except for the fact that pre-trial discovery is the process in which all evidence pertinent to the entire case is disclosed to the opposing council before the trial begins. Hence "pre-trial" discovery. The league would immediately request that I formation as part of the process, and they have a pretty good case for it, seeing as text messages and phone calls involving Marsha were the crux of the investigation that resulted in the suspension. So, before the opening day of the civil trial, the league would have the information they requested from Marsha during the investigation and that he refused to provide. Good point. We probably wouldn't know any of this as fans but that seems likely. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ouijaman Posted May 12, 2015 Share Posted May 12, 2015 The NFL has basically come out and said that Brady and the Pats are liars and cheaters. It's the sport itself saying this about its star player and most successful franchise. That has turned this into a player and franchise legacy issue more than anything else. The stakes are actually sky high. That's why TB can't do the honourable thing, admit guilt and accept the discipline. It's too late. That's why Kraft (and Yee) has now come out with guns blazing. I don't see any common ground here for a compromise as between NE and the league. Lance Armstrong syndrome. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
starrymessenger Posted May 12, 2015 Share Posted May 12, 2015 Lance Armstrong syndrome. Lance was a more hard core and serious offender by far IMO and is the extreme case, but I agree that the situations are in the same category. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
May Day 10 Posted May 12, 2015 Share Posted May 12, 2015 the sooner the Patriots show some class, the sooner this will go away. Would be in the rear-view by now if they handled it the right way in January. It would start to fade, then Brady, hoody, Kraft would have some sort of PC and ignite the flames again... Now, the way they are carrying on, this will be stretched in the news for quite awhile. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted May 12, 2015 Share Posted May 12, 2015 He may have stumbled upon doing the right thing here though. And frankly, I think the bigger the punishment Brady* and the Pats** get the better it is for the league. Most fans of the league hate the Pats** and Brady* and think they cheat. The prevailing thought yesterday seemed to be more, "Wow, I didn't think they had the guts to do this" more than the Pats** and Brady* got too little or got too much. It's theory that the league suffers from the suspension of its star player on its SB winning team (I'm talking after the fact that this all happened and something had to be done about it.) in reality, I suspect the league benefits on PR and in its pocketbook the bigger and harder they come down on the Patriots** because most fans think there is favoritism because of Kraft, and Belichick** and Brady*. Except Goodell couldn't care less about the fans. What difference do we make? He knows we'll watch the product on the field no matter what we think of Brady's punishment. He cares about the owners, and the revenue streams - TV, advertising, merchandising, overseas interest. Suspending Brady impacts at least two of those, and potentially all four. And really, only one of those matters: the league is driven by TV contracts (which is why "a team in LA" is so important - even if no one attends the games, it's still the #2 TV market in the country, and immediately increases the value of the TV contracts). So really, there's only one consideration as to what Goodell will or will not do: is perceived magnitude of the impact on broadcast agreements great enough that Goodell will cave like the spineless jellyfish he is? It doesn't even matter what the actual impact is (probably nothing), it only matters what Goodell perceives it to be (again, reference "hitting a woman" vs. "being caught on tape hitting a woman.") the sooner the Patriots show some class, the sooner this will go away. Would be in the rear-view by now if they handled it the right way in January. It would start to fade, then Brady, hoody, Kraft would have some sort of PC and ignite the flames again... Now, the way they are carrying on, this will be stretched in the news for quite awhile. All Brady had to say back in January was "I didn't know this was illegal. Hell, they changed the rules in 2007 so QBs could prepare and provide our own balls, and I assumed that rule change let us inflate them to the pressure we prefer." Just plausible enough to be accepted. $25k fine for making a dumb assumption. Instead, he had to go all Heisenberg and take the "I'm Tom !@#$ing Brady. I AM the one who knocks!" route. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WhitewalkerInPhilly Posted May 12, 2015 Share Posted May 12, 2015 All Brady had to say back in January was "I didn't know this was illegal. Hell, they changed the rules in 2007 so QBs could prepare and provide our own balls, and I assumed that rule change let us inflate them to the pressure we prefer." Just plausible enough to be accepted. $25k fine for making a dumb assumption. Instead, he had to go all Heisenberg and take the "I'm Tom !@#$ing Brady. I AM the one who knocks!" route. Pretty much. We would have gone "Oh, lol, those Patriots again" and that would have been the end of it. But no, we had Kraft demanding an apology from Goddell for even suspecting something like it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
K-9 Posted May 12, 2015 Share Posted May 12, 2015 Except Goodell couldn't care less about the fans. What difference do we make? He knows we'll watch the product on the field no matter what we think of Brady's punishment. He cares about the owners, and the revenue streams - TV, advertising, merchandising, overseas interest. Suspending Brady impacts at least two of those, and potentially all four. And really, only one of those matters: the league is driven by TV contracts (which is why "a team in LA" is so important - even if no one attends the games, it's still the #2 TV market in the country, and immediately increases the value of the TV contracts). So really, there's only one consideration as to what Goodell will or will not do: is perceived magnitude of the impact on broadcast agreements great enough that Goodell will cave like the spineless jellyfish he is? It doesn't even matter what the actual impact is (probably nothing), it only matters what Goodell perceives it to be (again, reference "hitting a woman" vs. "being caught on tape hitting a woman.") All Brady had to say back in January was "I didn't know this was illegal. Hell, they changed the rules in 2007 so QBs could prepare and provide our own balls, and I assumed that rule change let us inflate them to the pressure we prefer." Just plausible enough to be accepted. $25k fine for making a dumb assumption. Instead, he had to go all Heisenberg and take the "I'm Tom !@#$ing Brady. I AM the one who knocks!" route. There will be zero impact on the broadcast agreements. They are etched in stone through 2022 as it is. And even though they pay exorbitant fees for those rights, the networks are and have been the tail getting wagged by the NFL dog. Also, I doubt that the absence of a star player would even move the needle on ratings, even a little bit. GO BILLS!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevestojan Posted May 12, 2015 Share Posted May 12, 2015 Except Goodell couldn't care less about the fans. What difference do we make? He knows we'll watch the product on the field no matter what we think of Brady's punishment. He cares about the owners, and the revenue streams - TV, advertising, merchandising, overseas interest. Suspending Brady impacts at least two of those, and potentially all four. And really, only one of those matters: the league is driven by TV contracts (which is why "a team in LA" is so important - even if no one attends the games, it's still the #2 TV market in the country, and immediately increases the value of the TV contracts). So really, there's only one consideration as to what Goodell will or will not do: is perceived magnitude of the impact on broadcast agreements great enough that Goodell will cave like the spineless jellyfish he is? It doesn't even matter what the actual impact is (probably nothing), it only matters what Goodell perceives it to be (again, reference "hitting a woman" vs. "being caught on tape hitting a woman.") All Brady had to say back in January was "I didn't know this was illegal. Hell, they changed the rules in 2007 so QBs could prepare and provide our own balls, and I assumed that rule change let us inflate them to the pressure we prefer." Just plausible enough to be accepted. $25k fine for making a dumb assumption. Instead, he had to go all Heisenberg and take the "I'm Tom !@#$ing Brady. I AM the one who knocks!" route. You're making a whole lot of sense in this thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelly the Dog Posted May 12, 2015 Share Posted May 12, 2015 Except Goodell couldn't care less about the fans. What difference do we make? He knows we'll watch the product on the field no matter what we think of Brady's punishment. He cares about the owners, and the revenue streams - TV, advertising, merchandising, overseas interest. Suspending Brady impacts at least two of those, and potentially all four. And really, only one of those matters: the league is driven by TV contracts (which is why "a team in LA" is so important - even if no one attends the games, it's still the #2 TV market in the country, and immediately increases the value of the TV contracts). So really, there's only one consideration as to what Goodell will or will not do: is perceived magnitude of the impact on broadcast agreements great enough that Goodell will cave like the spineless jellyfish he is? It doesn't even matter what the actual impact is (probably nothing), it only matters what Goodell perceives it to be (again, reference "hitting a woman" vs. "being caught on tape hitting a woman.") I'm not talking about the fans, I'm talking about the same things you are. I think the revenue streams and TV would increase the harder they come down on them not decrease. The networks are Devils, too, but for the most part smart. More of their customers, the vast majority of them, dislike the Patriots**. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prickly Pete Posted May 12, 2015 Share Posted May 12, 2015 15 years of bitterness on display. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave mcbride Posted May 12, 2015 Share Posted May 12, 2015 Question about the $1 million fine: Isn't it really a $1 million fine with a $1.8 million plus rebate? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelly the Dog Posted May 12, 2015 Share Posted May 12, 2015 There will be zero impact on the broadcast agreements. They are etched in stone through 2022 as it is. And even though they pay exorbitant fees for those rights, the networks are and have been the tail getting wagged by the NFL dog. Also, I doubt that the absence of a star player would even move the needle on ratings, even a little bit. GO BILLS!!! I was typing that same thing but didn't want to get into it. The league is not affected by ratings for the most part because they are so high. That is why a team is not needed in LA. The networks pay as much as they possibly can for the rights because it's literally the biggest game around. If there is a loss in viewership the networks and local affiliates not the league loses the potential money. But as I said, the viewership is 90% (or whatever number) anti-Pats**.Question about the $1 million fine: Isn't it really a $1 million fine with a $1.8 million plus rebate? In reality, yes. Hell, they saved money on not paying a #1 pick, too! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave mcbride Posted May 12, 2015 Share Posted May 12, 2015 Instead, he had to go all Heisenberg and take the "I'm Tom !@#$ing Brady. I AM the one who knocks!" route. Now that is hilarious! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts