eball Posted July 7, 2015 Posted July 7, 2015 But there's the rub - the case against the league will be that a) Goodell should have been disqualified as the ultimate judge (i.e., he shouldn't be allowed to play judge, jury, and executioner) and b) we can see why because he misjudged circumstantial evidence (and they'll have a case there barring new evidence that implicates Brady). Whether that wins or not I don't know, but the league's record in these types of cases is quite poor. For the umpteenth time...that is the system the players agreed to and bargained for. The court is not going to overturn it unless Goodell makes an obvious mistake. Having an opinion with which others may disagree regarding circumstantial evidence is not an obvious mistake.
dave mcbride Posted July 7, 2015 Posted July 7, 2015 He orchestrated a plan to blatantly steal the balls and alter them in a championship game, then completely denied it and lied about it so much that two longtime employees who helped him lost their jobs. If you believe there is any chance they did this completely on their own I don't know what to say. I don't know whether he "orchestrated" anything. I don't even know if the balls were improperly deflated based on the conflicting reports I've read.
Kelly the Dog Posted July 7, 2015 Posted July 7, 2015 LOL! I suggest looking up the penalties for the following: overcurved stick in the NHL. Oversized pads in the NHL. ball doctoring by pitchers in MLB. corked bat in MLB. For all of those violations - of which are essentially the same as what Brady is accused of doing - the penalties are very small: 1-2 games after your second violation in the NHL and 7-8 games in MLB (less than 5 percent of the season). Brady was banned for 25 percent of the season. You're talking about one instance. In Bradys case there are multiple games, in fact deflator goes back to seasons previous. They discussed at least four different games and maybe more. I don't know whether he "orchestrated" anything. I don't even know if the balls were improperly deflated based on the conflicting reports I've read. So you believe it is entirely possible that all 10 or so coincidences I outlined above happened in a row. Got it.
dave mcbride Posted July 7, 2015 Posted July 7, 2015 You're talking about one instance. In Bradys case there are multiple games, in fact deflator goes back to seasons previous. They discussed at least four different games and maybe more. So you believe it is entirely possible that all 10 or so coincidences I outlined above happened in a row. Got it. Oh come on. They have no evidence that the ball was deflated below regulation levels for any of those games. None. In case that didn't sink in, I'll repeat: n-o-n-e. I respect your hatred of the man, but don't descend to lynch-mob arguments.
Doc Posted July 7, 2015 Posted July 7, 2015 LOL! I suggest looking up the penalties for the following: overcurved stick in the NHL. Oversized pads in the NHL. ball doctoring by pitchers in MLB. corked bat in MLB. For all of those violations - of which are essentially the same as what Brady is accused of doing - the penalties are very small: 1-2 games after your second violation in the NHL and 7-8 games in MLB (less than 5 percent of the season). Brady was banned for 25 percent of the season. If you can't do the time...
Kelly the Dog Posted July 7, 2015 Posted July 7, 2015 Oh come on. They have no evidence that the ball was deflated below regulation levels for any of those games. None. In case that didn't sink in, I'll repeat: n-o-n-e. I respect your hatred of the man, but don't descend to lynch-mob arguments. I'm not saying they proved it. I'm saying it's much different than a one time corked bat incident or curved stick, which could also have been used in multiple games. This was an orchestrated idea, to steal all the game balls used by everyone when your team has the ball, stealing from the referees right after they measured them, before a championship game, alter them all, using two long time employees of the team to do it for you, and then deny it under investigation after being caught, causing your team to fire these two guys and lose a number one pick and pay a million dollar fine which your owner, notorious for being a powerhouse, just accepted (saying, laughably, for the good of the league). If you don't see the difference between that and one hockey player curving his stick too long, so be it. I don't think the deflating helps him at all, which I have said endlessly. I actually think it helps him less than Brady himself thinks it helps him.
NoSaint Posted July 7, 2015 Posted July 7, 2015 For the umpteenth time...that is the system the players agreed to and bargained for. The court is not going to overturn it unless Goodell makes an obvious mistake. Having an opinion with which others may disagree regarding circumstantial evidence is not an obvious mistake. if brady takes it to court, and the nfl also has something they arent totally proud of in the process it could easily go to an arbitator that hears it and sees the argument that is being made about it being over the top. at that point, its a wild card.
K-9 Posted July 7, 2015 Posted July 7, 2015 We will find out soon enough, right? If it doesn't go well for Brady, then he has to decide if he'll take this to court. If he does, then we'll find out a lot more about those two guys. They may not be innocent at all, but people do in fact blow off steam on email/texts about their bosses all of the time. It's not smart to do that, but people do it anyway. Anyway, I think he definitely goes to court; you don't think he will. The problem for the league is the evidence against *Brady* in the Wells report is truly shaky (there's NOTHING that pins him in that report). Maybe if he goes to court he gets nailed based on the introduction of stronger evidence than what is in the report, and maybe he doesn't go because he's guilty and fearful he'll get nailed. But if he goes, we'll have to rethink our presumptions about all of this. But I can also easily see the penalty being significantly reduced too. If that happens, I don't have any idea what will happen. You honestly think the texts between Jastremski and McNally and the texts between Brady and Jastremski along with the phone call from Brady to Jastremski the day after the story broke, AREN'T strong pieces of circumstantial evidence? Really? GO BILLS!!!
Kelly the Dog Posted July 7, 2015 Posted July 7, 2015 if brady takes it to court, and the nfl also has something they arent totally proud of in the process it could easily go to an arbitator that hears it and sees the argument that is being made about it being over the top. at that point, its a wild card. That is doubtful but certainly possible. Everything I have read about the process from legitimate sources discusses the process and thinks it would be a tough case to make. In my mind it's impossible for an arbitrator to look at every bit of the evidence and conclude that Brady did nothing wrong, knew nothing about it, told the truth and should not be punished at all for tampering, breaking the rules, lying to investigators and non cooperating. You honestly think the texts between Jastremski and McNally and the texts between Brady and Jastremski along with the phone call from Brady to Jastremski the day after the story broke, AREN'T strong pieces of circumstantial evidence? Really? GO BILLS!!! Brady called him three days in a row at 7am, talking for more than 10 minutes each time, about an upcoming wedding. That's what they said.
NoSaint Posted July 7, 2015 Posted July 7, 2015 That is doubtful but certainly possible. Everything I have read about the process from legitimate sources discusses the process and thinks it would be a tough case to make. In my mind it's impossible for an arbitrator to look at every bit of the evidence and conclude that Brady did nothing wrong, knew nothing about it, told the truth and should not be punished at all for tampering, breaking the rules, lying to investigators and non cooperating. Brady called him three days in a row at 7am, talking for more than 10 minutes each time, about an upcoming wedding. That's what they said. i didnt say "do nothing wrong" but an independent person certainly could conclude it is out of line with precedence, potentially. essentially the tagliabue/bountygate style ruling.
Kelly the Dog Posted July 7, 2015 Posted July 7, 2015 (edited) i didnt say "do nothing wrong" but an independent person certainly could conclude it is out of line with precedence, potentially. essentially the tagliabue/bountygate style ruling. I just don't see how two games for the infraction and two games for the lying and obstruction could be considered grossly out of line. Remember, the court or arbitrator is not ruling on what should be fair or not, or even if it was a little too much. Of if it were us we think one game would have fit the crime. They are ruling on whether the league, under its own rules, went SO far out of line that it is almost criminal to Brady. I truly do not see how that is possible. I totally see how it is possible if they were ruling what is fair. Edited July 7, 2015 by Kelly the Dog
NoSaint Posted July 7, 2015 Posted July 7, 2015 I just don't see how two games for the infraction and two games for the lying and obstruction could be considered grossly out of line. Remember, the court or arbitrator is not ruling on what should be fair or not, or even if it was a little too much. Of if it were us we think one game would have fit the crime. They are ruling on whether the league, under its own rules, went SO far out of line that it is almost criminal to Brady. I truly do not see how that is possible. I totally see how it is possible if they were ruling what is fair. the nfl could, just like in bounty gate, give it to an independent person for an all new appeal which wouldnt need to be "grossly out of line" but simply a punishment that the person hearing it doesnt agree with. i was surprised the nfl didnt give it to an independent person on appeal from the get go, to avoid that angle.
Kelly the Dog Posted July 7, 2015 Posted July 7, 2015 the nfl could, just like in bounty gate, give it to an independent person for an all new appeal which wouldnt need to be "grossly out of line" but simply a punishment that the person hearing it doesnt agree with. i was surprised the nfl didnt give it to an independent person on appeal from the get go, to avoid that angle. I could be wrong but I think that was Tagliabue's argument. not that he just didn't agree with them but that they were grossly out of line. That the coaches and Saints managers contaminated the case and that fines were due to the players but any suspensions were grossly exaggerated penalties for the players carrying out the bounties of the coaches.
LeGOATski Posted July 7, 2015 Posted July 7, 2015 LOL! I suggest looking up the penalties for the following: overcurved stick in the NHL. Oversized pads in the NHL. ball doctoring by pitchers in MLB. corked bat in MLB. For all of those violations - of which are essentially the same as what Brady is accused of doing - the penalties are very small: 1-2 games after your second violation in the NHL and 7-8 games in MLB (less than 5 percent of the season). Brady was banned for 25 percent of the season. The penalties in those leagues should obviously be much harsher...
The Wiz Posted July 7, 2015 Posted July 7, 2015 I could be wrong but I think that was Tagliabue's argument. not that he just didn't agree with them but that they were grossly out of line. That the coaches and Saints managers contaminated the case and that fines were due to the players but any suspensions were grossly exaggerated penalties for the players carrying out the bounties of the coaches. I also think that is why Goodell didn't recuse himself from the appeal.
Kelly the Dog Posted July 7, 2015 Posted July 7, 2015 I also think that is why Goodell didn't recuse himself from the appeal. Yep. I also think that Bountygate was weird all around, and part of Tagliabue's actions were not only vindictive but indicative of his problem with Goodell. And he was B word-slapping Goodell for overstepping his bounds as a general rule not so much as in this case. And while I totally agree that Goodell has overstepped his bounds, and shouldn't be doing what he is doing, and is doing it erratically, I don't think Tags should have used that assignment to prove his point. That's pretty hypocritical IMO.
The Wiz Posted July 7, 2015 Posted July 7, 2015 Yep. I also think that Bountygate was weird all around, and part of Tagliabue's actions were not only vindictive but indicative of his problem with Goodell. And he was B word-slapping Goodell for overstepping his bounds as a general rule not so much as in this case. And while I totally agree that Goodell has overstepped his bounds, and shouldn't be doing what he is doing, and is doing it erratically, I don't think Tags should have used that assignment to prove his point. That's pretty hypocritical IMO.Yup. Also, I get the feeling that this is why it will likely be reduced to two games. Roger is going to play poker and hope that the reduction gets Brady to fold and put it all behind them. I don't know what kind of evidence the pats can draw up with the investigation process but I'm sure there are things that stand out in the court room -not recusing himself -Troy Vincent handing out the punishment -possibility of a sting You get my drift.
K-9 Posted July 7, 2015 Posted July 7, 2015 That is doubtful but certainly possible. Everything I have read about the process from legitimate sources discusses the process and thinks it would be a tough case to make. In my mind it's impossible for an arbitrator to look at every bit of the evidence and conclude that Brady did nothing wrong, knew nothing about it, told the truth and should not be punished at all for tampering, breaking the rules, lying to investigators and non cooperating. Brady called him three days in a row at 7am, talking for more than 10 minutes each time, about an upcoming wedding. That's what they said. And how long had it been since Brady spoke to Jastremski over the phone before then?
Kelly the Dog Posted July 7, 2015 Posted July 7, 2015 And how long had it been since Brady spoke to Jastremski over the phone before then? Well, let's see... Although I'm sure it's all coincidence... There was no evidence of phone calls or texts between Brady and Jastremski in the six months prior, but on January 19th, that changed. The report details the following: Two calls lasting 25 minutes and 2 seconds on January 19th; Two calls lasting 9 minutes and 55 seconds on January 20th; Two calls lasting 20 minutes and 52 seconds on January 21st. That totals 55 minutes and 49 seconds worth of calls between Tom Brady and the equipment assistant, and they ended when Jastremski surrendered his phone on January 21st, for forensic investigation.
K-9 Posted July 8, 2015 Posted July 8, 2015 Well, let's see... Although I'm sure it's all coincidence... There was no evidence of phone calls or texts between Brady and Jastremski in the six months prior, but on January 19th, that changed. The report details the following: Two calls lasting 25 minutes and 2 seconds on January 19th; Two calls lasting 9 minutes and 55 seconds on January 20th; Two calls lasting 20 minutes and 52 seconds on January 21st. That totals 55 minutes and 49 seconds worth of calls between Tom Brady and the equipment assistant, and they ended when Jastremski surrendered his phone on January 21st, for forensic investigation. So nothing for six months and then, AFTER the story breaks, all that activity at 7 IN THE MORNING, to discuss a wedding. That's almost as good as saying "The Deflator" was a reference to McNally's weight loss program. How many lies does the league have to tolerate before even considering reducing Brady's penalty? I keep it at 4 games just for the utter arrogance and contempt shown for the league's investigatory process. And again, "the science" is just a sideshow. GO BILLS!!!
Recommended Posts