K-9 Posted July 15, 2015 Share Posted July 15, 2015 Show me any punishment in line with this for non-cooperation or for equipment violations, I guess would be my return volley Doesn't need to be precedent for Goodell to make a ruling. But we don't know if Brady offered any level of cooperation at his appeal, either. Should he take into consideration the Patriots* have previously been found guilty of cheating? GO BILLS!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoSaint Posted July 15, 2015 Share Posted July 15, 2015 Doesn't need to be precedent for Goodell to make a ruling. But we don't know if Brady offered any level of cooperation at his appeal, either. Should he take into consideration the Patriots* have previously been found guilty of cheating? GO BILLS!!! for an organizational punishment, sure. For a player? No. And precedent can matter if this kicks into an appeal outside goodell. I'm not sure how you'd argue otherwise. It's very possible the nfl doesn't want this in court either, offers a 3rd party appeal and they say there is no basis for an extended suspension (or possibly any). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
K-9 Posted July 15, 2015 Share Posted July 15, 2015 for an organizational punishment, sure. For a player? No. And precedent can matter if this kicks into an appeal outside goodell. I'm not sure how you'd argue otherwise. It's very possible the nfl doesn't want this in court either, offers a 3rd party appeal and they say there is no basis for an extended suspension (or possibly any). I argue otherwise because you seem to suggest that the courts would need to see an established precedent from which Goodell can draw comparable levels of punishment. They don't. In clear instances of rules violations and failure to comply with the league mandate to cooperate, does Goodell have the latitude or not? IMO, that's the only question up for consideration by the courts. And in this case, I think it's pretty black and white. Vilma and other cases were far murkier. I agree that the league would prefer not to go to court. As would the NFLPA and Brady. There's a reason that room was full of 40 people at his appeal hearing. GO BILLS!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoSaint Posted July 15, 2015 Share Posted July 15, 2015 I argue otherwise because you seem to suggest that the courts would need to see an established precedent from which Goodell can draw comparable levels of punishment. They don't. In clear instances of rules violations and failure to comply with the league mandate to cooperate, does Goodell have the latitude or not? IMO, that's the only question up for consideration by the courts. And in this case, I think it's pretty black and white. Vilma and other cases were far murkier. I agree that the league would prefer not to go to court. As would the NFLPA and Brady. There's a reason that room was full of 40 people at his appeal hearing. GO BILLS!!! Vilma, much like I'm saying here might, didn't end in court but with the nfl passing the buck to an independent arbitrator (tagliabue) who called out goodell for abusing that latitude. I'm still not sure if it's my end or yours but that doesn't seem to be landing cleanly. I'm saying goodell thumps his chest, Brady flexes back - both avoid court with a 3rd party stepping in and that third party potentially saying goodell was reacting emotionally and reducing it as there's no precedent for suspension depending on how the third party frames some of the issues Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G-Daddy Posted July 15, 2015 Share Posted July 15, 2015 Can anyone just take responsibility for their actions these days. Make him sit a year if he loses the suit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
K-9 Posted July 15, 2015 Share Posted July 15, 2015 Vilma, much like I'm saying here might, didn't end in court but with the nfl passing the buck to an independent arbitrator (tagliabue) who called out goodell for abusing that latitude. I'm still not sure if it's my end or yours but that doesn't seem to be landing cleanly. I'm saying goodell thumps his chest, Brady flexes back - both avoid court with a 3rd party stepping in and that third party potentially saying goodell was reacting emotionally and reducing it as there's no precedent for suspension depending on how the third party frames some of the issues I don't think either argument is landing poorly. I just don't think this case requires any amount of chest pumping by the commissioner. It's pretty cut and dry. Especially from an "integrity of the game" perspective and the onus expressly put on commissioners of all sports leagues regarding that stricture. No doubt Brady needs to flex back, though. GO BILLS!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnC Posted July 15, 2015 Share Posted July 15, 2015 (edited) That's all well and good about Vilma, Williams, and Peyton but the fact remains it has NO bearing on anything. Please tell me how Goodell could have handled the Patriots* case in a "wiser way." As has been mentioned numerous times, he is well within the scope of his authority which was granted him by the NFLPA. If the question is what is the "appropriate" punishment for refusing to cooperate in a league investigation, I think he is the sole arbiter in that regard as well. I get why the NFLPA threatens a suit, though. With any luck, we'll see it happen. GO BILLS!!! No one questions the point that Goodell has the authority to rule on these cases. That is understood. But having that authority and making decisions that are erratic, inconsistent and are based on the perception of how he is perceived rather than on the facts and on established guidelines erodes his credibility. You and others keep bringing up the point that he didn't cooperate. That isn't necessarily true. He has a very talented attorney who is advising him. If the attorney tells him how he should or should not respond to the inquisitors then he would be a fool not to follow his counsel's advice. Brady and his legal representatives met with Goodell and his multitude of support staff under oath and responded to all questions in a full day of grilling. What more do you want? There have been issues regarding the treatment of balls with other teams, San Diego and Atlanta. It was clear that both teams mishandled the balls. Each team was subjected to a miniscule fine. Compare that with the New England fiasco? I have never said that something inappropriate didn't happen in the Colts game. What I have often stated is that this matter has been exaggerated beyond what it should have been and the saga has been an extended affair because of the incompetence of Goodell in executing his disciplinary responsibilities. The solution to this foolishness was for the commissioner to immediately order that league staff will now handle the balls prior and during the game. Simple solution to a simple problem! Edited July 15, 2015 by JohnC Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Wiz Posted July 15, 2015 Share Posted July 15, 2015 (edited) Doesn't need to be precedent for Goodell to make a ruling. But we don't know if Brady offered any level of cooperation at his appeal, either. Should he take into consideration the Patriots* have previously been found guilty of cheating? GO BILLS!!! From what the reports were, it made it sound like Brady was just there and the lawyers did most of the talking. I doubt anything new came to surface. Edited July 15, 2015 by The Wiz Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
What a Tuel Posted July 15, 2015 Share Posted July 15, 2015 http://espn.go.com/boston/nfl/story/_/id/13259683/nfl-players-association-fight-tom-brady-ruling-ban-stays Union to fight ruling if any of QB's ban remains mother 's Patriots adjust weight-loss 'deflator' reference The Patriots' website has adjusted a portion of text that claimed locker room attendant Jim McNally referred to himself as the "deflator" because he was trying to lose weight. Wow. Just wow. NFL investigators, according to the June 18 annotation, never asked McNally or Jastremski about the text message that included the word "deflator." "They simply assumed, with no basis or investigation whatsoever, what "deflator" must mean, and then relied on their assumption to filter all the other evidence they received," the annotation reads. "What they did know, but chose to ignore, is that 'deflate' is often used in contexts having nothing to do with taking air out of footballs -- and that even these two men used the term in their texts in various ways having nothing to do with footballs." Did they not deny Wells another interview of McNally? Citing that he should have asked him when he had the chance? And then here they say this is something that should of clearly been investigated more thoroughly by the Well's team, but they themselves denied Well's thorough access to investigate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted July 15, 2015 Share Posted July 15, 2015 I'm curious how the NFLPA can file on Brady's behalf when he was the one who denied their representation in the first place. They can still claim that the CBA is being violated. Which is really what this is about for the NFLPA: breaking the ridiculous disciplinary policy written into the CBA that makes Goodell judge, jury, and executioner. But !@#$ 'em. Yes, the disciplinary system is a complete joke, but they agreed to it nonetheless... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoSaint Posted July 15, 2015 Share Posted July 15, 2015 They can still claim that the CBA is being violated. Which is really what this is about for the NFLPA: breaking the ridiculous disciplinary policy written into the CBA that makes Goodell judge, jury, and executioner. But !@#$ 'em. Yes, the disciplinary system is a complete joke, but they agreed to it nonetheless... And while true, as a fan of the sport id rather it get fixed or the nfl voluntarily realize the issue and avoid it going forward; despite my &@$) them feelings for agreeing to it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G-Daddy Posted July 15, 2015 Share Posted July 15, 2015 Brady most likely Rosen'd the board this morning. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Wiz Posted July 15, 2015 Share Posted July 15, 2015 They can still claim that the CBA is being violated. Which is really what this is about for the NFLPA: breaking the ridiculous disciplinary policy written into the CBA that makes Goodell judge, jury, and executioner. But !@#$ 'em. Yes, the disciplinary system is a complete joke, but they agreed to it nonetheless... So the NFLPA is going to take the NFL(Goodell) to court over something they agreed too, and more than likely, have signed documentation of them agreeing to it? Sounds like a good idea. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
K-9 Posted July 16, 2015 Share Posted July 16, 2015 No one questions the point that Goodell has the authority to rule on these cases. That is understood. But having that authority and making decisions that are erratic, inconsistent and are based on the perception of how he is perceived rather than on the facts and on established guidelines erodes his credibility. You and others keep bringing up the point that he didn't cooperate. That isn't necessarily true. He has a very talented attorney who is advising him. If the attorney tells him how he should or should not respond to the inquisitors then he would be a fool not to follow his counsel's advice. Brady and his legal representatives met with Goodell and his multitude of support staff under oath and responded to all questions in a full day of grilling. What more do you want? There have been issues regarding the treatment of balls with other teams, San Diego and Atlanta. It was clear that both teams mishandled the balls. Each team was subjected to a miniscule fine. Compare that with the New England fiasco? I have never said that something inappropriate didn't happen in the Colts game. What I have often stated is that this matter has been exaggerated beyond what it should have been and the saga has been an extended affair because of the incompetence of Goodell in executing his disciplinary responsibilities. The solution to this foolishness was for the commissioner to immediately order that league staff will now handle the balls prior and during the game. Simple solution to a simple problem! Again, how did Goodell act "erratically and inconsistently" in this case? How have his actions in this case been based on "perception?" We keep on bringing up the point about non-cooperation because that is an irrefutable violation of league rules. Whatever Brady said at his appeal in the way of cooperation or not, was months after the fact. If he DID offer more in the way of cooperation, I'm sure it could carry weight in influencing Goodell's decision on the appeal. The treatment of balls by other teams has nothing to do with this case, nor do those cases rise to this level of infraction, given the lack of cooperation and the fact that McNally lied about his activity pre-game. Why did he lie? There's also the question of the Patriots* being repeat offenders. Is that not relevant? How has Goodell acted incompetently in this case? What has he done that is not in line with his office? Just because you don't like the man and he's had previous rulings challenged and overruled, doesn't mean he's wrong in this case. GO BILLS!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelly the Dog Posted July 16, 2015 Share Posted July 16, 2015 Brady didn't do anything wrong at all and cooperated fully and yet the Patriots fired the two ball guys and accepted the loss of a #1 pick and a million dollars. Right. It looks like Goodell's fault Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoSaint Posted July 16, 2015 Share Posted July 16, 2015 Again, how did Goodell act "erratically and inconsistently" in this case? How have his actions in this case been based on "perception?" We keep on bringing up the point about non-cooperation because that is an irrefutable violation of league rules. Whatever Brady said at his appeal in the way of cooperation or not, was months after the fact. If he DID offer more in the way of cooperation, I'm sure it could carry weight in influencing Goodell's decision on the appeal. The treatment of balls by other teams has nothing to do with this case, nor do those cases rise to this level of infraction, given the lack of cooperation and the fact that McNally lied about his activity pre-game. Why did he lie? There's also the question of the Patriots* being repeat offenders. Is that not relevant? How has Goodell acted incompetently in this case? What has he done that is not in line with his office? Just because you don't like the man and he's had previous rulings challenged and overruled, doesn't mean he's wrong in this case. GO BILLS!!! It seems your catch all isn't actually past rulings but instead "because he can" All the two of us are pointing out is that it hasn't always worked for him. Brady didn't do anything wrong at all and cooperated fully and yet the Patriots fired the two ball guys and accepted the loss of a #1 pick and a million dollars. Right. It looks like Goodell's fault Both of us have said Brady did but that the punishment may far exceed comparables Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Wiz Posted July 16, 2015 Share Posted July 16, 2015 No one questions the point that Goodell has the authority to rule on these cases. That is understood. But having that authority and making decisions that are erratic, inconsistent and are based on the perception of how he is perceived rather than on the facts and on established guidelines erodes his credibility. You and others keep bringing up the point that he didn't cooperate. That isn't necessarily true. He has a very talented attorney who is advising him. If the attorney tells him how he should or should not respond to the inquisitors then he would be a fool not to follow his counsel's advice. Brady and his legal representatives met with Goodell and his multitude of support staff under oath and responded to all questions in a full day of grilling. What more do you want? There have been issues regarding the treatment of balls with other teams, San Diego and Atlanta. It was clear that both teams mishandled the balls. Each team was subjected to a miniscule fine. Compare that with the New England fiasco? I have never said that something inappropriate didn't happen in the Colts game. What I have often stated is that this matter has been exaggerated beyond what it should have been and the saga has been an extended affair because of the incompetence of Goodell in executing his disciplinary responsibilities. The solution to this foolishness was for the commissioner to immediately order that league staff will now handle the balls prior and during the game. Simple solution to a simple problem! Based off of the information that they had. No new details of the investigation were going to be gather at the time of the appeal. So you have Brady's auto-tuned interview and what McNally and Jastremski said in the text messages as evidence. Not really a whole lot to go on as far as prosecution goes. More than likely it was about 15 questions asked to Brady and lawyers at up 30-45 minutes to decide they were going to either answer or not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelly the Dog Posted July 16, 2015 Share Posted July 16, 2015 It seems your catch all isn't actually past rulings but instead "because he can" All the two of us are pointing out is that it hasn't always worked for him. Both of us have said Brady did but that the punishment may far exceed comparables If you think he did it, which any normal human does, that automatically means he both cheated and obstructed. And the cheating was over a long period. Two games for cheating and two games for obstructing is hardly exorbitant. And it's way different than just letting air out. It's stealing all the game balls from the officials and altering them in a bathroom in a championship game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Wiz Posted July 16, 2015 Share Posted July 16, 2015 (edited) If you think he did it, which any normal human does, that automatically means he both cheated and obstructed. And the cheating was over a long period. Two games for cheating and two games for obstructing is hardly exorbitant. And it's way different than just letting air out. It's stealing all the game balls from the officials and altering them in a bathroom in a championship game. He nor the other two stole the game balls, Brady gave them money to turn a blind eye to them taking the game balls. It's all on the refs now, CORRUPTION!!!! Oh, I thought this was the Kromer thread. Edited July 16, 2015 by The Wiz Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoSaint Posted July 16, 2015 Share Posted July 16, 2015 If you think he did it, which any normal human does, that automatically means he both cheated and obstructed. And the cheating was over a long period. Two games for cheating and two games for obstructing is hardly exorbitant. And it's way different than just letting air out. It's stealing all the game balls from the officials and altering them in a bathroom in a championship game.Your literally pulling out of thin air that it's hardly exorbitant though. It's simply your opinion and you keep presenting it as fact. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts