Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

this one will go extra innings. lets see who blinks.

Honestly this is starting to become fun. The wanker tommie Brady Vs sir Rog. and tommie has the firepower to intimidate Krafts sleepover buddy Goody.

this is great for the off season doldrums

  • Replies 1.9k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted

What would you think if the league stood strong but a third party vacated it later?

Which is exactly Brady's strategy. Take this from the court "preponderance of evidence" to the court of "beyond a reasonable doubt."

Posted

Which is exactly Brady's strategy. Take this from the court "preponderance of evidence" to the court of "beyond a reasonable doubt."

That's not how it would work. You're not showing well here.

Posted (edited)

That's not how it would work. You're not showing well here.

Says who? Is Brady not threatening to take it to court? Different standard there. Edited by PromoTheRobot
Posted

The court wouldn't be hearing his appeal to determine if he's guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. That simply not how it works.

Then why go to court at all? He's arguing his suspension is excessive. The courts would apply a different standard than the NFL.
Posted (edited)

Then why go to court at all? He's arguing his suspension is excessive. The courts would apply a different standard than the NFL.

The courts are to determine if the process in the CBA is legal and if it was properly followed, generally speaking... not to hear an appeal and make a ruling on if hes guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.

 

 

Though there's a good chance the nfl doesn't want a court ruling and may give it to an independent arbitrator at that point to give an impartial ruling based on the CBA (ie the same rules roger followed). Think tagliabue in bounty gate with the players.

Edited by NoSaint
Posted

Then why go to court at all? He's arguing his suspension is excessive. The courts would apply a different standard than the NFL.

Reasonable doubt standard applies to criminal cases; it has absolutely no relevance here.

 

If the appeal goes to federal court, the hearing will be held to determine of the process followed was legitimate, and if the punishment was appropriate. Does the possibility exist that new evidence will be taken into account? Sure.

 

The standard of proof will remain the same, since the rules by which both parties agreed to abide will be the measuring stick to which the appellate court will hold the entire case.

Posted

If that happens, the League better get ready for some major fan backlash. That would be utter BS and make a mockery of the League disciplinary process. The lesson? Just make enough of a stink and create a teeny tiny sliver of doubt and wedge yourself right through that sucker to daylight. It would also look an awful lot like a compromise between Kraft and Goodell--fine and draft picks in exchange for Brady. Until, of course, Bob tries to weasel those back, too, on the back of the suspension being vacated.

 

Yeah, really. Remember the huge backlash after spygate? The NFL never recovered from that....

 

Then why go to court at all? He's arguing his suspension is excessive. The courts would apply a different standard than the NFL.

 

You answered your own question. The court (it would likely be non-jury) would be deciding whether the NFL overstepped its authority in suspending Brady, not whether he played with defaulted balls.

Brady*** related

 

Patriots RB Jonas Gray Talks Tom Brady Getting Special Treatment from Bill Belichick

New England Patriots running back Jonas Gray talks with The Fumble about getting in trouble with Bill Belichick, and Tom Brady

 

Wait, Bill Belichick gives his 4 time SB winning QB Tom Brady special treatment??...treatment he does not also extend to..."Jonas Gray"??

 

Wow---that's a huge scoop! Smells like Pulitzer..

Posted

The longer it takes to hear the results of the appeal hearing with Brady & Goodell, the more I feel Bills fans are not going to like the news when it eventually is announced. :censored:

Posted

Yeah, really. Remember the huge backlash after spygate? The NFL never recovered from that....

The difference there is that was their first transgression and the NFL punished them the most they were allowed.

 

 

Yeah, really. Remember the huge backlash after spygate? The NFL never recovered from that....

 

 

You answered your own question. The court (it would likely be non-jury) would be deciding whether the NFL overstepped its authority in suspending Brady, not whether he played with defaulted balls.

 

The difference with SpyGate is that it was their first trangression and Goodell punished them to the fullest extent he was allowed.

 

The court can't do a thing about it. You yourself have said many times the players gave away their right to question Goodell's judgments.

Posted

The difference there is that was their first transgression and the NFL punished them the most they were allowed.

 

 

The difference with SpyGate is that it was their first trangression and Goodell punished them to the fullest extent he was allowed.

 

The court can't do a thing about it. You yourself have said many times the players gave away their right to question Goodell's judgments.

 

The players did absolutely. But there is an agreement in place and if there is a dispute as to how the agreement is being enforced, the court obviously will decide who's right in this case--just as it has done in the past

Posted

The players did absolutely. But there is an agreement in place and if there is a dispute as to how the agreement is being enforced, the court obviously will decide who's right in this case--just as it has done in the past

 

The court has no standing to say how much is "excessive."

Posted

 

The court has no standing to say how much is "excessive."

 

Courts don't have "standing". Parties who bring cases before the court do (or don't).

 

Are you trying to say the civil court system cannot hear such a case?

Posted

Courts don't have "standing". Parties who bring cases before the court do (or don't).

 

Are you trying to say the civil court system cannot hear such a case?

They might hear it. Or they might judge it has no merit. And if Tommy Boy purposely didn't cooperate because he was hiding incriminating evidence, as it appears, Goodell could extend the suspension even more.

Posted

They might hear it. Or they might judge it has no merit. And if Tommy Boy purposely didn't cooperate because he was hiding incriminating evidence, as it appears, Goodell could extend the suspension even more.

 

Well, judging that "it has no merit" means they heard all the evidence and ruled for the NFL. But you just said that they cannot rule on such a case of alleged excessive punishment.

 

Which is it?

Posted

Well, judging that "it has no merit" means they heard all the evidence and ruled for the NFL. But you just said that they cannot rule on such a case of alleged excessive punishment.

 

Which is it?

Never mind I was thinking criminal suit versus civil suit.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...