NoSaint Posted August 19, 2015 Posted August 19, 2015 I think its sad that whenever a suspension is handed out that by appealing it, it will get cut in half or reduced CBF i think thats far less common than you portray.
starrymessenger Posted August 19, 2015 Posted August 19, 2015 Glad to see the NFL sticking to their guns on this. http://www.msn.com/en-us/sports/nfl/report-brady-willing-to-accept-suspension-for-not-cooperating/ar-BBlSimw?ocid=iehp"ESPN’s Adam Schefter reports that Brady would be open to accepting a suspension only if the punishment is the result of failing to fully cooperate with the investigation. As you know, Brady refused to turn over his personal cell phone during the Ted Wells investigation. That is apparently not good enough for the NFL. The reason no progress is being made is that Brady refuses to admit he had any knowledge of alleged ball tampering. The NFL wants the 38-year-old to accept the findings of the Wells report if the two sides agree to settle." In terms of "compromise" this is the only deal ie failure to cooperate and 2 games, that always made sense. It also looks like the position that judge Berman was holding out to the parties as an obvious middle ground. If the League is hard nosing it they must be very confident that they are in a good place re the process being hard to attack. I tend to agree with them for what that's worth. I think that partly explains Brady's reliance on the bias argument, which personally I see as weak one and improbable to succeed. Still, the League is taking on some risk here IMO.
Kelly the Dog Posted August 19, 2015 Posted August 19, 2015 From early reports the Judge was harder today on the NFL than on Brady, and still trying to get a settlement. IMO, the NFL should just stick to its guns. If Brady was willing to say he assumes some guilt and responsibility, then two games is a fair compromise and settlement, although I would think that is more fair to Brady, who deserves the four. Without Brady admitting something, there should be no settlement whatsoever. I would want two games and admission of guilt even over four games and no admission. He did it. Period.
starrymessenger Posted August 19, 2015 Posted August 19, 2015 From early reports the Judge was harder today on the NFL than on Brady, and still trying to get a settlement. IMO, the NFL should just stick to its guns. If Brady was willing to say he assumes some guilt and responsibility, then two games is a fair compromise and settlement, although I would think that is more fair to Brady, who deserves the four. Without Brady admitting something, there should be no settlement whatsoever. I would want two games and admission of guilt even over four games and no admission. He did it. Period. Brady will never admit to knowledge/participation in a scheme. There will be no settlement IMO.
Kelly the Dog Posted August 19, 2015 Posted August 19, 2015 (edited) Brady will never admit to knowledge/participation in a scheme. There will be no settlement IMO.I don't think there is much of a chance of that either. I was just saying what I would think is fair. My prediction now is the league sticks to its guns, the Judge reluctantly upholds the appeal with a stern reprimand to the league, Brady appeals the decision and it goes to another appeal court. The only question then is whether or not that court allows for an injunction, allowing Brady to play until it is settled. They may and may not. Plus there is the when will the case be heard problem. The judge could say I'm not going to let you just delay this until after the season with motions to Brady's team, which they will surely try. Edited August 19, 2015 by Kelly the Dog
Rocky Landing Posted August 19, 2015 Posted August 19, 2015 In terms of "compromise" this is the only deal ie failure to cooperate and 2 games, that always made sense. It also looks like the position that judge Berman was holding out to the parties as an obvious middle ground. If the League is hard nosing it they must be very confident that they are in a good place re the process being hard to attack. I tend to agree with them for what that's worth. I think that partly explains Brady's reliance on the bias argument, which personally I see as weak one and improbable to succeed. Still, the League is taking on some risk here IMO. I think the league actually has more to "risk" (and I think that's a loose term) by settling under Brady*'s terms. By standing firm that Brady* at least knew that balls were being deflated (a fairly obvious assumption, imo), the worst case scenario for the league is that Brady*'s suspension is overturned. And, so what? In that case, they still get to say that they stood firm in defending the integrity of the game. What do they really care if Brady* plays, or not? Conversely, if they concede to Brady*'s claim that he knew nothing, and did nothing regarding deflated balls, and was only uncooperative, the league concedes to being petty, and vindictive, and ultimately uninterested in the game's integrity. I have to believe that public perception of the league is far more important to them than whether or not they lose this appeal.
K-9 Posted August 19, 2015 Posted August 19, 2015 If the NFL can't discipline players, rightly or wrongly, then they have no authority to do anything. Agreed. Rightly or wrongly (but definitely stupidly), the NFLPA agreed to this system in the CBA. Is it a paper-toothed tiger or something to abide by? If the Commissioner's office isn't allowed to act as authorized, what's the point? To be fair to everybody? It doesn't work that way. Somebody is gonna be unhappy with any decision, regardless. If the Commissioner's office really isn't allowed to operate with the authority granted them, then the owner's should eliminate the position. It's a player's league, but they don't run anything. GO BILLS!!!
starrymessenger Posted August 19, 2015 Posted August 19, 2015 I think the league actually has more to "risk" (and I think that's a loose term) by settling under Brady*'s terms. By standing firm that Brady* at least knew that balls were being deflated (a fairly obvious assumption, imo), the worst case scenario for the league is that Brady*'s suspension is overturned. And, so what? In that case, they still get to say that they stood firm in defending the integrity of the game. What do they really care if Brady* plays, or not? Conversely, if they concede to Brady*'s claim that he knew nothing, and did nothing regarding deflated balls, and was only uncooperative, the league concedes to being petty, and vindictive, and ultimately uninterested in the game's integrity. I have to believe that public perception of the league is far more important to them than whether or not they lose this appeal. I hear you but I'm not sure I agree. If the League were to lose, especially on the issue of bias, giving vindication to and substantiating the player association's vitriolic recent filing, it will be a serious black eye administered in the most high profile and public forum. Sure, you always get points for sticking by your principles and doing what you think is right, but in this case the bad PR from a strongly worded decision against the League would be a colossal embarrassment.
JohnC Posted August 19, 2015 Posted August 19, 2015 (edited) I hear you but I'm not sure I agree. If the League were to lose, especially on the issue of bias, giving vindication to and substantiating the player association's vitriolic recent filing, it will be a serious black eye administered in the most high profile and public forum. Sure, you always get points for sticking by your principles and doing what you think is right, but in this case the bad PR from a strongly worded decision against the League would be a colossal embarrassment. The judge is leaning more heavily on the league to settle. He is sending non-subtle signals to them that their approach and process to this case is problematic. From a legal standpoint I still believe that the league is in a better position than Brady is. But the judge is letting the league know that they shouldn't assume that by taking a hard line and uncompromising stance that it will work out for them. This link is only a few hours old. So it is an update. http://abcnews.go.com/Sports/wireStory/deflategate-back-court-brady-goodell-talks-fail-33170511 Edited August 19, 2015 by JohnC
BuffJim Posted August 19, 2015 Posted August 19, 2015 I think its sad that whenever a suspension is handed out that by appealing it, it will get cut in half or reduced CBF Marcel should be allowed to play after halftime against the Colts.
YoloinOhio Posted August 19, 2015 Author Posted August 19, 2015 @RapSheet: Per 2 sources informed of Tom Bradys thinking, his stance hasnt changed. Not willing to accept any suspension in settlement at this point
JohnC Posted August 19, 2015 Posted August 19, 2015 @RapSheet: Per 2 sources informed of Tom Bradys thinking, his stance hasnt changed. Not willing to accept any suspension in settlement at this point My understanding is that he is not willing to accept a suspension for the ball deflation while he is amenable to accept a suspension for a lack of cooperation.
NoSaint Posted August 19, 2015 Posted August 19, 2015 The judge is leaning more heavily on the league to settle. He is sending non-subtle signals to them that their approach and process to this case is problematic. From a legal standpoint I still believe that the league is in a better position than Brady is. But the judge is letting the league know that they shouldn't assume that by taking a hard line and uncompromising stance that it will work out for them. This link is only a few hours old. So it is an update. http://abcnews.go.com/Sports/wireStory/deflategate-back-court-brady-goodell-talks-fail-33170511 ill generally agree with everything here.
Clippers of Nfl Posted August 19, 2015 Posted August 19, 2015 If the NFL can't discipline players, rightly or wrongly, then they have no authority to do anything. Ding ding ding. It's not like he's being tortured. Miss 4 games for even the possibility of involvement is not even that unjust. There is more unfairness in this world.
NoSaint Posted August 19, 2015 Posted August 19, 2015 Ding ding ding. It's not like he's being tortured. Miss 4 games for even the possibility of involvement is not even that unjust. There is more unfairness in this world. well if the standard is "not the most unfair thing in the world," i think we might all be able to agree
BuffaloHokie13 Posted August 19, 2015 Posted August 19, 2015 well if the standard is "not the most unfair thing in the world," i think we might all be able to agree I'm at least 51% certain that the punishment is generally fair for the infraction
Clippers of Nfl Posted August 19, 2015 Posted August 19, 2015 well if the standard is "not the most unfair thing in the world," i think we might all be able to agree Dude the guy appealed his appeal. Stop there. Like promo said, if the nfl cant suspend on this basis, they have no authority. Kinda like that young assistant manager at a fast food joint telling people what to do. No one listens. And why should they?
JohnC Posted August 19, 2015 Posted August 19, 2015 (edited) ill generally agree with everything here. There is an avenue to a resolution. The league suspends him for a game and then it can spin it the way it wants. Brady accepts the suspension and then he can spin it the way he wants or simply say nothing. The problem is that the league is so heavily invested in this manufactured fiasco that it feels that it has to save face with Brady's acknowledgement that he was involved with the ball conspiracy. Edited August 19, 2015 by JohnC
NoSaint Posted August 19, 2015 Posted August 19, 2015 I'm at least 51% certain that the punishment is generally fair for the infraction even with inconsistency between the gauges we use to measure these things, im generally aware of some pretty unfair things out there.
thebandit27 Posted August 19, 2015 Posted August 19, 2015 There is an avenue to a resolution. The league suspends him for a game and then it can spin it the way it wants. Brady accepts the suspension and then he can spin it the way he wants or simply say nothing. The problem is that the league is so heavily invested in this manufactured fiasco that it feels that it has to save face with Brady's acknowledgement that he was involved with the ball conspiracy. Wait, the league is supposed to reduce the suspension by 75%, despite the fact that Brady admits that he didn't cooperate in the investigation, and has contradicted himself repeatedly in his attempts to explain away his alleged involvement in the deflating? That sounds excessive. I've said all along that I expected 4 games reduced to 2 on appeal. To me, that seems fair.
Recommended Posts