Brady 4 game suspension upheld; Will go to court

[timtebow15]

Brady is so entitled. He obviously isn't stupid but his ego is so massive and he is such an habitual liar. I don't know how anyone can defend him now. I always wondered why he didn't just say at the very beginning, Yeah, I like the balls inflated to the legal minimum and instructed the equipment people to do that. I can't help it if they screwed up.

 

The only logical reason for not doing that is he was directing them to deflate balls under the minimum limit. And Belicheck didn't mind because he knew a side benefit was that turnovers would likely be reduced - they certainly wouldn't be higher. Then Brady destroys his phone claiming he always does that except there is an older phone they produce. The whole organization will do anything to win and they have no pride. It's not even the cheating that bothers me the most - it's the boldfaced lying!!!!

 

I really hope this is the beginning of the end for this franchise. They deserves two decades like the Bills just went through.

Edited July 29, 2015 by timtebow15

[DC Tom]

Maybe it's sinking in in Patriot-land as well (results to a Boston Globe poll)...

 

http://www.bostonglobe.com/sports/2015/07/28/poll-does-nfl-ruling-change-your-mind-brady/BmuewuQ2N9Gr8PVMN5hPDI/story.html

 

35% of responders think Brady destroyed his phone for undisclosed reasons having nothing to do with the investigation. Of course, given that a good number of non-Pats fans are voting in that pool, that 35% probably represents more than half of all Pats fans.

 

What a bunch of idiots.

[DJasper Probincrux III]

It'll be interesting to hear the HoF discussion with regards to Tommy Boy and if some of the journalists who have their panties in a twist about Bonds, McGwire, et al are quick to vote Tommy Boy in even though this is now the second cheating scandal he's been caught up in (one directly participated in, and one he was a direct benefactor of).

 

35% of responders think Brady destroyed his phone for undisclosed reasons having nothing to do with the investigation. Of course, given that a good number of non-Pats fans are voting in that pool, that 35% probably represents more than half of all Pats fans.

 

What a bunch of idiots.

I'm willing to wager that's roughly the same percentage who think Aaron Hernandez was framed, SpyGate was a hoax, and that Nick Kaczur's involvement with massive amounts of oxycodone was purely coincidental.

[BaaadThingsMan]

For a good warm feeling, people should read the full Goodell report. It's 20 pages but it's scathing stuff. He definitely took a stand. They had more evidence and there was a little more to the story than what has been reported. It's good stuff. Brady is a lying scumbag cheat. It's inarguable.

Can't see what he can argue about really?

[Go Kiko go]

I wrote this at SabreSpace and someone asked me to post it here:

 

Very materially. In the Second Circuit (for the rest of the board, that's where this is playing out, if this was filed in Manhattan): a party must demonstrate (1) irreparable harm absent injunctive relief and (2) either (a) a likelihood of success on the merits, or (b) a serious question going to the merits to make them a fair ground for trial, with a balance of hardships tipping decidedly in the plaintiff’s favor.

Lots of circuits do not have the "serious question" option.

Now let's analyze: What's the irreparable harm? Not his lost salary, because money is never, ever considered "irreparable harm." Not likely his reputation, since at the end of the day, he could still be vindicated by a verdict in his favor. It's got to be the opportunity to play. With a normal occupation, that won't fly, since the real opportunity is to earn money (again, never, ever considered "irreparable harm"),but maybe with a waning football career, he's got something. Maybe.

The second prong of the test: Overturning an arbitrator's decision is hard, so he probably doesn't have a likelihood of success on the merits. But one basis for overturning an award is arbitrator bias, and he may try to argue that Goodell is biased. That's at least a serious question going to the merits. Now we're down to a balance of hardships, and whether it tips decidedly in his favor, and I have no idea. The league has a serious interest in wanting to effectively and efficiently discipline cheaters. Brady has an interest in playing football. Don't know what a judge is going to do there.

 

That's not really a fair characterization of the Second Circuit's "serious question" doctrine. The Second Circuit had the occasion to re-examine the standard extensively, and observed that, "ecause the moving party must not only show that there are 'serious questions' going to the merits, but must additionally establish that 'the balance of hardships tips decidedly' in its favor, . . . its overall burden is no lighter than the one it bears under the 'likelihood of success' standard." Citigroup Global Mkts., Inc. v. VCG Special Opportunities Master Fund Ltd., 598 F.3d 30, 35 (2d Cir. 2010).

 

The VCG court also recognized that in "seven of [the court's] sister circuits, and in the Supreme Court itself," there is a "considerable history" of applying "flexible standards" when confronting requests for preliminary injunctions.

 

Wright and Miller agree, stating that "[t]he courts use a bewildering variety of formulations of the need for showing some likelihood of success—the most common being that plaintiff must demonstrate a reasonable probability of success. But the verbal differences do not seem to reflect substantive disagreement." 11A Charles Alan Wright and Arthur R. Miller, Federal Practice and Procedure § 2948.3.

 

I also think you're giving short shrift to Brady's ability to show irreparable harm. The Eighth Circuit, in connection with the 2011 lockout lawsuit, found irreparable harm simply because players couldn't participate in off-season activities, observing that both sides "likely will suffer some degree of irreparable harm." Brady v. National Football League, 640 F.3d 785, 793 (8th Cir. 2011). The dissenting judge went a step further, finding that "there can be little dispute that the off-season is an abundantly busy period for veterans and rookies alike. . . . Even the brief stay . . . will deprive the players of 'irreparable opportunities to develop their skills as football players and to otherwise advance their NFL careers.'"

 

Justice Stevens, acting as circuit justice for the Sixth Circuit, once found irreparable harm in the possibility that an athlete would be impeded from participating in the 1992 U.S. Olympic Trials. Reynolds v. Int'l Amateur Athletic Fed'n, 505 U.S. 1301, 1302 (1992).

 

How do you compensate a starting NFL quarterback with money for missing a quarter of a season? How do you measure that loss? To me, irreparable harm would be the easy part of Brady's request for an injunction.

 

 

Thanks for posting. Why is the issue of Goodell's bias a "serious question going to the merits" if the CBA the players agreed to expressly grants RG the authority to oversee appeals? The "he's biased" assertion is nothing more than another "I didn't do it" assertion. I read the SI.com article with the legal analysis, but who would truly believe that RG wants to see the league's bell cow QB be suspended? I believe the NFL's decision on the appeal was brilliantly crafted to place the majority of blame squarely upon Brady's specific actions to impede the investigation. How does any RG bias even play into that?

 

My guess is because section 10 of the Federal Arbitration Act provides that a party to an arbitration may seek relief from a federal court when, among other things, "there was evident partiality or corruption in the arbitrators."

 

As the Supreme Court has observed, "[w]e cannot believe that it was the purpose of Congress to authorize litigants to submit their cases and controversies to arbitration boards that might reasonably be thought biased against one litigant and favorable to another." Commonwealth Coatings Corp. v. Cont'l Cas. Co.

 

That's assuming the FAA applies here. I know very little about the law of arbitrations and absolutely zero about labor law, so it may not and I may be completely wrong.

 

Makes sense from the NFLPA's perspective.

 

This is lawyering 101.

 

Whether or not the NFL's action will be merged with the NFLPA's (and critically, the venue of said action) remains to be seen.

 

Perhaps I'm missing something, but how would Brady's attempt to forum-shop his way into Minnesota withstand jurisdiction and venue challenges?

 

Starting with Goodyear Dunlop Tires Operations, S.A. v. Brown and continuing with Daimler AG v. Bauman, the Supreme Court has sharply curtailed the ability of courts to assert general jurisdiction over corporations. For a corporation to be subject to hailed into a particular state, it's not enough that the corporation have "continuous and systematic" contacts with the state; the corporation's contacts must be "so continuous and systematic" with the state for the corporation to be "fairly regarded as at home" there, in the way that an individual is "at home" in their state of domicile. Can the NFL be characterized as "at home" in Minnesota? If so, is the NFL "at home" in every state that hosts an NFL franchise? That would seem to flout the reasoning of these two cases. (Of course, there is no suggestion that any part of Brady's case had anything to do with Minnesota, so there would be no basis for specific jurisdiction).

 

I also can't see a Minnesota case surviving venue challenges--both on the grounds that Minnesota is not a proper venue, and the grounds that Minnesota is not a convenient forum.

 

Then, ​even if the case survives these challenges, the whole theory of filing in Minnesota seems to be that the NFLPA wants to get the case assigned to Judge Doty. But the odds that his name comes up on the wheel and gets the case assigned to him is only 1 in 11.

Edited July 29, 2015 by Go Kiko go

[It's in My Blood]

Probably been posted here already but if Brady takes this to court then he is dumber than already thought of.

 

Tom, take the punishment like a man, and come November this whole cheating scandal will be am afterthought. The NFL will do everything they can to bury it. If not, your legacy is f'd more than it already is.

 

Oh how I hope he sues.

[KingRex]

 

The problem is that, with judges, you never know. They can make inexplicable decisions for wacky reasons.

The NFL and their band of high priced lawyers intelligently agree with you. Thus, they have already filed a motion with the federal court in Manhattan seeking a pre-approval of this decision. This was done in order to block the Pats from forum shopping and putting this before a Boston based judged.

 

One never can tell with judges, but stopping this is gonna be a hard uphill slog for Brady He hs to show a likelihood of winning in order to get an injunction. Simply being debatable ain't good enuf. He will have to demonstrate a likelihood he will prevail.

[YoloinOhio]

@JeremyWGR: "Give up. Its time for local loyalists to parachute down from Planet Patriot and get in touch with reality." --> https://t.co/ZNDYPpPsr5

[eball]

So they offered to cut it to two games if he admitted he did it with Jastremski and McNally, admitted he didn't cooperate with Wells, and he apologized, and then to one game if he was very contrite in his admitting that he did it as well as the apology. He said no. Ha.

 

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2015/07/28/nfl-offered-brady-at-least-50-percent-reduction-in-exchange-for-admission-of-guilt/

 

And that's the arrogance he'll regret when this is all said and done. Tommy Boy couldn't stand to admit publicly that he cheated -- it's pretty classic narcissism.

[Nanker]

He's the Lance Armstrong of the NFL, now and forever. Suck it Pats***

[The Wiz]

I still remember the original press conference and how he had to back track on the very first question.

 

Reporter: When and how did you supposedly alter the balls?

 

Brady: I didn't, you know, have any... uhhh... I didn't alter the balls in any way.

 

Get the feeling he was going to say something along the lines of "I didn't have any knowledge of the balls being alter" but had to change his answer quick.

 

lying bag of dicks.

Edited July 29, 2015 by The Wiz

[YoloinOhio]

@RapSheet: Even with Goodells ruling, dont expect #Patriots QB camp reps to change: Inside the building, there is a belief Brady ends up on the field

[WhitewalkerInPhilly]

@RapSheet: Even with Goodells ruling, dont expect #Patriots QB camp reps to change: Inside the building, there is a belief Brady ends up on the field

Well yeah, he will...Week 6 for the Colts. Even the worse case scenario should have Brady as primary. Even if they lose all four games without him (unlikely since one is against the Jags) 10-6 and the playoffs is highly likely and then it won't matter.

[KD in CA]

He's the Lance Armstrong of the NFL, now and forever. Suck it Pats***

 

Can one of you photoshop experts make a Mount Rushmore of Cheaters poster with Brady, Armstrong, Ben Johnson and Tanya Harding?

[Dorkington]

Boston Globe: Patriots quarterback Tom Brady is tarnished forever

 

 

 

 

It’s time to hear from Brady. Instead, late Tuesday afternoon we got a statement from Brady’s preposterous agent, Don Yee, who “eloquently” stated that “the science in the Wells Report was junk,’’ and also said, “neither Tom nor the Patriots did anything wrong.’’

Really? Then why did the Patriots suspend Jim McNally and John Jastremski? Why did Bob Kraft accept the loss of two draft picks (one a first-rounder) and the largest fine in the history of the NFL without a fight? Why didn’t the Patriots produce McNally for a final interview after Wells learned about damning texts? Why didn’t they bring McNally back last month when Goodell again offered to bring in the former equipment man for clarification?

The Patriots, like Brady, evidently arrived at the conclusion that it was better to cover up than to comply. It makes you wonder how bad this really was. What else are the Patriots hiding? What else might come out?

Edited July 29, 2015 by Dorkington

[Pine Barrens Mafia]

Boston Globe: Patriots quarterback Tom Brady is tarnished forever

 

 

Looking for subscriber login. bogus.

[Dorkington]

 

Looking for subscriber login. bogus.

Didn't require one for me O.o

[Best Player Available]

CBS morning news ( Charly Rose) basically said the same thing. His reputation is forever tarnished. Should have nutted up and admitted it. i do not like the guy but he did not need to do this. So eat it! Will his Canton Bust have an asterisk on it?

[Dorkington]

CBS morning news ( Charly Rose) basically said the same thing. His reputation is forever tarnished. Should have nutted up and admitted it. i do not like the guy but he did not need to do this. So eat it! Will his Canton Bust have an asterisk on it?

Basically if he would have accepted the penalty and said something like "Every player tries to gain an advantage, I got caught... lesson learned. I'll come back with a vengeance." He would look a lot better, and no one would really care all that much.

[YoloinOhio]

Tom Brady's response. Of course he would use Facebook. 😑

 

@ejleven: Tom Bradys facebook, in short: Why the hell should I have given them my phone? https://t.co/xn3uLcFyn7http://t.co/Scr1Xie62p