WhitewalkerInPhilly Posted July 29, 2015 Posted July 29, 2015 Whatever side of Deflategate you're on, in the trial everyone should be pulling for Brady. It's absolutely criminal that Goodell is given power of prosecution, ruling and sentencing in disciplinary disputes. This blatant conflict of interest has been Goodell's MO since becoming commissioner, and the league's credibility has been severely and repeatedly tainted as a result. Brady seems to have a good case IMO. The evidence against him was flimsy at best, very incomplete, and highly circumstantial. The league's presumption of guilt since the inception of the controversy discredits their claims of objectivity. This whole process smells of a kangaroo court led by a corrupt small town sheriff who also happens to be judge, jury and prosecution. I agree with the perception the Patriots under Belichick have a history of bending the rules, cheating if you will, to gain competitive advantage. That being said, the NFL under Goodell has been a far worse violator of ethics code. An unchecked bastion of corruption and cronyism run amok. The NFL led by Goodell are the ones most deserving to be on trial, and I'm happy to see that that's exactly what's going to happen. I won't be. Look, I'm not saying that it's a good thing that Goddell has so much authority is discipline cases. In fact, I'd argue that the past year or so has shown why he shouldn't. But the NFLPA handed that over to him in the CBA. They did it as a concession for more money, which raises all ships of the players they advocate for. They should rigorously fight to change it next time, but they absolutely gave him the power to conduct the proceedings as he had.
PromoTheRobot Posted July 29, 2015 Posted July 29, 2015 Worth noting that he says he turned over his relevant emails, call logs and that he says there were no relevant texts on the phone and the carrier wouldn't/couldn't restore them? Isn't that exactly what many, including wells, said he refused to do? If all he needed to do was voluntarily self report and not physically let wells have the phone- would that satisfy that request, in theory? Maybe I've misunderstood quotes along the way but it seems like a pretty substantial point that they are disagreeing on You know what's funny? When I read posts on my phone, I don't pay attention to the name of the poster. But when I read one sucking Brady's nut, I think "this must be NoSaint."
Tuco Posted July 29, 2015 Posted July 29, 2015 Worth noting that he says he turned over his relevant emails, call logs and that he says there were no relevant texts on the phone and the carrier wouldn't/couldn't restore them? Isn't that exactly what many, including wells, said he refused to do? If all he needed to do was voluntarily self report and not physically let wells have the phone- would that satisfy that request, in theory? Maybe I've misunderstood quotes along the way but it seems like a pretty substantial point that they are disagreeing on The answer can be found in the 20 page decision starting on page 11. It states that on the eve of the appeal hearing (months after the items were requested and long after the suspension was handed down) the NFLPA submitted a very limited number of phone numbers said to be relevant, but only from the phone used before the phone Brady destroyed. After the appeal hearing (and still months after the information was requested) and after each side's final arguments were submitted, Brady's representatives offered to give a list of names for the 10,000+ texts and emails.
plenzmd1 Posted July 29, 2015 Posted July 29, 2015 He did not. Wells requested specific records for a specific timeframe from a phone Brady destroyed. And MONTHS before Brady offered anything at all. If anything, it looks contemptuous on Brady's part to offer non-relevant records from a non-relevant phone months after Wells made the initial request for compliance. It's all in the commissioner's final report filed in federal court yesterday. I'm sure that Brady's legal team will improve upon Brady's Facebook pleadings, but for now I put a helluva lot more credence in an official court document. GO BILLS!!! Why do you keep referring to a non relevant phone. The spreadsheet contains all the numbers that Brady either texted or called from the destroyed phone...but what cannot be retrieved are the actually text or VMs.
thebandit27 Posted July 29, 2015 Posted July 29, 2015 Whatever side of Deflategate you're on, in the trial everyone should be pulling for Brady. It's absolutely criminal that Goodell is given power of prosecution, ruling and sentencing in disciplinary disputes. This blatant conflict of interest has been Goodell's MO since becoming commissioner, and the league's credibility has been severely and repeatedly tainted as a result. That is the system that the NFLPA bargained for in their 2011 negotiations. They made that bed themselves, so I don't feel the least bit bad for them. Brady seems to have a good case IMO. The evidence against him was flimsy at best, very incomplete, and highly circumstantial. The league's presumption of guilt since the inception of the controversy discredits their claims of objectivity. This whole process smells of a kangaroo court led by a corrupt small town sheriff who also happens to be judge, jury and prosecution. The scientific method was imperfect for sure...the evidence that points to tampering is quite strong, and the texts make it seem like the ball handlers were working at Brady's behest, as does the sudden (and major) uptick in communication immediately following the initial report. The fact that he disposed of evidence that he was directly asked to provide doesn't help his case. I agree with the perception the Patriots under Belichick have a history of bending the rules, cheating if you will, to gain competitive advantage. That being said, the NFL under Goodell has been a far worse violator of ethics code. An unchecked bastion of corruption and cronyism run amok. The NFL led by Goodell are the ones most deserving to be on trial, and I'm happy to see that that's exactly what's going to happen. The NFL isn't going on trial; the process by which Brady was investigated will be audited by a federal court (maybe--if the judge in question decides to hear the case). You know what's funny? When I read posts on my phone, I don't pay attention to the name of the poster. But when I read one sucking Brady's nut, I think "this must be NoSaint." In the pantheon of misplaced anger at a fellow fan, this post must rank in the top echelon.
GG Posted July 29, 2015 Posted July 29, 2015 That's what we call Occum's Shaver my friend. Is that the $1/week plan?
Wayne Cubed Posted July 29, 2015 Posted July 29, 2015 (edited) Why do you keep referring to a non relevant phone. The spreadsheet contains all the numbers that Brady either texted or called from the destroyed phone...but what cannot be retrieved are the actually text or VMs. It's in Goodell's ruling. It states that at the appeal hearing the NFLPA and Brady handed over a list of phone numbers that were said to be relevant but were from the phone that Brady had before the one he destroyed, which I believe he still has. According to the NFL he didn't hand over anything from the destroyed phone because as he admits, he couldn't get it. Edit: And as Brady arrogantly says, "the NFL had ALL relevant communication.." anyways, so why should he hand it over? Edited July 29, 2015 by Wayne Cubed
Kelly the Dog Posted July 29, 2015 Posted July 29, 2015 Why do you keep referring to a non relevant phone. The spreadsheet contains all the numbers that Brady either texted or called from the destroyed phone...but what cannot be retrieved are the actually text or VMs. The speadsheet was offered to the NFL after the fact and appeal, when the NFL first learned he destroyed the phone and they said no, that does not suffice. Brady did not give them a spreadsheet.
shibuya Posted July 29, 2015 Posted July 29, 2015 Whatever side of Deflategate you're on, in the trial everyone should be pulling for Brady. It's absolutely criminal that Goodell is given power of prosecution, ruling and sentencing in disciplinary disputes. This blatant conflict of interest has been Goodell's MO since becoming commissioner, and the league's credibility has been severely and repeatedly tainted as a result. LMAO every employer is like that. You don't have much chance it court against a corp. Sure as hell not in the case of cheating and discipline. The NFL is allowed ot discipline the players as they see fit. That's the way it goes, and if Brady get this suspension over turned then pro sports is foobarred completely IMO. Cheating needs to be met with even harsher discipline IMO Brady has no case and neither does the patriots. They have been crooked since day 1 and I am on any side but theirs
Wayne Cubed Posted July 29, 2015 Posted July 29, 2015 The speadsheet was offered to the NFL after the fact and appeal, when the NFL first learned he destroyed the phone and they said no, that does not suffice. Brady did not give them a spreadsheet. The NFLPA and Brady did hand over, 5 days before the appeal, a list of numbers that they deemed "relevant" but they were from the phone Brady had before the one he destroyed.
negativo Posted July 29, 2015 Posted July 29, 2015 That is the system that the NFLPA bargained for in their 2011 negotiations. They made that bed themselves, so I don't feel the least bit bad for them. Just because the union didn't succeed in revoking an unethical practice by the league as part of their agreement doesn't mean the players who are victimized don't have a case. The NFL will very much be on trial here.
YoloinOhio Posted July 29, 2015 Author Posted July 29, 2015 Why is everyone burying the lead? Brady is clearly saying the iPhone is better than the Android. Endorsement to follow...
shibuya Posted July 29, 2015 Posted July 29, 2015 (edited) Just because the union didn't succeed in revoking an unethical practice by the league as part of their agreement doesn't mean the players who are victimized don't have a case. The NFL will very much be on trial here. No they won't... The NFL has the right to discipline its employees as they see fit. Nothing will be changed here. There is nothign here that is too over the top that the court will interfere with Edited July 29, 2015 by shibuya
4merper4mer Posted July 29, 2015 Posted July 29, 2015 Just because the union didn't succeed in revoking an unethical practice by the league as part of their agreement doesn't mean the players who are victimized don't have a case. The NFL will very much be on trial here. In your humble opinion who should have the final say over discipline in football? Bud Selig? Obama? Chuck Norris?
Dorkington Posted July 29, 2015 Posted July 29, 2015 It's a pretty big one though. Wells claims they got nothing and requested the minimum and Brady seems to be saying he turned over what was requested. In the idea of determining who is acting in good faith this seems like a major and clear cut point for one of the camps Why would the NFL/Wells say he didn't? It'd be in the NFL's best interest if Brady/The Patriots are clean.
GG Posted July 29, 2015 Posted July 29, 2015 I agree with the perception the Patriots under Belichick have a history of bending the rules, cheating if you will, to gain competitive advantage. That being said, the NFL under Goodell has been a far worse violator of ethics code. An unchecked bastion of corruption and cronyism run amok. The NFL led by Goodell are the ones most deserving to be on trial, and I'm happy to see that that's exactly what's going to happen. If that is the case, why did Goodell and the NFL suddenly turn on their favored franchise? I bet that before this incident, you would have argued that the one franchise and owner who benefited the most from that supposed cronyism would have been Pats* & Kraft.
thebandit27 Posted July 29, 2015 Posted July 29, 2015 Just because the union didn't succeed in revoking an unethical practice by the league as part of their agreement doesn't mean the players who are victimized don't have a case. The NFL will very much be on trial here. Actually, yes, it does. They agreed to--and signed--the CBA, which explicitly gives the Commissioner the power to impose the penalty AND hear the appeal. If the NFLPA is planning to play the "oops, we shouldn't have signed that" card, they're going to lose.
Kelly the Dog Posted July 29, 2015 Posted July 29, 2015 I do want to repeat something I posted yesterday and see if someone can confirm this, but Goodell seemed to debunk a large portion of the science is flawed argument yesterday in the report for the first time, too. Most of the Brady side case was based on the fact Anderson had two different gauges and the NFL was not sure which one he used when he first measured them, so when he measured them at halftime there was a possibility that the balls were not as deflated as the league and Wells had said. Goodell all but put that to rest with the explanation of why Wells and Exponent knew which gauge Anderson had first used. Good stuff. Basically one read higher than the other, almost .5 PSI. They knew which one he used because before the game, McNally gave all 12 balls to Anderson and said these are set at 12.5. Tom wants all balls set at 12.5. Anderson measured them and 10 were at 12.5 and two a little under so he added a little air to them to make them 12.5. If he used the other gauge, which measured higher, the balls the Patriots gave them would not have measured 12.5 they would have measured 13.0 or so. And the Pats themselves testified this is what happened, we set them at 12.5. So sorry conspiracists, a lot of your theories were just shot to hell. They cheated.
thebandit27 Posted July 29, 2015 Posted July 29, 2015 In order for that provision of the CBA to be invalid, they'd have to prove that no meeting of the minds occurred...after months of negotiations lead by De Smith--a lawyer--that's not a possibility.
Kelly the Dog Posted July 29, 2015 Posted July 29, 2015 The NFLPA and Brady did hand over, 5 days before the appeal, a list of numbers that they deemed "relevant" but they were from the phone Brady had before the one he destroyed. Right. Not from the phone that was relevant, and I'm not sure about this but it was just a list, not the spreadsheet people are discussing.
Recommended Posts