Brady 4 game suspension upheld; Will go to court

[l< j]

I'm referring specifically to the term "impossible." As I've said elsewhere, he may have had a history of balls coming in higher than he liked and he wanted to get them to a lower albeit still legal (in his mind) level. I'm not saying that's probable; I'm saying that it's not "impossible."

So then you have arrived at the legal standard required to assign guilt: "more probable than not." Nothing more is required, under the law or the terms of the CBA.

 

All this time spent arguing and you convinced yourself.

 

kj

Edited August 9, 2015 by l< j

[JohnC]

So then you have arrived at the legal standard required to assign guilt: "more probable than not." Nothing more is required, under the law or the terms of the CBA.

 

All this time spent arguing and you convinced yourself.

 

kj

The problem isn't the standard. The problem is that the investigating unit is linked to the commissioner's office. It is not only investigating the case but also making the determination as to whether the standard is met. If a policeman made an arrest and then was making a judgment to guilt or innocence what conclusion do you think he/she would make make?

 

The Wells investigation was too closely associated with Goodell and his staff. There was an inherent conflict of interest between the two parties. The solution would have been to hand this case to a more independent investigator not linked to the league office or give the case to a neutral arbitrator not linked to RG.

[SRQ_BillsFan]

The problem isn't the standard. The problem is that the investigating unit is linked to the commissioner's office. It is not only investigating the case but also making the determination as to whether the standard is met. If a policeman made an arrest and then was making a judgment to guilt or innocence what conclusion do you think he/she would make make?

 

The Wells investigation was too closely associated with Goodell and his staff. There was an inherent conflict of interest between the two parties. The solution would have been to hand this case to a more independent investigator not linked to the league office or give the case to a neutral arbitrator not linked to RG.

 

 

If this was such a problem, why did the patriots or no one else complain when they named Well's the investigator? Why was it not a problem until after he released finding that the Patriots and NFLPA didn't like?

 

When Well's was made investigator everyone said good, you'll see they won't find anything. It was well known he had investigated Bountygate as well as others when Well's was named.

[l< j]

The problem isn't the standard. The problem is that the investigating unit is linked to the commissioner's office. It is not only investigating the case but also making the determination as to whether the standard is met. If a policeman made an arrest and then was making a judgment to guilt or innocence what conclusion do you think he/she would make make?

 

The Wells investigation was too closely associated with Goodell and his staff. There was an inherent conflict of interest between the two parties. The solution would have been to hand this case to a more independent investigator not linked to the league office or give the case to a neutral arbitrator not linked to RG.

 

That may be a problem, but I don't see the urgency to fix it now, when we have a franchise that is stealing footballs from game officials in the playoffs. Which is a bigger threat to the integrity of the game?

 

kj

[NoSaint]

If this was such a problem, why did the patriots or no one else complain when they named Well's the investigator? Why was it not a problem until after he released finding that the Patriots and NFLPA didn't like?

 

When Well's was made investigator everyone said good, you'll see they won't find anything. It was well known he had investigated Bountygate as well as others when Well's was named.

Mary Jo white, not wells, was the outside independent reviewer for bounty gate, and that was after the investigation --- but did also have problems.

 

And plenty have complained about Goodell having this power and the nfl liking to stretch it. Plenty of instances of them ending up in court and losing the last few years.

Edited August 9, 2015 by NoSaint

[JohnC]

If this was such a problem, why did the patriots or no one else complain when they named Well's the investigator? Why was it not a problem until after he released finding that the Patriots and NFLPA didn't like?

 

When Well's was made investigator everyone said good, you'll see they won't find anything. It was well known he had investigated Bountygate as well as others when Well's was named.

The bountygate investigation had problems. It resulted in GD's ruling against Vilma being overturned. Whatever one thinks about Incognito and his behavior his criticisms of Wells are valid. RG's handling of the Ray Rice case certainly had problems. His followup ruling was changed. Goodell's ruling on Harding was changed by an arbitrator. There has been a pattern of arbitrary and capricious decisions coming out of the commissioner's office that were successfully challenged when reviewed by a more neutral set of eyes.

 

No one from the Pats' organization were praising Wells and his investigation prior to their work. They had no say in its formation and its work. The NFLA filed an appeal on how Wells conducted its investigation after it was completed. It makes [/b]no sense[/b] to file a complaint about its conduct before it does its work.

[NoSaint]

What the league and the accusers are doing are demanding that Brady prove a negative, i.e. that he didn't do what he was accused of doing. They have no convincing proof that he ordered anyone to lower the balls below the permissible PSI level. In essence their position is that although we can't reasonably prove that you did something wrong you can't conclusively prove that you didn't do it.

 

http://www.si.com/nfl/2015/08/07/nfl-nflpa-legal-briefs-tom-brady-suspension-deflategate-patriots-roger-goodell

That was a real frustration in bounty gate too. At one point the nfl was refusing to show the players the evidence but demanding the players prove the conclusions wrong. It was crazy to watch. I'm sure many here thought I was nuts with my many updates while it was going on but it was just crazy to follow.

[JohnC]

 

That may be a problem, but I don't see the urgency to fix it now, when we have a franchise that is stealing footballs from game officials in the playoffs. Which is a bigger threat to the integrity of the game?

 

kj

There is an urgency to fix the disciplinary system sooner rather than later. A trivial matter that could have been resolved more simply, quickly and fairly has now turned into a fiasco and a legal morass. Arrogance and incompetence in disciplinary matters in the hands of someone who has a lot of power is a recipe for disaster.

[l< j]

There is an urgency to fix the disciplinary system sooner rather than later. A trivial matter that could have been resolved more simply, quickly and fairly has now turned into a fiasco and a legal morass. Arrogance and incompetence in disciplinary matters in the hands of someone who has a lot of power is a recipe for disaster.

I guess I'll never understand how a fan of this game can think that stealing footballs from game officials is trivial. And Goodell's arrogance is more than matched by the Patriots in all of this.

[Mr. WEO]

I guess I'll never understand how a fan of this game can think that stealing footballs from game officials is trivial. And Goodell's arrogance is more than matched by the Patriots in all of this.

 

Well, they were NE's balls...

 

Would you be less outraged if the deflators simply deflated the balls in the 10 min before kickoff when the refs give the teams their balls back?

[l< j]

 

Well, they were NE's balls...

 

Would you be less outraged if the deflators simply deflated the balls in the 10 min before kickoff when the refs give the teams their balls back?

 

I'm concerned with how cheaters did cheat and not how they could have cheated.

 

kj

[MattM]

There is an urgency to fix the disciplinary system sooner rather than later. A trivial matter that could have been resolved more simply, quickly and fairly has now turned into a fiasco and a legal morass. Arrogance and incompetence in disciplinary matters in the hands of someone who has a lot of power is a recipe for disaster.

I find this fixation on the disciplinary process in a case where pretty much everyone but diehard Pats* fans agree that cheating went on a bit odd I must admit. Why not pick a case where there is a real miscarriage of justice, for ex.?

 

In addition, what is your solution? Getting professional arbitrators or judges involved for every dispute? Shouldn't the League commissioner be the one with the power to discipline players? To suggest otherwise strikes me, frankly, as ridiculous.

Edited August 9, 2015 by MattM

[JohnC]

That was a real frustration in bounty gate too. At one point the nfl was refusing to show the players the evidence but demanding the players prove the conclusions wrong. It was crazy to watch. I'm sure many here thought I was nuts with my many updates while it was going on but it was just crazy to follow.

Roger Goodell sabotaged the season for the Saints before it got started. That was not only unfair to New Orleans but it was unfair to the competitive balance to the rest of the league. The aggressive environment and tough guy talk in their lockerroom was similar to the environment for most teams. They got singled out because a tape of some thug talk was exposed to the public. The reality is that it is part of the fabric of the NFL culture.

 

When the process is unfair it is not surprising that the outcome is more likely to be unfair. The more I observe RD's accumulated record on discipline (Rice, Hardy, Peterson, Vilma even Incognito etc) the more outraged I get. His rulings are for the most part predictable. He very often basis his ruling not on the facts and the established guidelines but he basis many of his rulings on how he will be perceived with his decisions.

 

Ray Rice was an easy target for Goodell when he made the decision to increase his punishment after a storm of criticism for his leniency. When he raised the punishment he claimed that it was due to new information that he got after his first ruling. The arbitrator decisely determined that RG had no new information and that he altered his first punishment decision to make himself look better.

 

There are aspects to his stewardship in which he does a very good job. But when it comes to disciplinary issues I find him at times to be incompetent and unethical. In my view RG used the exaggerated Inflategate issue to ingratiate himself with the faction of owners who resent the success of the Pats and the general way they do business i.e. push the limits.

[NoSaint]

 

I'm concerned with how cheaters did cheat and not how they could have cheated.

 

kj

I think part of his point is "stealing" sounds so much more elaborate and nefarious than "took control of a couple minutes before scheduled"

[l< j]

 

Well, they were NE's balls...

 

Would you be less outraged if the deflators simply deflated the balls in the 10 min before kickoff when the refs give the teams their balls back?

I'll ask you straight up and without any antagonism, without trying to pick a fight: why aren't you outraged? I'm genuinely curious. I just can't get past people saying this isn't a big deal. And I'm not speaking from Patriot-hate, either. This whole episode is such a huge act of disrespect to the game to me.

 

kj

[Kelly the Dog]

I'm referring specifically to the term "impossible." As I've said elsewhere, he may have had a history of balls coming in higher than he liked and he wanted to get them to a lower albeit still legal (in his mind) level. I'm not saying that's probable; I'm saying that it's not "impossible."

Impossible.

 

To me, it's the same thing as when Jose Canseco's book first came out and he said all those players were doing steroids. I said to all kinds of people that there is no way on earth that he just made that all up. Not a chance. It's not what humans do. Now, granted, that didn't mean that every single guy he pegged as doing steroids was true, he could have made a mistake or not remembered one or two, but it was impossible that he just totally made that up. And it turns out that every guy he mentioned iirc turned out to do steroids.

 

Now just because I was right once does not in any way make me right about this or anything else. That's not what I am saying. What I am saying its IMPOSSIBLE a guy would do that on his own. A crazy person would not do that on his own. If there were not certain circumstances we know for a fact to be true I would not say it was impossible. But what we know to be true makes it impossible IMO.

 

And by impossible I mean 99.9999%

 

And reread what I wrote above. We KNOW Brady told McNally to put the balls at 12.5 before the game. There are four separate reasons why we know that to be true. So in order for Brady to have said what you did, that he wanted them a little lower, that means he ordered them to be illegal. That is inarguable because of what we know.

Edited August 9, 2015 by Kelly the Dog

[SRQ_BillsFan]

How can u claim anyone the NFL would hire is independent? Wells work d for the NFL before, but he is not on the NFL full time payroll, and has investigated many things outside the NFL bye highly creditable and people speak very highly of him. So the NFL should find new investigators for every case??

 

The problems with Boutygate were not the investigation, it was what was done afterwards. Sure the players had issue with it as any losing side would any investigation. I didn't see Kraft standing up and questioning it or the mans integrity.

[NoSaint]

How can u claim anyone the NFL would hire is independent? Wells work d for the NFL before, but he is not on the NFL full time payroll, and has investigated many things outside the NFL bye highly creditable and people speak very highly of him. So the NFL should find new investigators for every case??

 

The problems with Boutygate were not the investigation, it was what was done afterwards. Sure the players had issue with it as any losing side would any investigation. I didn't see Kraft standing up and questioning it or the mans integrity.

Well, a big part of the bounty gate trouble was also the investigation. But I don't think you are 100% up to speed on that one, as much as a general knowledge of it

[Tuco]

If this was such a problem, why did the patriots or no one else complain when they named Well's the investigator? Why was it not a problem until after he released finding that the Patriots and NFLPA didn't like?

 

When Well's was made investigator everyone said good, you'll see they won't find anything. It was well known he had investigated Bountygate as well as others when Well's was named.

NEW GUY ALERT!---------- NEW GUY POSTING!---------- NEW GUY ALERT!

 

 

Very good point.

 

 

"The Patriots urged me when I got to the case to start fresh, not to pay any attention to what NFL security had done. In fact they thought the people at NFL Security were biased. They applauded when I said I wanted to start fresh. And for them to later say I couldn’t have a second interview with the most important person in the case was a lack of cooperation.” -- Ted Wells

Edited August 9, 2015 by Tuco

[SRQ_BillsFan]

Well, a big part of the bounty gate trouble was also the investigation. But I don't think you are 100% up to speed on that one, as much as a general knowledge of it

I'll choose to simply disagree. even Tagilabue upheld the NFLs key findings: that the Saints orchestrated a bounty program, that many players participated in the program, that some Saints coaches and players lied to investigators about the program, and that New Orleans Saints linebacker Jonathan Vilma put a $10,000 bounty on former Minnesota Vikings quarterback Brett Favre before the 2010 NFC championship game.

 

Other than that we had a lot of media crap about players being misconstrued while giving completely 180 degree statements that no one could have mis construed. It's what's flawed with the process. The players say one thing when interviewed and come back and say something completely different after the fact once they have something that sounds better. Just like Brady did.

Edited August 9, 2015 by SRQ_BillsFan