The Wiz Posted September 25, 2015 Posted September 25, 2015 So are McNally and Jestremsky going to be fired again?
NoSaint Posted September 25, 2015 Posted September 25, 2015 (edited) For the same reason you're citing 14 Dem judges who won't overturn a Dem judge's decision, I think that 31 owners will not sit quietly when they are convinced that a coach and/or player on one franchise have habitually cheated. what will they punish him for if he wins this appeal? just cause they dont like him? Edited September 25, 2015 by NoSaint
dave mcbride Posted September 25, 2015 Posted September 25, 2015 (edited) Again, I'm going for the fire where there's smoke angle. I still suspect that the NFL knows more than what's been disclosed in the deflategate filing. I don't see the 31 owners sitting quietly when they believe that the Pats* have flouted league rules. Even if the 2nd circuit doesn't overturn this decision, a penalty by Brady will be paid. For the same reason you're citing 14 Dem judges who won't overturn a Dem judge's decision, I think that 31 owners will not sit quietly when they are convinced that a coach and/or player on one franchise have habitually cheated. If the second circuit doesn't overturn it, how will a price be paid? Anyway, they're not going to overturn the decision. Edited September 25, 2015 by dave mcbride
BuffaloMatt Posted September 25, 2015 Posted September 25, 2015 Would be something if it were true AND it started in the playoffs and carried over until next season. I also think I'm gonna win Power Ball one day. Ahhh to dream . . . . .
D521646 Posted September 25, 2015 Posted September 25, 2015 care to share, because i have seen a ton of commentary to the contrary Well I haven't seen the actual appeal, so I can't be 100% sure, but an appeal does not allow you to argue another point of view, or present new evidence. With that said, Brewer did not rule against the NFL based on the merits of their decision, he ruled that their process for doing so was flawed and inequitable and as a matter of equity deemed it manifestly unfair to the Patriots and Tom Brady. In that, there is some precedent to back him up, but when applying precedent it is very important to make sure what you're applying precedent too, is exactly the same set of circumstances. I guess it could go either way, but I feel that the appeals court (most appeals courts) generally don't like creating new precedents, and typically side with corporations when adjudicating labor laws when no claims of discrimination are present, or when the employer is consistent, even if consistently wrong. Tim-
dave mcbride Posted September 25, 2015 Posted September 25, 2015 In the Adrian Peterson case, the NFL filed its appeal to the 8th Circuit in February. Oral arguments are set for for October 19th.
LeGOATski Posted September 25, 2015 Posted September 25, 2015 don't care. Brady serves or doesn't serve. His legacy is tainted forever, anyway.
Go Kiko go Posted September 25, 2015 Posted September 25, 2015 As far as briefs are concerned, not too many are required past the initial appeal brief; after that the Appeals court will ask for oral arguments, ask questions, and then decide. All of which can take place in a one or two day cycle. The decision however can take a while, but not 6 - 12 months as you are suggesting. that would actually be out of the norm, IMO. The entire process, however, will take that long. Initial briefing typically takes at least two months (30 per side), then the case has to be calendared for argument or consideration, which will normally be an additional few months in the future, then, once the case is heard or considered, the decision has to be drafted and issued, which, for even a short, unpublished opinion usually requires an additional few months.
D521646 Posted September 25, 2015 Posted September 25, 2015 The entire process, however, will take that long. Initial briefing typically takes at least two months (30 per side), then the case has to be calendared for argument or consideration, which will normally be an additional few months in the future, then, once the case is heard or considered, the decision has to be drafted and issued, which, for even a short, unpublished opinion usually requires an additional few months. Yeah I agree, but I thought both sides asked for expediency on this appeal? In this case it can be heard and decided on quicker if memory serves? Tim-
YoloinOhio Posted September 25, 2015 Author Posted September 25, 2015 Florio's take (since he's a lawyer) http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2015/09/25/report-nfl-has-no-doubt-brady-will-serve-suspension-this-year/
Go Kiko go Posted September 25, 2015 Posted September 25, 2015 Yeah I agree, but I thought both sides asked for expediency on this appeal? In this case it can be heard and decided on quicker if memory serves? Tim- At the district court level they asked Judge Berman to expedite a decision on the merits to avoid the need to hold a hearing on preliminary injunctive relief (essentially a Rule 65(a)(2) request). Had the district court not reached a decision on the merits befor the start of the season, Brady and the NFLPA almost certainly would have sought preliminary injunctive relief to enjoin the NFL from suspending him until the district court could decide the case, so rather than have to do that, it made more sense to simply accelerate the disposition of the merits of the case. At the appellate level, there is no longer any need for expediency, because Brady's suspension was vacated. It would be up to the NFL to ask the Second Circuit to stay the district court's ruling pending the appeal, but I haven't heard any word that they've done so (my Second Circuit PACER account is currently acting up so I can't check that docket), and I can't really see how the NFL could make an argument for a stay under these circumstances. So the case will proceed at the normal, glacial federal appellate pace. With that said, Brewer did not rule against the NFL based on the merits of their decision, he ruled that their process for doing so was flawed and inequitable and as a matter of equity deemed it manifestly unfair to the Patriots and Tom Brady. I have to disagree with you here. Judge Berman's decision was not grounded in "equity" or a sort of free-wheeling inquiry into the fairness of the situation, he was applying federal labor law.
GG Posted September 25, 2015 Posted September 25, 2015 If the second circuit doesn't overturn it, how will a price be paid? Anyway, they're not going to overturn the decision. I'm not saying that the price to be paid will be related to deflategate. The leauge wouldn't be coming down so hard on the franchise & Brady if the only issue was deflated balls. I have no proof, but there's enough conjecture flying around that the rest of the league has had enough with Pats* flouting the rules. It's the creeping incrementalism that finally reached a boiling point for the 31 owners. If it's not deflategate, then they will hang Brady on something else.
LeGOATski Posted September 25, 2015 Posted September 25, 2015 Florio's take (since he's a lawyer) http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2015/09/25/report-nfl-has-no-doubt-brady-will-serve-suspension-this-year/ I'm not a lawyer, but I play one on the internet.
dave mcbride Posted September 25, 2015 Posted September 25, 2015 I'm not saying that the price to be paid will be related to deflategate. The leauge wouldn't be coming down so hard on the franchise & Brady if the only issue was deflated balls. I have no proof, but there's enough conjecture flying around that the rest of the league has had enough with Pats* flouting the rules. It's the creeping incrementalism that finally reached a boiling point for the 31 owners. If it's not deflategate, then they will hang Brady on something else. We shall see! As for the other 31 teams, I have to think that there are some who don't care that much. I have no basis for this, but my guess is that Irsay isn't very popular, and the Colts are at the root of this. In other words, I question the idea of unanimity. For instance, I certainly don't think the Seahawks care. They were beaten fair and square and didn't complain about it.
dave mcbride Posted September 25, 2015 Posted September 25, 2015 Agreed. Judge Berman issued his decision Sept 3, 2015. I would predict that it would take between 18 months-24 months from that date for there to be an unpublished opinion (longer if published). So you are looking at a suspension maybe to start the beginning of the 2017 season!! ... and it's not going to happen anyway. I'm sticking with my view on this one.
PromoTheRobot Posted September 25, 2015 Posted September 25, 2015 Make sure whatever judge hears the case doesn't have Brady on his fantasy team.
PS 56 Posted September 25, 2015 Posted September 25, 2015 (edited) I just hope it does not happen until after we play the Pats again. I want to beat Brady and his team on their home turf. Edited September 25, 2015 by PS 56
The Big Cat Posted September 25, 2015 Posted September 25, 2015 I just hope it does not happen until after we play the Pats again. I want to beat him and his team on their home turf. I hate this nonsense. It's absolute, unqualified nonsense. WIN. If Chelsea Clinton has to lace them up under center, so be it. I want division wins. Period.
Augie Posted September 25, 2015 Posted September 25, 2015 I hate this nonsense. It's absolute, unqualified nonsense. WIN. If Chelsea Clinton has to lace them up under center, so be it. I want division wins. Period. Be careful what you wish for - I hear she's got great touch on the long ball....
Over 29 years of fanhood Posted September 25, 2015 Posted September 25, 2015 I hate this nonsense. It's absolute, unqualified nonsense. WIN. If Chelsea Clinton has to lace them up under center, so be it. I want division wins. Period. Her dad just perked up.... Picture his raspy "hey Chelsea that's great, do you suppose you could introduce me to Some of those patriot cheerleaders over there?????...
Recommended Posts