DC Tom Posted June 6, 2016 Posted June 6, 2016 wouldn't it be awful it turns out the Bills have been cheating first rate for 5-10 years. Yeah, I can just see Jauron now..."We had a good day of practicing cheating on Friday, it just didn't translate to game day." "My goal is to keep it close, then try to cheat in the final two minutes of the game." "Our guys cheated really hard, they just made the kind of mistakes that you can't make..."
Mr. WEO Posted June 6, 2016 Posted June 6, 2016 Yeah, I can just see Jauron now..."We had a good day of practicing cheating on Friday, it just didn't translate to game day." "My goal is to keep it close, then try to cheat in the final two minutes of the game." "Our guys cheated really hard, they just made the kind of mistakes that you can't make..." "It's hard to cheat in the NFL".
eball Posted June 6, 2016 Posted June 6, 2016 Yeah, I can just see Jauron now..."We had a good day of practicing cheating on Friday, it just didn't translate to game day." "My goal is to keep it close, then try to cheat in the final two minutes of the game." "Our guys cheated really hard, they just made the kind of mistakes that you can't make..." "It's hard to cheat in football."
3rdand12 Posted June 7, 2016 Posted June 7, 2016 Yeah, I can just see Jauron now..."We had a good day of practicing cheating on Friday, it just didn't translate to game day." "My goal is to keep it close, then try to cheat in the final two minutes of the game." "Our guys cheated really hard, they just made the kind of mistakes that you can't make..." I can almost hear that voice
26CornerBlitz Posted June 10, 2016 Posted June 10, 2016 @NFLPA The case for Tom Brady: An arbitrator’s take http://wapo.st/25Ru8P0
Canadian Bills Fan Posted June 10, 2016 Posted June 10, 2016 I am beyond tired of this... I dont even care if he's suspended or not. I just never want to hear about this again CBF
Mr. WEO Posted June 10, 2016 Posted June 10, 2016 I think this is the basis of the appeal: The Commissioner’s actions were biased from the outset. The one-day appeal hearing was an awkward circus. No arbitrator, partial or impartial, should have allowed the “independent investigator’s” law firm to represent the NFL’s interests at the hearing and deny Brady access to potentially exonerating information. No arbitrator should have allowed the NFL’s General Counsel to avoid cross-examination about his role in preparing the very report on which the Commissioner based his punishment. No arbitrator acting in good faith should have issued a final award analogizing Brady’s “offense” to steroid use and without even mentioning or discussing the schedule of collectively bargained fines arguably applicable to such offenses. And certainly no reasonable arbitrator should have conjured up new grounds to support his own decision after he had imposed discipline on other discredited grounds. These are the hallmarks of a fundamentally unfair arbitration and represent one of the rare exceptions where the courts can and should intervene.
Kelly the Dog Posted June 10, 2016 Posted June 10, 2016 @NFLPA The case for Tom Brady: An arbitrator’s take http://wapo.st/25Ru8P0 That article, which was mostly the reprinted words of a Boston based arbitrator, was so blatantly biased that it made me laugh out loud three times. I think this is the basis of the appeal: The Commissioner’s actions were biased from the outset. The one-day appeal hearing was an awkward circus. No arbitrator, partial or impartial, should have allowed the “independent investigator’s” law firm to represent the NFL’s interests at the hearing and deny Brady access to potentially exonerating information. No arbitrator should have allowed the NFL’s General Counsel to avoid cross-examination about his role in preparing the very report on which the Commissioner based his punishment. No arbitrator acting in good faith should have issued a final award analogizing Brady’s “offense” to steroid use and without even mentioning or discussing the schedule of collectively bargained fines arguably applicable to such offenses. And certainly no reasonable arbitrator should have conjured up new grounds to support his own decision after he had imposed discipline on other discredited grounds. These are the hallmarks of a fundamentally unfair arbitration and represent one of the rare exceptions where the courts can and should intervene. Mostly because Goodell didn't use those guidelines in his decision because those weren't the real issue in his case. It wasn't about an equipment issue, it was an integrity of the game issue.
Mr. WEO Posted June 10, 2016 Posted June 10, 2016 (edited) That article, which was mostly the reprinted words of a Boston based arbitrator, was so blatantly biased that it made me laugh out loud three times. Mostly because Goodell didn't use those guidelines in his decision because those weren't the real issue in his case. It wasn't about an equipment issue, it was an integrity of the game issue. He's a professional arbitrator giving an opinion. Which part(s) do you think he is fabricating to form the basis of his biased opinion? Edited June 10, 2016 by Mr. WEO
chris heff Posted June 10, 2016 Posted June 10, 2016 Gee what a surprise an arbitrator thinks arbitration is important.
Mr. WEO Posted June 10, 2016 Posted June 10, 2016 (edited) That article, which was mostly the reprinted words of a Boston based arbitrator, was so blatantly biased that it made me laugh out loud three times. Mostly because Goodell didn't use those guidelines in his decision because those weren't the real issue in his case. It wasn't about an equipment issue, it was an integrity of the game issue. So tampering by deflating is different than tampering with the balls in other ways? Here's a pretty cogent and on point article by Florio a while back, pointing out the shakiness of equating deflation to PED use (they did so for a reason, hence the arbitrator's objection) instead of just fineable ball tampering (like stickum). http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2015/08/08/conduct-detrimental-vs-equipment-violations-in-brady-vs-nfl/ Edited June 10, 2016 by Mr. WEO
Kelly the Dog Posted June 10, 2016 Posted June 10, 2016 (edited) So tampering by deflating is different than tampering with the balls in other ways? Here's a pretty cogent and on point article by Florio a while back, pointing out the shakiness of equating deflation to PED use (they did so for a reason, hence the arbitrator's objection) instead of just fineable ball tampering (like stickum). http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2015/08/08/conduct-detrimental-vs-equipment-violations-in-brady-vs-nfl/ That's the whole point these guys and you seem to be missing, cherry picking a single element of the entire issue in a loaded case against him. Brady was not suspended for four games for an equipment violation. At all. Brady was suspended for four games for leading a conspiracy to steal all of the footballs after they had been checked by an official, deflating them, and then blatantly lying to the league investigators about it, and then destroying evidence right before his arbitration hearing. That is the reason for four games. If Brady let the air out of a football on the sidelines he would have got a $25,000 fine or something close and no suspension. Edited June 10, 2016 by Kelly the Dog
PromoTheRobot Posted June 10, 2016 Posted June 10, 2016 I am beyond tired of this... I dont even care if he's suspended or not. I just never want to hear about this again CBF Then Brady and the Pats win. #NeverForget
Captain Hindsight Posted June 10, 2016 Posted June 10, 2016 That's the whole point these guys and you seem to be missing, cherry picking a single element of the entire issue in a loaded case against him. Brady was not suspended for four games for an equipment violation. At all. Brady was suspended for four games for leading a conspiracy to steal all of the footballs after they had been checked by an official, deflating them, and then blatantly lying to the league investigators about it, and then destroying evidence right before his arbitration hearing. That is the reason for four games. If Brady let the air out of a football on the sidelines he would have got a $25,000 fine or something close and no suspension. This^ I don't think its a big deal that footballs had less air. But he acted so recklessly, offered bribes, destroyed evidence, lied and made the league look stupid. Did he deflate the balls? I'm sure he did. if he had owned up to it in his presser instead of acting like he was unaware footballs even had air, this would have all blown over in the amount it takes the deflator to take a piss
PromoTheRobot Posted June 10, 2016 Posted June 10, 2016 That's the whole point these guys and you seem to be missing, cherry picking a single element of the entire issue in a loaded case against him. Brady was not suspended for four games for an equipment violation. At all. Brady was suspended for four games for leading a conspiracy to steal all of the footballs after they had been checked by an official, deflating them, and then blatantly lying to the league investigators about it, and then destroying evidence right before his arbitration hearing. That is the reason for four games. If Brady let the air out of a football on the sidelines he would have got a $25,000 fine or something close and no suspension.There is a deliberate, possibly organized, attempt by certain media members to lobby for Brady by obfuscating the salient points being decided here. Kelly is 100% correct, and I will add Goodell's so called bias is immaterial because the NFLPA gave him carte blanche in these matters. The case against Brady is an air tight slam dunk. Only Patriot nut hangers see it differently.
Doc Posted June 10, 2016 Posted June 10, 2016 They say the coverup is often times worse than the crime.
The Big Cat Posted June 10, 2016 Posted June 10, 2016 There is a deliberate, possibly organized, attempt by certain media members to lobby for Brady by obfuscating the salient points being decided here. Kelly is 100% correct, and I will add Goodell's so called bias is immaterial because the NFLPA gave him carte blanche in these matters. The case against Brady is an air tight slam dunk. Only Patriot nut hangers see it differently. Oh, the organization isn't a possibility: it's a certainty. It's what PR/Crisis firms do, and Brady/Pats* have the best ones money can buy. The strategy is to flood the consciousness with information. Whether or not that information is accurate or relevant doesn't apply.
Mr. WEO Posted June 10, 2016 Posted June 10, 2016 That's the whole point these guys and you seem to be missing, cherry picking a single element of the entire issue in a loaded case against him. Brady was not suspended for four games for an equipment violation. At all. Brady was suspended for four games for leading a conspiracy to steal all of the footballs after they had been checked by an official, deflating them, and then blatantly lying to the league investigators about it, and then destroying evidence right before his arbitration hearing. That is the reason for four games. If Brady let the air out of a football on the sidelines he would have got a $25,000 fine or something close and no suspension. Florio poses the same scenario for a WR "conspiring" with equipment guys to spray his gloves. Brady denies that he conspired to do anything and there is only the "independent report" that Wells created with the assistance of the NFL's own counsel to dispute Brady's claim of innocence. And Brady/NFLPA were not allowed to question, during his appeal, the NFL counsel who helped create that report. If this is a crime against the integrity of the game, in court, none of the events of the appeal would have gone down as they did. There is a deliberate, possibly organized, attempt by certain media members to lobby for Brady by obfuscating the salient points being decided here. Kelly is 100% correct, and I will add Goodell's so called bias is immaterial because the NFLPA gave him carte blanche in these matters. The case against Brady is an air tight slam dunk. Only Patriot nut hangers see it differently. If that statement was true, perhaps. But it's not--in fact, it's amazing, given the Commissioner's track record with suspension and arbitrators (and even Tagliabu), that you could consciously make that statement. The whole appeal is based on the contention that the CBA was not being enforced properly. You have some homework to do before you get back to this discussion.
BuffaloMatt Posted June 10, 2016 Posted June 10, 2016 That's the whole point these guys and you seem to be missing, cherry picking a single element of the entire issue in a loaded case against him. Brady was not suspended for four games for an equipment violation. At all. Brady was suspended for four games for leading a conspiracy to steal all of the footballs after they had been checked by an official, deflating them, and then blatantly lying to the league investigators about it, and then destroying evidence right before his arbitration hearing. That is the reason for four games. If Brady let the air out of a football on the sidelines he would have got a $25,000 fine or something close and no suspension. Exactly!
Recommended Posts