|
Post by Juggs on Aug 4, 2015 21:17:49 GMT -5
In the PDF are the details of the league's extensive scientific investigation by phys profs at Princeton and a third party to experiment with footballs in environmental conditions based on pre-game and half time measurements. The reports found that environmental conditions did not constitute the noted deflation in the footballs, if any at all.
After reading this, there is no doubt in my mind that the equipment managers not only cheated in that game, they also clearly cheated on a regular basis. The only question is whether Tom Brady specifically was aware. I believe the circumstantial evidence collected from the equipment managers was enough for an initial suspension, and unless Brady presented a possible alternative situation at an appeal, no reduction should have been granted. I'm firmly in the league's camp at this point.
|
|
|
Post by patriotsk1d on Aug 4, 2015 22:50:23 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by patriotsk1d on Aug 4, 2015 22:57:21 GMT -5
Some main points:
The NFL claims that Brady was suspended under the Competitive Integrity Policy, yet that policy does not apply to players but it applies only to the teams.
Now Brady could have been suspended under the Player Policy but the most he could have faced was a fine.
Brady was suspended for being “generally aware of the actions of the Patriots employees involved in the deflation of the footballs” not for any alleged ball deflation committed or directed or even authorized by Brady himself. Yet no NFL policy or precedent notifies players that they might be disciplined for general awareness of misconduct by others. This is the first suspension of this kind, in the history of the league. How is that being ignored?
The next common argument is that Brady was actually suspended for not cooperating with the investigation. However no player suspension in NFL history has been sustained for an alleged failure to cooperate with, or even for obstructing, an NFL investigation. Another fact that is somehow being conveniently ignored.
Goodell tried to suspend a player in Bountygate for noncooperation, Paul Tagliabue, serving as arbitrator, resoundingly rejected Goodell’s overreaching, holding that suspending a player for non-cooperation defied the CBA.
|
|
|
Post by patriotsk1d on Aug 4, 2015 23:00:21 GMT -5
And so far Judge Berman has been on the NFL PA's side based off of these reasons:
1. Will rule on the case by September 4th 2. Has ordered Goodell to appear in court two times. 3. Refuses to seal any records.
|
|
|
Post by patriotsk1d on Aug 4, 2015 23:01:09 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Juggs on Aug 4, 2015 23:22:39 GMT -5
And so far Judge Berman has been on the NFL PA's side based off of these reasons: 1. Will rule on the case by September 4th 2. Has ordered Goodell to appear in court two times. 3. Refuses to seal any records. He's not on either side. If he's giving any partiality, it's to the defense. None of those things actually indicate that he's leaning towards either side. The early ruling was to void the PR-heavy injunction. Ordering a defendant into court is perfectly normal procedure and doesn't indicate anything other than questioning, which isn't indicative of anything in either direction. He's likely refusing to seal records due to the media influence on the case. Even if there's some other motive, it doesn't mean he's leaning towards either side. These may be things that end up helping the union's case, but they aren't roadmarks saying that they're more likely to win or favored by the judge.
|
|
|
Post by patriotsk1d on Aug 4, 2015 23:53:01 GMT -5
And so far Judge Berman has been on the NFL PA's side based off of these reasons: 1. Will rule on the case by September 4th 2. Has ordered Goodell to appear in court two times. 3. Refuses to seal any records. He's not on either side. If he's giving any partiality, it's to the defense. None of those things actually indicate that he's leaning towards either side. The early ruling was to void the PR-heavy injunction. Ordering a defendant into court is perfectly normal procedure and doesn't indicate anything other than questioning, which isn't indicative of anything in either direction. He's likely refusing to seal records due to the media influence on the case. Even if there's some other motive, it doesn't mean he's leaning towards either side. These may be things that end up helping the union's case, but they aren't roadmarks saying that they're more likely to win or favored by the judge. Sorry never meant it like he was on a side in that regards, just in a comparable aspect to the NFL supposedly having home field advantage in New York(like some of these media clowns have been stating), if that makes any sense at all.
|
|
|
Post by patriotsk1d on Aug 5, 2015 0:03:32 GMT -5
During the Brady appeal hearing, NFLPA lawyer Jeffrey Kessler asked the NFL to make the transcript public immediately. The NFL declined.
The transcript will now become public record.
|
|
|
Post by patriotsk1d on Aug 5, 2015 21:25:57 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by xray567 on Aug 5, 2015 22:01:30 GMT -5
While I dont like Brady, I think the punishment was harsh for the league not having any concrete proof. Dont think Brady is the guy to make a example out of either. All this is doing is tarnishing the legacy of arguably the best quarterback of all time.
|
|