(07-29-2015, 10:07 PM)6andcounting Wrote: I'm not sure why all these Pats fans have made it their personal crusade to defend Brady on social media. When Bell and Blount got arrested I said they are both morons and Bells gets 2 games for DUI and Blount gets 1 for being a repeat offender.

From a Pats perspective?  Picture three crosses.  Bell and Blount are on each of the two outside crosses.  In the  middle is Brady.  Then Brady turned to Blount and said:  "This day you will be with me in Paradise" and Blount walked off the Steeler's sideline. (It actually took a little more than a day for him to enter Paradise).

(07-29-2015, 09:35 PM)rfaulk34 Wrote: Betcha the 4 games doesn't stick. 

Bet they do.

(07-30-2015, 10:48 AM)SteelCitySouth Wrote: Bet they do.

Come on homie. When it comes to the NFL, it's better to bet against them. 

Besides that...

Nuh uhhh!

(07-31-2015, 12:18 AM)rfaulk34 Wrote: Come on homie. When it comes to the NFL, it's better to bet against them. 

Besides that...

Nuh uhhh!

In this case it is incredibly unlikely that an injunction would be granted.

To clarify...

Yes huhhh!

(07-31-2015, 10:43 AM)SteelCitySouth Wrote: In this case it is incredibly unlikely that an injunction would be granted.

To clarify...

Yes huhhh!

They've moved away from the injunction and instead both sides will be looking to plead their case for a final resolution before the season starts. 

My money is on the Judge finding that there isn't sufficient direct evidence, or even enough circumstantial evidence, to warrant a suspension.

This league office and Commissioner doesn't seem to know their ass from a hole in the ground when it comes to meting out "justice". 

I just can't wait for this to be done. I'm so tired of hearing how "Brady is innocent!" or "He should be banned from the NFL for life!!!!" What happened, happened. He went out and beat the best defense in the league with perfectly inflated footballs, so I could really care less. This is one situation where whatever suspension the league hands out (or upholds) I will be fine with.






Side note: I am kinda hoping it stays at 4, so Brady will hang 50+ on the Colts in week 5

(07-31-2015, 09:40 PM)rfaulk34 Wrote: They've moved away from the injunction and instead both sides will be looking to plead their case for a final resolution before the season starts. 

My money is on the Judge finding that there isn't sufficient direct evidence, or even enough circumstantial evidence, to warrant a suspension.

This league office and Commissioner doesn't seem to know their ass from a hole in the ground when it comes to meting out "justice". 

Whoever is advising Brady isn't giving him good legal advice. A Federal Court is highly unlikely to overrule the NFL's decision unless Brady can show the NFL acted capriciously and arbitrarily. Great deference will be given to the NFL because there is a CBA in place.

(08-01-2015, 12:43 AM)Bmoreblitz Wrote: Whoever is advising Brady isn't giving him good legal advice.   A Federal Court is highly unlikely to overrule the NFL's decision unless Brady can show the NFL acted capriciously and arbitrarily. Great deference will be given to the NFL because there is a CBA in place.

http://boston.cbslocal.com/2015/07/30/closer-look-at-nflpas-filing-against-nfl-on-tom-bradys-behalf/

Just having a CBA in place means nothing unless the CBA has a particular set of teeth.

Zero games.

(07-31-2015, 09:40 PM)rfaulk34 Wrote: They've moved away from the injunction and instead both sides will be looking to plead their case for a final resolution before the season starts. 

My money is on the Judge finding that there isn't sufficient direct evidence, or even enough circumstantial evidence, to warrant a suspension.

This league office and Commissioner doesn't seem to know their ass from a hole in the ground when it comes to meting out "justice". 

sooooo, bet then?

(07-31-2015, 09:40 PM)rfaulk34 Wrote: My money is on the Judge finding that there isn't sufficient direct evidence, or even enough circumstantial evidence, to warrant a suspension.

This league office and Commissioner doesn't seem to know their ass from a hole in the ground when it comes to meting out "justice". 

The issue of sufficiency of evidence will not matter.  The players gave Goodell the power to make these decisions, and there is enough evidence to show that Brady might have been involved.

The only way Brady wins in court is if he can show that the league violated the rules of the CBA.  They will have to show that the CBA does not allow for a suspension iunder these set of circumstances.

The NFL has lost some cases in court, but it has never been over the issue of "finding of facts".  It has always been over technical issues such as the players not having notice of the possible penalty for their misbehavior.

Brady may want to clear his name, but he won't.  He might get the suspension lifted, but he will still be responsible for the fine or other punishment for deflating the balls.

(08-01-2015, 08:51 AM)SteelCitySouth Wrote: sooooo, bet then?

Sure. Got any ideas in mind? I would prefer to keep it relatively short-term. 

(08-01-2015, 11:36 AM)fredtoast Wrote: The issue of sufficiency of evidence will not matter.  The players gave Goodell the power to make these decisions, and there is enough evidence to show that Brady might have been involved.

The only way Brady wins in court is if he can show that the league violated the rules of the CBA.  They will have to show that the CBA does not allow for a suspension iunder these set of circumstances.

The NFL has lost some cases in court, but it has never been over the issue of "finding of facts".  It has always been over technical issues such as the players not having notice of the possible penalty for their misbehavior.

Brady may want to clear his name, but he won't.  He might get the suspension lifted, but he will still be responsible for the fine or other punishment for deflating the balls.

That's what i'm looking at. No terms of suspension in place. Arbitrary rulings. And if you've seen the link i posted earlier (though i'm not sure how relevant this is in regards to penalties) Goddell handed over the penalty phase, or maybe even more responsibility, to Troy Vincent, in reaching the ruling.

(08-01-2015, 08:51 AM)SteelCitySouth Wrote: sooooo, bet then?

(08-01-2015, 12:21 PM)rfaulk34 Wrote: Sure. Got any ideas in mind? I would prefer to keep it relatively short-term. 

So, uh...

What happened to this?

It’s very difficult to overturn the arbitration. Big difference between arbitration and court decision.

(08-01-2015, 12:24 PM)rfaulk34 Wrote: That's what i'm looking at. No terms of suspension in place. Arbitrary rulings. And if you've seen the link i posted earlier (though i'm not sure how relevant this is in regards to penalties) Goddell handed over the penalty phase, or maybe even more responsibility, to Troy Vincent, in reaching the ruling.

I didn't read the NFL CBA, but I know our handbook at work always has language that allows for the punishment above and beyond what is called for of any particular offense.

So where the book might say its a written warning it also allows for "up to and including termination".

Brady's best chance at overturning the 4 game suspension was gone the moment he destroyed the cell phone.

(07-29-2015, 09:35 PM)rfaulk34 Wrote: Betcha the 4 games doesn't stick. 

(07-30-2015, 10:48 AM)SteelCitySouth Wrote: Bet they do.

(08-01-2015, 12:43 AM)Bmoreblitz Wrote: Whoever is advising Brady isn't giving him good legal advice.   A Federal Court is highly unlikely to overrule the NFL's decision unless Brady can show the NFL acted capriciously and arbitrarily. Great deference will be given to the NFL because there is a CBA in place.

(08-01-2015, 02:26 AM)rfaulk34 Wrote: http://boston.cbslocal.com/2015/07/30/closer-look-at-nflpas-filing-against-nfl-on-tom-bradys-behalf/

Just having a CBA in place means nothing unless the CBA has a particular set of teeth.

Zero games.

(08-01-2015, 08:51 AM)SteelCitySouth Wrote: sooooo, bet then?

(08-01-2015, 12:21 PM)rfaulk34 Wrote: Sure. Got any ideas in mind? I would prefer to keep it relatively short-term. 

(08-05-2015, 10:01 PM)rfaulk34 Wrote: So, uh...

What happened to this?

Good thing you never got back to me on this. 

Don't worry, i'll get you on the next one.

(09-03-2015, 12:04 PM)rfaulk34 Wrote: Good thing you never got back to me on this. 

Don't worry, i'll get you on the next one.

I know why I didn't get back to you.  I left town on the 6th and didn't return till the 10th.

(09-03-2015, 12:07 PM)SteelCitySouth Wrote: I know why I didn't get back to you.  I left town on the 6th and didn't return till the 10th.

Good for a chuckle. It was pretty obvious from the start that the suspension would get tossed and for the exact reasons the judge stated. And he also ripped the way the league has been abusing the "Conduct Detrimental" concept.