Destroyed his cell phone and didn't tell investigators til three months later. That's new info and suggests clearly he was hiding his communication with the two ball boys. Looks like he will try to fight the NFL in court, but it appears the NFL Collective Bargaining Agreement will be difficult to get a court to second guess.
Brady's Four Game Suspension Will Stand
- Thread starter HallLine69
- Start date
I've seen too many examples of cases which are allegedly open and shut where the results are the direct opposite of what the so called " experts" predicted. Let's wait until the whole process is over to see how this all plays out.
I don't think this will be one of those occasions. I think the NFL has him cornered.
Remember this is the NFL we're talking about , the organization and commissioner that brought you the Ray Rice fiasco . LOL
He is "Hall of Fame" AND a lying chump who will continue to lie all his days like Pete Rose.
My take is that in the end, his slippery ethical compass will be seen more and more clearly.
I expect him to be in the Hall - and be a bitter old man - and it will be his own damned fault.
My take is that in the end, his slippery ethical compass will be seen more and more clearly.
I expect him to be in the Hall - and be a bitter old man - and it will be his own damned fault.
Just watched Belichecks presser. Why bother? He answers nothing and is arrogant beyond belief. When will they ever learn? Patriots apparently are a cheat at any cost organization. Ignore them. They won't go away, but by ignoring them it will drive them crazy, even if it is a slow drive.
I hear Costa and others say the rule is not important so this is not a big deal. But there is this rule. People knowingly break the rule. Doesn't that tell us that is gives them an advantage that the rule is designed to eliminate. I see guilty.
Brady's testimony: "I did not have sex with that woman". Worked for slick Willie, why not for poor Tom.
Brady and his lawyers are not going to dispute any of the real issues. They're going to dispute procedural issues. For instance that Brady was not given enough time to give them the information they requested and that the review process was blatantly unfair.
Brady has only himself to blame. The cover-up is always worse thsn the crime, but they never learn. I have no love for the Patriots or Brady, and I hope they get there just due. Frank
I agree!
While the PSI rule is at the heart of this, the specific "charge" for which Brady is being suspended is specified in both the CBA (Article 46) and in every player's contract: the player shall do nothing which in the sole judgment of the Commish is "detrimental to the ...public confidence in, the game of professional football".
Is there anyone in the US --- outside of New England --- who believes that --- as a whole --- the general public's "confidence" in the NFL has not waned a smidge as a result of this fiasco?
Is there anyone outside New England who would not consider Brady's destruction of the requested cell-phone to have "impeded" the investigation?
Is there any thinking person who has read Goodell's 20 page "Decision" who does not understand that the NFLPA specifically contracted to give the Commish this power, this MO and this leeway on penalties??
Is there any thinking person who has read Goodell's 20 page "Decision" who does not understand that the "contractually" required threshold of confidence is not the legal "beyond a reasonable doubt" but merely the preponderance of the evidence in the sole opinion of the Commish??
Based on legal precedent, does anyone really believe a Federal Judge (outside-Minnesota-on-a-case-not-involving-Peterson) would reverse a BINDING arbitration decision which for 40 years has been re-ratified as a NLRB sanctioned CBA which specifies both the requirement of and the methodology for such binding arbitration?
This is a PR battle, not a legal battle. Question: In which way is Tom Brady's reputation for posterity less damaged: as a wrongfully accused innocent or as a contrite, team oriented, confused perpetrator of a meaningless offense?
ESPN Legal on CBA and binding arbitration:
http://espn.go.com/espn/otl/story/_...-roger-goodell-decision?ex_cid=espnapi_public
Goodell:
http://static.nfl.com/static/content/public/photo/2015/07/28/0ap3000000504265.pdf
Last edited:
And can you please point me toward those 'facts'...all I've seen are assertions by the NFL that he destroyed the phone and assertions by Brady that he simply switched to a new phone. Near as I can tell, neither of those positions have been factually proven. In the absence of the 'facts', the circumstantial evidence strongly suggests to me that Brady was hiding text messages to the ballboys.
There are three issues that I would like to see expanded upon that would make it easier for me to support the four game suspension rather then a lesser penalty.
1. Does the NFL , under the CBA , have the legal authority to gain access to a personal telephone and the information contained therein. If it does not then Brady did nothing wrong and no adverse inference can be drawn from his destruction of his phone.
2. If the NFL does have the right to have access to the personal phone of any player or employee of any NFL team why didn't they ask for the personal phones of the two Patriot employees who had access to the game balls and see whether there were text messages from Brady that would help answer the question of Brady's role or knowledge of under-inflated game balls.
3. Assuming that the fact that a number of owners actively lobbied the commissioner not to reduce the number of games is true does that fact provide any legal basis that suggests that the commissioner's decision was unduly influenced by the owners and thus it was not based on the facts of the case and therefore it violates the CBA and must be vacated.
1. Does the NFL , under the CBA , have the legal authority to gain access to a personal telephone and the information contained therein. If it does not then Brady did nothing wrong and no adverse inference can be drawn from his destruction of his phone.
2. If the NFL does have the right to have access to the personal phone of any player or employee of any NFL team why didn't they ask for the personal phones of the two Patriot employees who had access to the game balls and see whether there were text messages from Brady that would help answer the question of Brady's role or knowledge of under-inflated game balls.
3. Assuming that the fact that a number of owners actively lobbied the commissioner not to reduce the number of games is true does that fact provide any legal basis that suggests that the commissioner's decision was unduly influenced by the owners and thus it was not based on the facts of the case and therefore it violates the CBA and must be vacated.
Last edited:
You are believing exactly what the NFL wants you to. Here you go:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/sport...da3b02-3666-11e5-9d0f-7865a67390ee_story.html
Read the article I linked above and you'll see you don't even need to ask 1 and 2. I have a question... Why didn't Goodell turn his personal cell phone over for the Mueller Report?
Here is a terrific legal perspective read:
http://www.stradleylaw.com/deflategate-legal-questions/
Stevie
Thanks for the articles , they did answer some questions but raised others. Again , if true, you have to wonder if the NFL will ever get it right. I would just ask this question: What competent investigator EVER asks the target of an investigation , probably the prime target , to review his own phone records and turn over what is believed evidence against the target which Wells allegedly did instead of asking Brady just to turn over the phone.
That would be akin to the Justice Dept. asking Bernie Madoff to go over his records and turn over any record that shows he's running a Ponzi scheme.
Thanks for the articles , they did answer some questions but raised others. Again , if true, you have to wonder if the NFL will ever get it right. I would just ask this question: What competent investigator EVER asks the target of an investigation , probably the prime target , to review his own phone records and turn over what is believed evidence against the target which Wells allegedly did instead of asking Brady just to turn over the phone.
That would be akin to the Justice Dept. asking Bernie Madoff to go over his records and turn over any record that shows he's running a Ponzi scheme.
Did you read this report on Wells May 12 conference call:
"He came to the interview, he answered every question, he did not refuse to answer any questions in terms of the back and forth between Mr. Brady and my team -- he was totally cooperative," Wells said. "At the same time, he refused to permit us to review electronic data from his telephone or other instruments. Most of the key evidence in this case as in most cases comes from people’s cell phones and he refused to let us review the phone.
"And I want to be crystal clear, I told Mr. Brady and his agents I was willing to not take possession of the phone, I don’t want to see any private communications, I said, ‘You keep the phone, you give me documents that are responsive to this investigation, and I will take your word for it.’ And they still refused."
Did you read the 20 pp decision?
Do you understand this is not a criminal situation? Do you understand this is a labor contract ? Do you understand that under the NLRB approved CBA and Brady's personal contract Brady contracted to (1) cooperate fully with any League investigation and (2) not do anything "detrimental" to the NFL public image? Do you understand the CBA gives Goodell the sole and BINDING power to arbitrate?
Based on the 20 pp decision what would you say most likely happened?
Last edited:
NFL has no subpoena power.
What it has is Brady's signed contract that he will "cooperate" with any NFL investigation. The NFL emailed and spoke a request to see the text messages.
Do you think Brady "cooperated" with that request?
The NFL asked for and was given the personal phones of the two Patriot employees. Please read the decision.
There were text messages that "helped" to answer the question of Brady's role. They did not "prove" Brady's role but they DO NOT HAVE TO under the CBA.
Steve
I read your link and the two on which it seems to be based.
The only tack I see with a reasonable hope for Brady is that they can "prove". Goodell is biased.
As the articles said that is unlikely to be heard let only to succeed as the union bargained that away 40 years ago
I do not like Goodell at all but in this case with the NLRB sanctioned CBA my non-legal reading is Brady has little or no chance, as both of the supporting articles stated.
Did you read my two links above?
If you read the Wells report, Brady cooperated fully. Wells states this many times throughout. In regards to the cell phone brady and team offered all information along with text messages but Wells along with the NFL said no thanks. When this goes to court I have Brady winning this one. I think the league really F'd up and overstepped their bounds here.
Time will tell.
Goodell never submitted his personal phone during the Mueller investigation. This entire thing is a joke and all that's been proven is that the NFL is in complete control of ESPN.
I'm not the one arguing Goodell's power here. It's been well established he can do whatever he wants to, reason and fairness be damned. See: everything from Bountygate to this most recent non-scandal scandal.
I've read just about everything on every case since Bountygate, including the quote you cite above. This comment following the report in which Wells indicates the exact opposite. The "independent" investigations and subsequent reports the NFL has produced in recent years are high unintentional comedy or cringe-inducing examples of the ineptitude, arrogance, and CYA-at-all-costs NFL modus operandi. This particular case has dozens of fascinating layers.
This seems to be in direct Contradiction to the decision wording.
The decision seems to read that all Wells asked for was a transcript of the relevant texts.
It reads that all Brady offered was a list of all names and numbers texted but no more, which is impractical to pursue.
As you say, time will tell.
I'd bet on it though
Why is impractical to pursue? If Brady offered the names and numbers of those he texted then you review the list for all that fall within the relevant period and if they're employees of the Pats you interview them. I would strongly suggest you're not looking at many.
The follow-up legal battles aside, I put Brady in the same category with Lance Armstrong, A-Rod, Mark Maguire, Roger Clemens, etc. Guys that cheated, fervently denied it, redirected blame or anger to others, continued to deny it and made lame excuses once they had no choice but to admit.
All A-Holes that symbolize the abhorrent and arrogant behavior we see in too many of our leaders today.
All A-Holes that symbolize the abhorrent and arrogant behavior we see in too many of our leaders today.
You are absolutely insane.... They are not even close to being alike, btw their is also no proof Brady cheated.
No, I am not. I prefer solid proof before we condemn someone. Bit difference between thinking he did it or knowing, and actually being able to prove it..
