HawkShack.com

Presented without comment:

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-nfl-b ... SKCN0XM1TD

Based on what they were ruling on, no surprise here.

FolkCrusader wrote:Based on what they were ruling on, no surprise here.

Agreed.

The NFL initially handed down the penalty predicated upon Brady's knowledge of, and complicity in the deflating of the footballs and his subsequent destruction of evidence and lying about the whole thing.

The judge that ruled in Brady's favor was basing his decision on whether he thought deflating the footballs actually gave the Pats a competitive advantage.

This Appeals Panel ruled on the NFL's right to have handed down the punishment in the first place based upon the terms laid out in the CBA.

IMO the appropriate end has been reached. The actual deflating of the footballs deserved no more than the fine and draft choice sanctions the Pats were initially dealt, but Brady deserves the suspension for the cover up.

Not that this will be the final word ... there will likely be further apeals.

Not really a surprise, it was far more of one when the ruled in favor of Brady originally.

BBBWWWWWWAAAAAAAA!!!! The original suspension should have never been overturned. Judge Berman was a Kraft buddy who was seen partying with Kraft the week after his ruling. One would have to suspend common sense to say Brady was innocent or deserved exoneration in any way.

I wonder if Brady will appeal to the SCOTUS or just let it go.

SCOTUS ain't taking this case.

Uppercut wrote:Cards are sitting pretty on this one as they open at home against a Brady-less Patriot team and we play them later in NE after they have a bye!!!

Yeah, we are get him when he is pissed and we are take a major uppercut!

kalibane wrote:SCOTUS ain't taking this case.

Great point Kali, they wouldnt touch this with a 10 foot pole and 20 foot extension!

obiken wrote:Yeah, we are get him when he is pissed and we are take a major uppercut!

If all it takes for him to beat us is being "pissed", then we won't deserve the win.

Look at the bright side- it will be all the more satisfying when we smoke their asses at full strength.

Just because the Supreme Court won't hear this case doesn't mean he wont file.

c_hawkbob wrote:Just because the Supreme Court won't here this case doesn't mean he wont file.

Especially if he could get a temporary injunction I suppose. I don't have a lot of experience with supreme court cases but I worked for a company that appealed a labor decision to the Supreme Court. If i remember correctly it was a fair bit of time between when they filed and when the court officially declined to review the case.

I know Tom is on record as wanting to play until he is 45, but honestly if you watch his last 4 games last season one would thing the end is much closer than that. Another year delay could be just what the retiree ordered.

Justice! Now wipe that smirk off your face and sit on the pine and whine!

It will be very interesting to see how Brady and the Pats respond.
In my opinion Brady needs to swallow his huge ego and sit down for the good of the franchise and to begin the repair of his legacy. Is the SCOTUS the only potential remaining remedy? As has been said they may not take it, probably wont. But is they do and If Brady files there it could take years to be heard. If hes able to find a way to kick the can down the road another year or two with an injunction I think its over for him anyway. He may say he wants to play till hes 45 but hes honestly only a couple of years behind Peytons trajectory on the dink and dunk scale right now.

If Billacheat sees Brady slip one centimeter below what he needs to be he will cut and run like he has with plenty of aging stars.Id be curious to know what is in that ruthless mans mind right now with Garrapalo sitting there in the wings.Hes on a way different planet than Brady right now but has looked pretty slick at times in his limited opportunities.

What if the suspension holds up and Garrapalo is sitting at 3-1 or 4-0 heading to week 5? Might be fascinating.

Here's an option:
http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/20 ... d-circuit/

NorthHawk wrote:Here's an option:
http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/20 ... d-circuit/

Yeah I don't see Brady stopping or the NFLPA. But the SCOTUS? NO.