Brady's Suspension Upheld

[burrrton]

Goodell should just set up a Disciplinary Czar

You and I both know if he does that, it'll just be that person that gets bitched about when someone doesn't like a decision handed down.

It's not the structure of the review process, I don't think.

[obiken]

You might be right it might just be a transference of the Jerk mode.

[RiverDog]

You and I both know if he does that (sets up a Disciplinary Czar), it'll just be that person that gets bitched about when someone doesn't like a decision handed down.

It's not the structure of the review process, I don't think.

I am perfectly comfortable with one man, the Commissioner, taking responsibility for the final decision on player suspensions. You can complain about how the Commissioner is selected, ie he's the owner's man, but establishing him as the judge, jury, and executioner is fine by me.

And let's be clear about this: The concept of disciplinary power being entrusted to one man is nothing new, either to the NFL or to professional sports in general. Player suspensions has been one of the primary job duties of the Commissioner dating back to MLB's Black Sox scandal, when they hired a federal judge as their Commissioner in part to rule with an iron fist and restore public confidence in the game.

[Hawktawk]

Its the NFL not a court of law. God we have heard so much bloviating about scientific findings and legal precedents and blah blah blah. Its really a simple story. Tom Brady,, all world QB conspired with low level employees in the equipment department to deflate footballs in exchange for memorabilia. He lied repeatedly to the public, the commissioner, and his owner. He destroyed his phone the day of the interview. Hes busted big time and he and his few remaining advocates are grasping at straws trying to salvage any shred of his credibility.The Judge in NY has already advised Brady and the League to try to resolve this impasse on their own but he clearly is in no mood to overturn the findings of the league.
Guilty as hell.
End of story.

[NorthHawk]

I tend to agree with you, Hawktawk, but when things enter the legal arena with high priced lawyers, things don't always end up the way you would think.
How many times have people who the evidence seems to point to guilt get off because an excellent lawyer found some way to cast doubt on the procedures or evidence?
Good lawyers get good results for their clients, and Brady and the Pats will have some very good lawyers.

So although I hope the ruling stands, I have enough doubt that it wouldn't surprise me if it was to be overturned.

[RiverDog]

North Hawk is right. No one can predict how a court will rule. What looks like a simple, straight forward slam dunk case to us can be turned upside down by a smart lawyer or looked at in a completely different light by a judge and/or jury. My two favorite examples is the OJ Simpson case and the McDonald's hot coffee case. So don't bet anything you can't afford to lose on this case turning out how we expect it to turn out.

There's more drama that has come to light this morning. It seems that an all out war has broken out between the Pats and the league office, with the Pats accusing the league of withholding evidence and planting false stories in the media.

On Friday the Patriots released a series of February emails from spokesman Stacey James and general counsel Robyn Glaser to the league office begging for the NFL to correct numerous erroneous and highly prejudicial stories that New England asserts the league made up and then leaked to ESPN.

The Patriots were convinced the NFL leaked the fake story in the first place. The least the NFL could do, New England argued, was set the record straight.

"What is unconscionable to me is that the league holds data that could very well exonerate us from any wrongdoing and completely dismiss the rampant reports and allegations of nefarious actions, but the league refuses to provide the date," James wrote to NFL spokesman Greg Aiello in an email that also complained about another inaccurate ESPN story that, citing league sources, claimed Patriots ball boys tried to insert kicking balls into the AFC championship game.

It's really getting juicy, and I love it!

http://sports.yahoo.com/news/patriots-- ... 10492.html

[NorthHawk]

Neither side wants to expose the backroom positions and comments, but a public trial (or whatever the wording is for this procedure) could expose all of the "sausage making" goings on in the back rooms of both the NFL and Patriots. Not to mention any other things about the NFL's Golden Boy Tom Brady.
There's the aspect of "Protecting the Shield" that the NFL always promotes, so if things are exposed that makes them look bad, it could tarnish the NFL image.

In that light, I could see the NFL settle prior to the deadline for no suspension. I think protecting the image might be considered more important than a single players suspension and/or fine.
As well, it could be considered a shot across the bow for any further tampering of balls or equipment by teams or players.

[RiverDog]

In that light, I could see the NFL settle prior to the deadline for no suspension. I think protecting the image might be considered more important than a single players suspension and/or fine.

I disagree. I could see them rescinding their punishment of the Pats, but not Brady's suspension. If they had any inclination whatsoever of reinstating Brady, they wouldn't have not only upheld the suspension, they wouldn't have disclosed the fact that Brady intentionally destroyed evidence sought by the league.

The only way the league caves is if public opinion turns against them, and at this point, I see no evidence of that happening.

[Futureite]

I cannot believe a judge agreed to hear this before the season starts. Of all the cases to expedite. LOL what a joke our judicial system is. And yet, it's still the best in the world. I guess we are better than Zimbabwe. I wouldn't want to be tried there. Especially for hunting a Lion.

[HumanCockroach]

North Hawk is right. No one can predict how a court will rule. What looks like a simple, straight forward slam dunk case to us can be turned upside down by a smart lawyer or looked at in a completely different light by a judge and/or jury. My two favorite examples is the OJ Simpson case and the McDonald's hot coffee case. So don't bet anything you can't afford to lose on this case turning out how we expect it to turn out.

There's more drama that has come to light this morning. It seems that an all out war has broken out between the Pats and the league office, with the Pats accusing the league of withholding evidence and planting false stories in the media.

On Friday the Patriots released a series of February emails from spokesman Stacey James and general counsel Robyn Glaser to the league office begging for the NFL to correct numerous erroneous and highly prejudicial stories that New England asserts the league made up and then leaked to ESPN.

The Patriots were convinced the NFL leaked the fake story in the first place. The least the NFL could do, New England argued, was set the record straight.

"What is unconscionable to me is that the league holds data that could very well exonerate us from any wrongdoing and completely dismiss the rampant reports and allegations of nefarious actions, but the league refuses to provide the date," James wrote to NFL spokesman Greg Aiello in an email that also complained about another inaccurate ESPN story that, citing league sources, claimed Patriots ball boys tried to insert kicking balls into the AFC championship game.

It's really getting juicy, and I love it!

http://sports.yahoo.com/news/patriots-- ... 10492.html

I wonder why the Pats refused to allow the ball boys to be interviewed then. Hell, we'll just skip the admission here that the "Pats did nothing wrong" as that would be by definition wrong. And unless ALL of the balls happened to be kicking balls, I can't imagine what this weak excuse is attempting to accomplish, and IF that was the reason, why did the equipment guys get suspended instead of the ball boys, and IF that was the case, why did those guys get suspended at all?

By suspending them, and accepting the punishment, the Pats have already admitted wrong doing, now they are merely trying to avoid admitting how far the rabbit hole descends, and how long it has been common practice, which IMHO is quite some time.

[RiverDog]

I wonder why the Pats refused to allow the ball boys to be interviewed then. Hell, we'll just skip the admission here that the "Pats did nothing wrong" as that would be by definition wrong. And unless ALL of the balls happened to be kicking balls, I can't imagine what this weak excuse is attempting to accomplish, and IF that was the reason, why did the equipment guys get suspended instead of the ball boys, and IF that was the case, why did those guys get suspended at all?

By suspending them, and accepting the punishment, the Pats have already admitted wrong doing, now they are merely trying to avoid admitting how far the rabbit hole descends, and how long it has been common practice, which IMHO is quite some time.

Are we sure that the ball boys/equipment guys were suspended without pay? I know that there are times that employers will suspend employees with pay during an investiagtion, especially if the investigation is expected to take a long time, as they do with police officers that are involved in a fatal shooting. Suspending an employee with pay does make a difference in terms of their admission of guilt.

[Hawktawk]

The two employees who were conspiring to deflate the balls were suspended without pay. Again, lawyers and injunctions aside the man did it. He cheated. And millions in legal fees will be spent to buy back his reputation which has been permanently diminished regardless of the outcome of these proceedings. The way hes acting they should have suspended him longer honestly.

[RiverDog]

The two employees who were conspiring to deflate the balls were suspended without pay. Again, lawyers and injunctions aside the man did it. He cheated. And millions in legal fees will be spent to buy back his reputation which has been permanently diminished regardless of the outcome of these proceedings. The way hes acting they should have suspended him longer honestly.

Are you sure about that? As a rule, employees on leave for that long are either terminated or paid for the time they were off. Courts have ruled that they have a reasonable expectation of a prompt decision on their future, so they can move on if their employer no longer wants their services.