OT: Brady out for 4 and Pats lose a first round pick. Nm

[CL82]

lol....I thought we couldn't do GIFs anymore.

 

[FartMan69]

Mort lied

 

[Bonehead]

You ran away...

but I have a suggestion where to run to:

Start a Haters Whining Crying thread. I promise I won't respond to anything said in it.

Bonehead can be the top poster there.

wow - you got me wrong I am not a hater...how many times can I tell you this.
I don't hate the Patriots. I don't hate Tom. I respect the Patriots.

Stop taking this personally - you and I are both outsiders to this dude.

The simplest explanation for Judge Berman’s decision is that the NFL failed to show that it applied Article 46 of the collective bargaining agreement in a fair and consistent way. Remember, this was a case about process and specifically how the NFL investigated and punished Brady. The NFL had a relatively low bar to meet. Federal judges rarely vacate arbitration awards and only in extraordinary circumstances. Yet Judge Berman identified so many problems in the NFL’s application of Article 46 that he felt compelled to vacate Brady’s suspension," SI.com legal analyst Michael McCann wrote

http://www.wcvb.com/sports/read-federal-court-decision-gives-brady-victory/35080614

 

[UConn990411]

I agree with a lot of your post, but don't understand the following:

How is there evidence of something fishy happening when it is (highly) likely no infraction in the first place?

I never said there's evidence of something fishy happening - only that destroying your phone and McNally's text make Brady look guilty (at least in the eyes of people who want him to be).

What's he guilty of? No idea. Probably not deflating footballs, though.

 

[CL82]

http://www.usmagazine.com/celebrity...chen-threatened-tom-brady-with-divorce-201529

So is Gisele! We're brands now. Butch™.

You need a 'wordmark.' I suggest:

Butch ™

 

[FartMan69]

 

[intlzncster]

I never said there's evidence of something fishy happening - only that destroying your phone and McNally's text make Brady look guilty (at least in the eyes of people who want him to be).

What's he guilty of? No idea. Probably not deflating footballs, though.

Gotcha. I misinterpreted your post then.

 

[CL82]

There's enough here to think something shady happened...such as Brady destroying his phone and the "deflator" text. And there's also zero proof the footballs were below the legal limit.

All in all, it begs the question: what the duckk are we even debating about?

It's truly remarkable how much the NFL screwed this one up yet again. That's the real story here.

What's really remarkable is that Kraft bent over and took a hard one on this. I not complaining since I am still bitter about the non-move to Hartford, but I really thought the fix was in with Brady and that's why he didn't challenge the sanctions. Goodell went out of way to smear and sanction Brady even after Kraft made nice with him. This whole this has been a cluster fawk.

 

[upstater]

Any time now you can start theWhining Crying Haters thread. Trust me, you won't be alone in your posts.

For you NOT to recognize how the Judge ripped the NFL apart and entered territory that was not at all in his purview, you are blind, deaf and dumb.

He tore apart the Wells report in this decision. He didn't even need to. All he was charged with ruling was the fairness of the arbitration. He didn't need to get into deflated balls at all.

But he did in the questioning.

He ripped into the evidence against Brady.

 

[Bonehead]

What's really remarkable is that Kraft bent over and took a hard one on this. I not complaining since I am still bitter about the non-move to Hartford, but I really thought the fix was in with Bardy and that's why he didn't challenge the sanctions.

again - the Brady ruling is about perceived 'fair' punishment and NOT guilt or innocence.

Kraft gave up a million dollars and a #1 for NFL parity and NOT because anyone employed by the Pats were doing things considered illegal to the NFL.

 

[Bonehead]

Any time now you can start theWhining Crying Haters thread. Trust me, you won't be alone in your posts.

Ill start that thread the same day I start the 'Joe Paterno was a good catholic' thread...

 

[upstater]

Ill start that thread the same day I start the 'Joe Paterno was a good catholic' thread...

As usual, no one knows what you're talking about. Stop taking hallucinatories before posting.

 

[FartMan69]

Are the Colts now off the hook for their under inflated balls too?

 

[Bonehead]

As usual, no one knows what you're talking about. Stop taking hallucinatories before posting.

Don't be foolish...you know I wont start the Joe Paterno good catholic thread, like you have claimed he was, so it was in reference to expecting the Crying thread - come on, if I need to explain everything to you, we are destined for ignore status.

You defend the innocent - the Tom Bradys, the Joe Paternos and the OJ Simpsons of the world.

 

[CL82]

again - the Brady ruling is about perceived 'fair' punishment and NOT guilt or innocence.

Kraft gave up a million dollars and a #1 for NFL parity and NOT because anyone employed by the Pats were doing things considered illegal to the NFL.

No the ruling was about a lack of tangible basis for punishment. That doesn't clear Brady per se, but it does say that the NFL after half a year and millions of dollars had, well a couple of idiots' ambiguous texts and a complete disregard for experts testimony.

If this was a normal company, rather than the richest consortium in sports, the bloodbath of firings for investing so much time and money with nothing to show for it would be epic.

 

[upstater]

Don't be foolish...you know I wont start the Joe Paterno good catholic thread, like you have claimed he was, so it was in reference to expecting the Crying thread - come on, if I need to explain everything to you, we are destined for ignore status.

You defend the innocent - the Tom Bradys, the Joe Paternos and the OJ Simpsons of the world.

Again you're crazy. Insane.

Either that or you got me confused with someone else who apparently wrote something I never did.

Every post of yours is more insane than the previous one.

 

[Husky25]

There's enough here to think something shady happened...such as Brady destroying his phone and the "deflator" text. And there's also zero proof the footballs were below the legal limit.

All in all, it begs the question: what the duckk are we even debating about?

It's truly remarkable how much the NFL screwed this one up yet again. That's the real story here.

I agree with everything except for the bolded part. The deflator text and the destroyed cell phones were taken out of context by Wells and the NFL.

 

[Bonehead]

No the ruling was about a lack of tangible basis for punishment. That doesn't clear Brady per se, but it does say that the NFL after half a year and millions of dollars had, well a couple of idiots' ambiguous texts and a complete disregard for experts testimony.

If this was normal company, the bloodbath of firings for investing so much time and money with nothing to show for it would be epic.

With all due respect I disagree...I read about 12-15 pages and again I came away with the punishment doesn't fit the crime more that tangible basis - but I am open to seeing it your way?

 

[upstater]

If anyone thought I wasn't going to crow about this today, they had a very high opinion of me.

 

[upstater]

With all due respect I disagree...I read about 12-15 pages and again I came away with the punishment doesn't fit the crime more that tangible basis - but I am open to seeing it your way?

Read the damn court proceedings and stopped being such a biased dummy on this.

The judge ripped the NFL apart on deflation.

 

[Bonehead]

Read the damn court proceedings and stopped being such a biased dummy on this.

The judge ripped the NFL apart on deflation.

Read the ruling.

 

[FartMan69]

 

[UCPusky]

Wow. Too bad it's not UConn's season opener tonight so we could concentrate on the important cr@p. Oh, wait...

 

[upstater]

Read the ruling.

You are thick in the head.

The judge, despite the fact that his purview was only about the arbitration procedures, decided to go into the actual evidence--outside his purview. He ripped the NFL apart on deflation. Kessler was heard to utter in open court, "That's an excellent point, your honor." The ruing was about arbitration. Inopen court, the NFL was shocked that the case against Brady being aware of deflating was eviscerated by the judge, even though it had little to do with what the judge was charged with doing.

Read and educate yourself: http://mmqb.si.com/mmqb/2015/08/12/nfl-deflategate-tom-brady-roger-goodell-judge-berman-hearing

In particular, point #1:

1. Berman’s direct and strident questioning of NFL attorney Dan Nash about evidence of ball deflation had to be concerning to the NFL. Although the appellate review was supposed to be more about process than evidence, Berman asked about what direct evidence the NFL had of deflation and of Brady’s involvement, beyond the circumstantial evidence raised in the Wells report. The NFL attorneys had to be shaking their heads at a line of inquiry questioning the evidence the league spent $3 million to collect.

 

[CL82]

With all due respect I disagree...I read about 12-15 pages and again I came away with the punishment doesn't fit the crime more that tangible basis - but I am open to seeing it your way?

I hadn't seen it before your post and won't get a chance to really look at until tomorrow evening, but Berman's basis for the ruling is procedural (see pages 20 and 21) because in a judicial review of an arbitration, the judge doesn't make rulings about findings of fact, but there are plenty of good nuggets in there that will severely curtail the NFL's ability to sanction Brady.

Check out the discussion at page 25 entitled "No Notice of Discernible Infraction." That severely limits the NFL from taking any action against Brady for the vague 'generally aware' language. Couple that with the 'no notice of sanction vs. fine' language of the following section and most the NFL can do is fine Brady for lack of cooperation (and it might be stuck with just a warning to the club) and even that would only be after giving Brady access to Pash and the investigative file, which would undoubtedly give rise to more problems for them.

Nah, Boney this was a bitch slap by the judge. I know that you don't have a dog in this hunt other than trolling Pat fans, but you might just need to find a new hobby. This thing is over.


(The foregoing was based on a very quick scan of the decision. If I see anything materially different when I read the report, I'll post about it.)

 

[Bonehead]

You are thick in the head.

The judge, despite the fact that his purview was only about the arbitration procedures, decided to go into the actual evidence--outside his purview. He ripped the NFL apart on deflation. Kessler was heard to utter in open court, "That's an excellent point, your honor." The ruing was about arbitration. Inopen court, the NFL was shocked that the case against Brady being aware of deflating was eviscerated by the judge, even though it had little to do with what the judge was charged with doing.

Read and educate yourself: http://mmqb.si.com/mmqb/2015/08/12/nfl-deflategate-tom-brady-roger-goodell-judge-berman-hearing

In particular, point #1:

I would think you would be just as thick as I, since you still ignore the ruling.


He may have ripped, questioned, rolled his eyes and passed gas...

If its not in the ruling it hasn't been ruled on. I am not sure how else to state this so maybe you would see where I am coming from.
Evidence is heard, then a ruling is made. I read 'punishment doesn't fit crime' and not 'Brady is innocent of any involvement of deflation, if there was deflation.

I hadn't seen it before your post and won't get a chance to really look at until tomorrow evening, but Berman's basis for the ruling is procedural (see pages 20 and 21) because in a judicial review of an arbitration, the judge doesn't make rulings about findings of fact, but there are plenty of good nuggets in there that will severely curtail the NFL's ability to sanction Brady.

Check out the discussion at page 25 entitled "No Notice of Discernible Infraction." That severely limits the NFL from taking any action against Brady for the vague 'generally aware' language. Couple that with the 'no notice of sanction vs. fine' language of the following section and most the NFL can do is fine Brady for lack of cooperation (and it might be stuck with just a warning to the club) and even that would only be after giving Brady access to Pash and the investigative file, which would undoubtedly give rise to more problems for them.

Nah, Boney this was a bitch slap by the judge. I know that you don't have a dog in this hunt other than trolling Pat fans, but you might just need to find a new hobby. This thing is over.


(The foregoing was based on a very quick scan of the decision. If I see anything materially different when I read the report, I'll post about it.)

Well stated - and like yourself I didn't get all the way through it and posted on how I read the ruling.

Ill let upstater break it down once he has the time to fine tooth comb it -

 

[Nostical]

Great decision. Kraft ought to now shame the league into having them donate his olive-branch $1M fine to charity. And he should sit with Goodell to discuss the lost draft picks. What happened here was as plain as day. Brady told the ball boys he wanted the low end of the psi. They had needles, not highly calibrated equipment . That, plus the cold weather, caused an under inflation--but the Judge understood one important point. Brady played better when those balls weren't in play. Small fine--or pre-game warningshould have happened.This was a witch hunt. Thank goodness for fair, impartial Judges.

 

[intlzncster]

This is from ESPN. The lawyers on the board can speak to it far better than I.

On Thursday morning, Tom Brady's four-game suspension was vacated by a federal judge. Here are five highlights from U.S. District Judge Richard M. Berman's ruling.

The Court finds Brady had no notice that he could receive a four-game suspension for general awareness of ball deflation by others or participation in any scheme to deflate footballs, and noncooperation with the ensuing investigation. Brady also had no notice that his discipline would be the equivalent of the discipline imposed upon a player who used performance-enhancing drugs.

The Court finds the NFL's steroid policy cannot reasonably be used as a comparator for Brady's four-game suspension for alleged ball deflation by others in the first half of the AFC Championship Game and for noncooperation in the ensuing investigation.

Commissioner Roger Goodell's reliance on notice of broad CBA “conduct detrimental” policy -- as opposed to specific player policies regarding equipment violations -- to impose discipline upon Brady is legally misplaced.

The Court finds Goodell's denial of the Players Association's motion to produce certain investigative files, including notes of witness interviews, for Brady's use at the arbitral hearing was fundamentally unfair and that Brady was prejudiced as a result. The interview notes were, at the very least, the basis for the Wells Report, and Brady was prejudiced by his lack of access to them.

For the reasons stated herein, the Management Council's motion to confirm the arbitration award is denied and the Players Association's motion to vacate the arbitration award is granted. Brady's four-game suspension is vacated, effective immediately. The Clerk is respectfully requested to close cases 15 Civ. 5916 and 15 Civ. 5982.

 

[Waquoit]

Still searching the ruling for Tom is innocent

And you won't see that anywhere. No one is ever ruled innocent, they are found not guilty.

 

[Bonehead]

This is from ESPN. The lawyers on the board can speak to it far better than I.

On Thursday morning, Tom Brady's four-game suspension was vacated by a federal judge. Here are five highlights from U.S. District Judge Richard M. Berman's ruling.

The Court finds Brady had no notice that he could receive a four-game suspension for general awareness of ball deflation by others or participation in any scheme to deflate footballs, and noncooperation with the ensuing investigation. Brady also had no notice that his discipline would be the equivalent of the discipline imposed upon a player who used performance-enhancing drugs.

The Court finds the NFL's steroid policy cannot reasonably be used as a comparator for Brady's four-game suspension for alleged ball deflation by others in the first half of the AFC Championship Game and for noncooperation in the ensuing investigation.

Commissioner Roger Goodell's reliance on notice of broad CBA “conduct detrimental” policy -- as opposed to specific player policies regarding equipment violations -- to impose discipline upon Brady is legally misplaced.

The Court finds Goodell's denial of the Players Association's motion to produce certain investigative files, including notes of witness interviews, for Brady's use at the arbitral hearing was fundamentally unfair and that Brady was prejudiced as a result. The interview notes were, at the very least, the basis for the Wells Report, and Brady was prejudiced by his lack of access to them.

For the reasons stated herein, the Management Council's motion to confirm the arbitration award is denied and the Players Association's motion to vacate the arbitration award is granted. Brady's four-game suspension is vacated, effective immediately. The Clerk is respectfully requested to close cases 15 Civ. 5916 and 15 Civ. 5982.

You would think finding Brady NOT GUILTY would be a highlight...

And you won't see that anywhere. No one is ever ruled innocent, they are found not guilty.

Thanks for correcting me.

Still searching through the ruling for 'Tom is NOT GUILTY' but that's hard to do when that is NOT what the case was about, right?
wrong?