Golden Boy Tom Brady suspended four games

[g under p]

I would give the NFL what ACDC would *BIG BALLS* if they take this to appeal. Why further along a technical knockout you still lose either way?

 

This is a bit of an upset victory here. I'm not sure they lose on appeal.

 

Of course, if you mean they lose by prolonging this, you might be right on that.

 

Yes the NFL would have more than a fair chance of winning on appeal. However, after taking so many negative hits on decisions Goodell has made (0-5 I believe) then also having the owners saying enough already. The NFL would be better one off to *let sleeping dogs lie*

The word down here is that Hardy might try to get his suspension nullified as well. Personally, I think he should be thankful that his supsension was reduced to four games and shut the f**k up.

 

I totally agree, after what he did he should get on knees and give Thanks it's not worse than what was given to him.

[Disembodied Spirit]

Narrator:

"TOM BRADY. Who crawled through a river of shit and came out clean on the other side"

 

http://i1303.photobucket.com/albums/ag153/Freedom80065/shawshank_redemption_andy_dufrense_in_rain_zpsmfizuamr.jpg

[KenJennings]

The NFL is acting like a ridiculous petulant child, and Goodell is digging his own grave here. They never had any solid evidence against Brady, and they have decided to scapegoat him as a show of power.

 

Absolutely pitiful that they're still pursuing this matter.

[LedRush]

I haven't read the decision, though I have skimmed it. One argument seems to be that Brady wasn't on notice that him cheating could get him suspended. I wonder if Goodell had allowed Brady to question Pash and see all the files if the decision would have been different.

 

So, in your estimation, the findings of a "kangaroo court," are still entitled to deference? Because that's what Berman is essentially calling the disciplinary proceedings. He's saying that because the process was so fundamentally flawed and unfair it can't be confirmed as a judgment.

 

I've recently been hearing that the decision would be decided by what the court chose to review: (1) if it just looked at the CBA, then the NFL would win as they clearly have the power to do what they did; (2) If it looked at the fairness of the arbitration process, then Brady has a shot because Goodell wasn't neutral, and the process was biased against Brady.

 

It seems that the court looked at the second one, but I think it is more fair to look at the first.

 

The standard of review is described accurately in the decision. An arbitrator can mistakes of fact and law, even serious ones, and still be entitled to deference. An arbitrator cannot conduct an unfair proceeding.

 

But they should be allowed to if there is an agreement in place that they're allowed to.

 

You can't agree to have a fundamentally unfair process for public policy reasons. Arbitration agreements are bargaining away your right to access the civil justice system in the first instance. That's why courts say, in effect, don't come to us and complain that the arbitrator made errors. You can come to us if you feel you've been robbed of due process.

 

If that's really what this judge is saying, that would mean that the arbitration process in the CBA must be changed, right? That would make this a huge victory for the NFLPA as they won't have to give huge concessions to get a better process in the next CBA. It also would mean that Goodell would be more likely to appeal.

[Rick N. Backer]

I haven't read the decision, though I have skimmed it. One argument seems to be that Brady wasn't on notice that him cheating could get him suspended. I wonder if Goodell had allowed Brady to question Pash and see all the files if the decision would have been different.

 

So, in your estimation, the findings of a "kangaroo court," are still entitled to deference? Because that's what Berman is essentially calling the disciplinary proceedings. He's saying that because the process was so fundamentally flawed and unfair it can't be confirmed as a judgment.

 

I've recently been hearing that the decision would be decided by what the court chose to review: (1) if it just looked at the CBA, then the NFL would win as they clearly have the power to do what they did; (2) If it looked at the fairness of the arbitration process, then Brady has a shot because Goodell wasn't neutral, and the process was biased against Brady.

 

It seems that the court looked at the second one, but I think it is more fair to look at the first.

 

The standard of review is described accurately in the decision. An arbitrator can mistakes of fact and law, even serious ones, and still be entitled to deference. An arbitrator cannot conduct an unfair proceeding.

 

But they should be allowed to if there is an agreement in place that they're allowed to.

 

You can't agree to have a fundamentally unfair process for public policy reasons. Arbitration agreements are bargaining away your right to access the civil justice system in the first instance. That's why courts say, in effect, don't come to us and complain that the arbitrator made errors. You can come to us if you feel you've been robbed of due process.

 

If that's really what this judge is saying, that would mean that the arbitration process in the CBA must be changed, right? That would make this a huge victory for the NFLPA as they won't have to give huge concessions to get a better process in the next CBA. It also would mean that Goodell would be more likely to appeal.

 

Although I wouldn't suggest he do it, I think Goodell could legally serve as arbitrator in a disciplinary appeal. The league lost because it had a weak case against Brady, as Judge Berman points out, and tried to cover that up by obstructing Brady's efforts to challenge their evidence. Smart judges hamper a party's ability to appeal by bending over backwards to let that party introduce evidence. But, then again, smart judges, or at least honest ones, aren't themselves for all intents and purposes a party to a case.

[LedRush]

I haven't read the decision, though I have skimmed it. One argument seems to be that Brady wasn't on notice that him cheating could get him suspended. I wonder if Goodell had allowed Brady to question Pash and see all the files if the decision would have been different.

 

So, in your estimation, the findings of a "kangaroo court," are still entitled to deference? Because that's what Berman is essentially calling the disciplinary proceedings. He's saying that because the process was so fundamentally flawed and unfair it can't be confirmed as a judgment.

 

I've recently been hearing that the decision would be decided by what the court chose to review: (1) if it just looked at the CBA, then the NFL would win as they clearly have the power to do what they did; (2) If it looked at the fairness of the arbitration process, then Brady has a shot because Goodell wasn't neutral, and the process was biased against Brady.

 

It seems that the court looked at the second one, but I think it is more fair to look at the first.

 

The standard of review is described accurately in the decision. An arbitrator can mistakes of fact and law, even serious ones, and still be entitled to deference. An arbitrator cannot conduct an unfair proceeding.

 

But they should be allowed to if there is an agreement in place that they're allowed to.

 

You can't agree to have a fundamentally unfair process for public policy reasons. Arbitration agreements are bargaining away your right to access the civil justice system in the first instance. That's why courts say, in effect, don't come to us and complain that the arbitrator made errors. You can come to us if you feel you've been robbed of due process.

 

If that's really what this judge is saying, that would mean that the arbitration process in the CBA must be changed, right? That would make this a huge victory for the NFLPA as they won't have to give huge concessions to get a better process in the next CBA. It also would mean that Goodell would be more likely to appeal.

 

Although I wouldn't suggest he do it, I think Goodell could legally serve as arbitrator in a disciplinary appeal. The league lost because it had a weak case against Brady, as Judge Berman points out, and tried to cover that up by obstructing Brady's efforts to challenge their evidence. Smart judges hamper a party's ability to appeal by bending over backwards to let that party introduce evidence. But, then again, smart judges, or at least honest ones, aren't themselves for all intents and purposes a party to a case.

 

So the argument is that the process isn't necessarily unfair, it was unfair here because Brady didn't get notice (a ridiculous argument), and didn't have access to question Pash or see all the evidence (a better argument, but one that doesn't effect how clearly guilty Brady is).

[Rick N. Backer]

I haven't read the decision, though I have skimmed it. One argument seems to be that Brady wasn't on notice that him cheating could get him suspended. I wonder if Goodell had allowed Brady to question Pash and see all the files if the decision would have been different.

 

So, in your estimation, the findings of a "kangaroo court," are still entitled to deference? Because that's what Berman is essentially calling the disciplinary proceedings. He's saying that because the process was so fundamentally flawed and unfair it can't be confirmed as a judgment.

 

I've recently been hearing that the decision would be decided by what the court chose to review: (1) if it just looked at the CBA, then the NFL would win as they clearly have the power to do what they did; (2) If it looked at the fairness of the arbitration process, then Brady has a shot because Goodell wasn't neutral, and the process was biased against Brady.

 

It seems that the court looked at the second one, but I think it is more fair to look at the first.

 

The standard of review is described accurately in the decision. An arbitrator can mistakes of fact and law, even serious ones, and still be entitled to deference. An arbitrator cannot conduct an unfair proceeding.

 

But they should be allowed to if there is an agreement in place that they're allowed to.

 

You can't agree to have a fundamentally unfair process for public policy reasons. Arbitration agreements are bargaining away your right to access the civil justice system in the first instance. That's why courts say, in effect, don't come to us and complain that the arbitrator made errors. You can come to us if you feel you've been robbed of due process.

 

If that's really what this judge is saying, that would mean that the arbitration process in the CBA must be changed, right? That would make this a huge victory for the NFLPA as they won't have to give huge concessions to get a better process in the next CBA. It also would mean that Goodell would be more likely to appeal.

 

Although I wouldn't suggest he do it, I think Goodell could legally serve as arbitrator in a disciplinary appeal. The league lost because it had a weak case against Brady, as Judge Berman points out, and tried to cover that up by obstructing Brady's efforts to challenge their evidence. Smart judges hamper a party's ability to appeal by bending over backwards to let that party introduce evidence. But, then again, smart judges, or at least honest ones, aren't themselves for all intents and purposes a party to a case.

 

So the argument is that the process isn't necessarily unfair, it was unfair here because Brady didn't get notice (a ridiculous argument), and didn't have access to question Pash or see all the evidence (a better argument, but one that doesn't effect how clearly guilty Brady is).

 

So you're saying that a negative inference shouldn't be drawn against the league by virtue of its refusal to grant Brady access to pertinent evidence?

[Lost In Xanadu]

I haven't read the decision, though I have skimmed it. One argument seems to be that Brady wasn't on notice that him cheating could get him suspended. I wonder if Goodell had allowed Brady to question Pash and see all the files if the decision would have been different.

 

So, in your estimation, the findings of a "kangaroo court," are still entitled to deference? Because that's what Berman is essentially calling the disciplinary proceedings. He's saying that because the process was so fundamentally flawed and unfair it can't be confirmed as a judgment.

 

I've recently been hearing that the decision would be decided by what the court chose to review: (1) if it just looked at the CBA, then the NFL would win as they clearly have the power to do what they did; (2) If it looked at the fairness of the arbitration process, then Brady has a shot because Goodell wasn't neutral, and the process was biased against Brady.

 

It seems that the court looked at the second one, but I think it is more fair to look at the first.

 

The standard of review is described accurately in the decision. An arbitrator can mistakes of fact and law, even serious ones, and still be entitled to deference. An arbitrator cannot conduct an unfair proceeding.

 

But they should be allowed to if there is an agreement in place that they're allowed to.

 

You can't agree to have a fundamentally unfair process for public policy reasons. Arbitration agreements are bargaining away your right to access the civil justice system in the first instance. That's why courts say, in effect, don't come to us and complain that the arbitrator made errors. You can come to us if you feel you've been robbed of due process.

 

If that's really what this judge is saying, that would mean that the arbitration process in the CBA must be changed, right? That would make this a huge victory for the NFLPA as they won't have to give huge concessions to get a better process in the next CBA. It also would mean that Goodell would be more likely to appeal.

 

Although I wouldn't suggest he do it, I think Goodell could legally serve as arbitrator in a disciplinary appeal. The league lost because it had a weak case against Brady, as Judge Berman points out, and tried to cover that up by obstructing Brady's efforts to challenge their evidence. Smart judges hamper a party's ability to appeal by bending over backwards to let that party introduce evidence. But, then again, smart judges, or at least honest ones, aren't themselves for all intents and purposes a party to a case.

 

So the argument is that the process isn't necessarily unfair, it was unfair here because Brady didn't get notice (a ridiculous argument), and didn't have access to question Pash or see all the evidence (a better argument, but one that doesn't effect how clearly guilty Brady is).

 

So you're saying that a negative inference shouldn't be drawn against the league by virtue of its refusal to grant Brady access to pertinent evidence?

effing lawyers!

[Rick N. Backer]

I haven't read the decision, though I have skimmed it. One argument seems to be that Brady wasn't on notice that him cheating could get him suspended. I wonder if Goodell had allowed Brady to question Pash and see all the files if the decision would have been different.

 

So, in your estimation, the findings of a "kangaroo court," are still entitled to deference? Because that's what Berman is essentially calling the disciplinary proceedings. He's saying that because the process was so fundamentally flawed and unfair it can't be confirmed as a judgment.

 

I've recently been hearing that the decision would be decided by what the court chose to review: (1) if it just looked at the CBA, then the NFL would win as they clearly have the power to do what they did; (2) If it looked at the fairness of the arbitration process, then Brady has a shot because Goodell wasn't neutral, and the process was biased against Brady.

 

It seems that the court looked at the second one, but I think it is more fair to look at the first.

 

The standard of review is described accurately in the decision. An arbitrator can mistakes of fact and law, even serious ones, and still be entitled to deference. An arbitrator cannot conduct an unfair proceeding.

 

But they should be allowed to if there is an agreement in place that they're allowed to.

 

You can't agree to have a fundamentally unfair process for public policy reasons. Arbitration agreements are bargaining away your right to access the civil justice system in the first instance. That's why courts say, in effect, don't come to us and complain that the arbitrator made errors. You can come to us if you feel you've been robbed of due process.

 

If that's really what this judge is saying, that would mean that the arbitration process in the CBA must be changed, right? That would make this a huge victory for the NFLPA as they won't have to give huge concessions to get a better process in the next CBA. It also would mean that Goodell would be more likely to appeal.

 

Although I wouldn't suggest he do it, I think Goodell could legally serve as arbitrator in a disciplinary appeal. The league lost because it had a weak case against Brady, as Judge Berman points out, and tried to cover that up by obstructing Brady's efforts to challenge their evidence. Smart judges hamper a party's ability to appeal by bending over backwards to let that party introduce evidence. But, then again, smart judges, or at least honest ones, aren't themselves for all intents and purposes a party to a case.

 

So the argument is that the process isn't necessarily unfair, it was unfair here because Brady didn't get notice (a ridiculous argument), and didn't have access to question Pash or see all the evidence (a better argument, but one that doesn't effect how clearly guilty Brady is).

 

So you're saying that a negative inference shouldn't be drawn against the league by virtue of its refusal to grant Brady access to pertinent evidence?

effing lawyers!

 

You're right. :)

 

Oh, and [/thread] I guess.

[goose]

I haven't read the decision, though I have skimmed it. One argument seems to be that Brady wasn't on notice that him cheating could get him suspended. I wonder if Goodell had allowed Brady to question Pash and see all the files if the decision would have been different.

 

So, in your estimation, the findings of a "kangaroo court," are still entitled to deference? Because that's what Berman is essentially calling the disciplinary proceedings. He's saying that because the process was so fundamentally flawed and unfair it can't be confirmed as a judgment.

NFL disciplinary hearings sound just like the process of appealing a superintendent's ruling to a school board. Gee, maybe we'll win this time... :D

[Rick N. Backer]

http://sports.yahoo....-221425352.html

 

This was the NFL’s nightmare.

After more than seven months, several millions of dollars and big talking from the league and commissioner Roger Goodell in the deflate-gate controversy, the first time someone independent looked at the case against Tom Brady it was thrown out.

Judge Richard M. Berman ruled that Brady’s four-game suspension by the NFL will be vacated, a decision Goodell plans on appealling.

Brady maintained his innocence even while the NFL tried to make its most popular player a scapegoat in a scandal the league let grow to outrageous proportions, but from the moment investigator Ted Wells’ report came out it was clear that there was no evidence against Brady. The NFL, for whatever reason, didn’t want to admit that and kept trying to turn Brady into a villain. An independent judge saw it for what it was worth.

[Rick N. Backer]

In a statement, Goodell "respectfully" disagreed with Berman's ruling, saying, "We will appeal today’s ruling in order to uphold the collectively bargained responsibility to protect the integrity of the game. The commissioner’s responsibility to secure the competitive fairness of our game is a paramount principle, and the league and our 32 clubs will continue to pursue a path to that end. While the legal phase of this process continues, we look forward to focusing on football and the opening of the regular season."

 

[g under p]

Yet Goodell won't be attending the opening of the season in Foxboro I wonder why. He'll attend a game this weekend, just not indicating which game it will be. What a chickenshit.

[troutman]

In a statement, Goodell "respectfully" disagreed with Berman's ruling, saying, "We will appeal today’s ruling in order to uphold the collectively bargained responsibility to protect the integrity of the game. The commissioner’s responsibility to secure the competitive fairness of our game is a paramount principle, and the league and our 32 clubs will continue to pursue a path to that end. While the legal phase of this process continues, we look forward to focusing on football and the opening of the regular season."

 

 

Just like a spoiled brat who doesn't get his way.

[Lost In Xanadu]

In a statement, Goodell "respectfully" disagreed with Berman's ruling, saying, "We will appeal today’s ruling in order to uphold the collectively bargained responsibility to protect the integrity of the game. The commissioner’s responsibility to secure the competitive fairness of our game is a paramount principle, and the league and our 32 clubs will continue to pursue a path to that end. While the legal phase of this process continues, we look forward to focusing on football and the opening of the regular season."

 

He is totally effing himself with this move.

 

If he doesn't devote the same energy to every wife beater, he will paint himself into a corner real fast. What a worthless POS commissioner. Focus on important shit, this couldn't be any more insignificant to the "integrity" of the game.

 

Can't wait for Lambeau Field to be "too cold" and considered unfair to Tampa and Miami. Or the grass is "too long" and unfair for speedster teams like the Seahawks.

[Rick N. Backer]

In a statement, Goodell "respectfully" disagreed with Berman's ruling, saying, "We will appeal today’s ruling in order to uphold the collectively bargained responsibility to protect the integrity of the game. The commissioner’s responsibility to secure the competitive fairness of our game is a paramount principle, and the league and our 32 clubs will continue to pursue a path to that end. While the legal phase of this process continues, we look forward to focusing on football and the opening of the regular season."

 

He is totally effing himself with this move.

 

If he doesn't devote the same energy to every wife beater, he will paint himself into a corner real fast. What a worthless POS commissioner. Focus on important shit, this couldn't be any more insignificant to the "integrity" of the game.

 

Can't wait for Lambeau Field to be "too cold" and considered unfair to Tampa and Miami. Or the grass is "too long" and unfair for speedster teams like the Seahawks.

 

Mr. Wells' firm billed the NFL more than $3 million for their "independent" investigation. I assume they billed a boatload more to represent the NFL during the arbitration and court proceedings (proving how ridiculous the "independent investigation" label was). Maybe someone at that NYC law firm will offer their client some good advice for a change, and tell the league when it's time to move on from something.

[LedRush]

http://sports.yahoo....-221425352.html

 

This was the NFL’s nightmare.

After more than seven months, several millions of dollars and big talking from the league and commissioner Roger Goodell in the deflate-gate controversy, the first time someone independent looked at the case against Tom Brady it was thrown out.

Judge Richard M. Berman ruled that Brady’s four-game suspension by the NFL will be vacated, a decision Goodell plans on appealling.

Brady maintained his innocence even while the NFL tried to make its most popular player a scapegoat in a scandal the league let grow to outrageous proportions, but from the moment investigator Ted Wells’ report came out it was clear that there was no evidence against Brady. The NFL, for whatever reason, didn’t want to admit that and kept trying to turn Brady into a villain. An independent judge saw it for what it was worth.

 

[liquidcrystalcompass]

In a statement, Goodell "respectfully" disagreed with Berman's ruling, saying, "We will appeal today’s ruling in order to uphold the collectively bargained responsibility to protect the integrity of the game. The commissioner’s responsibility to secure the competitive fairness of our game is a paramount principle, and the league and our 32 clubs will continue to pursue a path to that end. While the legal phase of this process continues, we look forward to focusing on football and the opening of the regular season."

 

Big mistake. If I'm correct, the penalty for tampering with the ball is on the books. A $25 thousand fine for the team. Goodell is digging a deeper hole. I'm more than sure that Brady was involved, but that doesn't seem to be the issue anymore. The way the league handled it was flat out horrible.

[troutman]

In a statement, Goodell "respectfully" disagreed with Berman's ruling, saying, "We will appeal today’s ruling in order to uphold the collectively bargained responsibility to protect the integrity of the game. The commissioner’s responsibility to secure the competitive fairness of our game is a paramount principle, and the league and our 32 clubs will continue to pursue a path to that end. While the legal phase of this process continues, we look forward to focusing on football and the opening of the regular season."

 

Big mistake. If I'm correct, the penalty for tampering with the ball is on the books. A $25 thousand fine for the team. Goodell is digging a deeper hole. I'm more than sure that Brady was involved, but that doesn't seem to be the issue anymore. The way the league handled it was flat out horrible.

 

Exactly,

 

If it did happen the league should have just found solid evidence and fined the team then moved on. Dragging this out is not helping the NFL.

Edited September 3, 2015 by troutman

[liquidcrystalcompass]

In a statement, Goodell "respectfully" disagreed with Berman's ruling, saying, "We will appeal today’s ruling in order to uphold the collectively bargained responsibility to protect the integrity of the game. The commissioner’s responsibility to secure the competitive fairness of our game is a paramount principle, and the league and our 32 clubs will continue to pursue a path to that end. While the legal phase of this process continues, we look forward to focusing on football and the opening of the regular season."

 

Big mistake. If I'm correct, the penalty for tampering with the ball is on the books. A $25 thousand fine for the team. Goodell is digging a deeper hole. I'm more than sure that Brady was involved, but that doesn't seem to be the issue anymore. The way the league handled it was flat out horrible.

 

Exactly,

 

If it did happen the league should have just found solid evidence and fined the team then moved on. Dragging this out is not helping the NFL.

They're giving the players Union more power with every loss. And the losses are piling up.

[lerxt1990]

The Juice is LOOSE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[lerxt1990]

In a statement, Goodell "respectfully" disagreed with Berman's ruling, saying, "We will appeal today’s ruling in order to uphold the collectively bargained responsibility to protect the integrity of the game. The commissioner’s responsibility to secure the competitive fairness of our game is a paramount principle, and the league and our 32 clubs will continue to pursue a path to that end. While the legal phase of this process continues, we look forward to focusing on football and the opening of the regular season."

 

He is totally effing himself with this move.

 

If he doesn't devote the same energy to every wife beater, he will paint himself into a corner real fast. What a worthless POS commissioner. Focus on important shit, this couldn't be any more insignificant to the "integrity" of the game.

 

Can't wait for Lambeau Field to be "too cold" and considered unfair to Tampa and Miami. Or the grass is "too long" and unfair for speedster teams like the Seahawks.

 

Mr. Wells' firm billed the NFL more than $3 million for their "independent" investigation. I assume they billed a boatload more to represent the NFL during the arbitration and court proceedings (proving how ridiculous the "independent investigation" label was). Maybe someone at that NYC law firm will offer their client some good advice for a change, and tell the league when it's time to move on from something.

 

Do you think the NFL may actually think they own the Brooklyn Bridge? Hahahahaaa. Im sure that got sold to them by said law firm(s).

[alphseeker]

Goodell claims this fight is for the integrity of the NFL. Well he is flushing that integrity down the crapper with his refusal to let this thing go like 95 % of the fans and players want. He is guilty of destroying the same thing he claims he is trying to preserve, which is proof this was always about his own credibility and not the truth. He saw this as a way to vindicate his 5 other blunders yet this one will prove to be the biggest of all. Edited September 4, 2015 by alphseeker

[Tick]

[g under p]

Already after 24 hours one owner from the Atlanta Falcons Bland I think that's his name is desinting from Goodell. I'm pretty sure they'll be more.

 

http://ftw.usatoday.com/2015/09/falcons-owner-arthur-blank-politely-torches-roger-goodells-handling-of-deflategate

Edited September 4, 2015 by g under p