Golden Boy Tom Brady suspended four games

[KenJennings]

SC better not waste time on this. 4 games is a joke, but at this point, just deal with it

 

If they do hear this case: the important thing will not be the result of the suspension, it will be to set a somewhat important precedent regarding the role of arbitration in our legal system. In my eyes, there does seem to be a need for judicial review on that front.

 

If the language used in the CBA means that one party is unilaterally allowed to decide the terms of the contract (as Goodell was unilaterally allowed to define what fair arbitration was), avoiding any legal challenge to that; then I think that it's important for everyone know that they should avoid such language. Supreme precedent would prevent these issues in the future.

 

That's the folly of Brady's court challenge. The whole point of arbitration is that people can agree to certain sets of rules outside of government interference and reduce the costs of doing business. The chilling effect on business and the disastrous effect on the courts of a Brady win makes it nearly impossible that SCOTUS would even entertain this ridiculous appeal unless they just wanted to stomp it dead. However, there is nothing novel in the case to decide, so SCOTUS won't touch it.

 

There's no contract that should be above a challenge in the court of law. Arbitration can be agreed upon, but if either party believes that arbitration is not conducted within the terms of the contract, it should be subject to legal review.

 

Don't you think both sides have lawyers who read over contracts before signing?

 

Yep, and I think both sides have lawyers who monitor the process in order to make sure the contract is being adhered to. If either party believes it isn't, it should be subject to review.

Edited July 18, 2016 by KenJennings

[LedRush]

SC better not waste time on this. 4 games is a joke, but at this point, just deal with it

 

If they do hear this case: the important thing will not be the result of the suspension, it will be to set a somewhat important precedent regarding the role of arbitration in our legal system. In my eyes, there does seem to be a need for judicial review on that front.

 

If the language used in the CBA means that one party is unilaterally allowed to decide the terms of the contract (as Goodell was unilaterally allowed to define what fair arbitration was), avoiding any legal challenge to that; then I think that it's important for everyone know that they should avoid such language. Supreme precedent would prevent these issues in the future.

 

That's the folly of Brady's court challenge. The whole point of arbitration is that people can agree to certain sets of rules outside of government interference and reduce the costs of doing business. The chilling effect on business and the disastrous effect on the courts of a Brady win makes it nearly impossible that SCOTUS would even entertain this ridiculous appeal unless they just wanted to stomp it dead. However, there is nothing novel in the case to decide, so SCOTUS won't touch it.

 

There's no contract that should be above a challenge in the court of law. Arbitration can be agreed upon, but if either party believes that arbitration is not conducted within the terms of the contract, it should be subject to legal review.

 

Don't you think both sides have lawyers who read over contracts before signing?

 

Yep, and I think both sides have lawyers who monitor the process in order to make sure the contract is being adhered to. If either party believes it isn't, it should be subject to review.

 

Yes, review under the terms of the contract, which require arbitration.

 

And the penalty was vacated not because of any allegation that the NFL violated the terms of the agreement, but that the process in the agreement was fundamentally unfair to the extent that Brady's due process rights were violated. Basically, you were so stupid with what you agreed to that the government must come in and rescue you from yourself. It was an absurd decision that was overturned.

[KenJennings]

And the penalty was vacated not because of any allegation that the NFL violated the terms of the agreement, but that the process in the agreement was fundamentally unfair to the extent that Brady's due process rights were violated. Basically, you were so stupid with what you agreed to that the government must come in and rescue you from yourself. It was an absurd decision that was overturned.

 

...but the contract required that arbitration be fair.

 

If the arbitration was not fair, the contract should not be upheld. That's a decision the courts have to make.

[LedRush]

And the penalty was vacated not because of any allegation that the NFL violated the terms of the agreement, but that the process in the agreement was fundamentally unfair to the extent that Brady's due process rights were violated. Basically, you were so stupid with what you agreed to that the government must come in and rescue you from yourself. It was an absurd decision that was overturned.

 

...but the contract required that arbitration be fair.

 

If the arbitration was not fair, the contract should not be upheld. That's a decision the courts have to make.

 

Absent corruption, misconduct by the arbitrator, or the exercise of power not provided in the contract, courts shouldn't be looking at an arbitrator's decision...even if he very obviously got it wrong. This is the whole point of having arbitration.

[g under p]

I'm predicting as the season draws closer around Labor Day, NFL will lower suspension to 2 Games

Reason: To make the league look good. And ratings

Also Week 3 Houston @ New England - Primetime Thursday night.

NFL knows no 1 wants to see Osweiler vs Garrapolo

NE opens @ Arizona -ALSO Primetime Sept 11....Pats are then HOME to Fish

It does no one any good to bring Brady back in Week 5- @ Cleveland/ Regional telecast

They will want JJ Watt vs. Brady...plus Osweiler beat Pats last year with Brady........

Tom deciding to drop suit means NFL won, they will cave and NBC needs them to

 

That theory actually makes some sense.....I certainly hope it works out that way. Also, I think a four game suspension was far too severe. Another thing in the next collective bargaining agreement the players may not want to repeal some of the commish's power if they reduce Brady's suspension. Basically this will make the league look good. This ALL was about the other owners wanted the Commish to hammer the Patriots for past transgressions.

 

 

[KenJennings]

Absent ... misconduct by the arbitrator...

 

Isn't that essentially the challenge?

[LedRush]

Absent ... misconduct by the arbitrator...

 

Isn't that essentially the challenge?

 

The best that I can tell, the charge is that they didn't like the decision. Goodell didn't accept bribes, didn't refuse to hear evidence, didn't refuse to allow Brady explain his actions, and didn't refuse to follow the rules of the contract. The accusations that he got it wrong, didn't share notes, didn't provide notice, and didn't allow questioning of NFL execs simply don't rise to the near the level of the types of misconduct the FAA contemplates.

[g under p]

HAPPY BIRTHDAY TOM BRADY here's my gift to you......

 

 

Hope you got a laugh out of that.

[Del_Duio]

I doubt that SCOTUS will waste their time on this. Look, it's time for Tom Terrific to put on his big boy pants and take his medicine. This could have been over a year ago and here we still are. I realize that in addition to clearing his name he might hope to kick this can down the road so far he retires before forced to serve :P but it's time to get it off THEIR plate. It's a distraction. Put in Janeane Garofalo or whatever and get it over with. They'll be fine. Even if they shit the bed they'll win TWO of those games and then pretty boy has 12 games to get them 10 more wins and a 12-4 season, another division title, and one of the two byes. Pretty much a normal year.

 

Enough already...

 

I wish he would've served the sentence last season. Now not only did we have to hear about it all last year we get to hear about it all this year too.

Hooray! :(

[Del_Duio]

I'm predicting as the season draws closer around Labor Day, NFL will lower suspension to 2 Games

Reason: To make the league look good. And ratings

Also Week 3 Houston @ New England - Primetime Thursday night.

 

Unless J.J. Watt is now playing the entire defensive line that's a very winnable game IMO.

[Rick N. Backer]

SC better not waste time on this. 4 games is a joke, but at this point, just deal with it

 

If they do hear this case: the important thing will not be the result of the suspension, it will be to set a somewhat important precedent regarding the role of arbitration in our legal system. In my eyes, there does seem to be a need for judicial review on that front.

 

If the language used in the CBA means that one party is unilaterally allowed to decide the terms of the contract (as Goodell was unilaterally allowed to define what fair arbitration was), avoiding any legal challenge to that; then I think that it's important for everyone know that they should avoid such language. Supreme precedent would prevent these issues in the future.

 

That's the folly of Brady's court challenge. The whole point of arbitration is that people can agree to certain sets of rules outside of government interference and reduce the costs of doing business. The chilling effect on business and the disastrous effect on the courts of a Brady win makes it nearly impossible that SCOTUS would even entertain this ridiculous appeal unless they just wanted to stomp it dead. However, there is nothing novel in the case to decide, so SCOTUS won't touch it.

 

There's no contract that should be above a challenge in the court of law. Arbitration can be agreed upon, but if either party believes that arbitration is not conducted within the terms of the contract, it should be subject to legal review.

 

Don't you think both sides have lawyers who read over contracts before signing?

 

Yep, and I think both sides have lawyers who monitor the process in order to make sure the contract is being adhered to. If either party believes it isn't, it should be subject to review.

 

Yes, review under the terms of the contract, which require arbitration.

 

And the penalty was vacated not because of any allegation that the NFL violated the terms of the agreement, but that the process in the agreement was fundamentally unfair to the extent that Brady's due process rights were violated. Basically, you were so stupid with what you agreed to that the government must come in and rescue you from yourself. It was an absurd decision that was overturned.

 

I agree with everything but your last sentence. The argument was that the arbitration was conducted in a manner that was unfair. Courts can, and should, step in when an arbitration is not conducted fairly. If anyone was stupid, it was the NFL. Yes, the agreement allowed the Commissioner to serve as arbitrator. But given what was swirling around this case, he should have used some common sense. If he had come out and said, to avoid the appearance of unfairness, he was appointing a retired judge to arbitrate the case, the result could have been the same. Having the power to do something doesn't mean it's wise to exercise that power all the time.

[Rick N. Backer]

The Steelers deflated balls?

 

Yawn. Who cares?

[Ancient Ways]

My issue was never with deflated footballs. Tampering and cheating is an issue and should be dealt with but the coverup and destruction of evidence is usually worse than the original violation.

[Rick N. Backer]

My issue was never with deflated footballs. Tampering and cheating is an issue and should be dealt with but the coverup and destruction of evidence is usually worse than the original violation.

 

Ostensibly, the Patriots cheated by deflating the balls, no? If the deflation of the footballs was irrelevant, why investigate at all? And if it is relevant, then why aren't the Steelers/Roethlisberger being investigated?

[Ancient Ways]

My issue was never with deflated footballs. Tampering and cheating is an issue and should be dealt with but the coverup and destruction of evidence is usually worse than the original violation.

 

Ostensibly, the Patriots cheated by deflating the balls, no? If the deflation of the footballs was irrelevant, why investigate at all? And if it is relevant, then why aren't the Steelers/Roethlisberger being investigated?

Point is that an investigation that had cooperation that resulted in evidence that balls were deflated wouldn't have resulted in such a large penalty IMO. I agree that there should be an investigation into if and how the steelers balls were deflated. Especially since the nfl supposedly took actions to make this much more difficult since the patriots affair. My initial post above is based on personal experience with violations I have seen in my workplace and public scandals. Public perception of Nixon was damaged more by his bullying and coverup than the break in at the hotel.

[Rick N. Backer]

My issue was never with deflated footballs. Tampering and cheating is an issue and should be dealt with but the coverup and destruction of evidence is usually worse than the original violation.

 

Ostensibly, the Patriots cheated by deflating the balls, no? If the deflation of the footballs was irrelevant, why investigate at all? And if it is relevant, then why aren't the Steelers/Roethlisberger being investigated?

Point is that an investigation that had cooperation that resulted in evidence that balls were deflated wouldn't have resulted in such a large penalty IMO. I agree that there should be an investigation into if and how the steelers balls were deflated. Especially since the nfl supposedly took actions to make this much more difficult since the patriots affair. My initial post above is based on personal experience with violations I have seen in my workplace and public scandals. Public perception of Nixon was damaged more by his bullying and coverup than the break in at the hotel.

 

True, but the break in at the Watergate was itself an offense worth investigating. I agree it became a different issue once the President and his aides got involved with hiding the burglars' connection to CReeP. But the fact remains that people were arrested for breaking in to the DNC headquarters. Here, the deflation of footballs is either an offense that needs to be investigated, as it was when the Patriots were the claimed culprits, or it isn't, as appears to be the case now. If the latter is true, then "Deflategate 1" was less about the impact on the game, and more about "getting" the Patriots.

[Ancient Ways]

My issue was never with deflated footballs. Tampering and cheating is an issue and should be dealt with but the coverup and destruction of evidence is usually worse than the original violation.

 

Ostensibly, the Patriots cheated by deflating the balls, no? If the deflation of the footballs was irrelevant, why investigate at all? And if it is relevant, then why aren't the Steelers/Roethlisberger being investigated?

Point is that an investigation that had cooperation that resulted in evidence that balls were deflated wouldn't have resulted in such a large penalty IMO. I agree that there should be an investigation into if and how the steelers balls were deflated. Especially since the nfl supposedly took actions to make this much more difficult since the patriots affair. My initial post above is based on personal experience with violations I have seen in my workplace and public scandals. Public perception of Nixon was damaged more by his bullying and coverup than the break in at the hotel.

 

True, but the break in at the Watergate was itself an offense worth investigating. I agree it became a different issue once the President and his aides got involved with hiding the burglars' connection to CReeP. But the fact remains that people were arrested for breaking in to the DNC headquarters. Here, the deflation of footballs is either an offense that needs to be investigated, as it was when the Patriots were the claimed culprits, or it isn't, as appears to be the case nobw. If the latter is true, then "Deflategate 1" was less about the impact on the game, and more about "getting" the Patriots.

Maybe we can get th Russians to hack the patriots. I think deflate gate and steeler deflate gate deserved investigation. I'm just saying if there wasn't a lot of evidence that seems to point to the patriots destroying potential evidence I don't think it would have blown up as big as it was. If the steelers fully cooperate and are proven to have deflated footballs I expect a lesser punishment than the patriots got and a lot of complaining.

[Rick N. Backer]

My issue was never with deflated footballs. Tampering and cheating is an issue and should be dealt with but the coverup and destruction of evidence is usually worse than the original violation.

 

Ostensibly, the Patriots cheated by deflating the balls, no? If the deflation of the footballs was irrelevant, why investigate at all? And if it is relevant, then why aren't the Steelers/Roethlisberger being investigated?

Point is that an investigation that had cooperation that resulted in evidence that balls were deflated wouldn't have resulted in such a large penalty IMO. I agree that there should be an investigation into if and how the steelers balls were deflated. Especially since the nfl supposedly took actions to make this much more difficult since the patriots affair. My initial post above is based on personal experience with violations I have seen in my workplace and public scandals. Public perception of Nixon was damaged more by his bullying and coverup than the break in at the hotel.

 

True, but the break in at the Watergate was itself an offense worth investigating. I agree it became a different issue once the President and his aides got involved with hiding the burglars' connection to CReeP. But the fact remains that people were arrested for breaking in to the DNC headquarters. Here, the deflation of footballs is either an offense that needs to be investigated, as it was when the Patriots were the claimed culprits, or it isn't, as appears to be the case nobw. If the latter is true, then "Deflategate 1" was less about the impact on the game, and more about "getting" the Patriots.

Maybe we can get th Russians to hack the patriots. I think deflate gate and steeler deflate gate deserved investigation. I'm just saying if there wasn't a lot of evidence that seems to point to the patriots destroying potential evidence I don't think it would have blown up as big as it was. If the steelers fully cooperate and are proven to have deflated footballs I expect a lesser punishment than the patriots got and a lot of complaining.

 

When you say "destroy[ed] potential evidence," are you talking about Brady and the phone? If so, I have to say, I would NEVER turn my phone voluntarily over to someone, particularly when, as we now know, that someone was leaking information to Chris Mortensen that was demonstrably false. The league had no right to demand that he turn over his phone, and he was under no obligation to give it to them. When I left my old office, I had to turn in a phone. I signed out of iTunes, returned it to factory settings, and then filled it with podcasts. I had plenty of texts with my buddies and my wife I wouldn't want anyone else to read. I bet Brady does too.

 

Maybe it's me, but I never like the whole, "if you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to worry about," mindset. I'm entitled to my privacy, and the burden is on an investigator to find a legal mechanism to force me to give up my privacy. If he or she can't, that's too bad for them.