NJPatsfan26
In the Starting Line-Up
- Joined
- Jun 11, 2008
- Messages
- 3,416
- Reaction score
- 1,388
Probably they underestimated what the NFL was doing.
I dont think the NFL knew what the NFL was doing
Registered Members experience this forum ad and noise-free.
CLICK HERE to Register for a free account and login for a smoother ad-free experience. It's easy, and only takes a few moments.Probably they underestimated what the NFL was doing.
TBH, brady shoulve involved the PA from the start . this whole phone mess couldve been cleaned up.That was his big blunder. I know a lot of people were loving the rhetoric yee was shouting and doing interviews everywhere for PR but he didnt help much IMO. He claimed he has notes from ted wells investigation which he didnt release. Shouldve gotten NFLPA in from the start. Probably they underestimated what the NFL was doing.
I conjecture that he could control that by basing his defamation claims solely on loss of endorsement income and other business prospects.
A fair point to consider, although how does Tom Brady go about proving loss of endorsement deals and business prospects?
In other words, what companies have dropped him, etc? No matter what happens, no company in their right mind is going to deny Brady the opportunity to help sling their product. To date, I don't believe anyone has even brought it up.
He's still a 4x SB winning QB, one of the most well-known athletes in the entire world, and part of arguably the biggest power couple that there is. This isn't exactly a "Michael Vick" or "Jerod from Subway" type of situation, where companies are publicly pulling out of their deals.
My concern is that aspect may be somewhat difficult to prove in court, as good as it sounds in theory. Then again, I suppose it only takes one deal.
Good point.
But I'm sure there are people who estimate endorsers' values before making offers to them. So there's some level or other of expertise around in evaluating this.
I agree with you that there should be some type of concrete, objective, estimated value--although again, I wonder if that would be difficult to prove in a court of law? Just thinking aloud, that's all.
I'm sure someone here will bring up that recent article regarding the small sample size stating that Brady is now the most hated man in America, or the evil twin brother of the Iron Sheik, or whatever. My guess is that kind of data won't be much of a consideration
I agree with you that there should be some type of concrete, objective, estimated value--although again, I wonder if that would be difficult to prove in a court of law? Just thinking aloud, that's all.
(not should of), HAVE, not "of!" Sorry, pet peeve.Let's take the Phone issue a little further........
Tom should've (not should of)
1. Handed over his phone.
2. Allowed them full access to his phone records
3. Allowed a walk through of his house(s)
4. Allowed a search of his vehicle(s)
5. Turned over his bank records (to verify Tanguay's Ball boy payoff scheme)
6. Testified under oath while hooked up to a lie detector test.
Because that's what an innocent man would do if he had nothing to hide. Right?
It's a slippery slope.
it's also a little odd that the made no issue of the colts balls at the time when they admit they had no knowledge of the IGL -- they didn't even bother testing the other 8
(not should of), HAVE, not "of!" Sorry, pet peeve.