NFL final appeal brief filed

[DaBruinz]

"Even if we don't have ****-all for a case against Brady it doesn't matter."

And, sadly, I wouldn't be surprised if they have a point.

Except there wasn't even a "barely colorable justification". Fact is that Goodell flat out lied about how he came to his conclusion. He didn't use facts. He used major extrapolations that even 1st graders know don't make sense..

 

[eom]

Hurley: The 25 Most Brazen, Dishonest Claims From NFL's Latest DeflateGate Filing

I am not looking to see if already posted

 

[Hammer of Thor]

"Even if we don't have ****-all for a case against Brady it doesn't matter."

And, sadly, I wouldn't be surprised if they have a point.

They do have a point. That's exactly why Kessler has been avoiding the actual alleged tampering itself in his filings and focused on process.

If I recall correctly, even Berman himself said so in his ruling. The problem is, though, regardless of who the arbitrator is they have to follow US contract and CBA law. Berman explicitly ruled that Goodell didn't follow this, and he explicitly said his ruling isn't based on overturning Goodell's facts of the case.

That's the Steve Garvey decision in a nutshell - the arbitrator followed the entire process correctly and followed the law, he just made a really stupid determination. And the Supreme Court didn't overturn it for that reason. Compare that with the current rodeo clown arbitrator and his process.

 

[goheels22002]

Inconsistent is not illegal. Inconsistent is not unique. It happens with frequency.

In this case, the NFL practically ran to the courthouse in order to forum shop and get a court to take action by doing their specific bidding. The NFL then proceeded to cry about the court once it did take action, but did not do their bidding. In other words, they wanted an interventionist court, right up to the point where the intervention went against them, and then they wanted a completely non-interventionist court.

It doesn't get much more inconsistent than that.

Sounds like the Philadelphia Eagles and their fans being mad at Chip Kelly for re-working their roster.

 

[RelocatedPatFan]

In other words, it doesn't matter if the conclusion Goodell reached was wrong, gloriously wrong, laughably wrong, indefensibly wrong, so long as HE believes he's right, and his viewpoint can be justified even one part in a million, then he can issue any penalty he wants and there's really nothing any player or court can do about it.

That's exactly what the NFL is arguing here. For real.

That's why he keeping going to scheme as well. He is saying the court change his ruling on the facts/merit. And the only way to get article 46 invoked is some type of system wide tampering that affects how the public views the game as being fair for both teams.

Which is ironic given the recent issues with refs and the imbalance of calls.

 

[moejr]

I read all that is posted and I still can't tell if the NFL has a good chance of winning this or not.

 

[neuronet]

F Goodell, F Exponent, F Wells.

'nuf said.

 

[Ivan]

Thanks for posting, but I'm not going to focus on this until we know who the three judges are a couple of weeks before the Appeal is heard.

This is the key to the matter.

 

[YOUGOTMOSSED]

They do have a point. That's exactly why Kessler has been avoiding the actual alleged tampering itself in his filings and focused on process.

If I recall correctly, even Berman himself said so in his ruling. The problem is, though, regardless of who the arbitrator is they have to follow US contract and CBA law. Berman explicitly ruled that Goodell didn't follow this, and he explicitly said his ruling isn't based on overturning Goodell's facts of the case.

That's the Steve Garvey decision in a nutshell - the arbitrator followed the entire process correctly and followed the law, he just made a really stupid determination. And the Supreme Court didn't overturn it for that reason. Compare that with the current rodeo clown arbitrator and his process.

Don't you just love phrases like the the "barely color able justification" standard? It's the legal equivalent of "f*ck it, dude! Let's go bowling."

 

[ivanvamp]

That's why he keeping going to scheme as well. He is saying the court change his ruling on the facts/merit. And the only way to get article 46 invoked is some type of system wide tampering that affects how the public views the game as being fair for both teams.

Which is ironic given the recent issues with refs and the imbalance of calls.

What's incredibly funny at this point is that Goodell has said publicly, even in the aftermath of the deflate gate rulings, that he very much respects Brady as a fine man.

And yet, he (the NFL) is saying that Brady systematically and ruthlessly organized and implemented a scheme to deflate footballs illegally in an attempt to undermine the integrity of the sport.

Now, how can Brady be a fine man that Goodell, the commissioner of the very sport that Brady is seeking to undermine, respects, if Brady is in fact seeking to undermine the integrity of football?

It. Makes. Zero. Sense.

As an aside, a funny story today. My son's friend, a huge Pats-hater, who rails on and on and on about how much the Patriots cheat and how much Brady should have been suspended for a year, blah blah blah (yes, he's serious), was going to play football the other night with my son (college intramural game). It was warm in the dorm, but pretty cold outside (<40 degrees). It is a 15 minute walk from the dorm to the rec fields.

As they arrived, the friend was thrown the ball and caught it, and said, feeling how flat it was, "Man, what's the deal? I just pumped this up in my room before we left." And my son looked at him and said, "It's amazing what happens to the air pressure in a football when the weather gets cold."

Silence.

Beautiful.

 

[jpat]

I read all that is posted and I still can't tell if the NFL has a good chance of winning this or not.

yeah, this was better written than anything else they have put out so far. I could see a pro-management judge siding with it. The only hope i have is even though they make a compelling argument against the NFLPA's stance that it wasnt equipment violation, especially since Kessler on record said they didnt think it applied since it had nothing to do with game balls, they did a pretty weak job arguing the other points berman made, the lack of access to notes and lack of access to Pash.

 

[Zeus]

As a practical matter, this almost never happens. The attorney will just say something to the effect of "I may have been mistaken but I believed it in good faith." Even in cases where that statement will strain credibility, it will fly 99.999999999999999999999999999999999999999% of the time.

Which is one of the reasons those of us who are not lawyers on occasion regard the term "legal ethics" to be an oxymoron. In any event, the NFL has doubled down on lying through its teeth, much to the surprise of no one.

 

[YOUGOTMOSSED]

Which is one of the reasons those of us who are not lawyers on occasion regard the term "legal ethics" to be an oxymoron. In any event, the NFL has doubled down on lying through its teeth, much to the surprise of no one.

I can understand the negative public perception of lawyers.

Many are them are just corporate henchmen or government workers (a/k/a the "king's men").

There are 1 or 2 of us out there dedicated to helping the little guy who got a raw deal and still believe in things like truth, justice, and the tooth fairy.

 

[Clonamery]

I can understand the negative public perception of lawyers.

Many are them are just corporate henchmen or government workers (a/k/a the "king's men").

There are 1 or 2 of us out there dedicated to helping the little guy who got a raw deal and still believe in things like truth, justice, and the tooth fairy.

Yeah, lawyers do have to eat I suppose....and some do have families that aren't the Devils' spawn I suppose.

But I don't want to hear what a great litigator someone is that can't possibly believe the NFL's case but still takes their effing money to try and prove their case. **** them and the jurisprudence they ****ing rode in on.

 

[eom]

steph stradley was on 'eei today -- I assume talking about this
either that or the texans

Dale and Holley Podcast - Steph Stradley talks latest NFL filing on Deflategate

 

[Bobsyouruncle]

It's too bad we have to do everything through the courts because a good old fashioned ass kicking is in order. Or tar and feathering. Boston used to be that kind of town.

 

[Fencer]

I really, really, REALLY wish that the entire deflate gate episode was on trial, instead of merely the "process". Just one piece that is pissing me off today (among many):

The NFL, within an hour of its publication on espn.com, issued a rebuttal "correcting" the espn story that the NFL pulled funding from the CTE study at BU. They are well aware what goes up on espn and if there is false information (or information the NFL wants to address) put out there, the NFL has demonstrated that they absolutely will hop right on it and deal with it.

BUT....The Chris Mortensen story, where he claimed that 11 of 12 footballs were under inflated by 2 psi, which turned out to be utterly false, WAS NEVER, EVER, EVER addressed by the NFL. It's almost certain that the NFL is the ones that planted the false story in the first place, but even if not, they could have corrected that immediately, but they didn't. And that story is STILL up on espn.com (Sources: 11 of 12 Pats footballs underinflated), totally uncorrected and unaddressed.

I know we all know this, and this is just rehashing old news, but the way the NFL jumped all over this CTE story just highlights how obvious it is they were completely out to get the Patriots in the deflate gate situation.

Let's consider the possibility of the Pats suing ESPN for defamation over that.

• ESPN is clearly in the wrong; the corrected information has long been available.
• The Pats are clearly defamed by it.
• I doubt the franchise agreement prevents the Pats from suing ESPN.
• There's a slight possibility that the broadcast agreement prevents such a suit. Hopefully it doesn't, since is quite separate from game broadcasts and so on.
• We know Kraft would never do it. But let's ignore that point for a moment.
• What defense does ESPN have other than pointing their finger at the NFL?
  
• Presumably, as a strong partner to the NFL, ESPN would take the hit rather than pointing their finger at the NFL.
  
• I see a lot more ways this can help Brady's public image, including his chances in later defamation suits of his own, than it can hurt it.

Even more fun is the possibility of the Pats suing many media outlets over the cheating allegations.

• The outlets would have the defense that the league has made the same findings.
• The Pats could hit them for going beyond the league's findings, along the way forcing a rather clear record of what the league actually has or hasn't said, in privileged contexts or otherwise.
• The media outlets could bring up all the other allegations of Pats cheating as well.
• Could the Pats debunk those?

 

[Deus Irae]

I read all that is posted and I still can't tell if the NFL has a good chance of winning this or not.

No, the NFL does not have a good chance of winning this. While there is a chance they'll win, there's a better chance that they'll go down like Spinks against Tyson.

 

[TommyD4207]

But if an attorney knowingly makes a false statement in a filing, he/she has committed an ethical violation and could be sanctioned by their State Bar.

It's hard to prove that an opinion is "knowingly false".

 

[BelichickFan]

If the NFL were to win this appeal is that it for Brady or can he go further with it? Sorry but I know nothing about the law.