Tom Brady, NFLPA Granted 14-Day Extension To File Motion For Rehearing By Second Circuit Court

[signbabybrady]

The NFL must have leaked a dozen or more lies to the media at the onset of deflategate, added 56 more lies in the Wells report, added still more at the Goodell appeal, doubled down on all these lies at the Berman appeal, then tripled down on all of the lies at the reversal of Berman.

It takes an amazing amount of dedication to sort through such a neck-deep pile of lies and learn the truth. You have to actually read the Wells Report, the court briefs, scientific studies, Wells rebuttal report, etc. to expose the NFL's lies, or at the very least you have to listen attentively to someone who has read all of that. Few journalists have. Far fewer fans have.

It's amazingly great that so many Patriots fans have gone to such lengths to educate themselves about this case. Thus I don't really blame the average non-Patriots fan for still wallowing in ignorance. I was stupid enough, at one point, to believe that the NFL was in the right on bounty-gate, bully-gate, concussion awareness, concerns about domestic violence, etc.

Finding out the depths of corruption of Goodell and his cronies has been eye-opening.

I am at the point that if Goodell were to tell me that the sky is blue, I'd really need to look for myself.

If Douchdell said Blue I'ld go with gold.

 

[Palm Beach Pats Fan]

So I'm hearing that all 13 Judges have to agree to take this on again?

no, 7 of 13

 

[DaBronxPats14]

no, 7 of 13

That's what I thought. Some guy bein interviewed said all 13.

 

[The Gr8est]

no, 7 of 13

So is it a hard and fast rule that a judge who ruled against the appelant, like Chin, won't vote in favor of en banc?

 

[raduray]

Yup and some his Long Shots were great Comeback Wins.

Yeah, don't listen to John Madden.

 

[raduray]

That's what I thought. Some guy bein interviewed said all 13.

Lester Munson?

 

[Gronkowski123]

Brady’s petition for en banc hearing a long shot

less than 1%....

 

[QuantumMechanic]

So is it a hard and fast rule that a judge who ruled against the appelant, like Chin, won't vote in favor of en banc?

I would say it should expected. After all, voting for review is voting for his decision to be thrown out and the appeal done again from scratch in front of all the judges. If he believes in his decision, why would he vote for that?

On the other hand, @PatsFanSince74 has a theory that Chin was somewhat sympathetic to the NFLPA side and gave Kessler an opening that Kessler screwed the pooch on. So maybe with a better, clearer brief in front of him, Chin might see the error of his ways and vote for en banc review.

Parker wrote the opinion and Chin joined it. Did Chin waveringly sign on to it? Did he full-throatedly sign on to it? If the former, maybe he'll flip. If the latter, no way.

TL;DR answer to @The Gr8est : No, but that's totally the way to bet.

 

[Tony2046]

The NFL must have leaked a dozen or more lies to the media at the onset of deflategate, added 56 more lies in the Wells report, added still more at the Goodell appeal, doubled down on all these lies at the Berman appeal, then tripled down on all of the lies at the reversal of Berman.

It takes an amazing amount of dedication to sort through such a neck-deep pile of lies and learn the truth. You have to actually read the Wells Report, the court briefs, scientific studies, Wells rebuttal report, etc. to expose the NFL's lies, or at the very least you have to listen attentively to someone who has read all of that. Few journalists have. Far fewer fans have.

It's amazingly great that so many Patriots fans have gone to such lengths to educate themselves about this case. Thus I don't really blame the average non-Patriots fan for still wallowing in ignorance. I was stupid enough, at one point, to believe that the NFL was in the right on bounty-gate, bully-gate, concussion awareness, concerns about domestic violence, etc.

Finding out the depths of corruption of Goodell and his cronies has been eye-opening.

I am at the point that if Goodell were to tell me that the sky is blue, I'd really need to look for myself.

I occasionally travel for work and often wear my Pats cap while on site. Typical statements I hear when deflategate pops up are:

1. Why destroy the phone? (They did not know that all the relevant test's messages and phone logs were given.)
2. You think weather is responsible for 2 psi? (They did not know that the Well's report implies approximately 0.3 psi and that the 2 psi was based on a stupid tweet)
3. Why would someone call themselves "deflator" (They did not realize that the deflator text message was from May during the offseason nor aware of a text message that stated "ugh they should have been at 13 psi" after the Jets game)
4. Why did he go to the bathroom? (After learning that it wasn't 2 psi and actually closer to 0.3 psi (according to Exponent) they admit that competitive advantage, fumble rate arguments and that going to the bathroom to release 0.3 psi, if that, make little sense.)

Usually the conversation ends with "yeah but they must have done something" or " where there's smoke there's fire"

I usually end with, "you think this is bad?"...try scrutinizing what politicians spew.

PR is powerful. I'm glad they are using it.

 

[SlowGettingUp]

Michael McCann has a very fair and detailed analysis here:

Brady’s petition for en banc hearing a long shot

 

[Pats2000]

Just finished reading the draft. Olson really went after the other two judges, didn't pull any punches. I'm not a lawyer, or a judge . But from the farther reaching implications in arbitration hearings, I don't see how they say no to a rehearing.

 

[Triumph]

I think a lot of NFL fans outside of NE (particularly those who are actual fans and not just casual Sunday armchair QBs) think what happened to Brady is BS. At the same time, if it gives their team a leg up they don't mind so much. It's much easier to say, "Just take your medicine. It's part of the game." when it's not your team being impacted.

At least where I live the sentiment is that Brady and the Pats are cheats. They dont feel the least bit sorry for him with his 4 Super Bowl rings.

 

[AtomicDawg]

I occasionally travel for work and often wear my Pats cap while on site. Typical statements I hear when deflategate pops up are:

1. Why destroy the phone? (They did not know that all the relevant test's messages and phone logs were given.)
2. You think weather is responsible for 2 psi? (They did not know that the Well's report implies approximately 0.3 psi and that the 2 psi was based on a stupid tweet)
3. Why would someone call themselves "deflator" (They did not realize that the deflator text message was from May during the offseason nor aware of a text message that stated "ugh they should have been at 13 psi" after the Jets game)
4. Why did he go to the bathroom? (After learning that it wasn't 2 psi and actually closer to 0.3 psi (according to Exponent) they admit that competitive advantage, fumble rate arguments and that going to the bathroom to release 0.3 psi, if that, make little sense.)

Usually the conversation ends with "yeah but they must have done something" or " where there's smoke there's fire"

I usually end with, "you think this is bad?"...try scrutinizing what politicians spew.

PR is powerful. I'm glad they are using it.

Brilliant summary, @Tony2046. I would add that living in NY and wearing a different Pats cap almost every day at work, the other statement besides the ones you mention that I get a lot is: "Well, Brady ONLY got off on a technicality!!!"

To those, I say that SDNY was not allowed to re-litigate the evidence, no matter how much Brady and all NE fans may or would have liked. Any rational, logical review of the Wells investigation would have debunked it from jump.

If someone were to read Berman's ruling - and I have, a lot - and pay attention to the footnotes on the bottom, if he had been asked to rule on guilt or innocence, he would have ruled INNOCENT because of the flawed investigation of Wells and Goodell's appeal report in which he lied there. The fact that Berman vacated the entire punishment is further evidence that he would have ruled innocent if he had been asked to. Of course this is before the appeal news even came put, but I still get told that a lot.

 

[QuantumMechanic]

Curran had a good short piece (2/3 of this is quotes from the draft brief) pointing out that Brady's fate depends on Olson being able to convince CA2 (or, ultimately, SCOTUS) that this has bearing outside of football:

Brady's appeal hinges on judges believing his case has relevance beyond NFL

 

[SlowGettingUp]

But from the farther reaching implications in arbitration hearings, I don't see how they say no to a rehearing.

Because it starts out as a 1% shot to begin with, and a reasonable case can be made that most of the case is specific to these particular facts (specifically the players agreeing to make the Commissioner judge, jury and executioner). Olsen of course spins it that the case is widely relevant, but judges read these briefs with a very skeptical eye. Even if some judges think the decision was potentially wrong, it doesn't mean they would then necessarily vote for a re-hearing en banc if they also think the decision won't have much impact outside the parties involved.

Next event to watch for is whether they ask the NFL for a response or not.

 

[QuantumMechanic]

Even if some judges think the decision was potentially wrong, it doesn't mean they would then necessarily vote for a re-hearing en banc if they also think the decision won't have much impact outside the parties involved.

Bingo! The federal judiciary likes to do as little as they can (I don't mean that as a slam -- everything's so litigious they're still busy as hell) so they won't take it if they don't think there's some broader applicability.

 

[Palm Beach Pats Fan]

Just finished reading the draft. Olson really went after the other two judges, didn't pull any punches. I'm not a lawyer, or a judge . But from the farther reaching implications in arbitration hearings, I don't see how they say no to a rehearing.

One thing missing is any discussion of the NFL actually lying to the court. There were some very specific examples of known lies by the NFL that could have been cited, such as Goodell stating that Brady had denied discussing the allegations with Jastremski in the aftermath, when the transcript of Brady's testimony made it clear that such discussions were part of their conversation.

An accusation of perjury is an awfully big hammer and needs to be wielded with caution, but I think that it could have been used here.

IANAL... is there a reason that the NFL's provable lies wouldn't be highlighted?

 

[Patsfanin Philly]

One thing missing is any discussion of the NFL actually lying to the court. There were some very specific examples of known lies by the NFL that could have been cited, such as Goodell stating that Brady had denied discussing the allegations with Jastremski in the aftermath, when the transcript of Brady's testimony made it clear that such discussions were part of their conversation.

An accusation of perjury is an awfully big hammer and needs to be wielded with caution, but I think that it could have been used here.

IANAL... is there a reason that the NFL's provable lies wouldn't be highlighted?

I wonder if he feels that highlighting it now won't necessarily get him the en banc hearing but it will the "hammer" among many if it gets that far.....and he has a chance to use the lies in front of the full panel...

 

[Mack Herron]

Link to filed version:
Filed Deflategate Brady En Banc Petition

 

[XLIX]

They just gave some lines from the actual submission of the appeal on WEEI. Some of the quotes they gave were even more harsh than the draft we've been reading all day today.