Brady can't win?

rochrist said:

I noticed that as well.

Click to expand...

Yeah he didn't look real comfortable or happy

moejr said:

http://espn.go.com/espn/otl/story/_/id/12888612/tom-brady-nflpa-cannot-win-appeal-filed-deflategate

Click to expand...

Yep, the Wells report is clear and convincing. He says so himself, it must be so.

How can an editor let this go by? I'm telling you, there needs to be a bloodletting of media members over this pathetic excuse of a story. By bloodletting I mean a firing in mass. Starting with Kravtiz and Mort.

I wonder if any media members have tried to interview Mort. Talking about smoking guns.

Even for ESPN this is shocking. "Legal Analyst"? What online course based law school did he attend for two weeks??
First let me say he could be right from a procedural aspect -- I honestly don't know. The CBA may have contractual minutia that will ultimately give Emperor Goody the final decision of guilt or innocence. I don't recall if many have fought the declaration of guilt, just the level of punishment. Brady may only be able to say 'regardless of your proclamation of guilt, the punishment does not fit the crime". This point is something that Emperor Goody has an established record of loses on -- yet the "legal analyst" leaves this obvious legal point out? A friggin "legal analyst"???? But, again, he could be right procedurally on the specific guilt or innocence decision.

Then a "legal analyst" uses the term "clear and convincing"? Wells own report did not state "clear and convincing" and Wells himself said it was a preponderance of evidence, per league instructions. A first year law student knows that the burden of proof of "clear and convincing" is more difficult than preponderance. Does this "legal analyst" really believe Wells would not have stated "clear and convincing" as his finding if he didn't think that higher standard had not been met? Wells did not use it because it hadn't been met. If it had been and wells didn't state it he would be factually incompetent.

There is more to assail but, as usual, someone gave a F_ _ K from that nauseating network more due than is worthy. Honestly, I could take this nonsense it if the guy was "Sports Blow Hard" Joe with his beer and funyon breath opinion. But using the term "legal analyst" to gloss over the actual beer and funyon smell is an underhanded and amateurish attempt at clicks, a yellow journalism used car salesman tactic that is low even for FSPN.

Lester Munson is a real munson, huh?

I like the part where someone asks "Can Brady's appeal backfire on him?" Of course Munson answers YEP!, saying that Brady will now have to produce his phone and there's gotta be even more damning evidence on that thing, because if there wasn't then why didn't he just produce it in the first place?!

I actually think this is a great point Lester, good work. BTW, let me have your phone, there's nothing bad on there right? So that means you have to give it to me or else you're guilty of whatever I want you to be guilty of.

Iz

Charlotte Pats Fan said:

Was watching nfl network tonight. Looks like someone told willemac to tow the company line

Click to expand...

Izatso? Hmmmm. In what regard. I missed it.

ViperGTS said:

Izatso? Hmmmm. In what regard. I missed it.

Click to expand...

I refuse to watch NFLN until Brady's suspension is overturned but my guess is someone told him to tone down the "Brady didn't do it" rhetoric to zero and act as if he did do it.

Ross12 said:

I like the part where someone asks "Can Brady's appeal backfire on him?" Of course Munson answers YEP!, saying that Brady will now have to produce his phone and there's gotta be even more damning evidence on that thing, because if there wasn't then why didn't he just produce it in the first place?!

I actually think this is a great point Lester, good work. BTW, let me have your phone, there's nothing bad on there right? So that means you have to give it to me or else you're guilty of whatever I want you to be guilty of.

Click to expand...

And of course, none of them mention that the league will have to give up all sorts of communications and that there could be -any- problem with that.

Munson actually pasted in several texts, but only the ones talking about inflation, and cuts out the part saying Brady wanted them at 13. He then goes on to say that these texts clearly talk about inflation and deflation, so Brady's guilty.

At what point does "blow it up to a rugby ball" and "f---ing watermelons coming" imply deflation?

ViperGTS said:

Iz


Izatso? Hmmmm. In what regard. I missed it.

Click to expand...

His comments were basically in

ViperGTS said:

Iz


Izatso? Hmmmm. In what regard. I missed it.

Click to expand...

He seemed to support why the nfl did what they did to the pats, it seemed forced and he looked uncomfortable. He was on with the asshat silver

So the best BSPN could come up with for legal expertise is an alcoholic disbarred attorney. Pretty pathetic.

Who knows, maybe Munson was going to be a lawyer and a great one. Then something terrible happened, he gave up on life and joined ESPN as a "legal analyst".

robertweathers said:

What a Dorito ****

Click to expand...

All you need to know is in that paragraph. Dorito **** indeed who is deluding himself. Watch he'll eventually change his tune to..."Just because the suspension was overturned doesn't mean he didn't cheat". That will be their next stance.

For the record, the only way for this to "backfire" on Brady would be for Brady to win in Federal court with a requirement that a new outcome happen, the NFL to then hand Brady an even firmer punishment, and the court then upholding that.

In other words, it's not going to happen.

"Brady was clearly involved in an effort to under-inflate the footballs to give him a competitive edge."

Under-inflating footballs is perfectly legal, deflating is not. No big deal, wording isn't important for legal analysis.

I stopped watching, listening,reading these F****** turds days ago..Its the same crap. This is wha tthe NFL wanted, win public opinion for now.

I have lost all respect for ESPN. I used to think they were a respectable organization but their bias against the pats is ridiculous. I've stopped clicking on their links and I'm not one who wants to shut myself off from different sources. I just wanna know why the players allowed Goodell to have so much power and hear appeals himself. I'll never understand that. There has never been a player in professional sports who brings out this much jealousy. I just hope that this whole nonsense motivates Brady even more to play as long as he can and win as many Super Bowls as he can.

festy1986 said:

4 superbowl titles, best winning percentage all time, 6 afc championships, 2 mvps, 3 superbowl mvps and married to the richest super model ever.

Yeah, brady can't win.

Click to expand...

He must be cheating to be doing so well.