I don't actually see what you're disagreeing with me on.
I didn't argue that they shouldn't make those arguments. All I'm saying is that they may rule that the suspension is invalid, for example, because of the rules regarding conduct detrimental penalties, and never actually rule on whether or not there is evidence he did anything wrong.
Actually i believe that the primary argument for the punishment being invalid: ( quote below from notice of appeal)
"Dear Troy, (Vincent)
First, as both Mr. Brady’s discipline letter and the NFL’s public statements make clear,
you were tasked by Commissioner Goodell to determine whether Mr. Brady should be subject to discipline for conduct detrimental in connection with the events described in the Wells Report (the “Report”), and if so, to decide
and impose the discipline. And, you have, in fact, imposed Mr. Brady’s discipline pursuant to the Commissioner ’ s purported delegation of his authority.
Any such delegation is a plain violation of the CBA.
The CBA grants the Commissioner—and only the Commissioner—
the authority to impose conduct detrimental discipline on players. CBA, Art. 46, § 1(a); id., App. A, ¶ 15. This express CBA mandate is"
This is their first argument and i am sure will invalidate this whole thing in any court in which it is argued.
The question one must ask:
Was this obvious violation of the CBA included by roger the dodger
purposely knowing the punishment would be overturned by an outside neutral Judge. All the while the NFL gets to damage TB12 and the Pats while reaping the benefits of this off season media storm created by NFL, controlled by the NFL and benefiting the NFL. Well benefiting the NFL that does not include the PATS.
Is this too cynical a view? Sadly i do not think so.