Mike Reiss on What it Would Take for Zero Games For Brady

The Gr8est said:

I am referring to the part of your post that says "Goodell has known all along that there was a good probability that an independent arbiter would have reduced the suspension to one or two games".

My point is that I don't see any evidence of a neutral person finding any reason to suspend Brady at all.

There is no evidence he did anything worthy of being suspended for.

Click to expand...

I would agree with your latter two statements, which is why I think there was a "reasonable chance" that an independent third party would have taken the suspension to zero.

However, you or I saying (and agreeing) that the two of us "don't see" any evidence of a "reason to suspend Brady at all" is a completely different statement from asserting that an independent third party would indeed have found in that manner.

As a result, since we can know neither the identity of that hypothetical third party or how the process would have played out, there is also a "good probability" that the outcome might have been different, along the lines of a one or two game suspension. There's also a smaller, but not un-measurable, probability that an independent arbiter would have let all four games stand, no matter how you and I might see the evidence to the contrary.

In other words, what I happen to think "should" have happened and what actually "would" have happened are two completely different things. I think Brady "should" not serve a suspension of a single game or minute. But there is a wide range of possibilities when it comes to what an arbiter "would" have done.

I think Brady has a much better chance in a Federal Court, where the rules of evidence will apply and where people can be deposed under oath and penalty of perjury. That is what I think Goodell wants to avoid.

PatsFanSince74 said:

I think Brady has a much better chance in a Federal Court, where the rules of evidence will apply and where people can be deposed under oath and penalty of perjury. That is what I think Goodell wants to avoid.

Click to expand...

I think that would be glorious and I'd like to see Mr. Kessler in action. Plus, I'd like Kraft to let us know what Goody said in his little couch conversation prior to prostrating himself at the alter of the NFL*.

Deus Irae said:

In the world of free agency, draft picks are nice, but often overrated. Your post is a great example of that.

Click to expand...

Can't really agree on that.. the early round picks are essential to building a competitive football team. When you hit on them, it provides your team with a good player on a very cap friendly rookie deal for 4-5 years.

Free agency can provide you talented veterans, but you can't build your entire team that way because it's impossible to afford it.

Leonard Williams on the Jets is going to give them a potentially dominating player for 5 years at a rookies salary.. just like they got out of Wilkerson and Richardson to give an example.. having elite talent like that on rookie deals is what allows them to go drop a stupid amount of money on a Revis.. having a garbage QB on his rookie deal certainly helps as well

The Seahawks wouldn't have been nearly as good IMO if it weren't for all of the players they had on rookie deals, most notably was Wilson.

1st and 2nd rd round picks are incredibly valuable, and can even be used to trade for elite players like Jimmy Graham, Richard Seymour, etc

JarOfMayo51 said:

Can't really agree on that..

Click to expand...

It's not that draft picks have no value, because they do. What I said was that they are overrated in the era of free agency, which they clearly are. One look at the draft order shows that crappy teams generally stay crappy despite having high picks in every round.

In today's NFL, you need a QB. Outside of that QB, everything else can be worked around. Hell, if you've got an all-time defense, even the QB can be worked around.

Or, to put it another way, The Miami Dolphins didn't draft the best defensive tackle in the NFL. They signed him as a free agent.

BTW, the Seahawks got Thurmond in the 4th, Chancellor in the 6th, Sherman in the 5th and Maxwell in the 6th. And, as you noted, they got Wilson in the 3rd round, not the first.

VectorPrime said:

They want to expose this appeal process as the joke it is and blow the whole thing up. Brady and the PA don't want to play Goodell's game, they want to flip the board.

Click to expand...

And how do you know this with so much confidence?

Of course, this is what we all hope for, the best possible outcome that can be salvaged from this s***fest.

But how do you know Brady and the NFLPA will truly go scorched earth on the NFL? More likely that political forces will take over, and some compromise will be reached.

Yes, this is me being cynical. But after the serial let downs with the Wells toilet paper roll, the media's rabid frenzy over it, and Kraft's capitulation, I don't have much hope for any vindication from Brady's appeal/lawsuit (if the latter even materializes).

Mountain_Commando said:

And how do you know this with so much confidence?

Of course, this is what we all hope for, the best possible outcome that can be salvaged from this s***fest.

But how do you know Brady and the NFLPA will truly go scorched earth on the NFL? More likely that political forces will take over, and some compromise will be reached.

Yes, this is me being cynical. But after the serial let downs with the Wells toilet paper roll, the media's rabid frenzy over it, and Kraft's capitulation, I don't have much hope for any vindication from Brady's appeal/lawsuit (if the latter even materializes).

Click to expand...

1. What 'political force'?
2. Brady's lawsuit likely won't be about proving innocence. It'll more likely be attacking the process by which he was suspended 4 games, and the sufficiency of the evidence, and reasoning, that led to the suspension.
   
3. The NFLPA clearly realizes its mistake regarding discipline, and has been trying to remedy it for years.
4. Brady's suspension going from 4 to 0 would a huge win for both Brady and the NFLPA, whether it happens at the initial appeal or later in the process.

Mountain_Commando said:

And how do you know this with so much confidence?

Of course, this is what we all hope for, the best possible outcome that can be salvaged from this s***fest.

But how do you know Brady and the NFLPA will truly go scorched earth on the NFL? More likely that political forces will take over, and some compromise will be reached.

Yes, this is me being cynical. But after the serial let downs with the Wells toilet paper roll, the media's rabid frenzy over it, and Kraft's capitulation, I don't have much hope for any vindication from Brady's appeal/lawsuit (if the latter even materializes).

Click to expand...

For a "compromise" to work, it has to work for both sides. However, this is one of those situations where it's "all or nothing" for one of the sides.

A reduction of the suspension to two games or even one game would "work" for Goodell. The validity of the Wells report would be upheld in principle, Goodell could claim he had shown leniency and Brady would accept a reduced penalty "for the good of the game."

However, that wouldn't "work" for Brady. By accepting even a one game (or one half) suspension "for the good of the game," he would be assenting to and validating the entire process.

This all comes down to the irreducible truth that Brady and the NFLPA are operating out of a a fundamentally different definition of "for the good of the game" than are Goodell and (indeed) Kraft.

Preserving harmony among the owners was the defined "good" for Kraft and Goodell in San Francisco.

For Brady and the NFLPA, the "good" is defined around his right and the rights of its players not to be subjected to an arbitrary disciplinary process.

If he were ready to accept a token reduction, Brady wouldn't have hired Jeffrey Kessler. The signal is clear.

Remember, this could have all been handled as a tense but basically cordial conversation across a table at League Headquarters between the Commissioner and one of his marquee players. Once Brady hired Kessler, he signaled that that was not going to work for him.

So, Goodell is boxed into a corner.

He either leaves the suspension at four games and prepares for a donnybrook in Federal Court or he says that Kraft's acceptance of the fine and loss of Draft picks was sufficient and takes Brady off the hook.

So, it's all or nothing.

betterthanthealternative said:

FWIW, Rob, I read your original post as TIC and exactly as you explain it above.

The competitiveness and hormones around here create intransigence that wouldn't happen in the course of normal civil discourse.

Click to expand...

I guess I thought it is pretty common sense that most appeals (no matter the forum) ever increases the punishment or penalty, it can only keep it where it is, reduce or eliminate it. I thought that was self explainatory with my original post and I was making a gross exaggeration to make the point that there is no chance Goodell will reduce the suspension to zero, but I guess I was wrong.

Thanks for being at least one person who got it.

PatsFanSince74 said:

For a "compromise" to work, it has to work for both sides. However, this is one of those situations where it's "all or nothing" for one of the sides.

A reduction of the suspension to two games or even one game would "work" for Goodell. The validity of the Wells report would be upheld in principle, Goodell could claim he had shown leniency and Brady would accept a reduced penalty "for the good of the game."

However, that wouldn't "work" for Brady. By accepting even a one game (or one half) suspension "for the good of the game," he would be assenting to and validating the entire process.

This all comes down to the irreducible truth that Brady and the NFLPA are operating out of a a fundamentally different definition of "for the good of the game" than are Goodell and (indeed) Kraft.

Preserving harmony among the owners was the defined "good" for Kraft and Goodell in San Francisco.

For Brady and the NFLPA, the "good" is defined around his right and the rights of its players not to be subjected to an arbitrary disciplinary process.

If he were ready to accept a token reduction, Brady wouldn't have hired Jeffrey Kessler. The signal is clear.

Remember, this could have all been handled as a tense but basically cordial conversation across a table at League Headquarters between the Commissioner and one of his marquee players. Once Brady hired Kessler, he signaled that that was not going to work for him.

So, Goodell is boxed into a corner.

He either leaves the suspension at four games and prepares for a donnybrook in Federal Court or he says that Kraft's acceptance of the fine and loss of Draft picks was sufficient and takes Brady off the hook.

So, it's all or nothing.

Click to expand...

That's what is seems to be, and I hope it is.

Guess we'll wait and watch (and hope).

Just saying I won't be shocked if there is no lawsuit at all.

I would not be surprised if the Pudgy Putz has been advised by his lord and master the POS to induce Brady to accept a compromise punishment of two games for the good of the league and not take it any further. I have no doubt that the putz is more than willing to do this but I don't think Brady will accept it and I don;t think BB wil back Kraft on this.

flasox27 said:

I would not be surprised if the Pudgy Putz has been advised by his lord and master the POS to induce Brady to accept a compromise punishment of two games for the good of the league and not take it any further. I have no doubt that the putz is more than willing to do this but I don't think Brady will accept it and I don;t think BB wil back Kraft on this.

Click to expand...

I'm not sure many of us devoted fans would accept it either.

If Brady accepts any punishment for this I'm gone.

It's time for some other teams to accept arbitrary punishments for the good of the league.

The Gr8est said:

I'm not sure many of us devoted fans would accept it either.

If the Brady accepts any punishment for this I'm gone.

It's time for some other teams to accept arbitrary punishments for the good of the league.

Click to expand...

Three things- No other owner believes the good for the league and his partners BS to the detriment of his team and its fans like Kraft.
No other owner thinks that the other teams are partners not opponents like Kraft .
No other owner is a pathetically submissive putz like Kraft.
That is why the Pats repeatedly get the shaft.

I wanted to say Dislike because I do dislike this, but it is true

PatsWickedPissah said:

I wanted to say Dislike because I do dislike this, but it is true

Click to expand...

Unfortunately sometimes the truth is bitter. As for those that disagree with me , I would appreciate a reason. Maybe you think I am too harsh on Kraft and his actions.

Mike Reiss on What it Would Take for Zero Games For Brady

OK, I'll tell you what it would take....

At this point, all we know is that Brady is appealing. Ask yer girlfriend, she already knew that

I'd like it to be true that Brady feels bullet-proof enough to go to court on it.

Nobody knows how bullet-proof Brady feels. This is important to whether he wants to go to court. Kraft doesn't know the cards he's holding, only he and his lawyer do. And it's the reverse of what you'd think: The cards against this sham of a report are obvious. The cards I mean are whether there's an embarrassing story of one kind or another that Goodell's side can get aired through tangential relevance.

It might well be that what scares Kraft/the team does not scare Brady. ("I destroyed the films, but I kept the tape where Bob said....etc.")

It might be that something would scare both Kraft and Brady, but Brady knows blowing up the process scares Goodell worse, or should.

It might be that Brady could look like utter **** after a court fight in one way or another - and bear in mind that the tiniest grain of sand becomes a mountain of undeniable Cheaty McCheaterson press where Brady is concerned. He could not give a damn anyway.

One thing that makes me think a trial is more likely than a couple days ago is Kraft going out of his way to distance himself from Brady (The "whoever deserves to start" line).

That's Kraft saying, "If Brady gets it down to 0 games, fine. If not, fine. If it's in court, I call 'that's just Brady's deal not mine!' "

I've thought this all along, PFnVA...it's just business.

I'm puzzled that people are absolutely certain that this goes to court, but we do know that Kraft is nervous that it will.

Edit - but while we're speculating, the way he's spun this, Goodell could cut Brady's suspension in half and "get away with it."

What I find counter-intuitive is that he reduces it to 0 games - that's just begging the "unpredictable/capricious punishment" question (on behalf of the 31, which is what "matters," as opposed to the truth).

PatsFanInVa said:

At this point, all we know is that Brady is appealing. Ask yer girlfriend, she already knew that

I'd like it to be true that Brady feels bullet-proof enough to go to court on it.

Nobody knows how bullet-proof Brady feels. This is important to whether he wants to go to court. Kraft doesn't know the cards he's holding, only he and his lawyer do. And it's the reverse of what you'd think: The cards against this sham of a report are obvious. The cards I mean are whether there's an embarrassing story of one kind or another that Goodell's side can get aired through tangential relevance.

It might well be that what scares Kraft/the team does not scare Brady. ("I destroyed the films, but I kept the tape where Bob said....etc.")

It might be that something would scare both Kraft and Brady, but Brady knows blowing up the process scares Goodell worse, or should.

It might be that Brady could look like utter **** after a court fight in one way or another - and bear in mind that the tiniest grain of sand becomes a mountain of undeniable Cheaty McCheaterson press where Brady is concerned. He could not give a damn anyway.

One thing that makes me think a trial is more likely than a couple days ago is Kraft going out of his way to distance himself from Brady (The "whoever deserves to start" line).

That's Kraft saying, "If Brady gets it down to 0 games, fine. If not, fine. If it's in court, I call 'that's just Brady's deal not mine!' "

Click to expand...

My understanding is that it's very unlikely to end in a trial in the sense you seem to be thinking of. It's much more likely to be resolved on a question of process and sent back to be heard by a neutral arbitrator.

rochrist said:

My understanding is that it's very unlikely to end in a trial in the sense you seem to be thinking of. It's much more likely to be resolved on a question of process and sent back to be heard by a neutral arbitrator.

Click to expand...

I guess you are right if you think that the person appointed by Goodell will be a neutral arbitrator. Maybe you haven't heard about the case where the NLFPA has him in court fighting a contempt charge for not doing what you propose.