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

kraft has completely forgotten about who has made HIM successful in this league - brady and belichick.

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...

"induce" is a strong word with legal implications. By asking Kraft to provide any inducement to Brady (including asking him to do it for him as a "favor") to act "for the good of the league" as defined by the NFL, Goodell would be asking Kraft to meddle in a matter related to labor relations and the CBA. I don't think even Goodell is dumb enough to do that and Kraft is certainly too smart to do so, even if asked by Goodell.

The very most that Goodell could have done would have been to ask Kraft to advise Brady not to pursue matters beyond the League's Appeal process, if Brady came to him and asked for that advice. If Brady were dumb enough (which he is not) to go to Kraft to ask for his advice, I think Kraft would quickly get a lawyer in the room before providing it to him. Brady is no doubt too smart to have gone to Kraft for that advice on his own and, now that he is being advised by Jeffrey Kessler, he is certainly not going to do so.

Kraft is also too smart to ask Belichick to get involved in a matter between a player and the league that is covered by the CBA. Belichick is also too smart in his own right to get involved in any of this now that the League has handed down its findings, beyond providing supportive testimony if the matter ever gets to court.

If I'm the NFLPA, why on Earth would I accept anything less than a reduction to zero?

Brady is their dream plaintiff for a court hearing on the issue of player discipline/CBA. Probably the NFL's greatest player, boyscout image, and the charges, on their face, seem laughably trumped up.

Who else do they have? Ray Rice punching out his girlfriend? Adrian Peterson kicking it "old school" on a 2 year old?

They never had, and a never will have, a better representative than Brady and they know it.

aluminum seats said:

Damn right it's his legacy...and part of that legacy is not to sell out his peers by turning over his phone out of self-interest.

I can't tell you how much the "turn over his phone" thing pisses me off. It's a question of fundamental privacy...there's no way he should ever turn it over for any reason. Period, full stop.

Click to expand...

Yes, agreed. BTW PF, if any of you wan't laughs, try this a few times. When any Hater says TB is guilty because he didn't turn over his phone, ask them politely if you can check out their phone for a few minutes right there. Most will sheepishly refuse. Ask them why. -CHECK- Even better, if they are stupid enough to give it to you, take it, make yourself comfortable, and start going thru their texts messages and emails, occasionally saying "hmmm" and "interesting" until they finally get so delightfully uneasy, they grab it back from you. -CHECKMATE-.

pdangle said:

Yes, agreed. BTW PF, if any of you wan't laughs, try this a few times. When any Hater says TB is guilty because he didn't turn over his phone, ask them politely if you can check out their phone for a few minutes right there. Most will sheepishly refuse. Ask them why. -CHECK- Even better, if they are stupid enough to give it to you, take it, make yourself comfortable, and start going thru their texts messages and emails, occasionally saying "hmmm" and "interesting" until they finally get so delightfully uneasy, they grab it back from you. -CHECKMATE-.

Click to expand...

Sadly I doubt it'd be this easy.

Most people don't understand that Wells is acting more as a PI in this matter. So you'd have to wade through 3 or 4 levels of logical fallacies to get them to admit you have as much right to theirs as Wells did to Brady's.

Next they'd try to point out Wells had reason to look at Brady's phone while you have none. So now you're stuck trying to make them understand that all Wells had was an accusation.

pdangle said:

Yes, agreed. BTW PF, if any of you wan't laughs, try this a few times. When any Hater says TB is guilty because he didn't turn over his phone, ask them politely if you can check out their phone for a few minutes right there

Click to expand...

Unfortunately most Haters haven't bothered to read about out what actually happened. They'll just tell you that the reason that Brady is guilty is because, well, uh, you know, because he just is

His "Boy Scout Image" is gone for most fans... they already "gated" him in 2008. But I agree, he has heft in terms of public profile, being telegenic, being the GOAT QB (certainly the greatest active QB, even for haters), that kind of thing.

PatsFanSince74 said:

"induce" is a strong word with legal implications. By asking Kraft to provide any inducement to Brady (including asking him to do it for him as a "favor") to act "for the good of the league" as defined by the NFL, Goodell would be asking Kraft to meddle in a matter related to labor relations and the CBA. I don't think even Goodell is dumb enough to do that and Kraft is certainly too smart to do so, even if asked by Goodell.

The very most that Goodell could have done would have been to ask Kraft to advise Brady not to pursue matters beyond the League's Appeal process, if Brady came to him and asked for that advice. If Brady were dumb enough (which he is not) to go to Kraft to ask for his advice, I think Kraft would quickly get a lawyer in the room before providing it to him. Brady is no doubt too smart to have gone to Kraft for that advice on his own and, now that he is being advised by Jeffrey Kessler, he is certainly not going to do so.

Kraft is also too smart to ask Belichick to get involved in a matter between a player and the league that is covered by the CBA. Belichick is also too smart in his own right to get involved in any of this now that the League has handed down its findings, beyond providing supportive testimony if the matter ever gets to court.

Click to expand...

I hope you are right but both Goodell and Kraft have shown a propensity to take actions that are stupid and in the case of Goodell legally imprudent.

flasox27 said:

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.

Click to expand...

Yeah, but that still doesn't result in a trial on the disciplinary issue itself, it's the process. Maybe I'm wrong, but isn't what I described exactly what happened with the NO players?

rochrist said:

Yeah, but that still doesn't result in a trial on the disciplinary issue itself, it's the process. Maybe I'm wrong, but isn't what I described exactly what happened with the NO players?

Click to expand...

This is where the best guesses start to become hazy, due to the old "make it up as you go along" rules that the NFL uses. Since this seems to be their usual way of doing things, I am a bit apprehensive--yet hopeful.

I think you are spot on though, in the sense that the process will be under fire much more than the issue itself. Then again, I don't know if any of us knows whether or not the actual disciplinary issue will be addressed or not? If so, can/will "new" evidence be used? Can/will the arbitrator(s) bring in those two idiots to answer questions? I have no idea, and I'm not sure anyone does. I know that Michael McCann writes columns on this sort of topic for SI, but I haven't read anything in awhile, so I'm not sure where he stands.

flasox27 said:

I hope you are right but both Goodell and Kraft have shown a propensity to take actions that are stupid and in the case of Goodell legally imprudent.

Click to expand...

I think the NFLPA has a fairly strong case that Goodell has too much power. Whether or not they can get anywhere with it (or the NFL actually meets them halfway--or any part of the way) is yet to be determined, but we're all hopeful. I still don't see any scenario where Tom Brady files a defamation case, but as other much smarter posters (@TheBostonStraggler) have mentioned, the abuse or misuse of discretionary privileges may come into play. I think that will be done through the NFLPA though. I just don't see Brady going anywhere else with a private lawsuit.

Makes you long for the days of real, on the field football, doesn't it?

flasox27 said:

I hope you are right but both Goodell and Kraft have shown a propensity to take actions that are stupid and in the case of Goodell legally imprudent.

Click to expand...

No way I can argue with that!

PatsFanSince74 said:

No way I can argue with that!

Click to expand...

Just another point, Brady is a named individual in a prior suit against Goodell. I think that a case can be made that excessive punishment for Brady is a result of his prior union activities.

PatsFanSince74 said:

... I don't think even Goodell is dumb enough to do that ...

Click to expand...

Um, I just can't seem to get on board with this statement in any conceivable context.