Brady appeal decision coming next week?

Jackson 2 said:

Nice to see your ignorant viewpoints on the Red Sox haven't changed.

Click to expand...

I didn't express a viewpoint in my post, I asked a question you thus far have failed to answer. Your indirect response appears to harbor an unflattering (and unfounded) preconceived maliciousness.

Jackson 2 said:

God, you're a bloodless, boring drone.

Click to expand...

No, you either are projecting or confusing me with this guy:

Jackson 2 said:

I always enjoy reading your posts, but by definition, your described baseball fandom equates to a pink hat. Why do people who dislike women's sports, soccer, baseball or any other sport feel this insatiable need to let us all know that? How does that make one feel better? I've said this before, but I wouldn't watch an NHLgame if it were played in my backyard. That doesn't mean I wasn't happy when the Bruins won their championship. I was. For the record, I don't watch or like women's basketball, soccer regardless of the gender, or curling. But when the USA or local teams win, I'm happy for their fans. This primal need to **** on sports and, by extension, the fans of sports one dislikes screams insecurity and jealousy.

Click to expand...

I don't dislike baseball. I like watching minor league baseball, and I enjoy watching the Sox/Yankees matchups, or if.when the Sox get into the playoffs. But baseball in the majors, like Tennis, is, to me, boring. I watch college and NFL football. I watch the Bruins, women's basketball and women's soccer.

But I don't get how you think I don't like women's sports, or why I should have a pink hat? We all have different interests. I'm just baffled by your hostility on this issue.

I feel I'm somewhat radical on my belief with the NFL and the treatment given to Brady.

EDIT (actually remembered the message I wanted to deliver):
I don't believe Brady deserves this treatment and I think he does everything, more so than most or maybe even anyone, to make himself a better football player. I can't say that I know what he's like privately, and that's ok.

What I see from my limited view is a team first person. a Leader. A person committed to constant improvement of himself and his team. Selflessness. A man who was given nothing, no pedigree, no high draft pick. He EARNED being among the greatest ever.

Thus, I come to this radical conclusion. If there comes a point in the future where football is failing/fallen out of favor with Americans. And, we revisit this event and say this was the beginning of the end of it. I'd be ok with Brady taking the league down.

The actions, assuming we are correct, of the NFL and the 32 owners to hang one of their stars out like this...for no other reason than, Brady and BB are too good? Or, just a handful of people with power that wield it maliciously? As i said, it's ok if it all goes away and the billionaires become millionaires or less.

Gwedd said:

I don't dislike baseball. I like watching minor league baseball, and I enjoy watching the Sox/Yankees matchups, or if.when the Sox get into the playoffs. But baseball in the majors, like Tennis, is, to me, boring. I watch college and NFL football. I watch the Bruins, women's basketball and women's soccer.

But I don't get how you think I don't like women's sports, or why I should have a pink hat? We all have different interests. I'm just baffled by your hostility on this issue.

Click to expand...

I'm just as guilty as anyone else on this, but now is a good time to gently steer the conversation back to Tom Brady's appeal decision.

gently steer??????????????

no...violently steer it back. Nothing is of any real importance until the scum of Goodell is brought to justice!

As others have mentioned, Goodell's response of "could be," to the question of whether or not a ruling will come this week has been overblown.

I do agree that the baseball stuff could allow him to try and steal the spotlight, but that would have to happen Monday or Tuesday. I wasn't even sure we'd get a decision during the month of July, so anything in the next 2 weeks is great. I'm guessing it won't matter much unless a reduction to 2 games is suddenly acceptable, and I don't think it is.

If Brady accepts anything above zero games, that is an admission SOMETHING happened. If he's innocent, he's got to keep fighting.

I was listening to some sports radio this weekend. It's amazing the take of people who don't follow this as closely as we do. The majority of opinion is that the Patriots were caught red-handed and the appeal is really just trying to settle on the appropriate punishment. I was talking to a friend of mine on Friday (keep in mind I don't live in New England), and it was news to him there was any issues to resolve in this case.

So, Albert Breer's opinion is that it's beneficial to the NFL to wait as long as possible, then keep the punishment at 4 games?

Thanks for the input, Breer. My God, man.

http://www.csnne.com/new-england-patriots/breer-beneficial-nfl-hold-decision-brady-s-appeal

Was listening to Mike Reiss yesterday while out and about, Mike is usually a voice of sanity in this maelstrom..

His ESPN legal experts believe that Brady will not win in Federal Court as there may be a hands off approach as the current remedy and process has essentially been agreed upon by the NFLPA and NFL.. inow an appeal might be futile.

He also indicated that Peterson's was overturned as there were legal issues with the arbitrators decision...

DarrylS said:

His ESPN legal experts believe that Brady will not win in Federal Court as there may be a hands off approach as the current remedy and process has essentially been agreed upon by the NFLPA and NFL.. inow an appeal might be futile.

Click to expand...

ESPN, a known shill for the NFL, said Brady has no chance...I'm flabbergasted.

The problem with their analyst opinions are the federal judicial system, I believe -- or am I naive to think that --, doesn't vote by popular opinion.

RelocatedPatFan said:

ESPN, a known shill for the NFL, said Brady has no chance...I'm flabbergasted.

The problem with their analyst opinions are the federal judicial system, I believe -- or am I naive to think that --, doesn't vote by popular opinion.

Click to expand...

Keep in mind that the legal expert for ESPN is Lester Munson an admitted alcoholic disbarred attorney who hasn't practiced law in 20 years. He has also gone on record as saying the Wells report is conclusive. In other words an idiot shill.

Jackson 2 said:

The other sports have far more integrity in their commissioner's offices and, as far as I'm concerned, far more integrity in the product they present to the public. And that includes the NBA's officiating scandal. The NFL, integrity-wise, is now to me like pro wrasslin'. I have zero coincidence that anything which occurs, on or off the field from this time forward, isn't somehow rigged.

Click to expand...

I have similar foreboding feelings about the NYFL and what could happen this season. Thanks, Kraft!
Just a year or so ago as a scientific rationalist, I would have dismissed such sentiments as tin foil hat.
I must be getting senile.

RelocatedPatFan said:

ESPN, a known shill for the NFL, said Brady has no chance...I'm flabbergasted.

The problem with their analyst opinions are the federal judicial system, I believe -- or am I naive to think that --, doesn't vote by popular opinion.

Click to expand...

You would be naive to believe that politics isn't a factor in federal (or any other) court.

Heck, look at the Supreme Court. They just pulled a constitutional right to gay marriage out of their asses.

YOUGOTMOSSED said:

You would be naive to believe that politics isn't a factor in federal (or any other) court.

Heck, look at the Supreme Court. They just pulled a constitutional right to gay marriage out of their asses.

Click to expand...

Is that voting with their beliefs/values or whatever to get votes for the currently elected official. I'm not so naive to think that there is a bigger goal at times (rather than law or what's right/wrong)/. But, I don't think football at 10 billion is big business and likely to make them care (other than being a sports fan...possibly). Then again, on such a minor issue they can pretty much do as they please and it won't get reviewed too much.

flasox27 said:

Keep in mind that the legal expert for ESPN is Lester Munson an admitted alcoholic disbarred attorney who hasn't practiced law in 20 years. He has also gone on record as saying the Wells report is conclusive. In other words an idiot shill.

Click to expand...

I'm wondering why Mike Reiss is listening to this guy.

YOUGOTMOSSED said:

They just pulled a constitutional right to gay marriage out of their asses.

Click to expand...

This is the first comment I've ever really wanted to click disagree on. Is there a place to discuss this on this board?

It's not coming this week. No way.

supafly said:

So, Albert Breer's opinion is that it's beneficial to the NFL to wait as long as possible, then keep the punishment at 4 games?

Thanks for the input, Breer. My God, man.

http://www.csnne.com/new-england-patriots/breer-beneficial-nfl-hold-decision-brady-s-appeal

Click to expand...

What an arse. Basically he wants them to make the worst decision possible, and also go out of their way to do it in the worst way possible.

DarrylS said:

Was listening to Mike Reiss yesterday while out and about, Mike is usually a voice of sanity in this maelstrom..

His ESPN legal experts believe that Brady will not win in Federal Court as there may be a hands off approach as the current remedy and process has essentially been agreed upon by the NFLPA and NFL.. inow an appeal might be futile.

He also indicated that Peterson's was overturned as there were legal issues with the arbitrators decision...

Click to expand...

That is one of my fears. I admit I don't understand all the legal technicalities involved but one of my concerns is that any appeal to federal court can only look at the process within the framework of the CBA, and not the actual question of guilt.

RelocatedPatFan said:

Is that voting with their beliefs/values or whatever to get votes for the currently elected official. I'm not so naive to think that there is a bigger goal at times (rather than law or what's right/wrong)/. But, I don't think football at 10 billion is big business and likely to make them care (other than being a sports fan...possibly). Then again, on such a minor issue they can pretty much do as they please and it won't get reviewed too much.

Click to expand...

If .gov has some agenda (e.g. wanting to end the league's anti-trust exemption), it would be naive to assume the court's rulings won't be skewed accordingly. Even though federal judges are lifetime appointments, they are, at the end of the day, federal government employees.