PFT: Brady ruling expected this week, litigation seen as inevitable

MagicMarker · Jul 19, 2015

That may be.....But Clayton is on the radio here (Seattle) every day. When this story first broke, he all but implied the Patriots were guilty. However, it sounded like the story was new to him.

Clayton can be very informative, but once he gets an idea in his head, there seems to be no changing regardless of what facts come out. I could give some Patriot specific examples, but that's off topic.

VectorPrime · Jul 19, 2015

If it was common knowledge that Brady doctored footballs for 8 years not only would someone, anyone, have said something, anything about it over the past 8 years but also when this mess started you would have had people coming out of the woodwork with their own stories about it for a free 15 minutes of fame. Neither have happened.

PatsFanSince74 · Jul 19, 2015

FreeTedWilliams said:
Goodell has to uphold the suspension, or admit that his office made up the entire controversy.

He can't however, keep it at 4 games because he will then open himself up to all the Brady punishment is the same as Greg Hardy questions.

I think he lowers it to one or two games and gets Kraft to try and convince Brady to take it. I would be so pissed if Brady does. I think it would be easy for Brady to get an injunction, and then crush the league in court. the proble, form the league is if this drags out into the season, then Brady's team can begin to amass actual inflation data from games, which will of course prove that their was no deflation.

I agree with everything except your point about getting Kraft involved. Kraft's involvement would be construed as "meddling" in a matter between Ownership and Labor, unless Brady were to approach him and seek his advice (I wish we still had the "When Pigs Fly" Smiley. as I would insert it here). Even then, Kraft would only speak to Brady in the presence of one of his own lawyers and would likely insist that Brady be accompanied by his own Counsel.

Otherwise, you are completely correct.

Goodell has to uphold the basic finding of Brady's complicity, because to do otherwise would be to throw Vincent, Wells and himself under the bus and also admit, by the way, that he pissed away $5MM of the owners' money. I will boil and eat one of my Patriots' Championship hats if he exonerates Brady. There is, in my mind, no doubt that the basic finding will be left standing.

I also agree that he'll try to get away with reducing the suspension to one or two games.

As to the ease with which Brady will be able to get an injunction and "crush the league in court," I basically agree, but think that, while it's likely that he'll be able to get his case heard, that that is by no means a certainty. A lot will depend on the Judge who gets the appeal as much as anything else.

Danger Zone · Jul 19, 2015

MagicMarker said:
3menandablog says:Jul 19, 2015 12:29 PM
Sat next to John Clayton on a flight recently. He told me it’s known that Tom Brady has been cheating for the last 8 years with the footballs. I’m sure he’ll get off still.

Nobody believed that cold weather deflated footballs naturally.

Maybe teams came into a cold Foxboro, got their asses beat and started pointing fingers at the softer footballs.

RunAmok · Jul 19, 2015

MagicMarker said:
Reiss has said previously that Wells wouldn't likely be used again because he's complained openly and to the league about them not supporting him.

As far as attorney client privilege, if the NFL claims that, then Wells wasn't really an independent or outside investigator.

I was really thinking about the "Independent investigation" but more around any discussions that would have to do with the NFL's exposure. It would stop Well's from running out and trying to defend himself and the firm if the commish threw them under the bus.

Anteros · Jul 19, 2015

I honestly think that the only way this entire sham is gonna see the light of day is if Brady files a defamation lawsuit. That's the only way the entire sting would be exposed.

Taking the appeal process to court isn't gonna solve any of that stuff. All it will do is, hopefully, vacate the suspension.

Koma · Jul 19, 2015

The Gr8est said:
I hope the Pats DEMAND that the league take and publish readings of balls, for the upcoming season, for ALL teams to be taken before, during, and after games using controlled conditions of the same calibrated gages, same environment, and same storage conditions, and same time elapsed when removed from the playing environments.

If this was really about the "integrity of the game," the league would already be planning to do this, whether the Patriots asked for it or not. It would be an extra layer of farce on this ridiculous situation if the NFL did nothing to change it's procedures after this:

"We're very concerned about the PSI of our footballs.*"

(*Only applicable to one team during one game.)

We're 3 weeks away from the first preseason game. You'd think they would have some process in place before then.

VectorPrime · Jul 19, 2015

Again, the team should do it themselves and not rely on the league to do it.

Koma · Jul 19, 2015

VectorPrime said:
Hmm yes Ill trust the anonymous internet commentator on Pro Football Talk as an authority on inside information.

And even if the anecdote was true, define "it's known". Because I guarantee that it's only been "known" since deflategate began and people have come out of the woodwork assuming and accusing Tom of doing it for years. If it was "known" for years someone would have done something because people have been trying to bring down Brady for years. I would bet anything it only became "known" retroactively after this whole mess began. Accuse someone of anything enough times and it becomes fact in the public conscious no matter how untrue it is.

The Wells report touched on something similar:

They (Sullivan and Seabrooks, Colts equipment staff members) also cited unspecified chatter throughout the League that the Patriots prefer their footballs softer than other teams and that visiting teams should be on guard when playing at Gillette Stadium. They could not identify a specific source for this information or reference particular conversations.

Like Clayton, they couldn't give any specific examples or identify anyone who actually witnessed or confirmed this. They couldn't even say who told them this. This sounds like one of those BS rumors that get started and accepted as fact in high school hallways. It's kind of amazing that this whole affair started off an unsourced and unverified concern raised by the Colts.

We don't know if Wells did any additional digging on this topic. Considering the amount of time he had, it's conceivable he could have reached out to the equipment personnel on other teams to see if they had similar concerns, had heard the same rumors or if they had any concrete evidence. There's no mention of that and no equipment personnel for any teams besides the Colts and Patriots are on the list of interviewees.Without looking into that, how could anyone know if the original complaint had any validity?

VectorPrime · Jul 19, 2015

Allegedly the Colts got suspicious of the Patriots because they believed that the Patriots were using underinflated balls in their regular season game. But that was in Indy where the Pats didn't have any control over the balls before the game! And McNally wasn't even there! Why has noone talked about this at all!

Brewskies · Jul 19, 2015

Who cares I am so tired about deflategate and whether Brady lied or failed to turn over information requested, cheated or knew they were cheating. I am prepared to accept that he will miss the first 4 games and we will win 3 of them. Next !!!!!!!!

It's a team sport !!!!!!!!!!!!

rochrist · Jul 19, 2015

Meanwhile, the conventional 'wisdom' amongst the local media has now shifted to 'no way he takes this to court if it's only 1 or 2 games. He'd be too afraid of missing games in December!'

Koma · Jul 19, 2015

VectorPrime said:
Allegedly the Colts got suspicious of the Patriots because they believed that the Patriots were using underinflated balls in their regular season game. But that was in Indy where the Pats didn't have any control over the balls before the game! And McNally wasn't even there! Why has noone talked about this at all!

Doesn't fit the narrative/Requires too much thinking

MagicMarker · Jul 19, 2015

Probably don't need a new thread, but Volin says today that others might want Brady to accept because they have other motives

https://www.bostonglobe.com/sports/...deflategate/B0xQCYqRyxeZvQ4VKk5tQP/story.html

Does anyone thing Belichick isn't also just a little tired of the the league F@#$-ing with him and his team.? If the team did nothing wrong, I think they all want to be vindicated.

My comment to this story on twitter was Volin misses the forest for the trees.

MagicMarker · Jul 19, 2015

Maybe Brady's team does know what is coming down and when:
http://www.usatoday.com/story/sport...roger-goodell-federal-court-lawsuit/30388007/

This from David Cornwell:

"I'm not in the room for these discussions with Brady. I have a sense of what's going on from my discussions with others that are, and it's that they're two ships passing in the night. They're not connecting."

MitchKumstein · Jul 19, 2015

Koma said:
The Wells report touched on something similar:

They (Sullivan and Seabrooks, Colts equipment staff members) also cited unspecified chatter throughout the League that the Patriots prefer their footballs softer than other teams and that visiting teams should be on guard when playing at Gillette Stadium. They could not identify a specific source for this information or reference particular conversations.

Like Clayton, they couldn't give any specific examples or identify anyone who actually witnessed or confirmed this. They couldn't even say who told them this. This sounds like one of those BS rumors that get started and accepted as fact in high school hallways. It's kind of amazing that this whole affair started off an unsourced and unverified concern raised by the Colts.

We don't know if Wells did any additional digging on this topic. Considering the amount of time he had, it's conceivable he could have reached out to the equipment personnel on other teams to see if they had similar concerns, had heard the same rumors or if they had any concrete evidence. There's no mention of that and no equipment personnel for any teams besides the Colts and Patriots are on the list of interviewees.Without looking into that, how could anyone know if the original complaint had any validity?

patfanken · Jul 19, 2015

There is NO reason in the world that Roger Goodell should NOT have known what the decision was on the Brady appeal 48 hours after the Brady appeal ended.....IF the facts of the case was the only factor. He had months to absorb the issue while the Welles report was developed. He had weeks to absorb what was in the report, and now weeks again to go over the Brady rebuttal. RIDIUULOUS! This isn't splitting the atom. He literally has to work through about the 90 minutes that occurred between the refs took the PSI levels, and when the game started and determine if there is any evidence that Brady had someone lower that level. THAT's it.

This delay isn't about finding the truth, integrity, or justice; it's simply about determining self interest and the best way to keep to your agenda.

Joker · Jul 19, 2015

exactly,PFK...and this is PRECISELY why I've been calling for an investigation by the federal government into the "business" of the NFL since Goodell and his green mafia usurped control of the league in 2006.

It's not about "did they/didn't they","deflation","integrity of the game" or any other PR machinations. It is ALL ABOUT Roger Goodell and the hand picked people he has placed in positions of near absolute power carrying out an illegal, agenda driven conspiracy to destroy one of the NFL franchises, to HIS and his co-conspirators benefit>

He needs to be indicted on a RICO count...

RICO also permits a private individual "damaged in his business or property" by a "racketeer" to file a civil suit. The plaintiff must prove the existence of an "enterprise". The defendant(s) are not the enterprise; in other words, the defendant(s) and the enterprise are not one and the same.[3] There must be one of four specified relationships between the defendant(s) and the enterprise: either the defendant(s) invested the proceeds of the pattern of racketeering activity into the enterprise (18 U.S.C. § 1962(a)); or the defendant(s) acquired or maintained an interest in, or control of, the enterprise through the pattern of racketeering activity (subsection (b)); or the defendant(s) conducted or participated in the affairs of the enterprise "through" the pattern of racketeering activity (subsection (c)); or the defendant(s) conspired to do one of the above (subsection (d)).[4] In essence, the enterprise is either the 'prize,' 'instrument,' 'victim,' or 'perpetrator' of the racketeers.[5] A civil RICO action can be filed in state or federal court.[6]

Both the criminal and civil components allow the recovery of treble damages (damages in triple the amount of actual/compensatory damages).

Seize all his assets, give him 20 years...close the godaymned coffin lid on this moron.

lurker1965 · Jul 19, 2015

Eh, wake me when the lawsuit is over.
I mean the second or third one for defamation. (Yes, I know Brady is a public figure and it will be hard. So? Suing is what lawyers do and Brady has pieces of corporations that were counting on him for advertising. Besides, Jastremski and McNally are not public figures.)

supafly · Jul 19, 2015

Joker said:
RICO also permits a private individual "damaged in his business or property" by a "racketeer" to file a civil suit. The plaintiff must prove the existence of an "enterprise". The defendant(s) are not the enterprise; in other words, the defendant(s) and the enterprise are not one and the same.[3] There must be one of four specified relationships between the defendant(s) and the enterprise: either the defendant(s) invested the proceeds of the pattern of racketeering activity into the enterprise (18 U.S.C. § 1962(a)); or the defendant(s) acquired or maintained an interest in, or control of, the enterprise through the pattern of racketeering activity (subsection (b)); or the defendant(s) conducted or participated in the affairs of the enterprise "through" the pattern of racketeering activity (subsection (c)); or the defendant(s) conspired to do one of the above (subsection (d)).[4] In essence, the enterprise is either the 'prize,' 'instrument,' 'victim,' or 'perpetrator' of the racketeers.[5] A civil RICO action can be filed in state or federal court.[6]

Yeah, most people only relate RICO to criminal charges, but my dad was actually the defendant in a civil suit several years ago. It didn't stick, and there was insufficient proof that he did anything wrong, but we still get a kick from the story due to our Italian background.

In Goodell's case, I'm with you as far as getting a better look at his business practices, but I don't have much faith it will ever happen.

PFT: Brady ruling expected this week, litigation seen as inevitable

Third String But Playing on Special Teams

Pro Bowl Player

PatsFans.com Supporter

In the Starting Line-Up

On the Game Day Roster

Third String But Playing on Special Teams

In the Starting Line-Up

Pro Bowl Player

In the Starting Line-Up

Pro Bowl Player

PatsFans.com Supporter

Veteran Starter w/Big Long Term Deal

In the Starting Line-Up

Third String But Playing on Special Teams

Third String But Playing on Special Teams

Rotational Player and Threatening Starter's Job

PatsFans.com Supporter

PatsFans.com Supporter

In the Starting Line-Up

Eff you, Shula

Similar threads