PatsFans.com Menu
PatsFans.com - The Hub For New England Patriots Fans

Stephen A Smith: Brady's suspension to be upheld, Brady destroyed cell phone


Status
Not open for further replies.
Hilarious.

Camera location + completely unproven alteration of footballs = banned from the league.

All while identical & similar incidents have occurred among other teams with zero punishment.

If this ban was looming for Belichick, why wasn't it ever mentioned over the last 8 years? Is a similar penalty in place for Sean Payton and Gregg Williams? Do other coaches, like Rex Ryan, Tomlin, and McDaniels, have these secret, next-level punishments in store for them if they ever screw up again?
 
Yes, it's nice for him that he used all of those weasel words.

But notice when the story gets passed along, the qualifiers are often dropped:

From Gary Tanguay:
If Brady is innocent why Brady destroy his phone.
https://twitter.com/Gary_Tanguay/status/626043537310773248

Though twitter is limiting, with 140 characters and all:

If Brady is innocent, why might SAS be hearing from some unnamed somebody that Brady may have destroyed his phone, more likely than not, or was at least generally aware of a plan to destroy his phone, a plan that might or might not have happened.
This is how the 11 of 12 PSI crap started the whole mess.
 
Add Stephen A Smith to the list of potential defendants of a defamation lawsuit.

First he implies Brady is racist,......

Whoa! When did THAT happen?
 
Whoa! When did THAT happen?

I assume he's referring to when SAS made a point of mentioning that Brady never skipped the white house visits when GWB was president. He stopped short of calling Brady racist, but the implication he was trying to create was pretty obvious.
 
Who didn't expect this to be upheld?

Goodell comes out appeasing the masses and finally looks competent. If this gets overturned (although it wont if Brady did destroy his phone)Goodell just has to say "hey I did my job, nothing I can do if the court overturns this."
 
Smith is saying that "he heard that..." which covers him in any defamation suit, as he will claim he is a "journalist" and can not divulge his source.
Not that I'm singling you out, it just made me think...

You also can't make stuff up. So smith (mort or any other journalist) can turn over his sources or be held in contempt of court? I think this might be a potential landmark case of which celebritys (listen up hollywood, models, celebrities) in which we can start to get a division in what is actually reporting (facts) and those people who are in the media who are for "entertainment" purposes only. You can't have it both ways and perhaps this is a good time to make that distinction.

Journalists, the real ones from days long past, really needed to be able to get multiple corroborating sources to confirm the information. The rush to be the center of the mediaverse is allowing people to be run over without being held accountable.

Nut up or shut up time.
 
The human population has always been more morons and nitwits than not. The problem is that in the social media era they all have a platform to make themselves heard.

Seems worse than usual lately and not just in the realm of garden variety sports fan idiocy. Lately, it's like the whole human race is going batsh*t crazy.
 
Seems worse than usual lately and not just in the realm of garden variety sports fan idiocy. Lately, it's like the whole human race is going batsh*t crazy.


That Don Trump/Stephen A. Smith ticket is looking better and better by the minute.
 
I'm not sure I see the problem here.

Brady, like many affluent people, gets a new phone every now and then. What does he do with the old phone? It's his phone. It belongs to him. If he wants to trash it, he can. If he wants to smash it, he can.

Some of the analysis I'm seeing here seems to be based on the assumption that this is a criminal investigation, and Tom can be either held in contempt or charged with obstruction of justice. Neither of these concepts apply.

The investigation relies on the CBA, and if Tom is contractually obligated to turn over a phone when asked, then there's a problem. If not, hakuna matata.

All of this is assuming that these leaks are accurate, which is assuming a lot.

Oh, and what happened to Favre's Sexting Phone in the green-and-white Jets logo cover? Is that phone still around? I assume it is encased in acrylic and displayed on a velvet cushion, yes?
 
Watching NFLN 2014 playoffs. I dunno much about strangers' phones, but I am watching NE majorly destroy Indy. It was not even close.
 
ESPN is literally this scene from Birdman:

Clara: Now, is it true that you've been injecting yourself with semen from baby pigs?

Riggan: I'm sorry, what?

Clara: As a method of facial rejuvenation.

Riggan: Where did you read that?

Clara: It was tweeted by @prostatewhispers.

Riggan: No, that's not true.

Clara: I know, but did you do it?

Riggan: No, I didn't do it.

Clara: Okay, then I'll just write that you're denying it.
 
I'm not sure I see the problem here....The investigation relies on the CBA, and if Tom is contractually obligated to turn over a phone when asked, then there's a problem. If not, hakuna matata.

The CBA requires Tom to "cooperate with any NFL investigation"

It needs to be settled in court what it means to be cooperative. I would say that being cooperative does not mean turning over electronic information. The NFL says otherwise.

It would be incredibly stupid to destroy the phone because the courts could eventually (though VERY unlikely IMO) side with the NFL as to the definition of cooperating.

It would be so stupid, in fact, that we can assume that SAS is a lying fool.
 
As usual, mike reiss was right. said right from the start that goodell wouldn't overturn.
 
As usual, mike reiss was right. said right from the start that goodell wouldn't overturn.

Add Adam Schefter to the list now, as he is claiming it will remain at 4 games too.
 
The CBA requires Tom to "cooperate with any NFL investigation"

It needs to be settled in court what it means to be cooperative. I would say that being cooperative does not mean turning over electronic information. The NFL says otherwise.

It would be incredibly stupid to destroy the phone because the courts could eventually (though VERY unlikely IMO) side with the NFL as to the definition of cooperating.

It would be so stupid, in fact, that we can assume that SAS is a lying fool.

Agreed. If Brady did actually destroy his phone, that's pretty stupid of him. It's so stupid that I assume his lawyers would have made damn sure that he knew not to do it. So in short, I don't believe that he did it. It makes no sense. But if he did it then that 's pretty damning.

We'll see. I'm sure as hell not going to take idle speculation by SAS, of all ****ing people, as gospel.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.


Bruschi’s Proudest Moment: Former LB Speaks to MusketFire’s Marshall in Recent Interview
Monday Patriots Notebook 4/22: News and Notes
Patriots News 4-21, Kraft-Belichick, A.J. Brown Trade?
MORSE: Patriots Draft Needs and Draft Related Info
Friday Patriots Notebook 4/19: News and Notes
TRANSCRIPT: Eliot Wolf’s Pre-Draft Press Conference 4/18/24
Thursday Patriots Notebook 4/18: News and Notes
Wednesday Patriots Notebook 4/17: News and Notes
Tuesday Patriots Notebook 4/16: News and Notes
Monday Patriots Notebook 4/15: News and Notes
Back
Top