NFLPA files motion to vacate

NJPatsfan26 · Aug 8, 2015

tuckeverlasting said:
the judge has to be smarter than this, right ?

One would hope he is.

i mean the CBA gives powers, but it has been blatantly obvious that Goodell abused it to make himself and his office look better

Gronkowski123 · Aug 8, 2015

Sfpat said:
The NFLs argument is that it was fair because they said it was fair and they get to define what is fair

What’s to prevent the NFL from framing a random player and suspending him via Section 46 of CBA

tuckeverlasting · Aug 8, 2015

Gronkowski123 said:
What’s to prevent the NFL from framing a random player and suspending him via Section 46 of CBA

that's what they're doing now except brady's not so random. he's the qb of the pats. he's a high value target for jets errr i mean league office.

Palm Beach Pats Fan · Aug 8, 2015

Goodell lying repeatedly SHOULD get him in trouble. Maybe lying isn't spelled out as a CBA violation, but it ought to annoy the hell out of a judge anyway.

NJPatsfan26 · Aug 8, 2015

Palm Beach Pats Fan said:
Goodell lying repeatedly SHOULD get him in trouble. Maybe lying isn't spelled out as a CBA violation, but it ought to annoy the hell out of a judge anyway.

As others have mentioned on this, the judge should just ask Goodell one simple question.

How do you find it fair to be the judge, jury and executioner of this whole fiasco and say your still being independent?

RobertWeathers · Aug 8, 2015

VectorPrime said:
Shouldn't the judge be looking at all this and seeing what a sham it is?

What makes you think that he is not?

Palm Beach Pats Fan · Aug 8, 2015

NJPatsfan26 said:
As others have mentioned on this, the judge should just ask Goodell one simple question.

How do you find it fair to be the judge, jury and executioner of this whole fiasco and say your still being independent?

or,

Mr. Goodell, please explain to me how is it that you feel qualified to give both a fair ruling and an appeal verdict, when in multiple instances you have been clearly UNTRUTHFUL in statements of fact that YOU CLAIM to be important to your decisions?

These include, but are not limited to.
-your assertion of the alleged independence of Mr. Wells
-your mischaracterization of Mr. Brady's s testimony
-your much-belated determination that NFL review and/or possession on Mr.Brady's phone was essential to his defense

What say you, Mr. Goodell?

Oswlek · Aug 8, 2015

TheBostonStraggler said:
Their friggin argument is we don't have to be fair so that makes it fair.

Brilliant! I wish I wrote that.

mgcolby said:
I'm struggling with many things deemed as logic by the NFL, but one really stands out to me tonight.

Goodell/NFL are now claiming that increased conversations (phone/text) between Brady and JJ is concrete evidence of a conspiracy to cover up the "crime".

To backtrack a bit, it appears that Brady and JJ had little to no phone/text contact prior to the AFCCG while they were concocting the great deflate scheme (presumably over a bag of Doritos).

So what the NFL is trying to convince the court and the world of, is that Brady and JJ were smart enough to not communicate electronically while devising the deflating scheme, when no one was watching or aware of their actions.

However, when the scheme is under investigation by the league and is front page news on EVERY news site, regardless of their content format, its THEN that Brady and JJ suddenly have a co-brainfart where they now think it is ok to use electronic communication to cover up their actions.

How does a lawyer (presumably Pash) write that in an official document and not think of this obvious point?

QFT. I've always known that the argument is ridiculous but this illustrates that it was even dumber than I thought it was. I second you forwarding this to Florio or Curran.

NJPatsfan26 · Aug 8, 2015

Palm Beach Pats Fan said:
or,

Mr. Goodell, please explain to me how is it that you feel qualified to give both a fair ruling and an appeal verdict, when in multiple instances you have been clearly UNTRUTHFUL in statements of fact that YOU CLAIM to be important to your decisions?

Also good point

I truly hope Judge Berman rips Goodell a new one with Goodell just saying over and over again "But...the shield......Integrity....."

Oswlek · Aug 8, 2015

NJPatsfan26 said:
As others have mentioned on this, the judge should just ask Goodell one simple question.

How do you find it fair to be the judge, jury and executioner of this whole fiasco and say your still being independent?

I don't think that question gets to the heart of the situation because it is theoretically possible to be unbiased while performing all three duties.

The real problem is that the NFL is saying, "fairness is defined by us, so it is not possible for us to be unfair." For the most part, they aren't even denying their bias, they're just relying on this self-confirming axiom.

RelocatedPatFan · Aug 8, 2015

Perhaps we should go that the lying and unethical behavior should recuse Goodell from the process. Hence, no punishment can be awarded as the commission is the only one who can dole out such power and there is no process in place for transfer of authority under these circumstances.

It's absurd to say the least, but far more logical than anything Goodell has said in quite some time. If Goodell is going to try and play lawyer, he should either get a degree or a residence at a Holiday inn Express.

raduray · Aug 8, 2015

NJPatsfan26 said:
As others have mentioned on this, the judge should just ask Goodell one simple question.

How do you find it fair to be the judge, jury and executioner of this whole fiasco and say your still being independent?

Independence is NOT required in Article 46 of the CBA. However, the argument can be made that, by misrepresenting independence, the NFL misled Brady and tainted his defense strategy. But then, Article 46 doesn't call for fairness either. Per the NFL, the CBA grants Goodell absolute power. Labor Law, and Berman, may say otherwise. Next week's hearing should prove interesting.

Fencer · Aug 8, 2015

Gronkowski123 said:
What’s to prevent the NFL from framing a random player and suspending him via Section 46 of CBA

According to the league, nothing. Brady could be banned for life for bringing the league into disrepute by wearing ugly boots.

goheels22002 · Aug 8, 2015

TheBostonStraggler said:
NFL Memo of Law -- Points (3) & (4): "The Appeal hearing was procedurally fair" and "The Commissioner was not evidently partial"

Correct me if I'm wrong here: Roger Goodell's argument before the court is that the process was fair because he doesn't have to be fair. Seriously, no kidding, that almost literally appear to be the NFL's argument. Their friggin argument is we don't have to be fair so that makes it fair.

Goodell before: Vincent decided the punishment. Now: I decided the punishment
Goodell before: Ted Wells is an independent (and thorough/competent) man. Now, Wells is not independent and you can't see anything he did.

So after these lies and other admitted lies, the NFL argument now is because Goodell is not obligated to be fair, everything noted above is fair. This thing has gotten so bizarre is it actually/really happening? Wow....

There were many of us assuming Goodell was going to hand off Brady's appeal to a neutral arbitrator. This would be over by now had he done so. When Goodell chose to hear the appeal himself, he rolled the dice that this is the process that the NFLPA agreed to, Brady loses, and the NFL Commissioner has unfettered power to go after any player for any reason.

This is similar to Judge Kennesaw Mountain Landis' decision in the Black Sox Scandal that gave him absolute power to clean up baseball and end gambling by those employed by the teams. There is no proof that Shoeless Joe Jackson did anything in 1908, but he was banned from the game for life.

Landis' gamble was that he could wrest absolute power from the players based on the inherent threat of gambling's effect on the outcomes of baseball games, and he won. Goodell has taken the same gamble over under-inflated footballs.

Mack Herron · Aug 8, 2015

Gronkowski123 said:
What’s to prevent the NFL from framing a random player and suspending him via Section 46 of CBA

Judge Berman.

obgod3 · Aug 8, 2015

Article 46 "is" the problem. The NFLPA was just plain stupid to allow this in the CBA. I would have rather seen a shortened season by lockout than this be allowed. At this point I couldn't guess how this ruling might end up, all I think we can hope for is that Berman believes Goodell could not have been neutral arbitrator. Which clearly in my eyes he was not.

Rob0729 · Aug 8, 2015

raduray said:
Independence is NOT required in Article 46 of the CBA. However, the argument can be made that, by misrepresenting independence, the NFL misled Brady and tainted his defense strategy. But then, Article 46 doesn't call for fairness either. Per the NFL, the CBA grants Goodell absolute power. Labor Law, and Berman, may say otherwise. Next week's hearing should prove interesting.

At least Judge Doty, multiple times, has said that Article 46 does not give Goodell absolute power.

raduray · Aug 8, 2015

Rob0729 said:
At least Judge Doty, multiple times, has said that Article 46 does not give Goodell absolute power.

Hopefully Berman agrees as NFL has doubled down on that claim.

Rob0729 · Aug 8, 2015

obgod3 said:
Article 46 "is" the problem. The NFLPA was just plain stupid to allow this in the CBA. I would have rather seen a shortened season by lockout than this be allowed. At this point I couldn't guess how this ruling might end up, all I think we can hope for is that Berman believes Goodell could not have been neutral arbitrator. Which clearly in my eyes he was not.

In fairness to them, this article has been in the CBA since the 60s and no commissioner has abused that power remotely as much as Goodell has since they signed the current CBA. It is easy to kill the NFLPA for this in 20/20 hindsight (a talking point the NFL wants to spread), but I don't think they expected Goodell to take that article to create a dictatorship like he has.

Rob0729 · Aug 8, 2015

I am surprised Florio hasn't chimed in yet. Either he is trying to compile a swing for the fences article or he actually haven't had a chance to read the briefs. I hope for the former. He has written several news article since these were released.

NFLPA files motion to vacate

In the Starting Line-Up

Pro Bowl Player

In the Starting Line-Up

Pro Bowl Player

In the Starting Line-Up

Member of the Seattle 7 & Roadie for Metallica

Pro Bowl Player

Veteran Starter w/Big Long Term Deal

In the Starting Line-Up

Veteran Starter w/Big Long Term Deal

Experienced Starter w/First Big Contract

PatsFans.com Supporter

Pro Bowl Player

PatsFans.com Supporter

Pro Bowl Player

In the Starting Line-Up

PatsFans.com Supporter

PatsFans.com Supporter

PatsFans.com Supporter

PatsFans.com Supporter

Similar threads