Wetzel's report on today's (8/19) hearing.

I understand that you cant read too much into what berman is saying. but the fact that he is poking HUGE holes into the NFL's case and holes into their procedure which would vacate it leads me to believe he is leaning in bradys corner.

yes, he cant overturn the evidence. but stuff like not allowing pash to testify. the Arbitrator CHANGING what brady was accused of after the appeal hearing. moving the goal posts repeatedly are all part of the process by which berman can vacate the punishment.

AzorianPats said:

If Berman vacates the penalty, he becomes a cult hero across New England lol

Click to expand...

Kraft puts him in Patriots Hall Of Fame.

DaBronxPats14 said:

Kraft puts him in Patriots Hall Of Fame.

Click to expand...

Yeah ofcourse he put him, Berman would save his ass. Boy i hate him.
He quit fight cause other 31 team and fans are more important than his own!!!!
I will never forget that he betrayed us TWICE.
Can anyone make T-shirt like Free Brady and put Kraft picture with traitor or double crosser on his picture.

A point i havent seen mentioned much is that the NFLPA doesnt feel they are getting what was agreed upon, which is a fair process. Regardless of how ridiculous the CBA is currently, the PA had to have agreed upon it believing they would get a fair process.

Which brings me to my point, the ripple effect of the NFL taking a hard line on PSI and basically saying "its our power to do so" is going to set up an epic fight come time to negotiate the next CBA. Things will get ugly this time I think.

Fencer said:

Bad analogy. If the penalty is for non-cooperation, then Brady is confessing to NO facts other than those that are well-known in the public record. He'd never, ever, ever confess to cheating via ball deflation, but not turning over his phone -- well, he didn't turn over his phone, obviously.

Click to expand...

Why should Brady take a fine for non-cooperation for not turning over his phone. He offered up that information himself and was not notified of any penalty for destroying his phone until Goodell's appeal verdict came down. That's against the law of the shop and the law of the land. So, no, Brady shouldn't just take a fine and move on.

PatsfanTN said:

A point i havent seen mentioned much is that the NFLPA doesnt feel they are getting what was agreed upon, which is a fair process. Regardless of how ridiculous the CBA is currently, the PA had to have agreed upon it believing they would get a fair process.

Which brings me to my point, the ripple effect of the NFL taking a hard line on PSI and basically saying "its our power to do so" is going to set up an epic fight come time to negotiate the next CBA. Things will get ugly this time I think.

Click to expand...

The NFL needs to appoint a neutral arbitrator for these types of punishments. Its asanine Goddell is both the judge and executioner, but lets really think about this...what leverage does the NFLPA really have? Football isnt an international sport the way basketball, baseball and hockey are. If the NFL were to go on strike, there's no professional football league overseas and even if there was, can you imagine a Darelle Revis, same guy that will be scheduled to make $14M a year but will hold out for an extra $2M playing overseas for chump change? I cant.

NBA and NHL players can go on strike and play in European leagues and make some money in the meantime. NFL players dont have that luxury.

It sucks but these billionaire owners have most of the leverage.

I found this quote from Berman as communicated by Wetzel telling:

"The judge repeatedly noted that just because something is collectively bargained doesn't mean it can violate federal law"

I'm not sure what specific Federal Law is violated but the pro NFL side (ESPN) has been countering that Berman's motive for going after the NFL is to promote a settlement but as Florio points out and assuming this is correct, Berman could very well order a re-do of the Appeal if not vacate the suspension.
I'm really not clear on what is exactly within his power but given the last 2 hearings, the questions have certainly not been about posturing.

archstanton543 said:

Why should Brady take a fine for non-cooperation for not turning over his phone. He offered up that information himself and was not notified of any penalty for destroying his phone until Goodell's appeal verdict came down. That's against the law of the shop and the law of the land. So, no, Brady shouldn't just take a fine and move on.

Click to expand...

Because everyone already knows he didn't turn over his phone so no scathing admonishing of the NFL is ever going to change those who wonder - quite obtusely - why the phone was destroyed. A settlement also puts a definitive end date to this whole nonsense whereas a verdict may lead to a lengthy appeal process and possibly be overturned.

If I'm Tom, I gladly pay $50,000 and put this issue to rest.

SacPete1 said:

I found this quote from Berman as communicated by Wetzel telling:

"The judge repeatedly noted that just because something is collectively bargained doesn't mean it can violate federal law"

I'm not sure what specific Federal Law is violated but the pro NFL side (ESPN) has been countering that Berman's motive for going after the NFL is to promote a settlement but as Florio points out and assuming this is correct, Berman could very well order a re-do of the Appeal if not vacate the suspension.
I'm really not clear on what is exactly within his power but given the last 2 hearings, the questions have certainly not been about posturing.

Click to expand...

His powers are to confirm or vacate the award.
In the event of vacatur he can rule that the defect is incurable and therefore there would be no new appeal and the suspension will be null and void. If not, everything reverts to before the appeal, but Berman will have a say in how the arbitrator is chosen.

AndyJohnson said:

His powers are to confirm or vacate the award.
In the event of vacatur he can rule that the defect is incurable and therefore there would be no new appeal and the suspension will be null and void. If not, everything reverts to before the appeal, but Berman will have a say in how the arbitrator is chosen.

Click to expand...

Thanks AJ

This process has got to be mentally taxing on Tom. I would never blame him for wanting to pay a pittance fine and have it be done. He needs to and I'm sure he wants to focus on football full-time.

Bella*chick said:

This process has got to be mentally taxing on Tom. I would never blame him for wanting to pay a pittance fine and have it be done. He needs to and I'm sure he wants to focus on football full-time.

Click to expand...

Then again, every time he sits in a room and sees the lying NFL scum attack him, he must be thinking and getting even more determined that he should never give an inch to them.

Palm Beach Pats Fan said:

Then again, every time he sits in a room and sees the lying NFL scum attack him, he must be thinking and getting even more determined that he should never give an inch to them.

Click to expand...

This is a very important point.
The NFL is increasing it's character assault as time goes on.
It is now claiming that the number 1 piece of evidence they have is that Goodell found Brady's testimony to be in no way credible, and was the deciding factor in the award.
Think about that.
Tom Brady testified, and Goodell says after hearing Brady say he did not do anything, I am certain that he did, and now consider it a scheme that he organized, supported, and paid off people to do.

Roger Goodell is saying that the fact that Brady says he didn't do it is the best proof that he did because every word out his mouth is a guaranteed lie.
Would you settle?

AndyJohnson said:

This is a very important point.
The NFL is increasing it's character assault as time goes on.
It is now claiming that the number 1 piece of evidence they have is that Goodell found Brady's testimony to be in no way credible, and was the deciding factor in the award.
Think about that.
Tom Brady testified, and Goodell says after hearing Brady say he did not do anything, I am certain that he did, and now consider it a scheme that he organized, supported, and paid off people to do.

Roger Goodell is saying that the fact that Brady says he didn't do it is the best proof that he did because every word out his mouth is a guaranteed lie.
Would you settle?

Click to expand...

That is a great point and it continues to piss me off.

Whether Goodell personally believes your explanation is the basis of whether he will hammer you. He said that he didn't believe BB for Spygate, but DID believe Rex Ryan and Mike Westhoff in Tripgate.

Seems that he might have a tendency to believe Rats and disbelieve Pats and punish accordingly.

Almost seems like he might be biased....

supafly said:

In the case of Tom Brady, his back has been against the wall for 7 solid months now.

Click to expand...

Time and time again, he's proven that's when he's at his best.

AndyJohnson said:

His powers are to confirm or vacate the award.
In the event of vacatur he can rule that the defect is incurable and therefore there would be no new appeal and the suspension will be null and void. If not, everything reverts to before the appeal, but Berman will have a say in how the arbitrator is chosen.

Click to expand...

Interesting. What would be the grounds in this case for ruling the defect incurable?

raduray said:

Interesting. What would be the grounds in this case for ruling the defect incurable?

Click to expand...

Lack of notice. If Berman rules that the award is null because of lack of notice, you cannot go back and give proper notice.

AndyJohnson said:

This is a very important point.
The NFL is increasing it's character assault as time goes on.
It is now claiming that the number 1 piece of evidence they have is that Goodell found Brady's testimony to be in no way credible, and was the deciding factor in the award.
Think about that.
Tom Brady testified, and Goodell says after hearing Brady say he did not do anything, I am certain that he did, and now consider it a scheme that he organized, supported, and paid off people to do.

Roger Goodell is saying that the fact that Brady says he didn't do it is the best proof that he did because every word out his mouth is a guaranteed lie.
Would you settle?

Click to expand...

Well, in a defamation suit, Brady can put Goodell under oath.

AndyJohnson said:

Lack of notice. If Berman rules that the award is null because of lack of notice, you cannot go back and give proper notice.

Click to expand...

Interesting. One point that hasn't gotten a lot of discussion is when Nash compared ball deflation to PED use. This was challenged by Berman, but I think it benefits the Patriots since since PED use has a defined penalty and if ball deflation was like PED use, it should also have had a defined penalty. So, per the NFL's position, there's the lack of notice.

Or, would the NFL make the stretch argument that Brady should have known that the PED notice also applies to ball deflation?

raduray said:

Well, in a defamation suit, Brady can put Goodell under oath.

Click to expand...

I don't know that he could get a defamation suit heard.
Goodell kind of has some protection in that he is just stating his opinion, and it is his job to form one.

If you work for me, and I say that I think you are lying to me, it isn't defamation if I really believe it. With Brady's celebrity the bar is even higher.

Interesting. One point that hasn't gotten a lot of discussion is when Nash compared ball deflation to PED use. This was challenged by Berman, but I think it benefits the Patriots since since PED use has a defined penalty and if ball deflation was like PED use, it should also have had a defined penalty. So, per the NFL's position, there's the lack of notice.

Click to expand...

Agree. There are other notice issues as well.
-The suspension says it is based upon a policy that doesn't apply to players.
-There are numerous violations that are not handled under conduct detrimental policy, which are very related, such as stickum. Hard to argue that stickum isn't equal to psi in terms of competitive advantage, and also in terms of deception, since they are checked first.
-There are many examples of similar infractions that were not given suspension, such as the Jets K being generally aware of the coach who was manipulating the ball, the Viking/Panther issue, the Charger issue.
-Peterson's case which is HUGE. The NFL tried to discipline him under conduct detrimental after they were limited in the amount they could discipline him under personal conduct, and the court rules that violated notice. That is very applicable here because there are other policies that this would fall under, so there is not valid notice it fits under conduct detrimental.
-Generally aware of violations by others is a huge notice defect. It exists nowhere in the CBA, and there are thousands of examples where it was not enforced, including the steroids issue that Goodell tried to tie this too.
-Even the equating to the steroids issue. Steroids is not disciplined under conduct detrimental, so there is not notice that the exact violation Goodell compares this to would subject you to conduct detrimental policies.
-I'm sure there are others I missed.

Or, would the NFL make the stretch argument that Brady should have known that the PED notice also applies to ball deflation?

Click to expand...

See above. No, PED is PED. It is a specific policy that has nothing to do with conduct detrimental.

This is why Goodell changed from 'generally aware' and game operations policy to 'scheme' under conduct detrimental.
The NFLPA raised the notice issue at appeal. Goodell knew there was not proper notice, so he changed the findings in order to shoehorn it in to something he thought would address the notice defect.

I think Berman has seen through this, and I think that has a lot to do with why he is asking the questions that he is, because he is trying to separate Goodell the punisher from Goodell the arbitrator.

AndyJohnson said:

I don't know that he could get a defamation suit heard.
Goodell kind of has some protection in that he is just stating his opinion, and it is his job to form one.

If you work for me, and I say that I think you are lying to me, it isn't defamation if I really believe it. With Brady's celebrity the bar is even higher.


Agree. There are other notice issues as well.
-The suspension says it is based upon a policy that doesn't apply to players.
-There are numerous violations that are not handled under conduct detrimental policy, which are very related, such as stickum. Hard to argue that stickum isn't equal to psi in terms of competitive advantage, and also in terms of deception, since they are checked first.
-There are many examples of similar infractions that were not given suspension, such as the Jets K being generally aware of the coach who was manipulating the ball, the Viking/Panther issue, the Charger issue.
-Peterson's case which is HUGE. The NFL tried to discipline him under conduct detrimental after they were limited in the amount they could discipline him under personal conduct, and the court rules that violated notice. That is very applicable here because there are other policies that this would fall under, so there is not valid notice it fits under conduct detrimental.
-Generally aware of violations by others is a huge notice defect. It exists nowhere in the CBA, and there are thousands of examples where it was not enforced, including the steroids issue that Goodell tried to tie this too.
-Even the equating to the steroids issue. Steroids is not disciplined under conduct detrimental, so there is not notice that the exact violation Goodell compares this to would subject you to conduct detrimental policies.
-I'm sure there are others I missed.


See above. No, PED is PED. It is a specific policy that has nothing to do with conduct detrimental.

This is why Goodell changed from 'generally aware' and game operations policy to 'scheme' under conduct detrimental.
The NFLPA raised the notice issue at appeal. Goodell knew there was not proper notice, so he changed the findings in order to shoehorn it in to something he thought would address the notice defect.

I think Berman has seen through this, and I think that has a lot to do with why he is asking the questions that he is, because he is trying to separate Goodell the punisher from Goodell the arbitrator.

Click to expand...

Great post!