More settlement negotiations through the press (Newsday)

PatsWickedPissah said:

I am quite sure.
I see no prior NFL behavior by Bob Kraft that indicates in the slightest that he'd file suit.
(aside from the minor legal issue that the league charter prohibits it)

This is the guy who after several days of silence suddenly before the SB "demanded an apology" (so soon we forget) only to some time later after fulminating again suddenly accept meekly the largest league punishment sanction EVER only to again speak out just before training camp simply to avoid a few of us booing him.

Lots of words. No actions of substance unless you call a website as taking concerted action.

Click to expand...

Admittedly, Kraft stating he was accepting the penalties was pretty stupid and I think he also said something to the effect of "he hates lawsuits." However, if he decides to keep his stupid mouth shut and play his cards right, he may be able to parlay the threat of a lawsuit into (much needed) positive change for the league.

PatsWickedPissah said:

I am quite sure.
I see no prior NFL behavior by Bob Kraft that indicates in the slightest that he'd file suit.
(aside from the minor legal issue that the league charter prohibits it)

This is the guy who after several days of silence suddenly before the SB "demanded an apology" (so soon we forget) only to some time later after fulminating again suddenly accept meekly the largest league punishment sanction EVER only to again speak out just before training camp simply to avoid a few of us booing him.

Lots of words. No actions of substance unless you call a website as taking concerted action.

Click to expand...

Does the league charter really bar suits for intentional torts? So Bob Kraft can punch Woody Johnson in the mouth and couldn't be sued for it?

BingoBrown said:

A question for the legal eagles who post here.Lets say Berman sends
this back to arbitration,can Brady file and injuction with this judge?

Click to expand...

Not a lawyer but I believe if he sends it back for re arbitration he would have vacated the suspension in his ruling.

YOUGOTMOSSED said:

Maybe not willing but why not able? I seriously doubt there's anything in his owner's agreement waiving his right to sue for intentional tort.

Even if he doesn't actually sue, the potential lawsuit can be an effective "sword of Damocles" giving him some leverage to make some positive changes in the league office.

Click to expand...

I am not an attorney so I can't make determination on what the NFL's prohibition on lawsuits covers. As for willingness, I think Kraft's actions speak for themselves. I would have been happy if he just stood his ground and appealed as was his right rather his capitulation.

Fencer said:

Multiple knowledgeable-sounding people say something like that, so I'm not really challenging it, but:

Is that generally how it works? If he's ready to rule on 8/31, he has it all written out in final form?

Click to expand...

As I said in my OP, I was just stating what I thought based on "no knowledge or information," but yes, I would be very surprised if Judge Berman has not decided how he is going to rule. It's not out of the question that he would have outlined his decision in a conversation with his Clerk after he received the final filings by both sides earlier this week and had a final conversation with the Magistrate Judge. Under those circumstances, the Clerk could have already prepared a draft ruling...but I'm just guessing there.

If I'm right about that (and, as I said, I'm just guessing) and if the Clerk has worked with the Judge for a long time, as is likely the case for a Senior Judge, then s/he will know exactly how he wants the Ruling to read and can probably "finish his sentences" for him. The Clerk would line up all the precedents and prepare the Draft (maybe initially as a Memorandum?). Judge Berman would review the Draft and make his changes. In other words, there is no reason that his ruling could not be completed and awaiting his signature at 9:00 AM on Monday. I think Clerks to Federal Judges are no strangers to working weekends.

The reality is that there is nothing left to be said to Judge Berman by either side that he has not already heard...in some cases ad nauseam. The only new information he wants to hear from Goodell and Brady is whether they have settled or whether they think they are on the verge of settling if they have x more hours to discuss things.

On that scenario, when Court convenes on Monday, he could announce his intention to rule from the Bench later in the day in the presence of the Principals and then give them a final couple of hours to reach a Settlement before he signs the Ruling and reads it in Open Court.

Or he could wait until the end of the week or express his annoyance at the whole mess by making everybody wait a couple of weeks.

BelichickFan said:

I'm not saying it's fair but this thread is about a settlement...A settlement = you give something up.

Click to expand...

You're not wrong, but I think the point here is that most fans don't really want to see a settlement. There just isn't a viable one that's possible.

BelichickFan said:

If I were Brady the most I would accept would be :

2 game fine (not suspension)
No defamation suit against ESPN or NFL - or employees thereof
Agreement to respond "no comment" forever, no sit down interview denying all charges, etc.

That's the most I'd offer.

Click to expand...

I guess this is why your name isn't BradyFan .

Honestly, one of the "main" issues here is future precedent that the NFL is attempting to set. For the players sake, especially those that might make considerably less than Brady, he/NFLPA should make every attempt to make sure the fine/punishment doesn't extend beyond the CBA and aim for less.

Honestly, Brady shouldn't have any penalties unless it's proven he did something wrong. For the Brett Favre non-cooperation, it was fairly easy to prove he did something. Also, I would characterize Brady as having been fully cooperative with the investigation. But, he may need to make some concession for a settlement, but really needs to push hard for the NFL to state he didn't do anything wrong (not the implied the NFL wasn't able to find the evidence).

YOUGOTMOSSED said:

Does the league charter really bar suits for intentional torts? So Bob Kraft can punch Woody Johnson in the mouth and couldn't be sued for it?

Click to expand...

Woody Johnson's too useless and dumb to waste a punch on him to test the Charter...but....Irsay...that's another matter...might be worth testing the Charter to punch him in the mouth.

PatsFanSince74 said:

Woody Johnson's too useless and dumb to waste a punch on him to test the Charter...but....Irsay...that's another matter...might be worth testing the Charter to punch him in the mouth.

Click to expand...

nah! He'd probably be too high to feel it.

aluminum seats said:

You're not wrong, but I think the point here is that most fans don't really want to see a settlement. There just isn't a viable one that's possible.

Click to expand...

How can you say there isn't a viable settlement here? How do you know that. You couldn't possibly know that. There's usually always a viable settlement. And there definitely is one here too. Each side has to suck it up and give something up. That's just the way it goes

Settlements tend to come late in high stakes negotiations like this. I don't think anyone wants to take things Out of their hands and in the hands of a judge.

Well when the judge appears to be backing your case to such a high degree I bet the PA might want it in said judges hands.

Do teams get to decide where the commissioner sits during games? Can the pats put him in the cheapest seats with absolutely no security?

TomPatriot said:

Because in the twisted world of Goodell, Vincent, Kensil and Pash, abusing women matters less than failing to deflate a few footballs.

Click to expand...

In the context of the fact that they are a sports league, that's the only thing they've gotten right. Unfortunately, they get that simple concept correct, but draw the wrong conclusions from it.

billdog3484 said:

How can you say there isn't a viable settlement here? How do you know that. You couldn't possibly know that. There's usually always a viable settlement. And there definitely is one here too. Each side has to suck it up and give something up. That's just the way it goes

Settlements tend to come late in high stakes negotiations like this. I don't think anyone wants to take things Out of their hands and in the hands of a judge.

Click to expand...

From what I see and understand, there isn't a settlement that would work for both sides. I could be wrong.

billdog3484 said:

How can you say there isn't a viable settlement here? How do you know that. You couldn't possibly know that. There's usually always a viable settlement. And there definitely is one here too. Each side has to suck it up and give something up. That's just the way it goes

Settlements tend to come late in high stakes negotiations like this. I don't think anyone wants to take things Out of their hands and in the hands of a judge.

Click to expand...

There's no viable settlement because the NFL insists upon Brady admitting complicity and Brady is never going to admit to doing something he didn't do.

aluminum seats said:

From what I see and understand, there isn't a settlement that would work for both sides. I could be wrong.

Click to expand...

Nope, you're right.

PatsFanSince74 said:

Yes, and Kessler correctly stated in open Court that Brady received bad advice on that from Yee. But, the whole thing was exaggerated and purely cosmetic and did nothing to affect the substance of the matter, since Wells had already told him he would not be penalized for not handing over the phone. Brady's destruction of the phone just gave the NFL a chance to misrepresent that action and distract from their lack of a real case against Brady. The NFL thought it would get away with it, until they got Judge Berman, who ordered that all records be unsealed.

Click to expand...

A correction: What Wells said is that he did not warn Brady that he would be penalized for not handing over the phone. That's not the same as what you stated above (bolded).

Fire Goodell, and give the Patriots a public apology. That would be my settlement stance.

Tony2046 said:

Let's take the Phone issue a little further........

Tom should've (not should of)

1. Handed over his phone.
2. Allowed them full access to his phone records
3. Allowed a walk through of his house(s)
4. Allowed a search of his vehicle(s)
5. Turned over his bank records (to verify Tanguay's Ball boy payoff scheme)
6. Testified under oath while hooked up to a lie detector test.

Because that's what an innocent man would do if he had nothing to hide. Right?

It's a slippery slope.

Click to expand...

I'm not defending Wells, but your hyperbole doesn't serve us well. After first asking for the phone, Wells stated that he'd be willing to accept any Deflategate related texts/emails on the phone, as determined by Brady/Yee. Brady declined the compromise.

Zeus said:

I've seen it suggested more than once that the owners feel Brady should be punished because "they think he probably did something." This is unfair to the point of being offensive. It also reflects the reality of the Wells Report convicting Brady without any real evidence, purely based on tortured inferences and outright innuendo.

It's all been said before - Brady has been a model citizen, nothing but a credit to his profession and has contributed to the good of the game and the wealth of the very same owners who are treating him so shabbily.

In the end, this shows just how little regard the owners have for the players. To the Billionaire Boys Club, you're just meat on the hoof, a commodity that can be bought and sold, something that can be discarded at any time for any reason.

This is disgusting.

Click to expand...

Let's apply that same logic to Jim Irsay. After all, it's been more than suggested that he's a drug addict and has participated in the illegal purchase of controlled substances.