Excellent NY Times article on Defamegate

mb6592 said:

Thanks for the info. It would appear as a fan one stands no chance of even moving forward, let alone of success. Does being a season ticket holder - with all the financial investment that entails - give one standing? Would the suit have to come from season ticket holders only?

Click to expand...

No. See the Cameraplacegate lawsuit, which was thrown out by the 3rd Circuit: https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/USCOURTS-ca3-09-02237/pdf/USCOURTS-ca3-09-02237-0.pdf

I suppose we can declare ourselves an armed militia and take over some government building That seems to be popular now.

If I had to guess - and it's only a guess - I would hypothesize that the root cause of Brady's problems is that the NFL and the owners (a) have monopoly power and (b) are abusing that power. To me, the NFL (as a corporation, and the constituent teams, as a cartel) obviously have monopoly power in the market for professional football.

To make a claim that they are violating the Sherman Act (governing antitrust claims) you have to claim, very loosely, that they are "abusing" that power in some way.

Now, I am not an antitrust law expert. However, my sense from having studied hundreds of antitrust cases (just in outline) is that:

(a) the courts, for whatever reason, allow professional sports to get away with Sherman Act violations that no other industry can get away with, because

(b) the courts believe that there are "equities" that favor the creation of these huge all-powerful leagues, that is, they believe it just makes more sense.

Now, monopolies are not all bad. A monopoly has a lot of power and, like a superhero, can use that power for good. But the big danger of monopoly is that when a monopoly has become corrupted, the monopoly is so powerful that ordinary people - or suppliers, or competitors, or employees - have no recourse.

What I believe may have happened with the NFL is that they got so powerful, and so rich, that they literally became untouchable. They control vast TV networks (one prominent sports analyst who questioned the NFL's deflategate narrative found himself summarily out of a job, for instance). After all, the TV networks need the NFL revenue, thanks to the monopoly. Their legal war chest is unbounded. When someone like Brady tries to go against them, they are just too powerful.

I personally have never seen a private corporation utilize its monopoly power in as clearly abusive a way as the NFL has done to Brady. I've seen and read of hundreds of corporations harshly penalized for far less serious or clearcut transgressions. The NFL's actions, in which it leaked false, damaging information that was broadcast on major networks that were its own contract partners to target an innocent individual; and in which it then conspired to fabricate evidence against that individual; were extraordinary.

And the NFL could not have done those things if it did not have monopoly power.

If I were thinking of pursuing legal action against the NFL, I would look into the antitrust area. In fact, I think that the NFL's behavior during deflategate pretty clearly suggests that the "antitrust exemption" that allows them to control professional football should be removed. They were given unprecedented power by the courts; they abused that power; so the power should be taken away.

Disclaimer: The above are just some thoughts, completely unresearched, based on dimly remembered facts that may or may not be accurate. I am not expert in the relevant areas of law.

Ken Canin said:

If I were thinking of pursuing legal action against the NFL, I would look into the antitrust area. In fact, I think that the NFL's behavior during deflategate pretty clearly suggests that the "antitrust exemption" that allows them to control professional football should be removed. They were given unprecedented power by the courts; they abused that power; so the power should be taken away.

Click to expand...

FWIW, the NFL is only formally exempt from the antitrust laws in two areas. The first area is with respect to TV contracts (they and the other pro sports leagues were given that exemption by the Sports Broadcasting Act of 1961). The second area is the exemption that all industries enjoy with respect to various things bargained for in a CBA with a recognized union. It is the CBA-related exemption that allows the draft and salary cap to be legal, for example. Both of those are exemptions created by statute, not by courts.

Then there's the issue that there isn't one "private corporation". There are 33 -- the 32 teams and NFLHQ. The 32 teams (which are the entities that actually are the product and to which virtually all the revenue goes) haven't done anything to Brady or NE (besides whispering to Roger). It's NFLHQ that's done all this stuff.

Jackson 2 said:

For crissakes this crap about who has them and who has seen them is complete BS. Those freaking tapes were shown on national television when Goodell came down with his ruling. I remember it as if it were yesterday. There was a continuous loop over and over again. Jay Glazer showing them to his pals at his home parties is such horseshit, as if it was some secret porno tape showing where he charges an admission fee. Talk about urban legend lies...

Click to expand...

I'll be honest and tell you that I took everything at face value back then. I thought that the Patriots had been caught stealing signals. It wasn't until much later that I realized that they were penalized for basically not obeying a memo which discussed camera positions etc....

It was after defamegate when I had joined this forum and read numerous posts with supporting links that I had finally understood how screwed up the league really was.

Anyways I'm glad that I know now but I'm certain that the average Sunday only fan is only paying attention to what they hear on the radio etc.... Which is why the Felger and Mazz BS bothers me. If they aren't going to verify the facts for the average joe fan who is?

QuantumMechanic said:

There is zero chance of any 2nd Circuit decision "exonerating Brady" because that's not something even Brady's side is asking for as the courts have no power to do it.

At a high level there are only three possible decisions the 2nd Circuit can make:

1. "We agree with Berman that the CBA does not give Goodell the power to suspend Brady for what Brady is accused of. The vacatur of the suspension is upheld."
2. "We agree with the NFL that none of the grounds Berman considered are sufficient to strip Goodell of the power to suspend Brady for what Brady is accused of. However, we remand to Berman to now consider the things he didn't previously consider. We enjoin the suspension pending the conclusion of the remanded case."
3. "We agree with the NFL that none of the grounds the NFLPA brings up, whether or not Berman considered them, are sufficient to strip Goodell of the power to suspend Brady for what Brady is accused of. The vacatur of the suspension is overturned and Brady is suspended for the first four games of the 2016 season."

Click to expand...

Poor choice of words on my part. I should have written 2nd Circuit upholds Kessler's decision on the Brady case.

Said it before... we need Anonymous.

QuantumMechanic said:

The suit that Jets fan filed against NE and the NFL in the wake of Cameragateplace is instructive.

The judge (and then the 3rd Circuit on appeal) pointed out that buying a ticket only gives you a right to see the game specified on the ticket. And since the plaintiff was allowed into the stadium and saw the NE/NYJ game he had no recourse in the courts to claim fraud, etc.

https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/USCOURTS-ca3-09-02237/pdf/USCOURTS-ca3-09-02237-0.pdf

Click to expand...

The court's language in that case was disquieting insofar as it lambasted the Patriots for alleged "surreptitious" taping in a 12(b)(4) posture. Normally a court, in a failure to state a claim situation like here, would carefully disclaim that it was accepting all facts pleaded in the complaint as true, especially in a high profile case where most readers would not be familiar with pleading rules. Here, the opinion's style made it seem that it agreed with facts pleaded, even though at that juncture - before factfinding - the court could not have found any facts, so should not agree or disagree with them, much less engage in homilies directed at the defendant.

zoostation said:

great piece - someone send this link to Shank. It will allow him to learn about science, true journalism, and football all in one swoop.

Click to expand...

There's both a reading effort and reading comprehension problem in residence there.

Tony2046 said:

Because of the design of the stadium the Jets could tape legally but the Pats could not.

Click to expand...

Hey Tony, this is the first I've heard of this. Can you provide more detail? Thanks.

The Brandon Five said:

Pretty good except for the fact the lack of understanding about Cameraplacement-gate. After seeing the mess they made of Defamegate you would think they would have looked a little harder at that episode.

Click to expand...

There was also this - "They are never rebuilding, and always contending."

The Patriots are always rebuilding, which is why they are always contending.

Rhodey said:

Yeah, it was.

AND WE WANT OUR PICKS BACK...WITH AN APOLOGY!

Click to expand...

that's funny, because if the AFCCG was in Foxboro I would'v urged the fans to chant "we want our picks back, we want our picks back!" the apology part wouldn't have fit in there somewhere tho.

QuantumMechanic said:

The suit that Jets fan filed against NE and the NFL in the wake of Cameragateplace is instructive.

The judge (and then the 3rd Circuit on appeal) pointed out that buying a ticket only gives you a right to see the game specified on the ticket. And since the plaintiff was allowed into the stadium and saw the NE/NYJ game he had no recourse in the courts to claim fraud, etc.

https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/USCOURTS-ca3-09-02237/pdf/USCOURTS-ca3-09-02237-0.pdf

Click to expand...

QuantumMechanic said:

No. See the Cameraplacegate lawsuit, which was thrown out by the 3rd Circuit: https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/USCOURTS-ca3-09-02237/pdf/USCOURTS-ca3-09-02237-0.pdf

Click to expand...

I get it - there are multiple issues associated with bringing forth a suit and many obstacles to overcome. But, is it possible the climate has changed? After all, weren't we told by many "experts" Brady had little chance in court because of the Supreme Court's Garvey decision? Hell, even today, Goodell, in court filings, is still arguing that Berman erred and that he has unlimited power. He continues his hubris even after the extreme beat down he received in Berman's court. Times change and court decisions are revisited, so isn't there's a chance of some sort of lawsuit seeing the light of day if dooshbag Goodell doesn't make this right? This, of course, assumes the Berman decision is not overturned.

I just read the NY Times piece. Excellent.

Mr. Kraft was betrayed.

goheels22002 said:

I just read the NY Times piece. Excellent.

Mr. Kraft was betrayed.

Click to expand...

and he payed that betrayal forward to us.

QuantumMechanic said:

FWIW, the NFL is only formally exempt from the antitrust laws in two areas. The first area is with respect to TV contracts (they and the other pro sports leagues were given that exemption by the Sports Broadcasting Act of 1961). The second area is the exemption that all industries enjoy with respect to various things bargained for in a CBA with a recognized union. It is the CBA-related exemption that allows the draft and salary cap to be legal, for example. Both of those are exemptions created by statute, not by courts.

Then there's the issue that there isn't one "private corporation". There are 33 -- the 32 teams and NFLHQ. The 32 teams (which are the entities that actually are the product and to which virtually all the revenue goes) haven't done anything to Brady or NE (besides whispering to Roger). It's NFLHQ that's done all this stuff.

Click to expand...

I think the Colts accusations about the Pats deflating their footballs is a bit more than whispering to Roger.

Could the Colts franchise be sued by Brady and/or Kraft?

betterthanthealternative said:

Hey Tony, this is the first I've heard of this. Can you provide more detail? Thanks.

Click to expand...

Well this is odd. I posted the CBS link in a thread a while ago but that page no longer exists. I've pasted my original post which has quotes from the article.

Louis Riddick on Brady's week 7 performance vs Jets | Page 2 | New England Patriots Forums - PatsFans.com Patriots Fan Messageboard

Jackson 2 said:

I don't give a f### whose tapes they were. They were shown to everyone with Goodell commenting about his ruling while the tapes ran. The idea that Glazer has some exclusive stash of Pats tapes is complete crap and always has been.

Click to expand...

Hate to be talking about this before the game today, but have to step in to clarify something:

The networks might have played portions of the footage (I believe it was from Glazer's tape and Fox was the first network to play those portions), but never the full tape.

That is why the public were stunned when we heard about their destruction. Not only that, Goodell made some statement to the effect that every single tape has been destroyed and that if he finds more, he will penalize the Pats further.

That was infuriating for both the Pats fans and non-Pats fans because Pats fans thought the tapes did contain proof of other teams taping us (which Goodell didn't want to be exposed, and so his threat to penalize us upon any new revelation would hurt us more); whereas, non-Pats world thought that there was far more damaging evidence in the tapes and its destruction was proof that Goodell is in Kraft's pockets and did that to save the Pats.

Contrary to you thinking it is a crap, Glazer does have at least a copy of this CAMERA-gate infringhment tape.

And that friggin man has given interviews too!

See below for links (among many, Igave only a recent pft article and also an earlier article):

----------------
Glazer still has SpyGate tape, was threatened with jail over it

http://deadspin.com/jay-glazer-on-ufos-his-copy-of-the-spygate-tape-and-g-1509724480

-------------------

Based on what Glazer says is on the tape, it was/is unbelievable that that is all the evidence the NFL* had to humiliate us that badly.

And we thought that Mr. Kraft might have learnt never to trust them.

Fans who have not yet read the bleacher report might as well read it to understand the background, whose premise sadly applies for this deflategate-saga also:

The Truth About Spygate: Punishing Success and Promoting Parity


GO PATS!!

Patsfanin Philly said:

There is one more chance to right this wrong ( not likely though). The NFL owners meeting is Mar 23-26. Hopefully by then we will have a decision by the 2nd Circuit exonerating Brady. If that is the case, a strategic move would be for Bob Kraft ( or if he doesn't want to make waves let Jonathan do it) make a motion and ask for a vote by all 32 owners, even if not binding a sense of the owners that science has proven there was no malfeasance on the part of Brady or the Patriots. In addition, all appeals should be withdrawn and the Patriots should be given back their wrongfully seized draft picks. There won't be much sympathy for the Patriots but get it on the record who votes which way.

Note- I assume the comment was yours and not old rovers

Click to expand...

As much as I agree and want to share your optimism, do not see this happening.. the owners are firmly entrenched and invested in Goodell's "leadership" and would not want to usurp his "power".. the only hope is some back door influence that might cause him to change his mind.

The chance of that is slim and none..

The best revenge is to circumvent this decision by some salary cap magic and finding a couple of guys who make a difference on this team.. Dion Lewis for example.