Registered Members experience this forum ad and noise-free.
CLICK HERE to Register for a free account and login for a smoother ad-free experience. It's easy, and only takes a few moments.
Thanks for taking the time to not only respond, but to keep us all well informed....you freaking lunatic, you.
You, and the other attorneys are much appreciated in these trying times.
Yep, fair enough, maybe they don't like him, I don't know.
Not necessarily, if the nfl's brief was persuasive enough they could say no to en banc. I don't think the nfl's brief would be since they've been lying all along but that's what I've heard from lawyers. It would definitely mean they are seriously considering it though.
an unverifiable hypothesis and a wild ass guess, dontcha think?
Until today I haven't commented on Brady's suspension or the legal ramifications since the day the 2nd circuit upheld the NFL's case. I was simply appalled by the stupidity, ignorance, and lack of common sense shown by 2 supposedly smart men who chose to ignore the truth and take the cowards way and simply "follow the law and precedent". That day I lost my faith in the judicial process, the NFL, and the greatness of America in general. It proved that "the big lie" could succeed at even the highest level. Hitler and Gobells' beliefs were affirmed....and nothing much since (including the presidential nominating season) has led to believe anything has changed.
Finally today I read the original post about Fienstien's amicus brief and a ray of sunshine poured into my dark state of despair. After reading it I was reminded that this decision was a lot more important than just whether Tom Brady gets to play in the first four games this year. Much more important than righting a wrong perpetrated by the NFL, its jealous cadre of owners. on the Pats and Brady.
If left unchallenged this decision will SIGNIFICANTLY effect the general fairness of the arbitration process as a whole. It will allow the most powerful party to be the judge and arbiter both. It will allow them to change the terms of the arbitration. It will allow them to ignore evidence that proves innocence It will allow them to change the range of punishments at will. These are all things the NFL did in this case.
Previously I thought there was NO chance of this being sent back to be heard by the full panel of judges, and even LESS that it be heard by SCOTUS. But I was wrong. Wrong because I didn't realize the scope of the impact of the decision goes far beyond the desires of a Pats fan to see a wrong corrected that harmed his team. Unfortunately if it is upheld it will be just ANOTHER nail in the coffin any chance of fairness from our already lop sided legal system and the gap between the haves and have not's in this country will keep growing ever larger.
Hopefully with these critical amicus briefs there will be enough judges who will realize that this case NEEDS to be heard in full, right up to SCOTUS. And as much as I want it to be, if I read Fienstien's brief correctly, this isn't really about Tom Brady any more.
Color me more hopeful, though there was a small part of me that was just getting used to the idea of Jimmy G going 3-1 or better, and the Pats winding up at the end of the year with a less beat up Tom Brady, a Lombardi Trophy and an asset that will bring more picks back than Goodell ever took away. THAT wouldn't be a nice FU scenario either .
Until today I haven't commented on Brady's suspension or the legal ramifications since the day the 2nd circuit upheld the NFL's case. I was simply appalled by the stupidity, ignorance, and lack of common sense shown by 2 supposedly smart men who chose to ignore the truth and take the cowards way and simply "follow the law and precedent". That day I lost my faith in the judicial process, the NFL, and the greatness of America in general. It proved that "the big lie" could succeed at even the highest level. Hitler and Gobells' beliefs were affirmed....and nothing much since (including the presidential nominating season) has led to believe anything has changed.
Finally today I read the original post about Fienstien's amicus brief and a ray of sunshine poured into my dark state of despair. After reading it I was reminded that this decision was a lot more important than just whether Tom Brady gets to play in the first four games this year. Much more important than righting a wrong perpetrated by the NFL, its jealous cadre of owners. on the Pats and Brady.
If left unchallenged this decision will SIGNIFICANTLY effect the general fairness of the arbitration process as a whole. It will allow the most powerful party to be the judge and arbiter both. It will allow them to change the terms of the arbitration. It will allow them to ignore evidence that proves innocence It will allow them to change the range of punishments at will. These are all things the NFL did in this case.
Previously I thought there was NO chance of this being sent back to be heard by the full panel of judges, and even LESS that it be heard by SCOTUS. But I was wrong. Wrong because I didn't realize the scope of the impact of the decision goes far beyond the desires of a Pats fan to see a wrong corrected that harmed his team. Unfortunately if it is upheld it will be just ANOTHER nail in the coffin any chance of fairness from our already lop sided legal system and the gap between the haves and have not's in this country will keep growing ever larger.
Hopefully with these critical amicus briefs there will be enough judges who will realize that this case NEEDS to be heard in full, right up to SCOTUS. And as much as I want it to be, if I read Fienstien's brief correctly, this isn't really about Tom Brady any more.
Color me more hopeful, though there was a small part of me that was just getting used to the idea of Jimmy G going 3-1 or better, and the Pats winding up at the end of the year with a less beat up Tom Brady, a Lombardi Trophy and an asset that will bring more picks back than Goodell ever took away. THAT wouldn't be a nice FU scenario either .
That is a interesting take, and one that makes some sense. But if I read the OP correctly, Fienstien thinks the case has far reaching potential that go beyond the narrow confines of sports union/management relations. It is the reason why the AFL/CIO bothered to write its brief. They see the potential for management to use this precedent to further erode the arbitration process in their favor.
