Alan Millstein: Brady's chances of en banc hearing dramatically improved with latest amicus filings

XLIX said:

No, it really wouldn't. The USSC has been issuing opinions all month and the only one that really generated any news was one on abortion.

If this case went to the Supreme Court, the same people talking about it now would be talking about it then, but it isn't going to draw any extra attention from people who don't care about football.

Click to expand...

Richard Camembert said:

Less so than four nationally televised games in which he is suspended because he declined to appeal further and therefore appeared to be guilty? Versus denying guilt and fighting as hard as he could?

Here, let me help you. You cannot use a keeper on a 30 year old dude with 21 career TD over 6 years, one season over 1000 yards, concussions, a foot problem, and lots of new competition.

Click to expand...

JetFan79 said:

Hm, suppose you could be right, but I'd have to respectfully disagree.

Pretty sure this would get coverage on CNN, MSNBC, Fox...

If it comes to it, be interesting to see who's right.

Friendly wager? Winner gets to choose loser's forum picture for a month?

Click to expand...

JetFan79 said:

Hm, suppose you could be right, but I'd have to respectfully disagree.

Pretty sure this would get coverage on CNN, MSNBC, Fox...

If it comes to it, be interesting to see who's right.

Friendly wager? Winner gets to choose loser's forum picture for a month?

Click to expand...

JetFan79 said:

PPR league though. Dude catches like 10 a game. He's easily top 15 PPR WR when healthy (and w/Brady).

Click to expand...

XLIX said:

This issue has *already* gotten coverage - and a lot of it - from CNN, MSNBC, Fox. So yes, a USSC decision would get covered by those entities as well.

Your argument seems to be "nobody is covering it right now, but they will if it goes to the USSC." It is the *first* part of your statement which is incorrect.

Click to expand...

JetFan79 said:

Absolutely I'd think the same if the NFL went to SCOTUS. Again, to the general public every court not named the US Supreme Court doesn't mean squat. Most don't care or pay attention. SCOTUS is a much different scenario.

And right, if SCOTUS agrees with me, they'll deny it. Which I'd venture a very uneducated guess that they would deny it. However that's still Brady attempting to take it to SCOTUS and some of the public would see that as (can't find the right word...) conceeded/self-involved. Again, the same goes for the NFL if they were to go to SCOTUS.

You'd think if he does take it to SCOTUS, his team would figure there at least a decent chance of getting it heard. Otherwise, why risk the bad PR?

Click to expand...

JetFan79 said:

Darn, if we don't agree on current level of coverage, guess can't really place a bet on whether or not it increases.

But I watch a pretty decent amount of cable news. Haven't heard Brady mentioned in at least months. Except for the 3am show on Fox, Red Eye, may have been a joke or two.

Click to expand...

patfanken said:

Since SCOTUS takes on such a small percentage of cases that are offered, you aren't going very far out on that limb to believe that they won't take the case.

But your belief that outside NE everyone thinks he's guilty is typical Jet fan thinking; very muddled and factually wrong. The vast majority of NFL fans know Brady is innocent, but they are happy as hell that his suspension will weaken the Pats and give THEIR team a competitive advantage. What true American isn't going to support someone who knows he's being railroaded fighting for his rights.

Personally I wish he'd skip the move to SCOTUS and go directly to the defamation suit and TOTALLY out the NFL front office for the corrupt, biased, and contemptuous organization it has become.

BTW- Sheldon Richardson just got suspended for just ONE game for driving 143 mph, resisting arrest, with drugs, and a minor in the AM. The way the Jets run the NFL office, maybe if he'd crashed the car and killed the kid, he might have gotten a 2 game suspension

Also you might not know, being a Jet fan, that the last time (IIRC) the league caught at team tampering with a ball, it was the JETS. But they didn't lose their 1st and 4th round picks. They didn't lose their most important player for a quarter of a season. They didn't lose $1MM. In fact they didn't lose a nickel. When the Jets were caught red handed and never even denied the charge; the PLAYER was fined $8,000 and everyone moved on. THAT, my deluded friend, is what passes for "equal justice under the law" in the NFL that is run by the NYJ alumni club.

Click to expand...

JetFan79 said:

I posted a bunch quickly so it's possible I mistyped something, but when did I say most think he's guilty?

I said most don't care.

Now yes, I do think most would say he's guilty, but I don't think I said that 'til just now.

Click to expand...

patfanken said:

I didn't mean to imply YOU think he's guilty. I'm sure you know he isn't, despite being a Jet fan. The main point of my post was to rebut your contention that the vast majority of fans outside NE believe he's guilty of the charges the NFL has trumped up. I'd believe a majority might want him suspended, but mostly because they think it will help THEIR team win and weaken the team that has dominated the league for the last 15 years.

The last part of the post was to simply try to educate you to how unequally "justice" is meted out by the NYJ alumni club that works at 354 Park ave.

Click to expand...

JetFan79 said:

I'm not sure if Brady cares about how the public outside of NE views him at all, but if he does, he really needs to think pretty hard about whether or not to take this to SCOTUS (if needed).

Right now, the overwhelming majority of football fans in the country aren't paying attention and really don't care how this turns out. But if this goes to SCOTUS, that's a whole 'nother level. Football fans and non fans will all be paying attention.

And potentially (most likely in my opinion) be pretty freakin' pissed a case about deflated footballs (which is how most would see it) and a CBA agreed to by complete idiots, would be competing for time with other cases having to do with issues like abortion, immigration/deportation, LGBT rights, and so on...

Not saying he absolutely shouldn't do it, but he just better consider the consequences. If he does go through with it, at bare minimum he better have one heck of a PR team explaining his (or the broader) case to those outside NE.

I know most of you think he should do it. But trust me, I don't know a single person who thinks SCOTUS should spend a single second of their time on this.

Hopefully it doesn't even matter and Brady gets his appeal now. Guess we'll see soon enough.

Click to expand...

Ivan said:

To be really clear about it we don't give one rats ass what Jet fans or any other fans think, and I seriously doubt Brady does either. You can all drop dead.

Click to expand...

JetFan79 said:

Touchy subjects I probably shouldn't post about. Though on Jet boards, it's very similar to here. Us against the world mentality. And that it's the Pats who got all the breaks (until continually pushing things so far the owners got pissed).

Going into details on some of these topics would either get me banned or just hated on more than usual.

Heck, like 2 minutes ago I saw a post pop up saying I should be banned now. But it quickly disappeared. Not sure what that was about, but guessing I should watch my step.

Click to expand...

patfanken said:

No I encourage you to voice your opinion here. As long as you remain respectful I would be against your being banned simply for being a Jets fan, or any other fan for that matter. Our discussions are generally improved when legitimate input from "other fans" is added, though trollers and simply haters don't last long here. I posted regularly at Jets insiders for a decade before it was taken over by the Jets version of the Hitler's youth and was banned for simply offering an opinion I tried to back up with facts.. Not for nothing, but that formerly good site has pretty much disappeared in the years since I was banned.. (not implying there is any connection )

BTW- there have been several examples where it seemed the Jets got favorable rulings from the NYJ Alumni club listed in this thread. In this post you stated that Jet fans think the Pats get all the breaks. Would you mind listing ANY breaks the Pats have gotten from the NYJ alumni club in the last 15 years. I'd be really interested in just where you think the Pats are getting any "breaks".

Click to expand...

JetFan79 said:

Fill in the blank. The ____________ are the team most associated with cheating lately.

Click to expand...

JetFan79 said:

Breaks for the Pats? Two huge ones I can think of immediately. Tuck rule and burning the spygate tapes.

Click to expand...

JetFan79 said:

Breaks for the Pats? Two huge ones I can think of immediately. Tuck rule and burning the spygate tapes.

Click to expand...

Galeb said:

Your ignorance is showing. The spygate tapes were leaked to the media before they were "burned". You'll never guess which network they were leaked to...

Jane Skinner - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The tuck rule was a dumb rule, and was repealed later, but it was the correct call. Not only that, the Pats lost a game earlier that season as a direct result of the tuck rule.

The quality of your posting has significantly declined.

Click to expand...