PFT: Brady authorized NFLPA to appeal to Supreme Court

BTTA · Jul 18, 2016

Froob said:
Not ovah yet?

Wait. The NFLPA was the official body pushing this all along. If they are continuing what they were doing, does Brady's announcement mean anything at all, other than to cause the first four opponents to fixate on Garappolo?

QuantumMechanic · Jul 18, 2016

betterthanthealternative said:
Wait. The NFLPA was the official body pushing this all along. If they are continuing what they were doing, does Brady's announcement mean anything at all, other than to cause the first four opponents to fixate on Garappolo?

It means that Brady will be suspended on known dates, known well in advance.
It means Brady won't have to go into the season having to wonder (and stress about) possibly being suspended on any given day, with no notice.
It means Brady can put the whole thing past him and mentally check out of all the legal stuff and concentrate 100% on football.

BTTA · Jul 19, 2016

QuantumMechanic said:
It means that Brady will be suspended on known dates, known well in advance.
It means Brady won't have to go into the season having to wonder (and stress about) possibly being suspended on any given day, with no notice.
It means Brady can put the whole thing past him and mentally check out of all the legal stuff and concentrate 100% on football.

That speaks directly to the question I'm asking. Prior to Brady saying he was going to serve his suspension, these things were in play, as I understand them:

1. This was the NFLPA's case, not Brady's. They were pursuing it out of their own interests, with Brady's support. But they were the drivers, including legally.
2. The NFLPA will continue to do what it was doing. Brady's decision has no bearing on their legal process.
3. That legal process had the hope of getting a stay from the Supreme Court that would have kept Brady on the field until they decided.

So why isn't that stay still a possibility, just as it was before?

That's my question. Brady's "I'll serve my suspension" statement seems to have no bearing on the legal process moving forward.

IllegalContact · Jul 19, 2016

Froob said:
I disagree, the general public is incredibly stupid. They'll still blame Brady.

which would make the pile of money from punitive damages all that much bigger

IllegalContact · Jul 19, 2016

QuantumMechanic said:
It means that Brady will be suspended on known dates, known well in advance.
It means Brady won't have to go into the season having to wonder (and stress about) possibly being suspended on any given day, with no notice.
It means Brady can put the whole thing past him and mentally check out of all the legal stuff and concentrate 100% on football.

it cuts both ways.......at this point, some things were conceivably unavoidable and cutting your losses in one regard (sitting weeks 1-4 instead of later in the year or playoffs) becomes a huge pink elephant should future proceedings find fault with Goodell's process.......the punitive damages from that scenario would dwarf any penalties to date.....

I wonder if there's anything brewing in the back room to lessen the suspension in return for dropping the whole thing....probably too late for that now, but the league may be smart to make a trade for some non-disclosure

IllegalContact · Jul 19, 2016

betterthanthealternative said:
That speaks directly to the question I'm asking. Prior to Brady saying he was going to serve his suspension, these things were in play, as I understand them:

1. This was the NFLPA's case, not Brady's. They were pursuing it out of their own interests, with Brady's support. But they were the drivers, including legally.
2. The NFLPA will continue to do what it was doing. Brady's decision has no bearing on their legal process.
3. That legal process had the hope of getting a stay from the Supreme Court that would have kept Brady on the field until they decided.

So why isn't that stay still a possibility, just as it was before?

That's my question. Brady's "I'll serve my suspension" statement seems to have no bearing on the legal process moving forward.

defamation....in the end, it could be the biggest prize of them all

PatsFanSince74 · Jul 19, 2016

jmt57 said:
I wanted to put this somewhere and wasn't sure where. Since this is a comment from PFT (I know, I know), I'll place it here.

For backdrop, there is someone in the comment section that keeps stating that the Ideal Gas Law is easily refuted. After multiple back and forths, Einstein finally got around to explaining why that is so.

Um, OK. Try to keep up son. The Ideal Gas Law only applies to Ideal gasses. Footballs are filled with atmosphere. Atmosphere is a mixture of gasses and not a Ideal gas. A mixture of GASSES are not a Ideal GAS. See the difference between single and plural? It’s really not that hard of a concept.

I'm not sure if this person is trolling or serious, but it may be the most hilarious football-related comment I have read since that guy here years ago who insisted that he knew more about football than other forum members since he was one of the highest rated Madden players in the country.

Sorry, not trying to hijack this thread.... but I had to share.

Kraft supports Brady, slams “flawed and biased” investigation

If he's trolling, he is possibly the single most original and even brilliant Troll I have ever read. It reads like a piece that John Oliver would do.

If he's serious, he is no doubt the dumbest idiot on the face of the earth. Either that, or he is the person who wrote the Wells Report...which, come to think of it, is more or less the same thing.

SHOWTIME15 · Jul 19, 2016

what's the best case scenario now? brady misses 4 games, but Goodell loses at the Supreme Court?

slash83 · Jul 19, 2016

TommyBrady12 said:
what's the best case scenario now? brady misses 4 games, but Goodell loses at the Supreme Court?

Unless Roger gets fired or ends up in prison there is no best case scenario imo.

QuantumMechanic · Jul 19, 2016

betterthanthealternative said:
That speaks directly to the question I'm asking. Prior to Brady saying he was going to serve his suspension, these things were in play, as I understand them:

1. This was the NFLPA's case, not Brady's. They were pursuing it out of their own interests, with Brady's support. But they were the drivers, including legally.
2. The NFLPA will continue to do what it was doing. Brady's decision has no bearing on their legal process.
3. That legal process had the hope of getting a stay from the Supreme Court that would have kept Brady on the field until they decided.

So why isn't that stay still a possibility, just as it was before?

That's my question. Brady's "I'll serve my suspension" statement seems to have no bearing on the legal process moving forward.

1) They are only the "drivers" to the extent Brady lets them be. He could have dropped out of the case completely (which would have ended it) whenever he wanted as the federal courts don't (and can't) issue advisory opinions. Without Brady asking for the suspension to be voided (or, now, to get back his $235,000) there is no case.

2) That's correct, unless Brady decides he wants the case to completely go away.

3) The stay never stopped being a possibility. (And technically it still is a possibility -- there's no deadline to ask for a stay other than the overall deadline for asking SCOTUS to hear the case). Brady simply said he was not going to ask for a stay because (presumably) he doesn't want to take the risk of being suspended during the playoff drive or in the playoffs.

QuantumMechanic · Jul 19, 2016

TommyBrady12 said:
what's the best case scenario now? brady misses 4 games, but Goodell loses at the Supreme Court?

And Brady gets back his pocket change $235,000. But yeah, you're correct.

Ring 6 · Jul 19, 2016

betterthanthealternative said:
That speaks directly to the question I'm asking. Prior to Brady saying he was going to serve his suspension, these things were in play, as I understand them:

1. This was the NFLPA's case, not Brady's. They were pursuing it out of their own interests, with Brady's support. But they were the drivers, including legally.
2. The NFLPA will continue to do what it was doing. Brady's decision has no bearing on their legal process.
3. That legal process had the hope of getting a stay from the Supreme Court that would have kept Brady on the field until they decided.

So why isn't that stay still a possibility, just as it was before?

That's my question. Brady's "I'll serve my suspension" statement seems to have no bearing on the legal process moving forward.

Bradys announcement meant he will not seek a stay. The case won't have any chance of being heard before he serves the suspension.
I do not agree with not pursuing the stay, but other than that, nothing really changed.

RecoveringCowboy · Jul 19, 2016

RelocatedPatFan said:
Joker, you are in the general public, but you're not within 3 standard deviants of the mean.

Having said that, don't ever change.

XLIX · Jul 19, 2016

TommyBrady12 said:
what's the best case scenario now? brady misses 4 games, but Goodell loses at the Supreme Court?

As far as these proceedings go, yes, that is the best case scenario, especially if it included a strongly worded rebuke from a united Supreme Court.

My "short term" best case scenario is CA8 rules in favor of Peterson, creating a split-circuit.

XLIX · Jul 19, 2016

QuantumMechanic said:
3) The stay never stopped being a possibility. (And technically it still is a possibility -- there's no deadline to ask for a stay other than the overall deadline for asking SCOTUS to hear the case). Brady simply said he was not going to ask for a stay because (presumably) he doesn't want to take the risk of being suspended during the playoff drive or in the playoffs.

I'm not saying you're wrong, but this contradicts something I have read. I read that Brady has to ask CA2 for a stay before asking the USSC, and he only has 7 days from the decision not to hear en banc to do that (meaning he only has until tomorrow). He has to be denied a stay by CA2 before petitioning the USSC for one.

Timing issues like these are not something I know much about so I really have no insight on what's right and what's wrong, just passing on something I read.

Jlaff · Jul 19, 2016

Glad some people cleared up what I was kinda thinking, that is that the case is still going to be argued on Brady's behalf. It was Brady v NFL wasn't it? Seemed to me you had to have a willing plaintiff to proceed.

QuantumMechanic · Jul 19, 2016

XLIX said:
I'm not saying you're wrong, but this contradicts something I have read. I read that Brady has to ask CA2 for a stay before asking the USSC, and he only has 7 days from the decision not to hear en banc to do that (meaning he only has until tomorrow). He has to be denied a stay by CA2 before petitioning the USSC for one.

Timing issues like these are not something I know much about so I really have no insight on what's right and what's wrong, just passing on something I read.

As I understand it (and as my lawprof friend tells me) you can actually ask for a stay at any time before the case is final -- the deadlines we've read about are actually deadlines on when the CA2 order goes into effect and by when you can ask SCOTUS to hear the case. But those deadlines with respect to stays only matter if you want to keep the adverse decision from ever taking effect. With this case it doesn't matter if the adverse decision takes effect for a while. It only matters if it is blocked from taking effect from September 11 through February 5. Thus this case is different from many others is that a stay is not immediately time-sensitive. It's not like he'll be executed immediately if there's no stay. Or like some historic building will be destroyed tomorrow without a stay. With those kind of cases it is vital that the adverse order never be allowed to go into effect until you've exhausted your appeals, because if the adverse order goes into effect for even a day, you're screwed. That's not the case here.

So the CA2 mandate will issue and Berman will dissolve his order, freeing the NFL to enforce the suspension come September. But say something happens that causes Olson to think they had a good shot at a stay. Then he could ask CA2 for a stay and if that's denied then ask RBG/SCOTUS for a stay and if either request were granted that would unwind things and put Berman's order blocking the suspension back in place. Of course, since Brady announced he wasn't seeking a stay that will make it a lot harder (IMHO) to ever get one because a court will say to itself "you're on record as saying you're not interested in one and now you've changed your mind? We have a tough time seeing 'irreparable harm' given your earlier decision."

XLIX · Jul 19, 2016

QuantumMechanic said:
It's not like he'll be executed immediately if there's no stay.

According to the NFL, they could have ordered that if they wanted. You know, Article 46 and all.

adam941 · Jul 19, 2016

="So the CA2 mandate will issue and Berman will dissolve his order, freeing the NFL to enforce the suspension come September. But say something happens that causes Olson to think they had a good shot at a stay. Then he could ask CA2 for a stay and if that's denied then ask RBG/SCOTUS for a stay and if either request were granted that would unwind things and put Berman's order blocking the suspension back in place. Of course, since Brady announced he wasn't seeking a stay that will make it a lot harder (IMHO) to ever get one because a court will say to itself "you're on record as saying you're not interested in one and now you've changed your mind? We have a tough time seeing 'irreparable harm' given your earlier decision."

Does 'irreparable harm' change just because he's willing to accept it under certain circumstances?

Could someone confirm the following as a possible scenario?

NFLPA asks for cert and it is granted prior to week 4 (granted that seems fast). Couldn't Brady or the NFLPA request a stay at that point since a hearing and decision wouldn't be until well after the end of this season? If the decision eventually goes against him, he'd be looking at the first four of the '17 season.

PFT: Brady authorized NFLPA to appeal to Supreme Court

BTTA

He/Him

QuantumMechanic

Burn it all down!

BTTA

He/Him

IllegalContact

PatsFans.com Retired Jersey Club

IllegalContact

PatsFans.com Retired Jersey Club

IllegalContact

PatsFans.com Retired Jersey Club

PatsFanSince74

PatsFans.com Supporter

SHOWTIME15

No asterisks

slash83

Veteran Starter w/Big Long Term Deal

QuantumMechanic

Burn it all down!

QuantumMechanic

Burn it all down!

Ring 6

PatsFans.com Supporter

RecoveringCowboy

In the Starting Line-Up

XLIX

Pro Bowl Player

XLIX

Pro Bowl Player

Jlaff

Early Bird Specials

QuantumMechanic

Burn it all down!

XLIX

Pro Bowl Player

adam941

On the Roster

Similar threads