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

[Ivan]

Allowing the briefs is another small victory, fortunately they are adding up.

 

[Tony2046]

Allowing the briefs is another small victory, fortunately they are adding up.

I'll bet the NFL is already working on their reply.

 

[Ivan]

I'll bet the NFL is already working on their reply.

They should be but hubris runs strong in the league office.

 

[SHOWTIME15]

I'll bet the NFL is already working on their reply.

They will reply and get law professors and scientists to file amicus briefs to counter ours.

 

[Brady_to_Moss]

Still expect the suspension..hope i am wrong but we will see i guess soon

 

[Ivan]

They will reply and get law professors and scientists to file amicus briefs to counter ours.

Good luck with that. No reputable scientist has weighed in to support Exponent. Leterko claimed they did but when challenged to produce links he couldn't provide one.

It's more likely they will reiterate their "Article 46" argument and find some corporate lawyers to counter the AFL-CIO brief.

 

[SHOWTIME15]

Good luck with that. No reputable scientist has weighed in to support Exponent. Leterko claimed they did but when challenged to produce links he couldn't provide one.

breaking news: bill nye the science guy files amicus brief supporting NFL

 

[Ivan]

breaking news: bill nye the science guy files amicus brief supporting NFL

On a serious note its one thing to hire a lab to get the result they want for a heavily biased Wells Report but that's not going to fly for an amicus brief.

 

[letekro]

Good luck with that. No reputable scientist has weighed in to support Exponent. Leterko claimed they did but when challenged to produce links he couldn't provide one.

It's more likely they will reiterate their "Article 46" argument and find some corporate lawyers to counter the AFL-CIO brief.

Get off my jock. The one post you are referring to was corrected within minutes as I realized that the support from the scientific community came before the Exponent Report had been properly analyzed.

 

[Gumby]

If Brady wins en banc, the NFL will go to the USSC, with the blessing of a substantial number of the owners. The owners are itching to take down the Patriots, and they will not stop now.

So FREAKIN what. SCOTUS decides what cases DESERVE to be decided. No supreme in his right mind would take on gotohell's appeal, let alone 4. roger can ring the doorbell all he wants, it is a private party and he has no invite.

I facetiously-humorously asked earlier in the thread , but for you and any of the other posters who keep saying gotohell will take it to SCOTUS: give me one solid argument that would necessitate SCOTUS to take his appeal?

There is already plenty of precedent/cases that establish arbitrator authority. Repeating that is unnecesary. Taking the case just to revalidate the brady side /lower court ruling just isnt done. And if they take it, that means they believe not just one but ALL FIVE of the below arguments against gotohell are completely wrong (if they agree with any one of the pro-brady arguments, they have no reason to take a gotohell appeal on the case), that is, they would be saying:

1. the IGL is ******** and uncontrolled data can support whatever math an arbitrator wants
2. arbitrators can make up crimes not in the CBA
3. arbitrators can make up punishments different from previously applied (even recent or same season) and different from those stipulated in the CBA
4. arbitrators dont have to at least pretend to be fair/impartial
5. arbitrators dont have to share discovery or information with both sides in the appeal

That just doesnt seem likely they would agree with all five (and that was just my layman's shorthand that probably left out some of Feinberg's arguments)

 

[SVN]

They will reply and get law professors and scientists to file amicus briefs to counter ours.

But since they file last, they can spit all kinda lies like they did last time. Clement is competent enough to handle this i fear.

 

[aluminum seats]

Still expect the suspension..hope i am wrong but we will see i guess soon

Important fact to remember: these judges are human. Of course the vast majority of cases aren't heard en banc--why would they vote to hear something their peers already dealt with? It's more work for them, it's already done, what's the point.

This is the NFL...Tom Brady...Super Bowls, Super Models...you see? They want to be involved with this one. And their top dog was voted down. He wants another crack at this...and judges--being human--talk.

They're going to vote to hear this.

 

[PatsWickedPissah]

By that thinking Giselle should have field a "brief" as in the context of Super Models.

 

[The Gr8est]

By that thinking Giselle should have field a "brief" as in the context of Super Models.

I don't know, that may be seen as bribing the judges.

Maybe it would be alright if the "briefs" were in a vacuum-sealed bag.

 

[Deus Irae]

So from all the things I have read Olson is a closer right, you don't make a call to the bullpen and bring a closer to the field on the 7th inning.

My question is, was the appeal that Kessler ****ed up already Olson's territory or was still 7th inning?

Kessler, while not having a great day himself, got a bad judge draw. It's really that simple.

 

[bormio]

This is the NFL...Tom Brady...Super Bowls, Super Models...you see? They want to be involved with this one. And their top dog was voted down. He wants another crack at this...and judges--being human--talk.

They're going to vote to hear this.

I still think the odds are long, but I have this feeling these judges WANT this case. Who wouldn't want a chance to pontificate on the best sports legal case in ages? Get their 15 minutes of fame and all that. Now if we could just tell them Giselle would be in the courtroom.

 

[JMC00]

Well so much for all the "they never take en bancs" stuff

 

[JMC00]

Still expect the suspension..hope i am wrong but we will see i guess soon

Decent chance it won't be this year though or at least the first 4 games, whatever way the en banc goes it's going to the supreme court and Brady will get a stay because he's fighting those 4 games.

 

[Mack Herron]

He's all over the place today.

 

[ausbacker]

Good luck with that. No reputable scientist has weighed in to support Exponent. Leterko claimed they did but when challenged to produce links he couldn't provide one.

It's more likely they will reiterate their "Article 46" argument and find some corporate lawyers to counter the AFL-CIO brief.

I'm curious as to why you haven't blocked the fool?