Mike Reiss on What it Would Take for Zero Games For Brady

[BTTA]

Might wanna put in that this is what you think he should say. People might think it's real.

Done.

 

[BingoBrown]

Did Brady lose any endorsements ?

 

[BTTA]

Did Brady lose any endorsements ?

Losing, and having them damaged, are both in play here. If that's where Brady and his attorney's are heading, then I suspect they are quietly doing market research right now to gather evidence of the damage done.

 

[SVN]

Goodell wants to speak 1 on 1 with Tom. Which will never happen now. Even if brady wants a compromise, the NFLPA will want this in the courts and try and use this chance as taking the commissioner a peg down. Its now a bigger game of politics between the NFL and NFLPA and brady maybe stuck in the middle.

Plus as reiss said in another chat

Nick (Chapel Hill, NC)


Mike, I have seen you make the point several times that you can't believe the commish has allowed Brady's reputation to be tarnished like this. What is your honest assessment as to why he allowed it to happen? For me, the only logical conclusion is that in order to cover up a shoddy process on the part of the NFL, he allowed a hall of famer to be thrown under the bus. It was all about making the NFL look good and not expose anything unseemly. Thoughts?

Mike
(3:55 PM)


Nick, my feeling on that is that the people working under Goodell were so aggressive the night of the AFC title game, and I believe they had no knowledge of the science of footballs losing air pressure as they launched their investigation. Because of that, they created a situation that was bigger than it really was. To acknowledge that would be embarrassing, but they got so far down the road, they simply couldn't turn back. That brings me to Ted Wells' remarks that the league wouldn't want to bring down one of its star players. Consider the alternative: "You just spent $5 million of your money on my investigation and what I've found is that you completely overreacted." Hmmm, I wonder what the league would have preferred between those two.

NFL has no way to save face and now disregard the wells report.

 

[flasox27]

Kraft will be able to easily cover that for a number of reasons.
1 - He won't have to pay 1/4 of Brady's salary in 2015.
2 - He won't have to pay a 1st round pick in 2016.
3 - He won't have to pay a 4th round pick in 2017.
4 - He'll save the $10 an hour he was paying the two employees that were let go.
5 - The lawyer's fees will be much less than if he fought the NFL.
Am I missing anything?

I think you overestimate Kraft's liquidity. His actress--dancer (LOL) girtlfriend's time must be expensive.

 

[IllegalContact]

Unfortunately I think Kraft and the team accepting penalties goes a long way to stopping this. Is it slander if the team did something that right or wrong Tom's name got dragged into?

the interesting thing is that kraft accepted the penalties even though the report exonerates both owner and coach........are you really telling me that they're pinning the whole team portion of this on a couple of guys who barely make minimum?

kraft's decision to not fight the penalty even though he disagrees with it has nothing to do with whether or not anyone actually did anything.

Why is it that nobody has bothered to ask Kraft to get into the details of why he accepted a punishment even though he disagreed with it......just because he has no recourse with his owner friends? now we are walking back to the whole thing about collusion

I don't think people realize in how many different directions this whole thing can mushroom......collusion, damages for endorsees.....this portion of the iceberg stands to be bigger than whether or not the NFLPA can make good on it's stance that Goodell is overstepping his authority.

I'd like to see Tony Romo make some noise about the whole fantasy thing in vegas.......at some point players have to make a move to gain back more control over their own endeavors

 

[IllegalContact]

Goodell wants to speak 1 on 1 with Tom. Which will never happen now. Even if brady wants a compromise, the NFLPA will want this in the courts and try and use this chance as taking the commissioner a peg down. Its now a bigger game of politics between the NFL and NFLPA and brady maybe stuck in the middle.

Plus as reiss said in another chat

NFL has no way to save face and now disregard the wells report.

Goodell needed to speak to Tom 1 on 1 back in February........there is no practical grounds to have any conversation after the penalty has been handed down outside of a convo between Goodell and Kessler about how many different positions Kessler can use to f*ck Goodell....Goodell keeps talking about 'new info' and Brady's phone because that's the only place where anything could possibly exist that could give him anything other than a complete beating

I think the reality is that the Goodell is in a position of such stupidity that he has to go all the way crossing both fingers that some smoking gun shows up.

I know this is not the court of law, but it is the USA and 'guilty until proven innocent' will never hold up

I'd love to see the invoice for the $5M spent on the report........that in itself seems to be some criminal activity out of the movie 'The Firm'

 

[TheRightTool]

From your lips to God's ears. If there were an icon for "I hope you're right," I'd have clicked it for your post, but you'll have to settle for a "Useful."

Troy Vincent's suspension letter in itself has to be a form of libel. He took this statement from the Wells Report which is nothing more than opinion...

"Based on the evidence, it also is our view that it is more probable than not that Tom Brady (the quarterback for the Patriots) was at least generally aware of the inappropriate activities of McNally and Jastremski involving the release of air from Patriots game balls."

...and turned it into a statement of fact.

"With respect to your particular involvement, the report established that there is substantial and credible evidence to conclude you were at least generally aware of the actions of the Patriots' employees involved in the deflation of the footballs and that it was unlikely that their actions were done without your knowledge."

He even doubled down on that statement towards the end to suggest that Brady had full first hand knowledge of any wrong doing, which is a far cry from being "at least generally aware."

 

[RobertWeathers]

I beg to differ. I don't put any thing past Kraft now after his last pathetic display. I firmly believe if the POS told him to pressure Brady for the good of the league he would without a second thought. Kraft does what he thinks is best for him and the league. Anything else including the team and the fans is not even in the picture sadly.

Yea. If I had heard it to be true it would not be surprising.

 

[RobertWeathers]

As with UGG, Brady has an equity stake in the company as well.

Thats the thing...he not only has endorsement contracts, but also benefits from the company's financial performance.

 

[lurker1965]

The suspension cannot be increased.

and we all KNOW that Goodell NEVER does what he can't. It had to be heard in ten days, and an "independent"(or whatever) arbiter has to be named, etc.

They used the assumed values such as time frame, a master gauge, rain temperature etc to manipulate their findings far enough to get a conclusion of "more probable than not". IF their time frame was off by 2-4 minutes, or if they were incorrect assuming that Walt used the non logo gauge, or if the temperature of the rain was 38 deg F and not the assumed 48 deg, or if they analyzed the effects of evaporation, or or or or ....they would have came to a conclusion of "not possible" . But this whole investigation started as a result of destroying the evidence to begin with. They took the footballs in question off of the field. That was all the evidence they would ever need to prove quilt but instead they re-inflate the footballs essentially destroying the evidence. They definitely got caught off guard at the very beginning. They measured the Patriots footballs on the sideline and thought "aha, we got em" without ever knowing anything about some gas law or how weather would cause deflation. They then take the footballs into the locker room and shockingly realize that some of the colts footballs were also deflated below regulation. They probably tested all 12 of the colts footballs but decided to keep those additional readings to themselves because it would be more damning to their silly little sting operation. What a bunch of crap. Take this to court because even in a wore case scenario this report is weak.

To shorten your paragraph. We assume all the Colt balls were 13 psi, per the best recollection in the Wells report. When tested they should be about the same reading. The four recorded were not. (Yes, even by the same ref using the same gauge.) Therefore they were not all 13 psi. The data is useless.

 

[Jackson 2]

I forget where I read it, and it may be wrong, but I do not think he can make it larger. Of course, he had to hear it in ten days, etc.

He had to hear it within 10 days unless the he and the union agreed to go beyond, which evidently was the case.

 

[PatsFanSince74]

Troy Vincent's suspension letter in itself has to be a form of libel. He took this statement from the Wells Report which is nothing more than opinion...

"Based on the evidence, it also is our view that it is more probable than not that Tom Brady (the quarterback for the Patriots) was at least generally aware of the inappropriate activities of McNally and Jastremski involving the release of air from Patriots game balls."

...and turned it into a statement of fact.

"With respect to your particular involvement, the report established that there is substantial and credible evidence to conclude you were at least generally aware of the actions of the Patriots' employees involved in the deflation of the footballs and that it was unlikely that their actions were done without your knowledge."

He even doubled down on that statement towards the end to suggest that Brady had full first hand knowledge of any wrong doing, which is a far cry from being "at least generally aware."

You might be right, as I am not a Lawyer. But, it's my understanding that the bar for proving "libel" in the case of a public figure is pretty high. Someone else has already observed that this is not a case that would get tossed before being heard, but I think it would be difficult to prevail.

If this were a Debate and I were asked to take a side, whether I agreed with it or not, I could make a pretty strong argument that "more probable than not that Tom Brady...was at least generally aware..." is not that different a statement than "there is substantial and credible evidence to conclude that you were at least generally aware of..." In other words, I'd make the argument that Vincent's statement says that there's a lot of evidence but the evidence isn't definitive...in other words, it's "more probable than not."

So, I think you'd have a hard time making the case that that amounts to "libel," even if I happen to agree that Vincent's use of language was biased, unfair and took the definition of "more probable than not" to its limit.

PS: please don't attack me for agreeing with Vincent. I clearly do not and anyone who's read my posts out here for the last few weeks knows I do not. I'm just arguing a narrow point of language and the standard for "libel" in the case of a public figure.

 

[Rob0729]

The suspension cannot be increased.

It is still more likely that it gets increased than Goodell puts it to zero games.

And don't count out Goodell finding "new evidence" of cheating or Brady "lying" and increasing the punishment. He did that to Ray Rice.

 

[lurker1965]

You might be right, as I am not a Lawyer. But, it's my understanding that the bar for proving "libel" in the case of a public figure is pretty high. Someone else has already observed that this is not a case that would get tossed before being heard, but I think it would be difficult to prevail.

If this were a Debate and I were asked to take a side, whether I agreed with it or not, I could make a pretty strong argument that "more probable than not that Tom Brady...was at least generally aware..." is not that different a statement than "there is substantial and credible evidence to conclude that you were at least generally aware of..." In other words, I'd make the argument that Vincent's statement says that there's a lot of evidence but the evidence isn't definitive...in other words, it's "more probable than not."

So, I think you'd have a hard time making the case that that amounts to "libel," even if I happen to agree that Vincent's use of language was biased, unfair and took the definition of "more probable than not" to its limit.

PS: please don't attack me for agreeing with Vincent. I clearly do not and anyone who's read my posts out here for the last few weeks knows I do not. I'm just arguing a narrow point of language and the standard for "libel" in the case of a public figure.

I agree, that's why I'd like to see Kraft, or Brady, back the defamation suit of Doritos Dink McNally (or Jastremski) Seriously, the guy has a decent case, IMO. (No, I'm not a lawyer.)

 

[1960Pats]

the interesting thing is that kraft accepted the penalties even though the report exonerates both owner and coach........are you really telling me that they're pinning the whole team portion of this on a couple of guys who barely make minimum?

kraft's decision to not fight the penalty even though he disagrees with it has nothing to do with whether or not anyone actually did anything.

Why is it that nobody has bothered to ask Kraft to get into the details of why he accepted a punishment even though he disagreed with it......just because he has no recourse with his owner friends? now we are walking back to the whole thing about collusion

I don't think people realize in how many different directions this whole thing can mushroom......collusion, damages for endorsees.....this portion of the iceberg stands to be bigger than whether or not the NFLPA can make good on it's stance that Goodell is overstepping his authority.

I'd like to see Tony Romo make some noise about the whole fantasy thing in vegas.......at some point players have to make a move to gain back more control over their own endeavors

It really is amazing the way the owners have control over the players, when they are the ones we're paying to see play. It's why I have no confidence in the NFLPA.

 

[Jackson 2]

It is still more likely that it gets increased than Goodell puts it to zero games.

And don't count out Goodell finding "new evidence" of cheating or Brady "lying" and increasing the punishment. He did that to Ray Rice.

It can't be increased. Knock yourself out trying to rationalize your mistake. I'm, once again, not looking to engage in a war here. And, by the way, I agree with you that there is no chance the suspension is reduced to zero games. My point is that Goodell can reduce it to zero, but can't increase it. Neither will happen in my opinion.

 

[Deus Irae]

If this were a Debate and I were asked to take a side, whether I agreed with it or not, I could make a pretty strong argument that "more probable than not that Tom Brady...was at least generally aware..." is not that different a statement than "there is substantial and credible evidence to conclude that you were at least generally aware of..." In other words, I'd make the argument that Vincent's statement says that there's a lot of evidence but the evidence isn't definitive...in other words, it's "more probable than not."

You couldn't make a "pretty strong argument", at all. There is not, despite Vincent's claim, "substantial and credible evidence to conclude you ( you being Tom Brady) were at least generally aware of the actions of the Patriots' employees involved in the deflation of the footballs".

That's pretty much the whole point.

 

[JoeSixPat]

Did Brady lose any endorsements ?

I think in any civil case you'd simply be stating a fair market endorsement earnings estimate for a guy like Brady

Then you'd simply make the matter of fact case that unjustly being slandered and libeled as a "cheater" is going to have a certain percentage impact

I think any judge or civil jury would have a tough time denying that a "scandal" of this magnitude had a negative impact. "How much" is the only question.

 

[FredFromDartmouth]

Zero games out for Brady is really not that important. Losing the first round pick is way, way more damaging (and totally undeserved).