Official Brady vs. NFL Federal Court 8/12 Thread (LIVE UPDATES)

[Kdo5]

Amazing that there is even talk of the Dorito Dinks being called into court. If that's the case, so much for Judge Berman wanting nothing to do with this.

I'd rather not have McNally in court. I don't think he did anything but seems like he isn't the brightest bulb.

 

[Deus Irae]

Ok, I read the brief. Kessler, while having more of a flamethrower approach than I generally take in writings, really took the opportunity to re-hash the arguments, and to really pound home the NFL sleight-of-hand:

Wells himself concluded that the scientific consultants’
“analysis of [the halftime measurements] is ultimately dependent upon assumptions and
information that is uncertain.” Ex. 7 at 12. Wells further testified that this “uncertainty” was
because the NFL and referees had no understanding of what data to collect:
What I found in interviewing referees and just witnesses in general is that there
was no appreciation for the Ideal Gas Law and the possible impact that that
might have. And so people didn’t appreciate that if you measured a ball in a hot
locker room and then took it out to a cold field, you have automatic drop.

Goodell leads the Award with a “gotcha!” discussion about Brady purportedly
destroying his phone, never acknowledging that Brady had turned over all of his
emails and all of his phone bills (which demonstrated that Wells already had all
relevant text communications from other sources) or mentioning that it was Brady’s
career-long practice to recycle his phones because of Brady’s privacy concerns.

Goodell found that Brady’s increased communications with Jastremski after the AFC
Championship game “undermine[d] any suggestion that the communications
addressed only preparation of footballs for the Super Bowl rather than the tampering
allegations” (Award 9) when Brady actually testified—at length—that he did discuss
the tampering allegations with Jastremski because he was concerned they were
causing Jastremski considerable stress and he wanted to know what had happened.

Goodell wrote that the NFLPA’s expert, Dean Snyder, “performed no independent
analysis or experiments” (Award 6) when Snyder testified for two hours about the
statistical, regression, and other analyses that his team conducted (Hr’g Tr. 150-227).

Goodell wrote in the Award (at 8) that Brady testified “that the Patriots’ equipment
personnel would not do anything to game balls that was inconsistent with what he
wanted” when Brady actually testified that this is why he “do[es]n’t think anyone
would tamper with the ball” (Hr’g Tr. 147:21-22).

Goodell radically changed Wells’ finding of “general awareness” of purported ball
deflation by others into a conspiratorial “scheme” when the hearing record contains
not a shred of evidence about any such “scheme” that Goodell could cite.21

The NFL's brief should be interesting to compare.

 

[TommyD4207]

Ok, I read the brief. Kessler, while having more of a flamethrower approach than I generally take in writings, really took the opportunity to re-hash the arguments, and to really pound home the NFL sleight-of-hand:





The NFL's brief should be interesting to compare.

I don't know what else they could do, other than pound Section 46 and hope for the best.

 

[raduray]

Didn't say what I "know," just what "I think."

I don't "think" a federal court can compel a witness to appear across state lines without more than a few days notice. In addition, I would imagine there's a lot of paperwork required to compel peoples' presence when they are not named as parties to the proceedings.

I don't think Brady or the NFLPA has asked them to appear and I would imagine that the NFL asking them to appear would be a "hostile" action that would require some due process. But, I could be wrong. What do you think?

What I was implying (poorly) is that all those actions may have already been undertaken, but not revealed publicly. It's also possible that M&J may have agreed to testify without needing to be compelled. Of course, it's also possible that ESPN is once again blowing hot air.

 

[YOUGOTMOSSED]

Ok, I read the brief. Kessler, while having more of a flamethrower approach than I generally take in writings, really took the opportunity to re-hash the arguments, and to really pound home the NFL sleight-of-hand:





The NFL's brief should be interesting to compare.

link? I'm jonesin over here!

 

[PatsFan_Belarus]

Here:
http://thesportsesquires.com/wp-con...Nfl’s-Motion-To-Confirm-Arbitration-Award.pdf

 

[raduray]

The worst they can say is that they checked the inflation levels. There is definitely not enough air missing ,if any is missing at all, to support tampering to gain a competitive advantage.

No. That assumes the IGL accounts for all the deflation, which is what you and I believe. The worst they could say is that McNally deflated the balls in the bathroom, which would leave me devastated and scratching my head.

 

[MuscleCarLover]

If Brady does beat this, I have to call my Vegas guy. I want to bet, say $10,000, that before week 4 Brady is ejected from a game by a referee for some kind of thing (complaining about a call etc). The fix is going to be in fellas.

 

[fnordcircle]

If Brady does beat this, I have to call my Vegas guy. I want to bet, say $10,000, that before week 4 Brady is ejected from a game by a referee for some kind of thing (complaining about a call etc). The fix is going to be in fellas.

Doubt it. Ejections are so rare that it'd take Brady doing something ridiculously stupid to give them a reason to eject him. And I doubt they'd want to give Brady any ammunition for some sort of lawsuit that can show a pattern of harassment/bias that damaged his brand, etc.

 

[Patsfanin Philly]

Any links to NFL memoranda in response to this????? I need a good laugh...

 

[Hoodie]

Holy Cow! Kessler is as fired up as he was in court the other day.

 

[SVN]

Michael McCann ‏@McCannSportsLaw 24m24 minutes ago
New filing by Brady is most direct attack on Goodell yet. Even if judge rules for NFL, you could argue Goodell has already lost Deflategate.

 

[Tony2046]

No. That assumes the IGL accounts for all the deflation, which is what you and I believe. The worst they could say is that McNally deflated the balls in the bathroom, which would leave me devastated and scratching my head.

For me, it is not that it assumes the IGL accounts for all the deflation. It is that it accounts for most of or all of the deflation which is a far cry from the 2 psi = competitive advantage mantra that initiated this whole BS.

The Wells report implies deflation of less than 1/2 psi from the footballs.

That turns this from someone possibly seeking a competitive advantage to someone possibly checking the air pressure in the balls. Even if the latter is true it still makes Brady's claim of not being aware much more believable. The former would indicate a "scheme" which would be tougher to believe that Brady was unaware.

I am not sure if that is a valid point or not but for me personally it is proof that Brady was not trying to gain a competitive advantage or cheat by having the balls deflated 1 or 2 psi rather he wanted his footballs within regulation.

 

[SVN]

Now the media will blame the PA and Brady for becoming inflammatory and not willing to settle

 

[SVN]

Michael McCann ‏@McCannSportsLaw 18m18 minutes ago
Hard to see Tom Brady and Roger Goodell settling after tonight's filing. They seem to be all in. Might as well roll the dice with the judge.

 

[reflexblue]

It's a prosecutor's decision but, again, it's academic because it's not happening.

Usually, in a settlement, the parties issue an agreement that states that it is understood that they are not admitting fault but making a business decision. In criminal proceedings, people plead to lesser charges as part of a deal. I've never heard of a party admitting fault in a civil matter as a condition to settlement and the very notion is absurd IMO.

Yeah, that didn't occure to me, it would be the prosecutor. But i could see those guys pushing for it.

 

[grux]

.Although the NFL now denies that it applied a “generally aware” disciplinary standard, that is exactly what Vincent wrote in his letter imposing the discipline: 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.

Ex. 10 at 1. Vincent’s letter says nothing else about Brady’s alleged involvement in ball tampering. Moreover, Vincent testified that the discipline he imposed rests exclusively on the findings of the Wells Report (supra), which specifically declines to conclude that Brady was directly involved in ball tampering. Wells merely found in his Report “that it is more probable than not that Brady was at least generally aware of the inappropriate activities of McNally and Case 1:15-cv-05916-RMB-JCF Document 40 Filed 08/14/15 Page 9 of 19 7 Jastremski,” and he testified to the same effect at the arbitration. Ex. 7 at 17.7

Despite this record, the NFL now argues that Brady was suspended “for having ‘approved of, consented to, and provided inducements in support of’ ‘a scheme to tamper with the game balls.’” NFL Mot. 8 (citing Award 13, 17-18). But the NFL cites to the Award to make this argument—not to the source of the discipline, i.e., Vincent’s letter and the Wells Report. As the Court observed, the Award accuses Brady of having participated in a “scheme” fourteen times—but the word does not appear once in the 139 page Wells Report or the Vincent discipline letter. This is a clear essence-of-the-CBA violation. As the Article 46 arbitrator, Goodell only had the authority to adjudicate the discipline appealed to him; Peterson establishes that the arbitrator has no CBA authority to justify a suspension on a different basis from that upon which it was imposed. Peterson 15-16

Kessler crushed the NFL on changing the NFL's punishment from being "Generally Aware" to "for having 'approved of, conented to, and provided inducements in support of 'a scheme to tamper with the game balls". Roger and the NFL office are an embarrassment to how a successful organization should be run. The owners shouldn't walk, they should run from Goodell.

 

[SVN]

Christopher Price ‏@cpriceNFL 23m23 minutes ago
NFLPA notes, in bold, that when it comes to player policies, CBA says “First offenses will result in fines.”

 

[raduray]

For me, it is not that it assumes the IGL accounts for all the deflation. It is that it accounts for most of or all of the deflation which is a far cry from the 2 psi = competitive advantage mantra that initiated this whole BS.

The Wells report implies deflation of less than 1/2 psi from the footballs.

That turns this from someone possibly seeking a competitive advantage to someone possibly checking the air pressure in the balls. Even if the latter is true it still makes Brady's claim of not being aware much more believable. The former would indicate a "scheme" which would be tougher to believe that Brady was unaware.

I am not sure if that is a valid point or not but for me personally it is proof that Brady was not trying to gain a competitive advantage or cheat by having the balls deflated 1 or 2 psi rather he wanted his footballs within regulation.

Agree. Paraphrasing another post, cheating to deflate the ball 1/3 to 1/2 psi would be beyond stupid.

 

[SVN]

.Although the NFL now denies that it applied a “generally aware” disciplinary standard, that is exactly what Vincent wrote in his letter imposing the discipline: 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.

Ex. 10 at 1. Vincent’s letter says nothing else about Brady’s alleged involvement in ball tampering. Moreover, Vincent testified that the discipline he imposed rests exclusively on the findings of the Wells Report (supra), which specifically declines to conclude that Brady was directly involved in ball tampering. Wells merely found in his Report “that it is more probable than not that Brady was at least generally aware of the inappropriate activities of McNally and Case 1:15-cv-05916-RMB-JCF Document 40 Filed 08/14/15 Page 9 of 19 7 Jastremski,” and he testified to the same effect at the arbitration. Ex. 7 at 17.7

Despite this record, the NFL now argues that Brady was suspended “for having ‘approved of, consented to, and provided inducements in support of’ ‘a scheme to tamper with the game balls.’” NFL Mot. 8 (citing Award 13, 17-18). But the NFL cites to the Award to make this argument—not to the source of the discipline, i.e., Vincent’s letter and the Wells Report. As the Court observed, the Award accuses Brady of having participated in a “scheme” fourteen times—but the word does not appear once in the 139 page Wells Report or the Vincent discipline letter. This is a clear essence-of-the-CBA violation. As the Article 46 arbitrator, Goodell only had the authority to adjudicate the discipline appealed to him; Peterson establishes that the arbitrator has no CBA authority to justify a suspension on a different basis from that upon which it was imposed. Peterson 15-16

Kessler crushed the NFL on changing the NFL's punishment from being "Generally Aware" to "for having 'approved of, conented to, and provided inducements in support of 'a scheme to tamper with the game balls". Roger and the NFL office are an embarrassment to how a successful organization should be run. The owners shouldn't walk, they should run from Goodell.

This line
"As the Article 46 arbitrator, Goodell only had the authority to adjudicate the discipline appealed to him" is classic irony. The NFL wants the judge to rule only based on the case of CBA policies but they themselves didnt rule only based on the wells report and the appeal hearing data.