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

[5thRing-Hunt]

People keep saying they fear that the judge will side with the NFL solely because the cba gives the the authority. Ok but doesn't the cba also say that Goodell has to give a "fair" appeal? Because the nfl's own lawyer said today that there is no evidence that brady conspired to do anything with footballs on the game in question. So I don't think it would be considered fair to punish brady based on a report that they acknowledge doesn't have any evidence of wrongdoing.

 

[NEPats1]

Schefter and Sal Paolantonio:

http://espn.go.com/boston/video/clip?id=13424357&ex_cid=espnapi_public

 

[Patsfanin Philly]

I don't know if anyone pointed it out, but Mike Reiss just did on Twitter. Kessler took a shot at Ted Wells with his the most overblown story in 40 years comment because Wells said that not giving over his cell phone was one of the most illadvised decisions he saw in his 40 year career.

See post #580

 

[YOUGOTMOSSED]

I want to like today's action but I just can't get my heart into it given that things have broken against NE at every single decision point in this entire debacle

My big worry is that:
(a) Berman knows Brady got royally screwed
(b) But he feels that law + CBA language will force him to rule for NFL.
(c) Therefore he's being tough with the NFL to try to push things towards a just outcome (i.e. settlement mostly in Brady's favor) because if he's forced to render a decision he knows he will not be able to provide such an outcome.

While I'm not a labor law expert, I find it hard to believe that a CBA can simply allow this sort of discipline absent real proof of actual wrongdoing. With Rice and Peterson, there was no dispute as to whether or not they committed the acts they were disciplined for. Punishing someone without any real proof (and wildly inconsistent with prior punishments for proven equipment violations) is the definition of arbitrary.

Thus, I can't really see Berman ruling, "I don't see any proof of wrongdoing but my hands are tied by the CBA" as many seem to think.

 

[FourierSeries]

I want to like today's action but I just can't get my heart into it given that things have broken against NE at every single decision point in this entire debacle

My big worry is that:
(a) Berman knows Brady got royally screwed
(b) But he feels that law + CBA language will force him to rule for NFL.
(c) Therefore he's being tough with the NFL to try to push things towards a just outcome (i.e. settlement mostly in Brady's favor) because if he's forced to render a decision he knows he will not be able to provide such an outcome.

Uh, things have gone against Brady because Goodell has been in charge...until now.

There's no way this will end well for the league.

 

[FirstAndGoal]

People thought the same thing regarding the bountygate players and peterson and nfl ended up losing those.

Strong argument

Bountygate was overturned by an arbitrator (Tagliabue) and they did find the coaches guilty. This is a judge who is ruling a labor issue under an umbrella policy... huge difference.

Tagliabue was ruling as an NFL arbitrator about the fairness of the penalties. This judge is presiding over whether the NFL has the legal authority to do it. Not even close to the same thing.

 

[MuscleCarLover]

I agree with a few of the people here about today: it was a fun and good day but what this judge is "supposed" to rule on is not really much about what was discussed today. IMO he was showing the NFL that in a real court, they would have been laughed out. Now for a few % points of revenue, the NFL players signed off on a CBA agreement that was so stupid it really blows one's mind. Brady's best shot is that the Judge:
- pressures NFL on their stance on Wells Report (he did that today)
- pressures NFL on arbitrator issue in next hearing. Look article 46 says the NFL can do what they want, but there is some legal jargon there about consulting the NFLPA. They clearly objected to Goody being the arbitor (written submitted argument) so maybe that has weight.

IMO barring this judge getting a little froggy, it's still a hard sell he would vacate the suspension. I think it's clear today he feels the NFL is full of chit and does what they want, but that's not the issue before him UNLESS he sees such blatant miscarriage of justice he feels forced to act. I don't think many judges feels forced to do much in the summertime. Its vacation season.

By then end of next week and after missing time during practice, Brady may well have missed much of training camp and all the preseason games. Add a fine of say $250K and lets say it's all even. Coach B is more angered by players missing time than anything, and that Brady sketch was so bad, is that not punishment enough?

 

[FirstAndGoal]

While I'm not a labor law expert, I find it hard to believe that a CBA can simply allow this sort of discipline absent real proof of actual wrongdoing. With Rice and Peterson, there was no dispute as to whether or not they committed the acts they were disciplined for. Punishing someone without any real proof (and wildly inconsistent with prior punishments for proven equipment violations) is the definition of arbitrary.

Thus, I can't really see Berman ruling, "I don't see any proof of wrongdoing but my hands are tied by the CBA" as many seem to think.

When the CBA says Goodell can be the judge, jury, and executioner, it may tie Brerman's hands.

Look, no one is saying it's fair and I'm not saying it's going to happen that way. I'm just saying that fairness may not be at the heart of Berman's ruling if and when it happens.

I'm just not going to be surprised either way and I'm sure he will make his reason for the decision clear.

 

[ViperGTS]

People keep saying they fear that the judge will side with the NFL solely because the cba gives the the authority. Ok but doesn't the cba also say that Goodell has to give a "fair" appeal? Because the nfl's own lawyer said today that there is no evidence that brady conspired to do anything with footballs on the game in question. So I don't think it would be considered fair to punish brady based on a report that they acknowledge doesn't have any evidence of wrongdoing.

Agreed. It's what I've been saying all along. The CBA doesn't allow you to act with malice or deceit. They need to be truthful and honest. Without that, the CBA and article 46 are useless. I don't see a federal judge letting a person walk out of the courtroom being suspended from his job combined with the loss of millions with no evidence. That would set a dangerous precedent. If the NFL had said here is the evidence clear as day it would be over, and whatever punishment Goodell handed out would be unfortunately unassailable.

Anyone who cannot grasp that concept has zero ability to comprehend the judicial system or freedoms in general.

 

[YOUGOTMOSSED]

When the CBA says Goodell can be the judge, jury, and executioner, it may tie Brerman's hands.

Look, no one is saying it's fair and I'm not saying it's going to happen that way. I'm just saying that fairness may not be at the heart of Berman's ruling if and when it happens.

I'm just not going to be surprised either way.

If Berman thinks Brady is being screwed, Kessler has given him the legal basis he needs to hang his hat on. I won't buy any Pontius Pilate "wash my hands" explanation that he had no option.

 

[JJC]

This is why I shake my head when someone on a national TV or radio show talks about the "homer" media in Boston. This is the top (or one of the top two) paper in the state supporting the NFL in a witch hunt against a Patriots QB. Not really a bastion of homer-ism.

Tthe Boston Globe was owned by the New York Times until 2013. They paid $1.1B for it. They finally sold it for $70M. That's a 93.6% loss for those New Yorkers. LOL!

 

[raduray]

I want to like today's action but I just can't get my heart into it given that things have broken against NE at every single decision point in this entire debacle

My big worry is that:
(a) Berman knows Brady got royally screwed
(b) But he feels that law + CBA language will force him to rule for NFL.
(c) Therefore he's being tough with the NFL to try to push things towards a just outcome (i.e. settlement mostly in Brady's favor) because if he's forced to render a decision he knows he will not be able to provide such an outcome.

Granted the CBA grants Goodell broad power. But, can he use this power to suspend a player for a bad haircut? One would think not, but what would be the legal rationale for overturning that? And wouldn't that rationale be extended to apply to Brady.

 

[QuantumMechanic]

FWIW...

Michael McCann‏@McCannSportsLaw
Alan Milstein, who's litigated against NFL and tried cases before Judge Berman, told me: “Berman will absolutely vacate Brady's suspension.”

 

[FirstAndGoal]

If Berman thinks Brady is being screwed, Kessler has given him the legal basis he needs to hang his hat on. I won't buy any Pontius Pilate "wash my hands" explanation that he had no option.

What legal basis are you talking about?

The argument is whether Goodell overstepped his authority under one policy and the NFL is saying that's not the policy he's being punished for. There's legal disagreement but what's the "legal basis" for a Brady win? I don't see this as a clear case either way.

 

[patsfan13]

McCann on today's proceedings

http://www.si.com/nfl/2015/08/12/deflategate-federal-hearing-tom-brady-roger-goodell-patriots

 

[Big-T]

Couldn't Berman just over rule everything and say due to insufficient evidence the NFL acted unlawfully to suspend Brady in the first place?

 

[nowayback]

myth busted cba is no magic wand for roger goodell

http://www.yardbarker.com/all_sport...agic_wand_for_roger_goodell/s1_12986_19326904

 

[Ivan]

The highlight of the day for the NFL had to be when Berman asked for proof and Dunn shot back that they had none, which was absolute proof of how well Brady conspired. I don't see how that can be argued against, Brady's the GOAT, on that everyone agrees. He's a clever motherf.cker...........

 

[SVN]

I want to like today's action but I just can't get my heart into it given that things have broken against NE at every single decision point in this entire debacle

My big worry is that:
(a) Berman knows Brady got royally screwed
(b) But he feels that law + CBA language will force him to rule for NFL.
(c) Therefore he's being tough with the NFL to try to push things towards a just outcome (i.e. settlement mostly in Brady's favor) because if he's forced to render a decision he knows he will not be able to provide such an outcome.

I think the one strange part is he never question the NFL about their authority or precedence or equipment violation or anything . It was all about their sham investigation. While this exposed the NFL for their lies, maybe he is doing it so that his ruling if made against brady reflects he is only upholding the cba but believes nothing else.
Maybe this will come in the 19th hearing .

 

[RelocatedPatFan]

I'm fairly certain Berman could come up with 20 compelling reasons that Goodell didn't act in a fair manner and he only needs 1.

then there is all the procedural/notifications and changing of the goalposts/what he was guilty of...yeah, plenty of possibilities.