Patriots have filed an amicus brief in support of Brady/NFLPA.

[Froob]

No he didn't. He isn't part of the NFLPA's case. The team isn't joining the players association in it's lawsuit against the league.

Amicus curae, by definition, is someone who is not a party to the case.

Can Goodell file an amicus brief with him being a neutral party?

 

[Ivan]

No he didn't. He isn't part of the NFLPA's case. The team isn't joining the players association in it's lawsuit against the league.

Amicus curae, by definition, is someone who is not a party to the case.

Play semantics all you want Ray they weighed in on Bradys side, that's obvious.

 

[Ivan]

If we could know what Belichick will decide before he does and criticize him for it, views on this message board would skyrocket.

View attachment 13067

Nothing stops people from weighing in on issues before decisions are made, the chicken littles tend to wait until after the result is in and then cast blame.

 

[Ivan]

No he didn't. He isn't part of the NFLPA's case. The team isn't joining the players association in it's lawsuit against the league.

Amicus curae, by definition, is someone who is not a party to the case.

Everyone knows this Ray they just weren't interested in parsing.

 

[Ivan]

Can Goodell file an amicus brief with him being a neutral party?

No, just as Brady can't.

 

[Ivan]

I hope you're right! Certainly several legal pundits have said that the CJ being the dissenter does significantly increase the odds of en banc review happening.

I thought the language was really strong and IIRC he presented the scope of it as having ramifications for millions of American workers. I realize the odds make it unlikely but I believe it would be really hard for the other justices to dismiss his concerns and not address an issue with these kinds of ramifications. " oh well, too bad " just doesn't seem to fit here.

 

[QuantumMechanic]

No he didn't. He isn't part of the NFLPA's case. The team isn't joining the players association in it's lawsuit against the league.

Amicus curae, by definition, is someone who is not a party to the case.

Not just that, IIRC the lawsuit is against NFL Executive Management Council specifically and not the NFL more generally.

 

[BTTA]

I want to believe that Kraft actually believes what this filing says. But he's fooled me once, and I'm not going to allow him to do it again. And this entire episode just pisses me off in that it makes me revisit being fooled by him the first time. I'm still grieving the loss of innocence as a Pats fan. This just tears at the scab.

He and the Pats waited until it would have as little impact as possible to do something to try and get the love back from us fans. It is a calculated business move that has nothing to do with true loyalty.

And the idea that Kraft cares about the rights of the American worker is just silly.

The only real question I have is whether Kraft knew this was happening. He may have become just enough disconnected and demented at this point that his son is informing him after the fact on issues like this one.

Sorry to be so grumpy about it.

 

[Ring 6]

For all the Kraft apologists patting him on the back for sweeping in and saving the day ask yourself

Why didn't he testify in Brady's behalf in the appeal when Brady asked him to. Why did he also refuse to testify by phone.

Why did he say he thinks all players that deserve to play should when asked if Brady would play week 1

Where was his amicus during the initial trial

Where was his amicus during the appeal

Do you not find it ironic that he finally acts at a point where an appeal for an en bank hearing is pending when such an appeal historically has a .03% chance of being heard

Seems to me to be a PR move at what appears to be his last chance to make one.

 

[Ring 6]

No he didn't. He isn't part of the NFLPA's case. The team isn't joining the players association in it's lawsuit against the league.

Amicus curae, by definition, is someone who is not a party to the case.

He kind of did because as one of the owners if he NFL he just filed a brief in a case pending against them that unabashedly says they should lose.

 

[Froob]

No, just as Brady can't.

Yeah but Goodell is of the upmost integrity, I think an exception has to be made.

 

[PatsFanSince74]

Let me ask you then. If the footnotes et al gets media attention would that make it more likely or less likely they will read it?

Edit: Let me ask you because you would know better than I.

I'm just guessing here and did say "hopefully" they'd read them but that I wouldn't "bet" on it.

I think that the people who might read this material will be inclined to look at Kraft's motivations for putting it out and choose to ignore or heavily discount it if they read it. And, they all, from the Judges themselves to their ambitious, Ivy League-credentialed clerks, will think that they're a lot smarter than Stradley or media twitterers (emphasis on "think" in the case of Stradley).

The only things weighing heavily in Brady's favor here are Katzmann's strongly expressed views in his Dissent and the presence of Olson, who is an elephant in the room that they can't ignore. If the case still had anything to do with "what actually happened," the Amicus Brief by the group of Physicists would be helpful.

 

[Mike the Brit]

For all the Kraft apologists patting him on the back for sweeping in and saving the day ask yourself

Why didn't he testify in Brady's behalf in the appeal when Brady asked him to. Why did he also refuse to testify by phone.

This comes as news to me. Can you point me to evidence for it, please?

 

[RayClay]

Play semantics all you want Ray they weighed in on Bradys side, that's obvious.

It isn't semantics. You apparently think Kraft can declare himself a player and join a lawsuit against himself, since he is part of the league that appointed Goodel. Fair enough.

 

[Ivan]

I'm just guessing here and did say "hopefully" they'd read them but that I wouldn't "bet" on it.

I think that the people who might read this material will be inclined to look at Kraft's motivations for putting it out and choose to ignore or heavily discount it if they read it. And, they all, from the Judges themselves to their ambitious, Ivy League-credentialed clerks, will think that they're a lot smarter than Stradley or media twitterers (emphasis on "think" in the case of Stradley).

The only things weighing heavily in Brady's favor here are Katzmann's strongly expressed views in his Dissent and the presence of Olson, who is an elephant in the room that they can't ignore. If the case still had anything to do with "what actually happened," the Amicus Brief by the group of Physicists would be helpful.

I have to disagree on this 74, I think Chin and Parker took Bradys guilt for granted and ruled on Goodell's authority from that perspective. Unless they don't leave their robing rooms there is a tidal wave of league duplicity in the mainstream media right now and they have to both be aware of it and considering it in weighing the reliability of the information the league has put forward.

 

[Ivan]

It isn't semantics. You apparently think Kraft can declare himself a player and join a lawsuit against himself, since he is part of the league that appointed Goodel. Fair enough.

Kraft weighed in against the league and in favor of Brady, you want to believe otherwise then go for it.

 

[PatsFanSince74]

Can anyone here find one other example of a professional sports team joining legal action opposing their league on disciplinary action against one of their players.? I can't and as much as many want to dismiss this as insignificant I think it's a major FU to Goodell and the league and I have no doubt the 31 are fuming mad at Kraft for doing this. They told him to stfu and take his medicine and he's telling them to go screw themselves. Good for Kraft, he put his player above his relationship with the other owners and that's the right move in the right direction. I think people should call Patriot Place today and tell them they support this 100%, believe it or not they actually listen. Call and ask for media relations and they will get the message.

508-543-8200

Kraft can't "join the legal action" since he is one of the 32 Owners that comprise the NFL.

I think the brief means that he knows he blew it in San Francisco by trusting the League (as he has said before) and that he knows he has alienated many fans whose loyalties are now primarily to Brady and Belichick rather than to his Franchise.

FWIW, it's my personal opinion, without any basis in fact, that Kraft is sincerely regretful for what he did and for how this has turned out.

I also think that Kraft would be the last person to try to justify what he did. He knows he made a mistake and he knows he can't fix it.

 

[RayClay]

He kind of did because as one of the owners if he NFL he just filed a brief in a case pending against them that unabashedly says they should lose.

He kind of did, if this filing had any legal weight, which i don't think it does.

 

[RayClay]

Kraft weighed in against the league and in favor of Brady, you want to believe otherwise then go for it.

Well, he owns one of the teams, so maybe he filed it in support of his team which could be injured by losing Brady.

 

[Ivan]

Kraft can't "join the legal action" since he is one of the 32 Owners that comprise the NFL.

I think the brief means that he knows he blew it in San Francisco by trusting the League (as he has said before) and that he knows he has alienated many fans whose loyalties are now primarily to Brady and Belichick rather than to his Franchise.

FWIW, it's my personal opinion, without any basis in fact, that Kraft is sincerely regretful for what he did and for how this has turned out.

I also think that Kraft would be the last person to try to justify what he did. He knows he made a mistake and he knows he can't fix it.

I'm aware that was poorly worded but the point remains the same, he weighed in to support Brady. I know the scientists aren't part of the suit etc etc......