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

[RobertWeathers]

Brady's mistake with the phone was telling them he got rid of it. He should have just said they can't have it, he is not handing it over and they have no right to ask.

I do think it is very believable that Brady simply asked M&J to make sure that another 16 PSI situation never happened again and then McNally took care of it and prepped them accordingly every game if they felt "wrong". It's a theory that fits perfectly with the text messages and the other evidence. It also fits with Brady's vague "I don't think so?". And who knows - maybe McNally got carried away once or twice. Anyone who calls this cheating is like calling a jaywalker a lawbreaker.

But if that was all true then it's odd that Wells wasn't told about it.

It doesn't matter. It never mattered how Tom could have couched it. Brady could have told them that he gave the phone to his son or to those serving in the military so they could call home to use and the NFL would have deemed him not being cooperative.

Keep in mind this is the same group that told the media and the world that Brady destroyed his phone when he did no such thing.

 

[QuantumMechanic]

Kraft is supporting Brady to the best of his ability. It's not his job to do it, but he's a just man, apparently. He's obviously paying the hourly salaries of those top-notch lawyers. The PA ain't paying them and I know the Bundchen-Bradys ain't paying that kind of money either.

Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight. What do I need to consume to visit your world?

For one thing, how many more draft picks do you want NE to lose? What you claim would be a blatant, unambiguous violation of the salary cap rules.

 

[DaBruinz]

I will be as objective as possible on the subject, because nobody is innocent in this situation.

Kraft is supporting Brady to the best of his ability. It's not his job to do it, but he's a just man, apparently. He's obviously paying the hourly salaries of those top-notch lawyers. The PA ain't paying them and I know the Bundchen-Bradys ain't paying that kind of money either. We can argue about their net worth being in the millions, but it's not like they got millions waiting in the bank. These celebs have years of expenses, huge bills, taxes and they splurge on overpriced random stuff, just like everybody else. They are budgeting and living on borrowed funds, they just do it on a higher scale. Even Overpaid-ton Manning claims he won't sue AJ and listed legal expenses as one of the reasons.

WOW. You're already off to a piss poor start. You claim to be objective, but you show your clear bias against rich people in general. Budchen rakes in 100M a year. Brady brings in 10M a year. I guarantee you that Brady and Budchen could fund the budget of a host of 3rd world countries with what they have stored away.. Yes, they have some lavish expenses, but you acting like are living in debt is ridiculous. The NFLPA and Brady, together, are paying for the lawyers

Manning isn't going to sue Al-Jazeera because they've closed their doors and because he's guilty as sin and doesn't want his reputation tarnished by the truth coming out.

It's Kraft paying Brady back for all those pay-cuts that he's taken over the years. Though I would consider Kraft's business relationship with Brady (referring Patriot players to TB12 center) a bonus. He probably doesn't even charge Brady rent for that joint.

Unfortunately for you, those would both be direct violations of the CBA and Salary Cap. And they would cost the Patriots far worse if they were found out.

It's Kraft using his influence to allow the Washington Post to inform the sheep-like public and defend Brady. Anybody actually believe Brady has that type of pull?

So, your claiming that Sally Jenkins is a Robert Kraft shill? ROFLMAO..

Kraft used his money to fund the website that shredded the Wells Report.

WOW. You finally got something correct. Guess what they say about blind squirrels is true.

Kraft used his influence to try and have Brady sell out the ball boys and take a game for lack of cooperation. It's the best deal Brady's going to get. Yet his conscience wouldn't allow it.

Umm.. wrong again, boyo.. Kraft wasn't a part of these negotiations. And if Kraft was going to sell out the ball boys, why would they still have jobs??

It's Kraft who sacrificed the fine and loss of picks to protect his QB from being suspended, but the deciding or influential parties of the 31 decided that Brady was going down.

Kraft, like myself, seems like a man uncertain of Brady's guilt or innocence, but Brady has taken it this far, so what does it mean? It shows that this losing battle can somehow convince the public and some media that he's innocent. His lawyers have made this more about the cba, than about his innocence. Is this a ploy to distract the public from his actual guilt? Everybody loves the story of a hero taking down the big, rich and powerful machine. Luke Skywalker vs Darthvader and Death Star. I can't even recall them ever using the word "innocent" in any of their arguments to defend their client. If Brady defeats the league on the grounds of the Goodell abusing his power, then he will be celebrated among the masses, he will once again be a winner and the fact that he deflated balls, even if he did it, will be irrelevant and forgotten.

Ted Wells claimed, during a phone interview, that Brady was guilty. Yet we've heard that Pash edited the report and more than likely changed Wells's finding to "more probable than not," to make Brady's innocence 49% possible. He was protecting Brady and the 32, before Brady went rogue and decided to protect some part-timers, who may or may not have deflated balls for him.

I'm still curious about McNally's role with the balls, because from my understanding his position doesn't even require him to pump balls or anything like that. So what was he doing with the balls?

This leads me to believe that they may deflate balls, during some games, but didn't deflate them against the Colts. The league have known this for years, but didn't care and now, outside of hearsay, they can't prove it.

Here is the crux of the issue. Your understanding of the entire situation is lacking.
McNally is responsible for delivering the balls to the officials for inspection prior to the game. He is also responsible for taking the balls from the officials locker room to the field and back again. While on the field, he's responsible for providing officials with a new ball during Patriots possessions.

Since you clearly didn't read the Amicus Curiae brief from the 21 Physicists and engineers. Based on the temperatures provided by the league for the start of games going back to 1960, they found that anywhere from 38% to 85% of the league balls would be out of spec during game play. So, your belief is ********.

Brady got in the way of the Make-Luck-A-Superstar campaign and the league is punishing him for it. They tried to blow up some minor infraction, that they can't prove because they didn't consider nature. The PA will save this argument for last because a more informed person could argue that it wasn't cold enough to affect ball pressure, but then again they didn't record the initial ball pressure. Now they look like fools. Brady is, to their shock, fighting the allegation.

I don't think anybody is innocent in this matter. The NFL made their plans to go after Brady obvious, when they exonerate the coaches from scheme. No way Brady played with deflated balls without Belichick's knowledge.
Brady's phone situation is suspect, though, Im sure it has more to do possible infidelity, drugs or something to ruin the illusion of his clean-cut image than deflating a ball. If he's innocent, he should've just been up front about it during the investigation, but he was hiding something, and it made the guilt claims credible.

Sorry, but I can't, for a second, believe you were objective in your post. Not with the amount of bias you clearly have..

 

[Tony2046]

Lol is this about the NFL appeal? Nothing anybody said was going to win that appeal. Even a recorded convo of Goodell admitting it's a sham.

I agree. Was just stating that Andy was not completely off base when stating that they called Kraft. I understand that Roger had already convicted Brady and that the appeal was just for procedural purposes.

Question: What recorded convo? I must have missed that.

 

[DaBruinz]

Giving a hug sounds like blanket approval to me........

Roger Goodell, Patriots' Robert Kraft reportedly hug it out; could they resolve Deflategate penalties?


Roger Goodell and Patriots owner Robert Kraft already have met, spoke and even hugged, per an industry source who witnessed it.

— Adam Schefter (@AdamSchefter) May 19, 2015

You know. You'd make a lot more sense if you didn't bring up an incident that happened BEFORE the Arbitration hearing, before the case in front of Berman and before the 2CA Ruling.

The quote I pointed to happened March of 2016. Your incident is from May of 2015. Things clearly changed..

 

[Tony2046]

Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight. What do I need to consume to visit your world?

For one thing, how many more draft picks do you want NE to lose? What you claim would be a blatant, unambiguous violation of the salary cap rules.

You choose.

 

[DaBruinz]

According to Steph Stradley, the Pats are NOT part of the suit but rather a 'Friend of the Court' and in essence providing information and viewpoints that the court may find helpful.

Once thing unsaid here is that I think the legal fees the NEP and Bob are starting to climb up there. Granted I'm sure some of this is coming from The Kraft Group/NEP in-house legal but they must have shelled out a good $2-300k+ maybe even more to Goldberg and Morgan, Lewis. Thats a drop in the bucket for him but still substantial.

Why would the NEP and Bob have legal fees beyond having the Amicus Curiae brief done and whatever they had incurred last year from having counsel present for McNally and Jastremski? My guess is that everything except the brief was covered by the retainer they're on..

 

[RobertWeathers]

Why would the NEP and Bob have legal fees beyond having the Amicus Curiae brief done and whatever they had incurred last year from having counsel present for McNally and Jastremski? My guess is that everything except the brief was covered by the retainer they're on..

I was thinking specifically about the Wellsreportincontext. But to your point, yes. assuming they aren't on retainer I bet that cost them about $100k at a minimum.

 

[MagicMarker]

I think the brief was really a shot across the bow.

If the goal now (finally) of Kraft is to get rid of Goodell, how many votes does he need?

The rules probably say 17, but in most organizations like this, the commissioner will have 80% support, or he'll have 20. And, if he has 80% and the other 20% are adamantly against him, the other 80% might decide it's not worth if to keep defending him.

This brief called Goodell a liar. How can a team do that and still support him?

 

[Jackson 2]

I think the brief was really a shot across the bow.

If the goal now (finally) of Kraft is to get rid of Goodell, how many votes does he need?

The rules probably say 17, but in most organizations like this, the commissioner will have 80% support, or he'll have 20. And, if he has 80% and the other 20% are adamantly against him, the other 80% might decide it's not worth if to keep defending him.

This brief called Goodell a liar. How can a team do that and still support him?

Kraft has one vote: his own. Out of the rest of the owners, he'd maybe get 2 more, if that. They like Goodell. It's Kraft they dislike.

 

[Tony2046]

I think the brief was really a shot across the bow.

If the goal now (finally) of Kraft is to get rid of Goodell, how many votes does he need?

The rules probably say 17, but in most organizations like this, the commissioner will have 80% support, or he'll have 20. And, if he has 80% and the other 20% are adamantly against him, the other 80% might decide it's not worth if to keep defending him.

This brief called Goodell a liar. How can a team do that and still support him?

Saw this while wondering how many teams support Goody.

Roger Goodell is very powerful. Here's which NFL team owners have his ear. (Link)

 

[RobertWeathers]

Saw this while wondering how many teams support Goody.

Roger Goodell is very powerful. Here's which NFL team owners have his ear. (Link)

eflateGate has driven a wedge between the pair, but Kraft sees Goodell like a son and enjoys having a hand in running the league; those who know both men predict the rift will be brief

Not anymore.

Bob has his own category now. Enemy

 

[Kontradiction]

You know. You'd make a lot more sense if you didn't bring up an incident that happened BEFORE the Arbitration hearing, before the case in front of Berman and before the 2CA Ruling.

The quote I pointed to happened March of 2016. Your incident is from May of 2015. Things clearly changed..

They also gave each other a nice, tight embrace on the field at Met Life when the Pats played the Giants this past season. So there's that too.

 

[sb1]

From a post a while back:
On this week’s edition of Kirk Minihane’s “Enough About Me” podcast, Sirius XM radio host Chris “Mad Dog” Russo said he has spoken with nine NFL owners who told him that the Deflategate discipline handed down by commissioner Roger Goodell was more about punishing Patriots owner Robert Kraft than it was suspending quarterback Tom Brady.

“They want to get TV ratings,” Russo told Minihane, who then proceeded to spell out the thought process of the owners he spoke with.

“’Do you think we want Goodell to suspend the best player in the league? Its star? For the first four games of the regular season, which includes a game against the Cowboys and the first opening Thursday night game of the year?

“‘We got Kraft. We don’t like Kraft. We got him already. We nailed him for a million dollars, and he lost a first-round pick and a fourth-round pick. And we made sure that Kraft did not appeal it because we all bombarded him at the owners’ meetings and said ‘Bob, you’ve got no support here. Do what you have to do. You have no support. Nobody is going to back you up.’”

He added: “So Kraft took the sword and that was the end of it. ‘We didn’t need Brady, too. We got Kraft.’ ”

So maybe Bob woke up, saw the writing on the wall and realizes he does not have the pull that he thought he did. Who knows. Better late than never I guess but this would have been way more helpful a year ago.

 

[RobertWeathers]

From a post a while back:
On this week’s edition of Kirk Minihane’s “Enough About Me” podcast, Sirius XM radio host Chris “Mad Dog” Russo said he has spoken with nine NFL owners who told him that the Deflategate discipline handed down by commissioner Roger Goodell was more about punishing Patriots owner Robert Kraft than it was suspending quarterback Tom Brady.

“They want to get TV ratings,” Russo told Minihane, who then proceeded to spell out the thought process of the owners he spoke with.

“’Do you think we want Goodell to suspend the best player in the league? Its star? For the first four games of the regular season, which includes a game against the Cowboys and the first opening Thursday night game of the year?

“‘We got Kraft. We don’t like Kraft. We got him already. We nailed him for a million dollars, and he lost a first-round pick and a fourth-round pick. And we made sure that Kraft did not appeal it because we all bombarded him at the owners’ meetings and said ‘Bob, you’ve got no support here. Do what you have to do. You have no support. Nobody is going to back you up.’”

He added: “So Kraft took the sword and that was the end of it. ‘We didn’t need Brady, too. We got Kraft.’ ”

So maybe Bob woke up, saw the writing on the wall and realizes he does not have the pull that he thought he did. Who knows. Better late than never I guess but this would have been way more helpful a year ago.

I'm a little confused here but what did TV ratings have to do with it? Just the buzz over the whole thing? Why not call the dog off TB12 if ratings would get hurt?

 

[bbobbo]

I'm a little confused here but what did TV ratings have to do with it? Just the buzz over the whole thing? Why not call the dog off TB12 if ratings would get hurt?

their point was that they wanted to get Kraft and not Brady, and not having Brady on the field for the first four games would lower the ratings.

 

[RobertWeathers]

their point was that they wanted to get Kraft and not Brady, and not having Brady on the field for the first four games would lower the ratings.

Yea I got that part but if the concern was no TB would hurt ratings, and the owners theoretically have Goody on a marionette string, why was he suspended?

 

[bbobbo]

Yea I got that part but if the concern was no TB would hurt ratings, and the owners theoretically have Goody on a marionette string, why was he suspended?

i see what you're saying. in the interview, Russo basically implied that the nine owners he spoke to didn't want Goodell to go after Brady because they were satisfied that they got Kraft.

at 33:47

Ep. 7: Chris "Mad Dog" Russo

 

[The Brandon Five]

They also gave each other a nice, tight embrace on the field at Met Life when the Pats played the Giants this past season. So there's that too.

 

[cmasspatsfan]

To clarify to those observing, so that my words aren't misinterpreted by anyone else please note the following.

The quote "Kraft and Brady could have discussed it and Brady may have agreed that he didn't need to call in." contains the words could and may. Both words are conditional and are merely expressing a possibility.

Not only did I say "When the range of what happened could be anything from an outright betrayal to amicable consensus, such distinctions matter." directly before that sentence, it is followed two sentences later by suggesting the opposite may have occurred, " Conversely Brady could have strongly requested Kraft be there and the NFLPA was able to guilt an affidavit out of him."

The paragraph ended with this quote, "The simple fact is, we don't know. Only to those that have already made up their minds, do such distinctions not matter.", the same admission I've been making throughout the argument.

Please draw your own conclusions about

No, but he is one who upholds his commitments. Considering we don't know what was doing on the day before, how could you say that he would have returned the day earlier? Hell, for all we know, he was attending a funeral the day before the Brady's Arbitration hearing.

So, who are you really to say what he should have done?

And for all we know Tom and the NFLPA may have told him not to change his plans, that trip is very important to him. Bottom line is we just don't know.

i see what you're saying. in the interview, Russo basically implied that the nine owners he spoke to didn't want Goodell to go after Brady because they were satisfied that they got Kraft.

at 33:47

Ep. 7: Chris "Mad Dog" Russo

If that was the case they would have lowered or dropped Tom's suspension. Maybe there's some truth to what mad dog is saying but not sure I believe every word.