Schefter: Giants owner John Mara declines to participate in settlement discussions with Brady, NFL

[1960Pats]

That isn't the point at hand.
Of course judges are human and see things through their own views, but the suggestion was that the NFL refusing to give up anything in negotiations would color the judge to the point where even though the NFL should win, he would rule against them. I find that ridiculous.

Isn't it possible that Berman knows this fiasco is all a load of crap and is giving the NFL a chance for an out before he lowers the boom on them?

 

[BradyFTW!]

That isn't the point at hand.
Of course judges are human and see things through their own views, but the suggestion was that the NFL refusing to give up anything in negotiations would color the judge to the point where even though the NFL should win, he would rule against them. I find that ridiculous.

When the very thing that he's ruling on is whether the league acted outside of its authority in a mad power grab that displayed either a disregard or failure to understand the legal limits of its authority, I think displaying all of those same things in the courtroom could inform Berman's opinion in a pretty significant way.

I agree that it shouldn't be enough to change his decision by itself. If he was clearly going to rule for the NFL, and this really is an open-and-shut case, none of this will change that. But if he's conflicted in any significant way on how to rule, I could easily see this being a not-insignificant weight placed on the "pro-NFLPA" side of the scale.

 

[Ring 6]

I absolutely do believe he will rule and follow the law and facts. Im not saying he will rule with bias. What Im saying is that how he perceives he is treated in his "role" will affect his analysis, it is human nature and the NFL asked him for this. Any judge can rule "legally", there are many ways to do it and I do think he will rule legally. I still believe it is impossible to take away the human element. Good conversation.

Of course there is human element, humans are involved.
But the suggestions were that he would punish the NFL for not wanting to settle.
As I said should he punish Brady for not considering admitting guilt to just make it go away.

While it would certainly include a great amount of stupid it is entirely possible the NFL believes its own case.

Here is the case:

Roger Goodell is an honest man that both the NFL and NFLPA agreed would be a good arbitrator for disputes between them. He has no reason to be bias, and by Federal law his decision is not subject to review.
The rules say Goodell makes this call and no one can substitute their own judgment for his as he is the agreed upon authority.

If you step back and assume they believe that, why would a judge expect them to settle?

Of course they don't really believe it but if they can convince the court of it, they have unlimited power over the NFLPA so why would they willingly give that up?
The judge has not said YOU MUST SETTLE He said work hard to settle, if its even possible. Under no circumstances is he telling wither said give in even if you are sure you will win, or I will punish you for it.

 

[5thRing-Hunt]

Mara should call Goodell and say "hey man the judge is calling me and asking me to do your job. Do your job"

 

[Ring 6]

Isn't it possible that Berman knows this fiasco is all a load of crap and is giving the NFL a chance for an out before he lowers the boom on them?

Sure. That doesn't mean the NFL refusing to settle is the reason he rules in Brady's favor.

 

[Ring 6]

When the very thing that he's ruling on is whether the league acted outside of its authority in a mad power grab that displayed either a disregard or failure to understand the legal limits of its authority, I think displaying all of those same things in the courtroom could inform Berman's opinion in a pretty significant way.

So you are saying that if the NFL offered a 2 game suspension and Brady said no I won't accept any suspension because I am innocent, then he would find against Brady because he wasn't deferring to the power the NFL has in the CBA and therefore must be sanctioned?
Brady's willingness or unwillingness to settle has zero impact on the ruling, and the same goes for the NFL.
The judge is simply not going to say: I was concerned that maybe you were arrogant in the appeal, and since you are arrogant in my court, you lose!!!

I agree that it shouldn't be enough to change his decision by itself. If he was clearly going to rule for the NFL, and this really is an open-and-shut case, none of this will change that. But if he's conflicted in any significant way on how to rule, I could easily see this being a not-insignificant weight placed on the "pro-NFLPA" side of the scale.

Totally disagree. He will rule on the facts, not say its too close so I will pick who I like better. I know you aren't saying it that way, but, thats what it amounts to.

 

[Brewskies]

So you're saying the letter in which he "respectfully declines" to participate doesn't exist, except in the imagination of the NFL and various reporters?

That's what was said on Sirius XM Radio on the NFL stations around 10 AM in open discussion by moderators.

 

[Brewskies]

I must tell you that I have had the truck since September 2014 and it has 5000 miles and my wife's car is a 2015 since February with 3000 miles and she won't let me listen to NFL sport Radio on Sirius XM so I have limited listening but most of what I have reported has bee 100% on. So I conclude they don't say stuff that's not true. Could be wrong, just my experience.

 

[BradyFTW!]

So you are saying that if the NFL offered a 2 game suspension and Brady said no I won't accept any suspension because I am innocent, then he would find against Brady because he wasn't deferring to the power the NFL has in the CBA and therefore must be sanctioned?
Brady's willingness or unwillingness to settle has zero impact on the ruling, and the same goes for the NFL.
The judge is simply not going to say: I was concerned that maybe you were arrogant in the appeal, and since you are arrogant in my court, you lose!!!


Totally disagree. He will rule on the facts, not say its too close so I will pick who I like better. I know you aren't saying it that way, but, thats what it amounts to.

No, that's not even close to what I'm saying.

 

[Ring 6]

No, that's not even close to what I'm saying.

Replace Brady with NFL and I am innocent with 'we know he did it and it puts a stain on the integrity of game and we cannot tolerate giving an inch' and that is what you are saying.

In other words, the feeling that the judge will rule based upon one sides performance at the negotiation table is wishful thinking from the standpoint that the NFL has no reason to stand firm because Brady didn't do it.

Whether or not the belief that giving anything up is unacceptable is based upon actually being right or just believing you are is inconsequential here. A judge will not alter his ruling based on the confidence shown by either side.

 

[flasox27]

Funny how Mara and Rooney had no problems advising Goodell to destroy the tapes that would have shown how ridiculous the penalty for camera placement was or organizing the whitewash report when Goodell was in trouble regarding the Rice fiasco along with Goodell's buddy Kraft. Now when it could benefit the Pats, his hands are tied.