Why "it was repealed on procedure" is BS

[Seacoast Fan]

The NFL was sloppy, reckless, and deceitful at every stage of this entire process. The judge was only allowed to rule on the back half of it, but his feelings are clear.

So... he wasn't able to exonerate Brady on the facts, and the Patriots will not be able to win the Stanley Cup. Both of these are true, because neither outcome is part of their jobs.

You are correct that the judge made his feelings clear. If he could have ruled on the facts there is no doubt he would have totally exonerated Brady.

 

[MagicMarker]

The cleared on a technicality statement is true, but misleading.

I continue to wonder whether even though the NFL has filed for appeal, they ever actually go ahead with it. But, then, the NFL (and I think it's Goodell that drives this) is not rational.

They set up everything the way the wanted it -- leaking and not correcting false PSI, leaking an investigatory document calling it independent but edited by the NFL -- both putting Brady in the worse possible light. Then, controlling the appeal process -- again leaking false information and timing the ruling to appeal in the court of their choice.

They still lost.

If they appeal and win, even in their best result, I think a new appeal hearing is ordered with an independent arbitrator. I don't think the Wells Report can withstand independent scrutiny. Once all of the details come out -- that it was a witch hunt and important details were omitted -- the NFL looks worse.

I don't see any upside for the NFL and a whole lot of downside. They should try to get Brady to pay a $50,000 fine for non-cooperation in return for dropping the appeal. Brady might do it just to make this go away forever and the NFL could claim some small victory.

But, the NFL will never miss an opportunity to miss an opportunity.

 

[QuantumMechanic]

His assertion that Kraft "consented" to the findings of the Wells Report isn't just false.

You sure about that? I'm thought that in Kraft's cheese-eating surrender monkey speech in May he actually did say something about accepting the Wells Report.

 

[QuantumMechanic]

If they appeal and win, even in their best result, I think a new appeal hearing is ordered with an independent arbitrator.

The NFL's best result, should they win, is for CA2 to overturn Berman on the points he reached, decide to consider the points Berman didn't reach (they are allowed to do that, though it is unusual) and find for the NFL on those as well, and uphold the suspension and end the case.

The more likely thing, should they win, is for CA2 to overturn Berman on one or more of the things he reached an remand it back to him for "further proceedings consistent with this ruling". At that point Berman would go forward on the things he hadn't reached. That could result in upholding the suspension, vacating be remanding for re-arbitration (no guarantee Goodell would be prohibited from being the arbitrator -- if Berman doesn't find evident partiality Goodell likely will be allowed to be the arbitrator again), or vacating and barring re-arb.

What I'm curious to know is if the litigation would still be bound by the stipulation made by both parties that only the arbitration record would be considered, or if that stipulation can be revoked unilaterally by a party and discovery taken as part of the hearings into the remaining items.

 

[Ice_Ice_Brady]

I oversaw my wife watching Inside Edition. As far as these tabloid (but influential) shows go, all that they say is "Brady WON!" I love it.

 

[Koma]

I unfortunately was exposed to Doyel's filth when I picked up a copy of USA Today in a hotel lobby yesterday.

His assertion that Kraft "consented" to the findings of the Wells Report isn't just false.

It's childish.

If my opinion of Doyel was low before, it couldn't get any lower now.

Don't forget that Doyel keeps sinking to lower and lower depths in his behavior, so your opinion could change in the future

 

[raduray]

Here's the challenge. Many are saying that Brady got off on a technicality and never proved his innocence. But the NFL denied Brady a fair and impartial review of the charges. Even so, the “ Independent” Wells report was ambiguous at best (quotes are Berman’s). By the time we got through the Goodell appeal charade and to Berman's courtroom, it was no longer permitted to litigate what had actually happened to the footballs; the charges were no longer on the table and Brady was only allowed to argue process. Berman's ruling eviscerated Goodell's process and the "independent" investigation. That ruling confirms that he was denied the opportunity for a fair hearing. What else can Brady do at this point to prove his innocence, something one shouldn't need to do in America?

 

[captain stone]

Mac & Yaz say that they didn't deflate footballs post-inspection, but can't prove that they didn't.

The NYJFL says that they did indeed deflate footballs post-inspection, but can't prove that they did.

Real science says that deflation occurred, but only by the amount generally expected under the IGL, assuming that game balls were originally inflated to the lowest legal limit.

Unless Mac & Yaz admit guilt, then people's conclusions - one way or the other - have been drawn and nothing will ever, ever change them. It now just is what is.

 

[RunAmok]

I guess if you consider there was no factual evidence that any rules were broken and that the whole process was sham a technicality. Then yes TB got off on a technicality.

Tom Brady is guilty of being Tom Brady and that is enough for these idiots to want him punished.

 

[Bobs My Uncle]

If Judge Berman had even hinted that he used the evidence as part of his decision he would have essentially increased the NFL's chances of winning the appeal. Glad he did not do that.

I see Volin jumped on the "doesn't prove his innocent" bandwagon. Took him two days to latch onto the "appeal was about procedure" angle. I mean, c'mon, don't we all already know that?

Meanwhile, if Berman had ruled for the NFL, the unquestionable consensus would have been that that proves Brady's guilt.

If the judge had said he was innocent in the ruling, it would have been overturned on appeals and then they would just scream SEE THE APPEALS COURT SAID HE WAS GUILTY. Constantly moving the goal posts makes it impossible to argue with these people. Berman made it very clear during the two hearing transcripts that Brady was innocent.

So, this is why Berman ruled that "the court finds the arbiters finding as fact" ... or something to this effect?

Can someone clue me in on why it might not have been in Brady's best interest if Berman had ruled on the innocence component in this fiasco?

 

[Brady2Moss]

So, this is why Berman ruled that "the court finds the arbiters finding as fact" ... or something to this effect?

Can someone clue me in on why it might not have been in Brady's best interest if Berman had ruled on the innocence component in this fiasco?

I am not a lawyer, but basically this was a CBA issue as opposed to a trial regarding the facts of the case. Judge Berman could only rule on whether Roger Goodell violated/overstepped his collectively bargained powers as punisher/arbiter. If Berman said Brady was innocent was part of his decision it would open the ruling up to being overturned on appeal since that is not the issue that was to be ruled on.

Instead Berman made it blatantly clear that brady was innocent during the hearings by getting the NFL to admit they had no direct evidence, and then found iron clad, inarguable violations of the CBA to rule for Brady based on "procedure", for example the failure to give Brady notice or the ability to question Pash.

 

[IcyPatriot]

I'm on to Pittsburgh ............

 

[TheFlyingWedge]

The owners should learn from this pattern and hire a commissioner who either understands law, is a better delegator, or is willing admit they don't know what they are doing.

Goodell just looks like a controlling micromanager who doesn't know what he's doing.

 

[Bobs My Uncle]

I am not a lawyer, but basically this was a CBA issue as opposed to a trial regarding the facts of the case. Judge Berman could only rule on whether Roger Goodell violated/overstepped his collectively bargained powers as punisher/arbiter. If Berman said Brady was innocent was part of his decision it would open the ruling up to being overturned on appeal since that is not the issue that was to be ruled on.

Instead Berman made it blatantly clear that brady was innocent during the hearings by getting the NFL to admit they had no direct evidence, and then found iron clad, inarguable violations of the CBA to rule for Brady based on "procedure", for example the failure to give Brady notice or the ability to question Pash.

Thanks. I understand that Berman's role was not to judge Brady's guilt or innocence but rather to judge whether or not the NFL fairly administered article 46 of the CBA during the investigation and punishment process. I also understand that Berman didn't feel the need to have to rule on guilt for he had enough ammunition to vacate on process alone.

I suppose what I am wondering is what harm could have been (potentially) done by him judging on both, process and guilt?

 

[tuckeverlasting]

I see Volin jumped on the "doesn't prove his innocent" bandwagon. Took him two days to latch onto the "appeal was about procedure" angle. I mean, c'mon, don't we all already know that?

Meanwhile, if Berman had ruled for the NFL, the unquestionable consensus would have been that that proves Brady's guilt.

berman may not have ruled on brady's guilt or innocence but he definitely judged on it.

 

[TruthSeeker]

The owners should learn from this pattern and hire a commissioner who either understands law, is a better delegator, or is willing admit they don't know what they are doing.

Goodell just looks like a controlling micromanager who doesn't know what he's doing.

Goodell is much worse than that. He blatantly lies and manipulates the facts to his chosen agenda. He hasn't a clue as to what due process is all about. He is arrogant and temperamental when he doesn't get his way. He is arbitrary and capricious. I could go on but that's enough.

 

[RelocatedPatFan]

I saw a spot on CNN where their "Sports Analyst" said Brady got off on a technicality and Berman never said he was innocent. The media can't even do their job with the number of people at CNN to go beyond the surface headlines of other news organizations. It's really pathetic and it will be carried and ratified by the masses who only want to try to lift themselves up by putting others down.

 

[tigerjohn]

One of the problems with the process not facts argument is that the entire Wells Report was a series of judgements based on shaky circumstantial evidence. We haven't seen the totality of the evidence available, which could in fact lead objective observers (even those who now doubt the Patriots) to conclude that it 's more likely than not that there is not cheating. The reason the NFL's process violations are a problem is if they can't hold a fair hearing, why should we believe that they came to a fair conclusion? While the courts make no official judgement on whether the NFL made a fair conclusion Judge Berman clearly believed they hadn't based several statements (particularly footnotes) in the opinion. Why anyone would belive that the the Wells report is a fair representation of the evidence is beyond me. This of course ultimately is why those "technicalities" are important: if the Brady team had access to the interview notes (the totality of the evidence) and if they could cross-examine Pash who helped author the report it may have made it harder for the arbitrator to rule as he did.

 

[DarrylS]

Perhaps all of this shows the soft underbelly of the lazy media and their need to appeal to and appease the masses, rather than think... not sure it is as appealing to intelligently discuss why Brady won from a legal point of view.. saying it was procedure is the easy way out.

Without regard ESPN et al will subtly imply this for years to come.. this will not go away for a long time.

 

[MassPats38]

This was always an issue of procedure. It was never going to be a full blown trial. Even if it were a civil trial somehow limited to proving Brady ordered this alleged misconduct (not really possible), then a win would still be considered buying a verdict in the eyes of many (How many believe OJ killed his wife after a "not guilty" verdict?).

The only substantive issue involving fact-finding that could come up here is on the question of the Commissioner's bias. A finding there would only mean that Brady was prejudged, not that he is innocent.

Let the haters hate. You will never convince them otherwise, no matter how irrational their claims may be. They need an answer as to why their teams suck and never win, other than the response because their teams suck and that is why they never win. The media will cater to those self-pitying clowns through these storylines. Many of us here lived through the 'Patsies' years, so I will apologize for nothing in this amazing run of success. I could accept then that the difference turned on teams winning because they were better on the field and better coached. It is simply not worth conversing with any fan who cannot accept that fact now.