NFL and NFLPA Motions

[Mack Herron]

Here are the source documents:

https://timinhonolulu.files.wordpre...on-to-confirm-arbitration-award-brady-nfl.pdf

https://timinhonolulu.files.wordpre...ion-to-vacate-arbitration-award-brady-nfl.pdf

 

[RunAmok]

I almost threw-up in my mouth reading the NFL's motion.

 

[Big-T]

The dumb asses are trying to pass off the "deflator" text as damning evidence in Federal court? Christ the NFL are stupid.

Also, by not believing what Brady said in the appeal Roger Goodell is accusing him of perjury too.

 

[Ring 6]

Th NFL suspended Tom Brady for being 'at least generally aware' of actions by others in deflating footballs.
This was done by Troy Vincent. The NFLPA says that decision is not valid because only Goodell has that authority. Goodell says he made the decision.
Goodell served as arbitrator. The arbitrator on appeal must decide the correctness or incorrectness of the decision.
Goodell 'upheld' the penalty because Brady participated in a scheme to deflate footballs and bribed those who did it.
In other words, during the appeal Goodell, the arbitrator heard the Brady argument that 'generally aware' is not an acceptable standard for punishment, so Goodell the commissioner changed his decision, but did it as arbitrator.
That is no bueno, and totally invalidates the decision.

There are numerous other issues including the rule he was penalized under changing, the fact that Vincent says he was penalized on Wells findings solely, and the whole independence thing.

In essence what happened is a judge found a defendant guilty of murder, it was appealed (to the same judge) and proven that there was no basis for the verdict, but the judge noticed the defendant jay walked on tape, so he upheld the conviction and sentence.

 

[borg]

 

[Fencer]

You're right, but you're not. What you're right about is that you've highlighted one of several strong reasons for saying Goodell operated in a way that was arbitrary and unfair.

The case still boils down to:

Brady/NFLPA -- This was clearly unfair, for multiple reasons.

NFL -- That may appear to be the case, but Article 46 says that the Commissioner is the sole judge of fairness.

Either the judge buys that argument from the NFL or he doesn't. (I think he won't, for reasons like those quoted in the "Houston" thread I just started.)

 

[Bruins29]

The NFL is going down in a big ball of fire. Everyone knows it including them. They can say whatever they want. They have no case and they know it. This is all posturing for the fans and 31 other owners. Its actually comical some of the things they have pulled during this fiasco. They are committing fraud.

 

[Bobsyouruncle]

You're right, but you're not. What you're right about is that you've highlighted one of several strong reasons for saying Goodell operated in a way that was arbitrary and unfair.

The case still boils down to:

Brady/NFLPA -- This was clearly unfair, for multiple reasons.

NFL -- That may appear to be the case, but Article 46 says that the Commissioner is the sole judge of fairness.

Either the judge buys that argument from the NFL or he doesn't. (I think he won't, for reasons like those quoted in the "Houston" thread I just started.)

Sure, but the NFLPA has a few lines of reasoning.

1. Goodell cannot delegate the decision to Troy Vincent. (I think this is a weak argument because he said in the letter the commissioner authorized me to...)

2. Even if he could he cannot then arbitrate that decision when the arbitration involves his own conduct.

3. Even if he can arbitrate, the investigation can't be fundamentally unfair/non-independent.

4. Even if Goodell is allowed to conduct a not independent investigation, claiming they are doing an independent investigation- means they must.

5. Even if they are allowed to be non-independent and unfair in their verdict they still cannot issue punishments for "general awareness" or for policies not given to players.

6. Even if they can issue punishments based on those standards not listed in the CBA the punishments must be in-line with the CBA or law of the shop for similar offenses. (Evidence is given of similar offenses with no punishment).


Goodell might be right about points 1, 2, and 3. He probably is by the CBA. But I think points 4, 5, and 6 will be tough. From his filing it doesn't even look like he even attempted to address them. IMO