Talk with Judge - Labor lawyer who deals with Unions every day

[ViperGTS]

"When I'm a scientist, I'm a scientist," Syphers said. "I can go into the rest of the rest of the report, the technical part of that report, and tell you what a good job they did on A, B, C, D, E and F. They did exactly what they should do and I agree with the conclusions. I'm a little surprised about one of (the processes), but I accept their result because they detailed how it was done."

What is he saying here? Earlier he says if it was a report he would send it back due to it being incomplete. Then he ends with saying he accepts their result? Wtf? Why can't anyone just be consistent? It sounds good all the way up to the last paragraph.

 

[DarrylS]

In the past there has been a provision for "expedited arbitration", which fast tracks the whole process... both parties agree on an arbitrator, they set a date and just proceed... so there might not be a need to carry this on until the season or TC commences...

This might be a way out for Goodell, as his case is weak, the evidence is weak, the public is clamoring for a severe punishment and the NFL loses the case... Goodell can blame the arbitrator.

"It is more probable than not" that Goodell was "generally aware" that this case was shyt.. and thus the anticipated overreach decision. What might be positive in this scenario would be that the NFL would have to provide all of the information they have on this case... including the emails between Grigson and the rest of the cronies. That might show it was a sting..

OTOH Goodell might go light on#12, as he does not want a long legal battle with full disclosure of all of the information and "facts"...

 

[1960Pats]

heard where?

On the radio, and they were claiming it came from a NY paper. I forget which.

 

[PatsWickedPissah]

I am disgusted at what passes for science statements by scientists these days. I suppose I should not be surprised by this as scientists are people and some are sloppy or worse yet, agenda driven.
Any data should include error bars illustrating measurement, etc. uncertainties.
Instead these clowns report numbers with an implied degree of accuracy that simply is not there.
Once again, all Pats balls fall within the uncertainty range of error bars.
Therefore science simply says that there is no scientific evidence of tampering and the PSIs are irrelevant to the accusation. Period.
Even the mysterious Colts higher PSI balls do too because the ambient temp at initial inflation and measurement is unknown as well as how long they sat to equilibrate at halftime before being measured.

 

[Ross12]

... Add the texts, calls, his body langue, I get if it walks like a duck, it's a duck.

And if it posts like a troll, it's a troll.

Myself, as well as many others, have responded to you detailing the massive holes in your logic yet you ignore them and simply pick & choose pieces of random posts in a pathetic attempt to support your stance, which appears to be "I don't understand the science, but I am going to assume the worst possible context of the texts, and since I didn't like Brady's body language at one presser then he's guilty!" I would like to take a look several years of texts from those around you, see if I can find a few that sound like something you might have done. Maybe if I use your logic and combine those texts with your body language on one day, I can prove you're a serial killer!


Seriously, if your "gut" tells you Brady is guilty then you should go see a gastroenterologist.

 

[PatsWickedPissah]

Clearly, he's posting what comes out of his gut

 

[Ross12]

Clearly, he's posting what comes out of his gut

Even sh*t has more solidity than his "hot take" on Brady.

 

[upstater1]

Tom444, that's what the professor said. You disagree with him? Moronic.

 

[obgod3]

Fist off I don't think the NFL or Goody are the least bit worried about what Brady might do. Second while I think an arbitrator will side with Brady it is still a significant risk. I would prefer to see a fine over a suspension.

 

[#12]

Your contention is that "generally aware" is a 50% threshold, and "more probable than not" is also a 50% threshold..combine the two and that is a low standard of evidence..

I am not as familiar with civil proceedings as criminal proceedings, so find that any hearsay or assumptions being admissible is troubling..

Actually, my contention was that "Generally aware is the most broad, least level amount of knowledge you can possibly have to be convicted of whatever your accuser is stating you know."

There is no threshold for generally aware. Wells places the "more probable than not" threshold on this, by stating it was more probable than not that Brady was generally aware.

You are right that the two, taken together, make for a very low standard to implicate Brady.

 

[1960Pats]

Which is why Brady will sue the NFL and Wells and proceed with discovery he and G have the resources to fight the nfl, which not many have.

HE care about his reputation and will fight these punks tooth and nail and trolls like you will be unhappy.

Which, in turn, makes us happy.

And the Pats roll on...

 

[1960Pats]

Makes one wonder if this whole Barney Fife operation was really Grigson/Kensil and Goodell was as blind sided as everyone.

I felt that was possible from the beginning. This could be Kensil's attempt to replace Goodell.

 

[ViperGTS]

I felt that was possible from the beginning. This could be Kensil's attempt to replace Goodell.

A coup? No way! Wouldn't surprise me. If Kensil was commish, Brady would get suspended for showing up to practice. No practice for you Tom!

 

[1960Pats]

I can't prove ****, however, I'm not going to just ignore my gut on this just because I've lived most of my life in Mass. Or because I started going to Red Sox games when I was 5. Or because I watched Russell, Cousy, etc., practice at Babson college. Or because I fell asleep listening to Bruins games as a little boy. Or because watching the Patriots play over the last 15 years has been such a pleasure. My gut says to me Brady was involved. I don't dislike him for it. I've said I don't think it's a big deal. But, I think it's true.

I don't agree tom, and you know what my proof is? The Wells report. If there was any evidence of any wrongdoing on the day in question, Ted Wells would have found it and exposed the Pats and Brady. Instead he spent 5 million and came up with nothing, and now the NFL is trying to figure out what to do next.

My gut says to me that too many Pats fans are falling for the witch-hunt tactic. When someone has something, anything, that says Brady did something wrong, then I might not trust him. From what I've seen though, the lack of trust is with the NFL, not Tom Brady.

Oh, and let's just ignore the fact that an NFL employee was stealing balls from a charity, and let's not have one mention of the slimy prick's name, but please go ahead and name Brady and two Pats employees who more probably than not did nothing wrong at all.

Wait, there's NFL security now...

 

[tom444]

I don't agree tom, and you know what my proof is? The Wells report. If there was any evidence of any wrongdoing on the day in question, Ted Wells would have found it and exposed the Pats and Brady. Instead he spent 5 million and came up with nothing, and now the NFL is trying to figure out what to do next.

My gut says to me that too many Pats fans are falling for the witch-hunt tactic. When someone has something, anything, that says Brady did something wrong, then I might not trust him. From what I've seen though, the lack of trust is with the NFL, not Tom Brady.

Oh, and let's just ignore the fact that an NFL employee was stealing balls from a charity, and let's not have one mention of the slimy prick's name, but please go ahead and name Brady and two Pats employees who more probably than not did nothing wrong at all.

Wait, there's NFL security now...

Well, 1960Pats, we'll have to agree to disagree.

 

[1960Pats]

You are either delusional or trolling. You state as fact "it's a minor infraction". No infraction has been PROVED. "More likely than not " is NOT proof. What part of this are you NOT GETTING?

"He, in my opinion, is guilty of an equipment alteration,". Again, that's your OPINION based on NO ACTUAL FACTS...that is, unless YOU have done an investigation that goes beyond the scope of the Wells "report". In which case, let the rest of us read it.

The beauty of the Wells report is that it makes Brady's case for him. Wells is billed as a very successful investigator and he found nothing.

 

[tom444]

The beauty of the Wells report is that it makes Brady's case for him. He's billed as a very successful investigator and he found nothing.

I wonder why Joe Montana, Troy Aikman, Tim Hasselbeck, and other former NFL QBs think that Brady doesn't pass the smell test either?

 

[Dr Pain]

Run down of review to date.

1) If Brady is penalized in a significant way
2) Arbitration will be asked for
3)If Goodell does not choose a neutral arbitrator and chooses himself, Pash etc...
4) Brady's lawyers and Union will bring the issues of bias and unfair labor practices to a court in Massachusetts
5) The court will find cause and order the NFL appoint a neutral arbitrator
6) Brady wins in neutral arbitration but by this point he may well have missed games. (he would get his back pay)

Possible but unlikely Brady sues for defamation as rational people tend to avoid court but it is not like he can't afford the effort.

This is what I see now

 

[1960Pats]

Well, 1960Pats, we'll have to agree to disagree.

I don't have to agree to anything.

You're wrong and I'm right. Admit it and then we can part ways.

 

[Tony Cahncuhd]

I wonder why Joe Montana, Troy Aikman, Tim Hasselbeck, and other former NFL QBs think that Brady doesn't pass the smell test either?

Who cares what they think? It's not about 'smell tests.' That's a pretty stupid way to get through life. Ignoring facts and listening only to your prejudices.