"Tom Brady prefer his balls to feel a certain way" - balls underinflated

[purbeast0]

The NFL already proved their case with the Wells Report and a shitload of testimony. Anyone following this case would know that. Do you live in a cave?

translation:

"you proved me wrong, so now i'm going to change my original argument"

 

[emperus]

The NFL already proved their case with the Wells Report and a shitload of testimony. Anyone following this case would know that. Do you live in a cave?

For a refresher, read this:
http://espn.go.com/espn/otl/story/_...-short-court-challenge-roger-goodell-decision
Q: What evidence led Goodell to confirm the four-game suspension?

A: Goodell relied on evidence the Wells investigation, the 300 exhibits offered in the day-long hearing, and 450 pages of testimony. He also relied heavily on information that he did not learn during the hearing. Kessler and the NFLPA said there was no need for testimony from John Jastremski and James McNally, the Patriots employees who were involved in the machinations that led to the deflated game balls. The NFL attorneys argued, according to the Goodell opinion, that Goodell was entitled to make an "adverse inference" from Brady's failure to present key witnesses. Goodell went beyond the adverse inference and made a finding that both men lacked credibility in the statements they made to Wells. The Brady legal team also admitted that McNally had "more than enough time" during his famous 100-second visit into a locked bathroom to do what was necessary to deflate the balls.

Don't live in a cave, but generally don't like people telling me what to think. So. I actually read the report, and maybe dozens of analysis of it. I posted some of them earlier on in this thread. The Wells report really didn't prove anything. In fact it was spectacular in it's lack of proof. Try reading it and if you still believe that I am wrong, we can have a more meaningful discussion on it..

 

[Capt Caveman]

Yes, by the NFL. Not Bleacherreport or the Inquirer. Rumors of accusations are different than being accused by the NFL.

Neither of my links were from those sources. Brad Johnson admitting to bribing NFL employees to scuff the footballs prior to the SB is not proof. If your small brain thinks only cheating caught by the NFL is proof. You can google the number of Tampa Bay players caught cheating by using PEDs and suspended for them.

 

[Imported]

The NFL already proved their case with the Wells Report and a shitload of testimony. Anyone following this case would know that. Do you live in a cave?

For a refresher, read this:
http://espn.go.com/espn/otl/story/_...-short-court-challenge-roger-goodell-decision
Q: What evidence led Goodell to confirm the four-game suspension?

A: Goodell relied on evidence the Wells investigation, the 300 exhibits offered in the day-long hearing, and 450 pages of testimony. He also relied heavily on information that he did not learn during the hearing. Kessler and the NFLPA said there was no need for testimony from John Jastremski and James McNally, the Patriots employees who were involved in the machinations that led to the deflated game balls. The NFL attorneys argued, according to the Goodell opinion, that Goodell was entitled to make an "adverse inference" from Brady's failure to present key witnesses. Goodell went beyond the adverse inference and made a finding that both men lacked credibility in the statements they made to Wells. The Brady legal team also admitted that McNally had "more than enough time" during his famous 100-second visit into a locked bathroom to do what was necessary to deflate the balls.

The Wells report proved nothing except for the fact that Wells can get a shitload of money for a useless report.

 

[SunnyD]

I think the standard you are using is wrong. Brady doesn't have to prove anything even in an arbitration hearing, but the NFL had to prove the facts against Brady by the preponderance of evidence. I don't see any evidence that met that burden.

You apparently don't understand WHY arbitration is suck a big fucking deal these days and why companies want so desperately to take the legal system away from the end users. The sole purpose of arbitration is to do an end-around on the end user's legal protections and basically force the legal ruleset to be the agreed upon contract.

You're trying to apply a typical legal proceeding to this case. You're wrong. The proceeding here is wholly withing the framework of the CBA - also known as The Gospel According to Goodell. The preponderance of the evidence could very well be that Brady has to prove his innocence in order to escape conduct detrimental.

 

[Phoenix86]

The Wells report proved nothing except for the fact that Wells can get a shitload of money for a useless report.

There are interesting facts in there, but there's a ton of bullshit. I wouldn't quote the Wells report's final findings at all.

 

[emperus]

The preponderance of the evidence could very well be that Brady has to prove his innocence in order to escape conduct detrimental.

I don't believe that. Don't believe no matter how weak the NFLPA is, the would agree to that. Not even sure a court would allow that. I think Wells showed us what the standard was by his more probable than not phraseology.

 

[Phoenix86]

I think the standard you are using is wrong. Brady doesn't have to prove anything even in an arbitration hearing, but the NFL had to prove the facts against Brady by the preponderance of evidence. I don't see any evidence that met that burden.

We went over the when the report came out.

That IS the level of evidence, even in a court of law (civil). Remember how OJ wasn't found innocent (criminal) but then guilty in civil court? It's because there's a lower standard. Want to guess what that standard is? Preponderance of the evidence with means "more probable than not."

The guy who wrote the report is a lawyer.

edit: quoted right person, wrong post... corrected.

 

[SP33Demon]

Neither of my links were from those sources. Brad Johnson admitting to bribing NFL employees to scuff the footballs prior to the SB is not proof. If your small brain thinks only cheating caught by the NFL is proof. You can google the number of Tampa Bay players caught cheating by using PEDs and suspended for them.

The point still eludes you. One or two players admitting they cheated 13 years ago doesn't tarnish the reputation of the team. A coach who orders cheating at all different levels and gets caught is going to warrant a lot more attention to the entire team from the league (i.e. Spygate). Did you even graduate high school? Because this is basic logic.

 

[lupi]

He didn't have the balls "scuffed", he made sure they balls had the as constructed wax like sheen scrubbed off of them. Normally this is done by the team during the week before the game, but for the SB the league brings in a bunch of special balls to after the game hand out to various sponsors/partners etc... So all he wanted was to make sure the slippiness was removed from the balls as would normally be done.

Same principle as the special K kicking balls which the teams aren't allowed to rub down pre game in the leagues attempt to make kicking more difficult.

 

[smackababy]

We went over the when the report came out.

That IS the level of evidence, even in a court of law (civil). Remember how OJ wasn't found innocent (criminal) but then guilty in civil court? It's because there's a lower standard. Want to guess what that standard is? Preponderance of the evidence with means "more probable than not."

The guy who wrote the report is a lawyer.

Civil lawsuits really come down to who does the judge / jury believe more. It can literally be 51:49 and you win. It is utter bullshit.

 

[SP33Demon]

We went over the when the report came out.

That IS the level of evidence, even in a court of law (civil). Remember how OJ wasn't found innocent (criminal) but then guilty in civil court? It's because there's a lower standard. Want to guess what that standard is? Preponderance of the evidence with means "more probable than not."

The guy who wrote the report is a lawyer.

Yep, Pattycake fans still stuck on the Wells report. It's only one piece of evidence and is damning because of its testimony. Testimony is easily enough to win in civil court. Brady will not win in a NY court where the NFL just filed, hell Adrian Peterson isn't guaranteed to be in the clear either for 2016. It's far from over and will drag out to next year unless the NFL/NFLPA reach a settlement in August.
http://www.stlamerican.com/sports/local_sports/article_3209dbc2-2fb5-11e5-a384-7347a6d56c2b.html

 

[SunnyD]

I don't believe that. Don't believe no matter how weak the NFLPA is, the would agree to that. Not even sure a court would allow that. I think Wells showed us what the standard was by his more probable than not phraseology.

You don't have to believe that. The Supreme Court said such things are essentially valid during arbitration in the MLBPA vs. Steve Garvey case.

For that reason, the court found further arbitration proceedings inappropriate. But again, established law ordinarily precludes a court from resolving the merits of the parties’ dispute on the basis of its own factual determinations, no matter how erroneous the arbitrator’s decision.

 

[Capt Caveman]

The point still eludes you. One or two players admitting they cheated 13 years ago doesn't tarnish the reputation of the team. A coach who orders cheating at all different levels and gets caught is going to warrant a lot more attention to the entire team from the league (i.e. Spygate). Did you even graduate high school? Because this is basic logic.

Cheating at all different levels? Please list all of these NFL confirmed orders of cheating by Belicheck?

Did you graduate High school? You seem to make a lot of unconfirmed accusations.

And you read the Wells report right? Please post where it identifies Belicheck and the Patriot Organization knowledge of the balls being deflated. If I remember, it does the complete opposite.

 

[emperus]

We went over the when the report came out.

That IS the level of evidence, even in a court of law (civil). Remember how OJ wasn't found innocent (criminal) but then guilty in civil court? It's because there's a lower standard. Want to guess what that standard is? Preponderance of the evidence with means "more probable than not."

The guy who wrote the report is a lawyer.

Maybe you are replying to the wrong person or didn't read what I wrote.

 

[smackababy]

Yep, Pattycake fans still stuck on the Wells report. It's only one piece of evidence and is damning because of its testimony. Testimony is easily enough to win in civil court. Brady will not win in a NY court where the NFL just filed, hell Adrian Peterson isn't guaranteed to be in the clear either for 2016. It's far from over and will drag out to next year unless the NFL/NFLPA reach a settlement in August.
http://www.stlamerican.com/sports/local_sports/article_3209dbc2-2fb5-11e5-a384-7347a6d56c2b.html

The issue is the testimony in the Wells report is used against Brady, but Goodell claims had Brady put forth testimony from the same equipment managers it wouldn't have mattered, as their character is discredited or something to that effect.

So, "when they say what I want to hear, they are good; when they say something I don't want to hear, they are bad."

 

[emperus]

You don't have to believe that. The Supreme Court said such things are essentially valid during arbitration in the MLBPA vs. Steve Garvey case.

Again, you are arguing something different. A union can't enter into contractual agreements that permit their employees to be beaten by their employers as a punishment. What I am saying is that there are certain rights that we possess that can't be negotiated away.

 

[SP33Demon]

Cheating at all different levels? Please list all of these NFL confirmed orders of cheating by Belicheck?

Did you graduate High school? You seem to make a lot of unconfirmed accusations.

And you read the Wells report right? Please post where it identifies Belicheck and the Patriot Organization knowledge of the balls being deflated. If I remember, it does the complete opposite.

You are just trolling at this point when you try to equate a current coach's actions vs a player who admits something from 13 years ago. If you cannot see the difference then your meds just aren't strong enough.

 

[TheGardener]

There's a distinct difference between criminal proceedings and what happens in the NFL though.

The NFL has something called conduct detrimental to the integrity of the game/league that all of its employees are held accountable to. Unfortunately that term is also very vague and nebulous. In the case of Tom Brady, he was named to be involved in this "scandal" by other parties involved, however his conduct during the investigation did nothing to exonerate him from being involved. Sure, it wasn't proven that he was actually involved either, but there was enough circumstantial evidence against him in the court of NFL arbitration that lets him fall under the category of conduct detrimental to the integrity of the game/league.

Simply, by not presenting the proper evidence to support his defense in this case, Brady just made the presumption of guilt that much greater. Remember, this isn't a court of law - this is collectively bargained arbitration. The NFLPA agreed to it and the NFL holds the cards here. It doesn't work the same as your traditional legal context anymore.

I agree that Brady, as an employee is not be held to a standard equal to that as a court of law. The NFL is after all an employer. But as you point out, the employer has signed with the NFLPA a contract. That contract does set certain standards in place to ensure that the employee receives greater consideration, than if no contract were in place. The statement by the NFLPA [below] that I find most intriguing is the accusation that the NFL violated the plain meaning of the CBA.

I believe this has to do with the NFL front office's process of passing judgement on Brady and the subsequent appeal process. As I've heard, the Commissioner is responsible for passing judgement with fines and suspensions. But the player has the right of an appeal with an independent arbitrator. What Goodell did, was to delegate the initial review process to his second in command, and set himself up as an independent arbitrator. That I believe is what the NFLPA says he cannot do, according to the plain language in the CBA.

Regarding the smartphone, I haven't heard if this phone and its service, was paid for by either the NFL or the Patriots. If so, demanding the physical phone for the investigation seems reasonable to me for the purposes of the NFL investigation. But if it is a private phone, I don't see how the NFL can reasonably demand it. We cannot compare Brady's phone to say Clinton's email, as the latter was conducting government business on her private server.

I think that Brady stands a good chance of the court agreeing to hear the case, and ultimately sending it back to a true independent arbitrator, who is not employed by the NFL front office. In other words, this might not be resolved for a long time. Getting an injunction to delay the suspension might be a higher bar for Brady's lawyers to overcome. So we could be reading about this finally being resolved 2-3 years from now.

"Statement from the NFLPA:


“The Commissioner’s ruling today did nothing to address the legal deficiencies of due process. The NFL remains stuck with the following facts:

• The NFL had no policy that applied to players;
• The NFL provided no notice of any such policy or potential discipline to players;
• The NFL resorted to a nebulous standard of “general awareness” to predicate a legally unjustified punishment;
• The NFL had no procedures in place until two days ago to test air pressure in footballs; and
• The NFL violated the plain meaning of the collective bargaining agreement.


The fact that the NFL would resort to basing a suspension on a smoke screen of irrelevant text messages instead of admitting that they have all of the phone records they asked for is a new low, even for them, but it does nothing to correct their errors."

http://boston.cbslocal.com/2015/07/...-to-take-deflategate-appeal-to-federal-court/

 

[Capt Caveman]

You are just trolling at this point when you try to equate a current coach's actions vs a player who admits something from 13 years ago. If you cannot see the difference then your meds just aren't strong enough.

LOL. So, you make accusations and can't provide evidence that the NFL confirms. Go back to high school.

 

[SunnyD]

Again, you are arguing something different. A union can't enter into contractual agreements that permit their employees to be beaten by their employers as a punishment. What I am saying is that there are certain rights that we possess that can't be negotiated away.

There's miles of difference between corporal punishment and an employment suspension that is written into employment contract terms.

And if Brady has a problem with the employment agreement then he needs to be suing the NFLPA for signing off on the CBA which the entire union agreed to in the first place that allowed this to happen.

That said, what exactly are you arguing, because it seems as if every post you make you're arguing a completely different point? First it was that the arbitrator can't arbitrate, then it was that the arbitrator can't hand down an arbitrary punishment, and now it's something about beating employee and/or CBA terms. I understand you're grasping at any straw you can here (Tom, is that you?), but this is what it is.

 

[emperus]

There's miles of difference between corporal punishment and an employment suspension that is written into employment contract terms.

And if Brady has a problem with the employment agreement then he needs to be suing the NFLPA for signing off on the CBA which the entire union agreed to in the first place that allowed this to happen.

That said, what exactly are you arguing, because it seems as if every post you make you're arguing a completely different point? First it was that the arbitrator can't arbitrate, then it was that the arbitrator can't hand down an arbitrary punishment, and now it's something about beating employee and/or CBA terms. I understand you're grasping at any straw you can here (Tom, is that you?), but this is what it is.

I don't think you know what you are arguing. You seem to be all over the place. This is where you initially jumped in.

The NFL has something called conduct detrimental to the integrity of the game/league that all of its employees are held accountable to. Unfortunately that term is also very vague and nebulous. In the case of Tom Brady, he was named to be involved in this "scandal" by other parties involved, however his conduct during the investigation did nothing to exonerate him from being involved. Sure, it wasn't proven that he was actually involved either, but there was enough circumstantial evidence against him in the court of NFL arbitration that lets him fall under the category of conduct detrimental to the integrity of the game/league.

Simply, by not presenting the proper evidence to support his defense in this case, Brady just made the presumption of guilt that much greater. Remember, this isn't a court of law - this is collectively bargained arbitration. The NFLPA agreed to it and the NFL holds the cards here. It doesn't work the same as your traditional legal context anymore.

You seem to be saying that the burden of proof is on Brady to prove his innocence. That isn't the NFL standard even when it falls under conduct detrimental to the league.

 

[Phoenix86]

Maybe you are replying to the wrong person or didn't read what I wrote.

No, I'm replying to you, just quoted the wrong post. I fixed it.

 

[Phoenix86]

Civil lawsuits really come down to who does the judge / jury believe more. It can literally be 51:49 and you win. It is utter bullshit.

Yes, 51:49 is the definition of more likely than not. It's a standard that has held the test of time, centuries old I believe, maybe over a thousand years... You may not like it, but it's one of the corner stones of our legal system.

 

[Phoenix86]

The issue is the testimony in the Wells report is used against Brady, but Goodell claims had Brady put forth testimony from the same equipment managers it wouldn't have mattered, as their character is discredited or something to that effect.

So, "when they say what I want to hear, they are good; when they say something I don't want to hear, they are bad."

So I heard/read something else about this, the scope of what the court would decide if the NFL followed the agreed to process. That's it. They will not delve into fact finding.

Who destroyed what and when, ball handling, PSI, etc. None of that will ever come up.