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

[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.

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

So, if you did quote the right person, you clearly didn't read the quote you replied to. Again, what in your post is different from mine.

 

[Phoenix86]

So, if you did quote the right person, you clearly didn't read the quote you replied to. Again, what in your post is different from mine.

Sorry, when I you said they were using the wrong standard I thought you mean the more likely than not was the incorrect standard. My bad.

 

[Fern]

Kraft Statement:

I saw Kraft make his remarks. Looks to me like the gloves are off and the fight is on. IMO, those were very, very strong words from Kraft, and aimed squarely at Goodell.

Looks like a serious rift in the NFL, and it's now out in the open.

Kraft acts like a man who has been double-crossed. Might be more to this story (secret/private deal not kept etc.)

Kraft vs. Goodell? I'd put my money on Kraft.

So, again the NFL had every phone except the NFLPA employees (players). So, they basically had every text Tom would have sent anybody in the organization. Ask yourself, why would they need Tom Brady's phone?

If they were only after communications between Patriots they wouldn't need Brady's phone.

If I'm Brady, or his attorney, they're not getting the phone. Period. I have seen more people get in trouble over pics, video, texts and tweets than just about any other thing I can think of. He's married to a celebrity (model), think there's any photos on the phone? Any texts to/from his wife? Why the heck should the NFL get those? What about her privacy? Did anybody text something stupid, something non-PC, or something that could be misconstrued? Brady (and his wife) make many millions per year in endorsements. What if some embarrassing stuff is leaked? How much could it cost them? I think anyone trusting the NFL, or anybody else, to NOT leak private pics/vids/texts is foolish. (My bet is that TMZ would get hold of the phone data in a flash and milk it for whatever they could.)

There's a big disconnect between what Brady is saying about the phone and how Goodell is acting. The NFL tells Brady they don't need the phone and then punish him when he destroys it after they said they didn't need it? Somethings not right here.

------------------------

Goodell's behavior seems odd to me. His judgement bad. He insisted on hearing the appeal? WTH? That's crazy. Imagine if in our court system the (original) trial judge also hears the appeals against his/her original ruling. That's crazy. An appeal should be heard by an objective 3rd party. Goodell is a lawyer; he knows better. Something is not right here either.

Fern

 

[Fern]

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."

Yeah.

So Goodell holds it against Brady that the equip managers didn't show up to testify, even though it was the union that told them not to, then in the next breath says he wouldn't believe what they may have testified to anyway? Goodell is cray-cray.

Fern

 

[Fingolfin269]

I'm sitting here wondering what a stranger who doesn't know me or my friends might think if they stumbled in on some of our text conversations in an investigation. Frightening really.

Yeah there's no way I'd willingly hand this thing over to someone. If they asked pointed questions about data inside of it I might hold it and show them or offer screen prints but that would be the extent of it.

 

[SunnyD]

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 "no you" argument. :thumbsup:

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.

That's exactly what I said, and that's exactly what the NFL said and did.

*shrug* Keep defending on it though.

 

[cubby1223]

This thread always amuses me

The basic summary of the banter throughout the year:
-"I'm a Patriots fan and I believe my team is far more likely not guilty than guilty, therefore Goodell & the NFL must be batshit crazy."
-"I'm not a Patriots fan, and have a hard time believing the NFL is batshit crazy, therefore the Patriots must be more likely guilty than not."

 

[cubby1223]

It's pretty much settled this close to the season, Brady's getting time off to reexamine his relationship with his balls

 

[BUTCH1]

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 think that's what Brady's lawyer's will try and argue in court that the punishment was overly harsh for what he was accused of. How the NFLPA members agreed to let the Commissioner be the arbitrator of his own rulings is baffling to me, WTF did they get in return for that huge gift?. Maybe it's best Brady just let it go at this point, even if he could get an injunction he might lose the case down the road and have to serve the suspension late in the season.

 

[emperus]

The "no you" argument. :thumbsup:



That's exactly what I said, and that's exactly what the NFL said and did.

*shrug* Keep defending on it though.

Sorry, ur wrong there. The NFL never said that unless ur referring to the Appeal process. Then yes the burden was on Brady to prove why he should win the appeal. In the initial process, the NFL had to prove by a preponderance of the evidence that Brady cheated. The burden of proof lay on the side of the NFL.

 

[BUTCH1]

As much as I do feel there was some type of tampering going on ( I'm not even sure it happened at the AFCCG) the Patriot's do have legitimate gripes in how the whole incident has been handled, here is a list, the worst one is when the official tells them (Well's) what gauge he used pre-game on the Patriot's balls but they refuse to accept it because it would mean all the Pat's balls fall into the "unmolested" category and hey, 5 mil is a big chunk of change so we're not going for that bro so we will just declare your 'best recollection" fine EXCEPT when it makes our report look wrong.

Incorrect communication on PSI. In a Jan. 19 letter to the club the day after the AFC Championship Game, senior vice president T. David Gardi wrote that an investigation was starting and one of the footballs measured at 10.1 psi. In the letter, Gardi wrote that each Colts football that was inspected met the requirements. That information was incorrect or incomplete; no football measured at 10.1, and three of the four Colts balls measured below regulation on one gauge.

Acceptance of Wells report's interpretation of certain data and rejecting Walt Anderson's recollection. Referee Walt Anderson recalled that he used the "logo gauge" for pregame measurements, which would have meant the total average of all Patriots footballs were in compliance at halftime. But the Wells report rejected that recollection, while accepting it for the measurement of Colts footballs. It was the lone recollection of Anderson that was rejected. The NFL did not challenge this interpretation, which was a central part of the Patriots' rebuttal website, Wellsreportcontext.com site (Paragraph 5 of executive summary).

Media leaks, culminating in Tuesday's regarding Tom Brady's cell phone. Kraft expressed his outrage at the Super Bowl with various media leaks from the league office that contributed to shaping public perception, which was also reflected in a February communication with NFL general counsel Jeff Pash. The issue continued right up until the hours in which the NFL announced the decision to uphold Brady's four-game suspension as information about Brady's cell phone being "destroyed" was reported by ESPN.

Portrayal of "destroying" cell phone. As Brady noted in his Wednesday statement, he had told league officials that under no circumstances would his phone be subject to any part of the investigation, which is his right as a union member.

"To suggest that I destroyed a phone to avoid giving the NFL information it requested is completely wrong," he said.

Kraft also blasted the NFL on Wednesday for how it portrayed Brady replacing his cell phone


Suspension of team employees. In his 20-page opinion upholding Brady's four-game suspension, Goodell notes that the Patriots informed him that they suspended equipment assistant John Jastremski and officials locker room attendant Jim McNally. That is technically correct, but it's my understanding the decision was made after consulting with the league and top NFL officials, who essentially said, "Are you going to suspend them or are we?" So it's my understanding that was as much a joint decision as anything.

Accountability. In March's annual meeting, Goodell said that if the league did anything wrong as part of its investigation, it would be reflected in the Wells report. The 243-page report included one paragraph on the topic (Page 21, executive summary). There has been no other public acknowledgment of missteps. That helps explain why Kraft, in his statement Wednesday, said: "There are those in the league office who are more determined to prove that they were right rather than admit any culpability of their own or take any responsibility for the initiation of a process and ensuing investigation that was flawed."

 

[lupi]

Portrayal of "destroying" cell phone. As Brady noted in his Wednesday statement, he had told league officials that under no circumstances would his phone be subject to any part of the investigation, which is his right as a union member.

"To suggest that I destroyed a phone to avoid giving the NFL information it requested is completely wrong," he said."

that's actually quite hilarious placed back to back like that.

 

[SunnyD]

Sorry, ur wrong there. The NFL never said that unless ur referring to the Appeal process. Then yes the burden was on Brady to prove why he should win the appeal. In the initial process, the NFL had to prove by a preponderance of the evidence that Brady cheated. The burden of proof lay on the side of the NFL.

There's that "no you" argument again. Round and round we go! :biggrin:

Annnnyway... Brady's lawsuit suffers a setback - Judge Kyle in Minnesota ordered that there's no reason the case cannot be heard in the Southern District of NY. The NFL's got home court (pun intended) advantage.

 

[cabri]

Wonder what the NFL position will be IF the ball pressure experiment shows the same results as the AFLCS balls?

Goodell would have been better off holding off the suspension until those results.

 

[Phoenix86]

Portrayal of "destroying" cell phone. As Brady noted in his Wednesday statement, he had told league officials that under no circumstances would his phone be subject to any part of the investigation, which is his right as a union member.

"To suggest that I destroyed a phone to avoid giving the NFL information it requested is completely wrong," he said.

Kraft also blasted the NFL on Wednesday for how it portrayed Brady replacing his cell phone

OK, so I read some more about this and you're shining an odd light on it. Basically, Brady's lawyers said we're not giving it up, then it was destroyed.

The NFL asked for it, Brady denied, then destroyed it.

You said it's his right as a union member, and that's not true at all. His defense for this is he didn't want to set a precedence for others in the union. Admirable, but he's not specifically protected by any rules that says cell phones are verboten.

So we're back to the situation where he knew they wanted it, said no on moral ground (not legal/contractual), and ensured they would never get it later if a court did order it. That's destruction of evidence, period.

That puts it back into the wildly vague detrimental to the league policy.

 

[emperus]

Wonder what the NFL position will be IF the ball pressure experiment shows the same results as the AFLCS balls?

Goodell would have been better off holding off the suspension until those results.

No matter the outcome of this. I hope new organization do those experiments during cold weather games next season. What will people say when they realize the ball deflation aligned with those in the PAts-Colts game.

 

[emperus]

I'm not even sure why most people here are defending the NFL's actions. You should read Judge Doty's ruling in the Peterson case and see what the NFL tried to do to Peterson.

Here

The NFLPA is a terrible union. In the future they should probably ask for an impartial arbitrator chosen by the Player. That the NFL can make a ruling than choose the arbitrator for an appeal that can't be challenged in court should be offensive to every American.

 

[BUTCH1]

I'm not even sure why most people here are defending the NFL's actions. You should read Judge Doty's ruling in the Peterson case and see what the NFL tried to do to Peterson.

Here

The NFLPA is a terrible union. In the future they should probably ask for an impartial arbitrator chosen by the Player. That the NFL can make a ruling than choose the arbitrator for an appeal that can't be challenged in court should be offensive to every American.

We don't know what the union got in return for that but in hindsight it looks like NOTHING could be worth having an asshole like Goodell in FULL control of your NFL destiny. FWIW right from the start after reading the text's I thought there was some tampering going on in some games but I actually don't think the AFCCG was one of them. In any event how does one go from a $25K "equipment violation" to a 4-game suspension, million-dollar fine and 2 draft picks. How do you fine Farve $50K for not cooperating with an investigation and take the same offense and make it a 4-gamer for Brady. We have no idea what Kraft might do next, he said in May he will "accept the harsh punishment for the good of the league" but he might go all Al Davis at this point, he's pissed off really bad.

 

[Phoenix86]

How do you fine Farve $50K for not cooperating with an investigation and take the same offense and make it a 4-gamer for Brady.

Spoliation of evidence is the difference. Saying no is VERY different than saying no and destroying the evidence.

 

[SP33Demon]

We don't know what the union got in return for that but in hindsight it looks like NOTHING could be worth having an asshole like Goodell in FULL control of your NFL destiny. FWIW right from the start after reading the text's I thought there was some tampering going on in some games but I actually don't think the AFCCG was one of them. In any event how does one go from a $25K "equipment violation" to a 4-game suspension, million-dollar fine and 2 draft picks. How do you fine Farve $50K for not cooperating with an investigation and take the same offense and make it a 4-gamer for Brady. We have no idea what Kraft might do next, he said in May he will "accept the harsh punishment for the good of the league" but he might go all Al Davis at this point, he's pissed off really bad.

Because dick pics don't affect the outcomes of games.

 

[smackababy]

Spoliation of evidence is the difference. Saying no is VERY different than saying no and destroying the evidence.

Except, the NFL has zero authority to actually obtain Tom Brady's phone. Unless they wish to take this into a real courtroom, where the burden of proof is higher, they cannot get Brady's phone without him directly handing it over. Since, he made it clear that would not happen, and he provided the evidence relevant to the case at hand.

Unless the NFL is trying to argue Tom Brady withheld evidence and then destroyed the only manner in which to obtain it, they can't punish him for the phone destruction. They can argue his non cooperation (not handing the phone over) is an issue, but after his refusal, what he did with it is not their concern.

 

[Capt Caveman]

Spoliation of evidence is the difference. Saying no is VERY different than saying no and destroying the evidence.

Except, it was not known the phone was destroyed when the 4 game suspension was handed down, just that they would not give them the phone.

And note, even with the phone destroyed, Brady provided at the appeal all phone records(numbers and dates) from that phone.

 

[lupi]

Not sure how "except" applies there. He destroed phone in march just before his appointment by the investigator. He was suspended in may. Then reveals in june that he destroyed the phone. He already knew of the investogation prior to making thousands of phone pieces from his original phone.

 

[smackababy]

Not sure how "except" applies there. He destroed phone in march just before his appointment by the investigator. He was suspended in may. Then reveals in june that he destroyed the phone. He already knew of the investogation prior to making thousands of phone pieces from his original phone.

Not sure how what he did with the phone after providing the evidence asked from it has anything to do with the case. He already made it clear the only evidence he would be providing was what he provided and not the actual phone. The phone still being in existence has no bearing, as he still wouldn't hand it over. Without the authority to force him to give the phone up, the phone being destroyed is not an issue.

 

[Phoenix86]

Except, the NFL has zero authority to actually obtain Tom Brady's phone. Unless they wish to take this into a real courtroom, where the burden of proof is higher, they cannot get Brady's phone without him directly handing it over. Since, he made it clear that would not happen, and he provided the evidence relevant to the case at hand.

Unless the NFL is trying to argue Tom Brady withheld evidence and then destroyed the only manner in which to obtain it, they can't punish him for the phone destruction. They can argue his non cooperation (not handing the phone over) is an issue, but after his refusal, what he did with it is not their concern.

I'm just going to quote myself since I replied to this earlier this morning.

The NFL asked for it, Brady denied, then destroyed it.

You said it's his right as a union member, and that's not true at all. His defense for this is he didn't want to set a precedence for others in the union. Admirable, but he's not specifically protected by any rules that says cell phones are verboten.

So we're back to the situation where he knew they wanted it, said no on moral ground (not legal/contractual), and ensured they would never get it later if a court did order it. That's destruction of evidence, period.

That puts it back into the wildly vague detrimental to the league policy.

OK, so now we're in court. Judge grants a subpoena for the phone. What now? Oops sorry judge, it's been destroyed.

That excuse won't fly when it was known the phone was sought as evidence before it was destroyed.