"DeflateGate" Update: Suspension Upheld! Brady Accepts 4 Game Ban.

[rmcjacket23]

1 minute ago, allblackraven said:

You're not letting up, are you?

It wasn't about Goodell, it was about cheating football club breaking rules again and destroying evidence when they got caught.

Ummm... what? Straight face and all, do you actually believe a word of anything you just said?

100% of the legal process had absolutely nothing to do with football deflation, cheating, Tom Brady, or the Patriots. That whole concept ended like 16 months ago... that's just fodder for fan boys to debate over what did or didn't happen and what was or wasn't proven.

The legal process that has occurred after that cares nothing about any of that. Its 100% about Roger Goodell's responsibility and power granted in the CBA, and whether he violated that power. 

That's the irony of the whole thing... the entire legal fight is about Roger making sure everybody knows that he did what he was granted power to do (right or wrong doesn't matter), and simultaneously, he's negotiating with the Union to voluntarily give up said power.

[rmcjacket23]

5 minutes ago, harfordravenfan said:

Should we have another countdown for a Pat's fan to reply?

I wonder if we are the most popular board for them, or is there another team who would hammer the more? Colts?

[beanfigger]

I think the whole contract restructure when everyone knew this was coming sets a bad precedent. In this post, I am NOT implying that I feel one way or the other about whether the accused in this particular case deserves suspension. However, I do feel strongly that anyone who is suspended deserves to lose the checks from the contract that is in place when the suspension is dealt. This could start a bad trend.

[beanfigger]

4 minutes ago, rmcjacket23 said:

Ummm... what? Straight face and all, do you actually believe a word of anything you just said?

100% of the legal process had absolutely nothing to do with football deflation, cheating, Tom Brady, or the Patriots. That whole concept ended like 16 months ago... that's just fodder for fan boys to debate over what did or didn't happen and what was or wasn't proven.

The legal process that has occurred after that cares nothing about any of that. Its 100% about Roger Goodell's responsibility and power granted in the CBA, and whether he violated that power. 

That's the irony of the whole thing... the entire legal fight is about Roger making sure everybody knows that he did what he was granted power to do (right or wrong doesn't matter), and simultaneously, he's negotiating with the Union to voluntarily give up said power.

That is a little shortsighted. Sure the judges were not concerned about did he or didn't he, but the fight was about punishing a specific rule violation. Just because the union was forced to appeal it another way doesn't negate the fact that the league was trying to uphold that punishment for the violation they felt occurred.

[rmcjacket23]

1 minute ago, beanfigger said:

I think the whole contract restructure when everyone knew this was coming sets a bad precedent. In this post, I am NOT implying that I feel one way or the other about whether the accused in this particular case deserves suspension. However, I do feel strongly that anyone who is suspended deserves to lose the checks from the contract that is in place when the suspension is dealt. This could start a bad trend.

Not really sure you can do anything about it though. I think freezing a players contract for 18 months or however long this played out just because they MIGHT be suspended sets a worse precedent.

In the grand scheme of things, he probably saved like $1.75M, which is chump change to the league. Plus, its the Patriots who pay his salary, so if I were them, I'd just give him a "workout bonus" in 2017 for (not coincidentally) the same amount he forfeited as part of the suspension.

The money was never really a player in this, but it is sort of a saavy, "in your face" kind of move by the Patriots, and I appreciate that as somebody who would have done the same thing in this situation.

[rmcjacket23]

Just now, beanfigger said:

That is a little shortsighted. Sure the judges were not concerned about did he or didn't he, but the fight was about punishing a specific rule violation. Just because the union was forced to appeal it another way doesn't negate the fact that the league was trying to uphold that punishment for the violation they felt occurred.

Not really. The fight from a legal perspective wasn't about punishing a rule violation... it was about Brady attempting to show that the policy the NFL set up for such protocol was violated. One judge agreed, another didn't.

The league isn't taking this stance because they are so outraged by the cheating that they won't to send a strong message to deter others, because that simply ain't going to work and this punishment wouldn't accomplish that. They are taking this stance to protect their CBA rights, which again, I find ironic, considering I'd wager in a year or two we will be talking about a more independent party handling these types of situations.

[The Mom Gene]

21 minutes ago, rmcjacket23 said:

I hope this is a joke...

We have a really messed up concept of justice if anybody thinks this whole process is anything about justice or deflating footballs.

Apparently, you just don't get it. STILL... It wasn't about the deed that was done...  It was about obstruction and the process;  which was 100% legal and binding under the CBA.  I'm done with discussing this.

[GrimCoconut]

Gotta love narcissism concealed through the guise of one's perceived sense of logic. 

[harfordravenfan]

21 minutes ago, Moderator 3 said:

No, the trolls will appear soon enough.  Please don't respond to them.  Let the mods take out the trash.  Thanks.

Actually I like the one pats fan that often comments here, wouldn't consider him a troll but I get what your saying

[beanfigger]

18 minutes ago, GrimCoconut said:

Gotta love narcissism concealed through the guise of one's perceived sense of logic. 

We should be grateful one like that humbles himself enough to come down from his pedestal above to educate us.

As for this whole thing, I just hope we can all go back to ignoring it like we were doing months ago. It's just annoying and frustrating. NFL politics and campaigning.

[ludy51]

23 minutes ago, GrimCoconut said:

Gotta love narcissism concealed through the guise of one's perceived sense of logic. 

we are simply peasants, praying one day we can reach that level of enlightenment slowly being fed to us 

[rmcjacket23]

29 minutes ago, The Mom Gene said:

Apparently, you just don't get it. STILL... It wasn't about the deed that was done...  It was about obstruction and the process;  which was 100% legal and binding under the CBA.  I'm done with discussing this.

Obstruction by who? It wasn't about obstruction by Tom or the Patriots, because that's not part of any of the legal process that has occurred.

It is 100% about the process, though I'm not sure how this ruling provides justice for the process, particularly when both sides are already negotiating there way out of the process.

[Tank 92]

On February 4, 2016 at 10:46 AM, rmcjacket23 said:

I just can't wait until these judges laugh this whole thing out of a courtroom. That way, these threads will die and some perspective will be added to the masses.

Laugh?  lol    Seems they only laughed at the idea of vacating the suspension to begin with.  And hopefully some perspective has been added to the myopic scumbag admirers.   

Edit; Sorry meant to say the myopic admirers of the scumbag.   lol

Edited April 25, 2016 by Tank 92

[JO_75]

It should be stated. Patriots won 4 Super Bowls by cheating and the only two they played by the rules... They loss. Coincidence? I think not. 

Thankfully the Patriots first 4 games is as close of a cakewalk you can get outside of Arizona. Bills, Texans and Dolphins? Should be 2-2 at worst, 3-1 if Jimmy proves to be any good. 

[rmcjacket23]

1 hour ago, Tank 92 said:

Laugh?  lol    Seems they only laughed at the idea of vacating the suspension to begin with.  And hopefully some perspective has been added to the myopic scumbag admirers.   

Edit; Sorry meant to say the myopic admirers of the scumbag.   lol

Ha, I'm not sure any perspective is going to be added from this ruling. I think anybody who thought this entire process was related to cheating or ball deflation lost perspective a long time ago and aren't likely to get it back, nor do I think Brady supporters are likely to somehow feel some sort of perspective about their support for Brady, particularly when this ruling had nothing to do with guilt vs innocence.

If you're a Brady supporter, nothing changed. If you're a Brady hater, nothing changed.

Heck, if you're like me and think the whole entire ordeal is one big farce, nothing changed either.

Edited April 25, 2016 by rmcjacket23

[rmcjacket23]

37 minutes ago, JO_75 said:

It should be stated. Patriots won 4 Super Bowls by cheating and the only two they played by the rules... They loss. Coincidence? I think not. 

Thankfully the Patriots first 4 games is as close of a cakewalk you can get outside of Arizona. Bills, Texans and Dolphins? Should be 2-2 at worst, 3-1 if Jimmy proves to be any good. 

I don't see any of those teams as cakewalks.

Obviously its a bit of a stretch to say that they won exclusively because of cheating. Its not like anybody really thinks they were losing to the Colts. They could have played with beach balls or golf balls and they win by 20. Total mismatch.

[i82much]

3 hours ago, rmcjacket23 said:

Ummm... what? Straight face and all, do you actually believe a word of anything you just said?

100% of the legal process had absolutely nothing to do with football deflation, cheating, Tom Brady, or the Patriots. That whole concept ended like 16 months ago... that's just fodder for fan boys to debate over what did or didn't happen and what was or wasn't proven.

The legal process that has occurred after that cares nothing about any of that. Its 100% about Roger Goodell's responsibility and power granted in the CBA, and whether he violated that power. 

That's the irony of the whole thing... the entire legal fight is about Roger making sure everybody knows that he did what he was granted power to do (right or wrong doesn't matter), and simultaneously, he's negotiating with the Union to voluntarily give up said power.

In theory, the appeal decision is not about whether the Patriots did anything wrong, the appeal decision is only about whether the NFL violated the contract by arbitrarily imposing discipline.  However, the key takeaway from the appeal decision is that the NFL's decision was not arbitrary precisely because the evidence supports the fact that Brady did in fact cheat.  

So you can tell yourself all you want this is just about the CBA, but the court clearly recognizes that Brady was involved in cheating and hiding evidence.  

[rmcjacket23]

1 minute ago, i82much said:

In theory, the appeal decision is not about whether the Patriots did anything wrong, the appeal decision is only about whether the NFL violated the contract by arbitrarily imposing discipline.  However, the key takeaway from the appeal decision is that the NFL's decision was not arbitrary precisely because the evidence supports the fact that Brady did in fact cheat.  

So you can tell yourself all you want this is just about the CBA, but the court clearly recognizes that Brady was involved in cheating and hiding evidence.  

Cool. And another court determined a precisely opposite outcome and determination with the exact same evidence and "facts". After 18 months, we've got two judges viewing the same proceedings in a different way than two other judges. So whatever conclusions one side of the argument draws based on those outcomes, the exact same conclusions can be drawn by the other side.

Welcome to the inherently subjective world of the legal system, hence why this farce should have never even gone there.

 

[i82much]

26 minutes ago, rmcjacket23 said:

Cool. And another court determined a precisely opposite outcome and determination with the exact same evidence and "facts". After 18 months, we've got two judges viewing the same proceedings in a different way than two other judges. So whatever conclusions one side of the argument draws based on those outcomes, the exact same conclusions can be drawn by the other side.

Welcome to the inherently subjective world of the legal system, hence why this farce should have never even gone there.

 

Contract disputes end up in court, and courts are never perfect.  This case isn't particularly special other than the level of public interest involved.  Welcome to life.  

One thing that isn't so subjective is that people who destroy evidence almost always have something to hide.  

[Tank 92]

4 minutes ago, i82much said:

Contract disputes end up in court, and courts are never perfect.  This case isn't particularly special other than the level of public interest involved.  Welcome to life.  

One thing that isn't so subjective is that people who destroy evidence almost always have something to hide.  

 

"One thing that isn't so subjective is that people who destroy evidence almost always have something to hide." 

Very true.  Add to that anyone with half a brain could tell he was lying during his pressers.  Those things in themselves are the abhorrent crimes, not deflating footballs.

Edited April 25, 2016 by Tank 92

[GrimCoconut]

Yeah, I don't remember anyone ever destroying evidence because they had nothing to hide. Isn't that the whole point? I'm sure accidents have happened, but I don't think that happened here. I'm tired of the story and I think Brady did cheat but I still think he's a Hell of a QB. Not sure why he felt like he should cheat in the first place because he certainly didn't need that stuff to win, as we saw this year. Patriots did well despite a lot of things being stacked against them. 

[berad]

Guys, 'Tom regularly has his mobile phones destroyed' so it's not a big deal... really!

[rmcjacket23]

23 minutes ago, i82much said:

Contract disputes end up in court, and courts are never perfect.  This case isn't particularly special other than the level of public interest involved.  Welcome to life.  

One thing that isn't so subjective is that people who destroy evidence almost always have something to hide.  

Yeah... things like their privacy.

I never really cared much about the whole cell phone "conspiracy" thing, mostly because its not like anybody really thinks a rich person is just going to voluntarily hand over their phone to a complete stranger and just pretend like all of it won't be online in an hour.

Rich people got trust issues, and rightfully so. If I were him, I'd destroy the phone just because I can and chuckle at all the conspiracy theories that come from it.

Kind of validates this whole farce in a way. I mean its not like we can really look at things like whether the footballs were actually deflated, because there just isn't any valid evidence on either side of the argument to prove they were. So we just ask questions like "we you smash your phone" to troll up some substance. I don't blame it, because I'd do it too. Its similar to attacking credibility when we deep down know the person is telling the truth. We can't refute what they are saying or what actually happened, so we refute the person instead.

And in the end, Tom is going to lose less than 1% of his 2016 earnings and the people that hated him before still hate him, and the people that liked him before still like him. I'd right it off as paying for my own amusement.

And the only thing the NFL gets is lost revenue and a court upholding an agreement that they already signed years ago.

That's the perspective people should be focusing on.

Edited April 25, 2016 by rmcjacket23

[GrimCoconut]

13 minutes ago, berad said:

Guys, 'Tom regularly has his mobile phones destroyed' so it's not a big deal... really!

Oh, I didn't know that. Is he a drug lord or something? Maybe he and Hernandez doing shady business in the side. 

[FGSB]

5 hours ago, rmcjacket23 said:

Who knows. I suppose they could just appeal again, but I doubt it.

Brady already slashed his salary to $1M for the season, so he's only losing $250K (down from $2M he would have lost last year).

I wonder how the NFL feels about now about their big time Sunday night game they scheduled for week 1... where the Cardinals will play Jimmy Garapolo, or that Thursday night game in week 3 against the Texans. 

I wonder if that was worth $250K to a charity plus legal fees? All to protect the rights of a Commissioner who has already said he's negotiating to give up those rights as we speak.

the salt is delicious

[i82much]

58 minutes ago, rmcjacket23 said:

Yeah... things like their privacy.

I never really cared much about the whole cell phone "conspiracy" thing, mostly because its not like anybody really thinks a rich person is just going to voluntarily hand over their phone to a complete stranger and just pretend like all of it won't be online in an hour.

Rich people got trust issues, and rightfully so. If I were him, I'd destroy the phone just because I can and chuckle at all the conspiracy theories that come from it.

Kind of validates this whole farce in a way. I mean its not like we can really look at things like whether the footballs were actually deflated, because there just isn't any valid evidence on either side of the argument to prove they were. So we just ask questions like "we you smash your phone" to troll up some substance. I don't blame it, because I'd do it too. Its similar to attacking credibility when we deep down know the person is telling the truth. We can't refute what they are saying or what actually happened, so we refute the person instead.

And in the end, Tom is going to lose less than 1% of his 2016 earnings and the people that hated him before still hate him, and the people that liked him before still like him. I'd right it off as paying for my own amusement.

And the only thing the NFL gets is lost revenue and a court upholding an agreement that they already signed years ago.

That's the perspective people should be focusing on.

If you are capable of convincing yourself that Brady didn't do anything wrong, good for you.  While we are at it, all dogs go to heaven, Santa Claus is real, and you really are just as handsome and smart as your mommy says you are. 

Edited April 25, 2016 by i82much

[Steve0x]

Well Pats are not on Ravens schedule unlike he faced us last year. Why can NFL reinbuse us the win cause Ravens would had beaten the Pats if Courts didn't overturn his suspension. Pats made the playoffs.Pats would been eliminated if Brady didn't play. Pats are just another 6-10 team without Brady. Just look at the Steelers for example. The only reason Steelers made the playoffs is because of Big Ben. If Big Ben didn't play they wouldn't have made playoffs. Same way with pats though.

[The Mom Gene]

2 hours ago, berad said:

Guys, 'Tom regularly has his mobile phones destroyed' so it's not a big deal... really!

The problem with that one, at the time, Berad, was the one he used before, and the one he used after were still available.

[Cville-Raven]

55 minutes ago, Steve0x said:

Well Pats are not on Ravens schedule unlike he faced us last year. Why can NFL reinbuse us the win cause Ravens would had beaten the Pats if Courts didn't overturn his suspension. Pats made the playoffs.Pats would been eliminated if Brady didn't play. Pats are just another 6-10 team without Brady. Just look at the Steelers for example. The only reason Steelers made the playoffs is because of Big Ben. If Big Ben didn't play they wouldn't have made playoffs. Same way with pats though.

Uh what?

[Grapple Raven]

Justice has prevailed!  Hasn't this just been the greatest day ever? lol