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

[52520Andrew]

1 hour ago, Cville-Raven said:

Uh what?

Yeah we play the Pats this year and did not play them last year

[Tank 92]

1 hour ago, Grapple Raven said:

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

I wanna see him squirm in some interviews again. That will be cool.   scumbag   lol

[K-Dog]

39 minutes ago, Tank 92 said:

I wanna see him squirm in some interviews again. 

He won't.
He will just sit there with his cocky arrogant smile.  "It's the whole world against me because I am the greatest ever "

SMH.

[Inqui]

20 minutes ago, K-Dog said:

He won't.
He will just sit there with his cocky arrogant smile.  "It's the whole world against me because I am the greatest ever "

SMH.

Every post on every Patriots forum ever.

[Cville-Raven]

19 minutes ago, Inqui said:

Every post on every Patriots forum ever.

It's beyond the point of being predictable

[harfordravenfan]

20 minutes ago, Inqui said:

Every post on every Patriots forum ever.

Soooooooooo true, it's all a conspiracy

[Inqui]

2 minutes ago, Cville-Raven said:

It's beyond the point of being predictable

They were even harping on about how Goodell and the rest of the world were out to get them when Tray Walker died. I don't think any other fan base can get that scummy. As far as this Deflategate stuff goes they've got no sympathy from me.

Edited April 26, 2016 by Inqui

[Cville-Raven]

10 minutes ago, Inqui said:

They were even harping on about how Goodell and the rest of the world were out to get them when Tray Walker died. I don't think any other fan base can get that scummy. As far as this Deflategate stuff goes they've got no sympathy from me.

http://www.patsfans.com/new-england-patriots/messageboard/threads/shame-on-america.1129223/

this is gold

 

Some guy even wants America to crumble because they've allowed goodell to still be the comish. Man if only they knew who sepp blatter was.

Edited April 26, 2016 by Cville-Raven

[rmcjacket23]

16 hours ago, i82much said:

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. 

Implies that I think Brady didn't do anything anything wrong, which is a poor assumption on your part. I'll give you a hint... there are people on this planet that think Brady did do something wrong AND, simultaneously, the whole process is one big farce and complete botch job by the NFL.

 

Edited April 26, 2016 by Moderator 3
Disrespectful remarks removed

[rmcjacket23]

12 hours ago, K-Dog said:

He won't.
He will just sit there with his cocky arrogant smile.  "It's the whole world against me because I am the greatest ever "

SMH.

Can you blame him though? He's filthy rich, he's got a Supermodel wife who makes more money than he does, and he's without question one of the most accomplished players to ever play professional football.

And he knows a lot of people didn't like him 5 years ago just like they don't like him now, so nothing has changed.

What do you expect him to do? Tell us everything we want to hear just so we can feel better about our lives?

[ludy51]

27 minutes ago, rmcjacket23 said:

Can you blame him though? He's filthy rich, he's got a Supermodel wife who makes more money than he does, and he's without question one of the most accomplished players to ever play professional football.

And he knows a lot of people didn't like him 5 years ago just like they don't like him now, so nothing has changed.

What do you expect him to do? Tell us everything we want to hear just so we can feel better about our lives?

Yes

[rmcjacket23]

6 minutes ago, ludy51 said:

Yes

Sure, if you are self-righteous. If you believe that everything is just roses and daisies and celebrities always tell you what you want to hear so you can sleep better.

There's also the possibility that he literally doesn't think he did anything wrong, in which case you're now asking him to tell you what you want to hear when he doesn't think it actually happened. Basically, you want him to lie to you.

Certainly a realistic possibility, especially considering he's willing to throw a lot of money and time in court cases in attempt to disprove something that can't in any way benefit or hurt his reputation any more than what has been done already. 

[BmoreBird22]

16 hours 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.

They went 11-5 with Matt Cassell, so...

[BmoreBird22]

I really don't understand this thread.

On one side, we have rmc who was thoroughly convinced judges on the appelete court would "laugh this out of court" and then still fights and argues when they didn't do that. I know he thinks this entire case was stupid, so why argue?

Then, we have people who only want to hear rmc admit he was wrong about the outcome, which he will not.

I'm convinced both sides are just arguing for the sake of arguing.

Then, we have the people who only care that Brady got suspended and don't give a crap about what the league does as long as Brady is suspended.

In my opinion, this was a ridiculous court case to begin with. I don't understand how it even made it to court in the first place. The NFLPA gave Goodell the power to discipline players as a part of the CBA to avoid third party, outside arbitration. They wanted to avoid outside decisions, but then do exactly that? 

I also throroughly believe the NFL botched this. They were way too focused on the deflated balls that wouldn't decide the outcome of the game instead of focusing on the lack of cooperation or the fact that he destroyed his cell phones. I'm not saying he had to turn them over, but he flat out destroyed it AND refused to help.

I honestly believe that if he had just owned up that the NFL would have likely given a two game suspension that would get appealed down to one and the Pats wouldn't have lost their first round pick or been fined. I think it was the self righteous attitude that did them both in and the NFL just wanted to set the tone that you cant just walk over the NFL. 

I also am really glad that the suspension got reinstated because it sets the precedent that when the NFLPA is unhappy, they can't just cry to the courts. 

Oh, and one last thing- while I think it's dumb to get suspended for deflated footballs that wouldn't have altered the game, the NFL has to be consistent. They broke the rules and the NFL has to be consistent in their discipline in what they believe will challenge the integrity of the game. It's about consistency to me. Still believe the NFL would have suspended him for consistency, but do believe it would have been shorter had he cooperated.

[rmcjacket23]

54 minutes ago, BmoreBird22 said:

I really don't understand this thread.

On one side, we have rmc who was thoroughly convinced judges on the appelete court would "laugh this out of court" and then still fights and argues when they didn't do that. I know he thinks this entire case was stupid, so why argue?

Then, we have people who only want to hear rmc admit he was wrong about the outcome, which he will not.

I'm convinced both sides are just arguing for the sake of arguing.

Then, we have the people who only care that Brady got suspended and don't give a crap about what the league does as long as Brady is suspended.

In my opinion, this was a ridiculous court case to begin with. I don't understand how it even made it to court in the first place. The NFLPA gave Goodell the power to discipline players as a part of the CBA to avoid third party, outside arbitration. They wanted to avoid outside decisions, but then do exactly that? 

I also throroughly believe the NFL botched this. They were way too focused on the deflated balls that wouldn't decide the outcome of the game instead of focusing on the lack of cooperation or the fact that he destroyed his cell phones. I'm not saying he had to turn them over, but he flat out destroyed it AND refused to help.

I honestly believe that if he had just owned up that the NFL would have likely given a two game suspension that would get appealed down to one and the Pats wouldn't have lost their first round pick or been fined. I think it was the self righteous attitude that did them both in and the NFL just wanted to set the tone that you cant just walk over the NFL. 

I also am really glad that the suspension got reinstated because it sets the precedent that when the NFLPA is unhappy, they can't just cry to the courts. 

Oh, and one last thing- while I think it's dumb to get suspended for deflated footballs that wouldn't have altered the game, the NFL has to be consistent. They broke the rules and the NFL has to be consistent in their discipline in what they believe will challenge the integrity of the game. It's about consistency to me. Still believe the NFL would have suspended him for consistency, but do believe it would have been shorter had he cooperated.

Pretty good summary. My additions:

1. Its kind of dumb to ask me to admit I was wrong about the outcome when nobody actually knows what the outcome is. The outcome isn't decided until people stop suing each other and somebody either starts serving a suspension or the league tells him he no longer has to. Until then, there is no outcome. 

In both cases, I said I didn't think an appellant court would overturn anything that happened before it. I thought the original appeal by Brady would fail, and I thought the NFL's appeal of the appeal would fail. I certainly wasn't alone in thinking this, because from a legal perspective, its all just a bunch of different opinions in different courts (imagine that).

2. Overwhelming majority of posters on these boards are absolutely, 100%, only interested in Brady getting punished. It doesn't matter if he did anything right, wrong, ethical, unethical, has integrity, lacks integrity. Its a Ravens board, and Ravens fans simply don't like Tom Brady. They didn't like him before DeflateGate, and they won't like him afterwards, so anything bad that happens to him is considered a good thing around here. I get it, but its also a purely emotional reaction, rather than a logical or well-thought-out reaction. Its those kinds of reactions that we, as Ravens fans, mock others for. When somebody tells us they don't like the Ravens because they think Ray Lewis is a murderer and that he represents our organization (which he does), that's a very similar emotional reaction to a Ravens fan saying they don't like Tom Brady because we think he's been deflating footballs every game for 15 years.

3. Even if we go ahead with the Tom did everything he's been accused of theory... does any single person actually think the NFL comes out of this looking good? Does anybody think the NFL's handling of the process was done correctly, and that the punishment and legal process that has followed it warrants the type of infraction that Brady is guilty of? Does anybody really think the guy who's got a one-way, unaltered ticket directly to a first ballot, unanimous seat in the HOF comes out of this looking worse than the NFL?

4. I agree with the consistency concept. The issue I have is that how can anybody say consistency has been shown in this process? Consistent with what?

Edited April 26, 2016 by rmcjacket23

[beanfigger]

I still think four games is the biggest joke. The league obviously believes, like me, that a violation like this is egregious and deserves a big punishment. They proved this with the punishment they levied on the team. Therefore, if they could have shown Brady was directly involved, nothing short of a full year suspension is enough.

However, there's the rub. They did not do enough to "prove" he was involved. We all know he was, but that's not enough in what has become a courtroom battle. A destroyed cell phone cannot be the brick wall that causes them to throw up their hands and say, "Well, we tried."

The four game suspension is lazy. It's saying, "We know you did it, even though we won't work hard enough to definitively prove it." That may be enough in many cases because this was not a legal battle to begin with; it was a business dispute. The problem is that this was so high-profile and destined to be drawn out and dragged into the courtroom, so the NFL needed to do more.

A full year or nothing were the only two options, in my mind. Four games is just dumb and meaningless. Nobody wins here, least of all the entire NFL.

[rmcjacket23]

15 minutes ago, beanfigger said:

I still think four games is the biggest joke. The league obviously believes, like me, that a violation like this is egregious and deserves a big punishment. They proved this with the punishment they levied on the team. Therefore, if they could have shown Brady was directly involved, nothing short of a full year suspension is enough.

However, there's the rub. They did not do enough to "prove" he was involved. We all know he was, but that's not enough in what has become a courtroom battle. A destroyed cell phone cannot be the brick wall that causes them to throw up their hands and say, "Well, we tried."

The four game suspension is lazy. It's saying, "We know you did it, even though we won't work hard enough to definitively prove it." That may be enough in many cases because this was not a legal battle to begin with; it was a business dispute. The problem is that this was so high-profile and destined to be drawn out and dragged into the courtroom, so the NFL needed to do more.

A full year or nothing were the only two options, in my mind. Four games is just dumb and meaningless. Nobody wins here, least of all the entire NFL.

Well, lets be real here... a full year suspension is exponentially too harsh and serves no purpose, particularly given what has transpired in the last 24 months.

You can't logically claim that deflating footballs intentionally and lying about it is a bigger detriment to the reputation of the league and the integrity of the sport than domestic violence or even steroid usage, so punishing it 3 or 4 times harsher than that makes the NFL look incompetent. Those are the kinds of decisions that ultimately cost people their jobs.

And that's even if you can definitively prove that footballs were intentionally deflated and that he didn't cooperate... just doesn't come anywhere near rising to that level.

I mean even the punishments in the BountyGate scandal, which certainly rises way above the "integrity of the game" aspect that people preach in regards to DeflateGate, were viewed as too harsh, and that was basically a year long suspension for a bunch of people for organizing a program of compensation for intentionally injuring other human beings over several years (basically assault).

That's why a year long suspension never made any sense and was likely never a consideration. It just never rose anywhere near that level.

Edited April 26, 2016 by rmcjacket23

[i82much]

3 hours ago, rmcjacket23 said:

Implies that I think Brady didn't do anything anything wrong, which is a poor assumption on your part. I'll give you a hint... there are people on this planet that think Brady did do something wrong AND, simultaneously, the whole process is one big farce and complete botch job by the NFL.

 

So you're on both sides of the issue and still want to debate with everybody else.  Sounds like you should run for office.

The bottom line is quite simple.  Brady and the Pats have been established cheaters for about as long as I can remember.  Deflategate is just more of the same, and I am glad to see that they got punished.  The courts are completely screwed up but we've known that for a long time too, so however arbitrary they are at least, for now, they got this one right.  

[beanfigger]

18 minutes ago, rmcjacket23 said:

Well, lets be real here... a full year suspension is exponentially too harsh and serves no purpose, particularly given what has transpired in the last 24 months.

You can't logically claim that deflating footballs intentionally and lying about it is a bigger detriment to the reputation of the league and the integrity of the sport than domestic violence or even steroid usage, so punishing it 3 or 4 times harsher than that makes the NFL look incompetent. Those are the kinds of decisions that ultimately cost people their jobs.

And that's even if you can definitively prove that footballs were intentionally deflated and that he didn't cooperate... just doesn't come anywhere near rising to that level.

I mean even the punishments in the BountyGate scandal, which certainly rises way above the "integrity of the game" aspect that people preach in regards to DeflateGate, were viewed as too harsh, and that was basically a year long suspension for a bunch of people for organizing a program of compensation for intentionally injuring other human beings over several years (basically assault).

That's why a year long suspension never made any sense and was likely never a consideration. It just never rose anywhere near that level.

This has nothing to do with domestic violence. The NFL, though it should do what it can to make sure its employees are not criminals, has absolutely no responsibility when it comes to crimes committed outside the game. They have been forced to, and I'm not complaining, implement ways to punish individuals for crimes committed in the real world beyond what the justice system, who IS responsible for those actions, seems necessary.

This is a violation of league rules. If they believe this occurred, it is cheating. Just because you personally believe that it was just a little cheating, that still means it's cheating. It was cheating in the conference championship game in order to earn a place in the ultimate title game in American sports.

Bountygate is a fair comparison (though it was less cheating and more terrible on the field conduct), and there were people suspended for a year, and more. That was also the controversy that led to Payton being guilty by ignorance, something that Belichick was mind-bogglyingly never accused of. He should have gotten what Payton gotten IF the NFL had done enough to prove this occurred. Brady should have gotten what Vilma got IF the NFL had done enough to prove he was involved.

The NFL didn't do enough to prove what was already obvious to everyone else, so the four games still bothers me. It would still bother me even if they had done enough to prove it, just for the opposite reason.

Edited April 26, 2016 by beanfigger

[rmcjacket23]

1 minute ago, i82much said:

So you're on both sides of the issue and still want to debate with everybody else.  Sounds like you should run for office.

The bottom line is quite simple.  Brady and the Pats have been established cheaters for about as long as I can remember.  Deflategate is just more of the same, and I am glad to see that they got punished.  The courts are completely screwed up but we've known that for a long time too, so however arbitrary they are at least, for now, they got this one right.  

Ahh, and see there enlies the rub... I'm not on a side. I sit back and soak it all in. I don't just soak in what I want to soak in to formulate a solution I've already determined I want to see.

I don't buy into all the nonsense of trying to loop in people to past controversies that they had nothing to do with, because I'm not attempting to formulate a solution that I want to see.

One thing is for certain... there isn't a reasonable person on this planet who thinks anything about this entire process is "quite simple". Even figuring out what actually happened is the precise opposite of the word "simple". That's partially why we are where we are.

 

 

[BmoreBird22]

1 hour ago, rmcjacket23 said:

Pretty good summary. My additions:

1. Its kind of dumb to ask me to admit I was wrong about the outcome when nobody actually knows what the outcome is. The outcome isn't decided until people stop suing each other and somebody either starts serving a suspension or the league tells him he no longer has to. Until then, there is no outcome. 

In both cases, I said I didn't think an appellant court would overturn anything that happened before it. I thought the original appeal by Brady would fail, and I thought the NFL's appeal of the appeal would fail. I certainly wasn't alone in thinking this, because from a legal perspective, its all just a bunch of different opinions in different courts (imagine that).

2. Overwhelming majority of posters on these boards are absolutely, 100%, only interested in Brady getting punished. It doesn't matter if he did anything right, wrong, ethical, unethical, has integrity, lacks integrity. Its a Ravens board, and Ravens fans simply don't like Tom Brady. They didn't like him before DeflateGate, and they won't like him afterwards, so anything bad that happens to him is considered a good thing around here. I get it, but its also a purely emotional reaction, rather than a logical or well-thought-out reaction. Its those kinds of reactions that we, as Ravens fans, mock others for. When somebody tells us they don't like the Ravens because they think Ray Lewis is a murderer and that he represents our organization (which he does), that's a very similar emotional reaction to a Ravens fan saying they don't like Tom Brady because we think he's been deflating footballs every game for 15 years.

3. Even if we go ahead with the Tom did everything he's been accused of theory... does any single person actually think the NFL comes out of this looking good? Does anybody think the NFL's handling of the process was done correctly, and that the punishment and legal process that has followed it warrants the type of infraction that Brady is guilty of? Does anybody really think the guy who's got a one-way, unaltered ticket directly to a first ballot, unanimous seat in the HOF comes out of this looking worse than the NFL?

4. I agree with the consistency concept. The issue I have is that how can anybody say consistency has been shown in this process? Consistent with what?

I think we're both in agreement that this entire thread is bogus and that it's gotten convoluted with so many different sides.

When I say consistency, I mean consistently punishing for acts they view as challenging the integrity of the game. For example, PED's net a suspension, so deflating footballs, if you believe it creates an advantage, should as well. Just consistent in their punishment so that it doesn't become murky as to what's allowed and what's not. I think the NFL is doing a strong job of at least trying to outline boundaries so teams don't push the envelope too much, so to speak.

I am also in overwhelming agreement that the NFL totally botched this case  (I think they had a case, but definitely screwed it up) and in the idea that a year long suspension would be wise. A player has to get busted like four times for PEDs, but you wanna ban Brady for a year for deflating footballs? I agree in the suspension, but a year?

Edited April 26, 2016 by BmoreBird22

[rmcjacket23]

5 minutes ago, BmoreBird22 said:

I think we're both in agreement that this entire thread is bogus and that it's gotten convoluted with so many different sides.

When I say consistency, I mean consistently punishing for acts they view as challenging the integrity of the game. For example, PED's net a suspension, so deflating footballs, if you believe it creates an advantage, should as well. Just consistent in their punishment so that it doesn't become murky as to what's allowed and what's not. I think the NFL is doing a strong job of at least trying to outline boundaries so teams don't push the envelope too much, so to speak.

I mean I'm fine with this, I just don't see the consistency comparison because I think, somewhat like BountyGate, this is sort of a "rare" case. 

The PED comparison was even brought up in court, and I just don't see it, partially because PED suspensions are collectively bargained, so there's no "arbitrary" assignment of punishment, and I also view PED issues as more of a league-wide problem. Sort of an "epidemic" if you will. Something that happens frequently enough that even the NFLPA acknowledged its a problem and needs to be addressed. 

Obviously don't view deflating footballs or natures of "cheating" in this context to be an epidemic, so I struggle with the comparisons there.

For me, I always thought the punishment was just sort of conjured out of thin air, and I always thought it was in many ways just a case of Roger making sure he never is viewed as going light in punishment ever again, on the heels of Rice/AP. He completely whiffed on judging the temperature of the room in those cases, and I think he whiffed on this one too... just in the other direction.

[Tank 92]

As someone has already mentioned, if Brady would have just come out and told the truth this story would have died and ended quickly. 

I'm not sure how anyone could miss the point of why so many wanted Brady punished. It has zero to do with the fact that he is the QB of a rival, and also not a lot to do with deflating footballs. The guy went on world wide broadcasts and blatantly lied. He also destroyed evidence which pretty much undeniably implies he cheated. The disdain for him has nothing to do with rivalry or envy of his wealth and fame, the guy is a proven, flat out scumbag, period. If it wasn't known by many prior to this mess, it sure should be now. 

 

[i82much]

1 hour ago, rmcjacket23 said:

Ahh, and see there enlies the rub... I'm not on a side. I sit back and soak it all in. I don't just soak in what I want to soak in to formulate a solution I've already determined I want to see.

I don't buy into all the nonsense of trying to loop in people to past controversies that they had nothing to do with, because I'm not attempting to formulate a solution that I want to see.

One thing is for certain... there isn't a reasonable person on this planet who thinks anything about this entire process is "quite simple". Even figuring out what actually happened is the precise opposite of the word "simple". That's partially why we are where we are.

 

 

Oh it's plenty simple.  Cheat, get caught, get punished.  End of story.  God Bless Roger Goodell and somebody make me a sammich.  

[Tank 92]

Shut er down.  

You want cheese on that?

[BmoreBird22]

1 hour ago, rmcjacket23 said:

I mean I'm fine with this, I just don't see the consistency comparison because I think, somewhat like BountyGate, this is sort of a "rare" case. 

The PED comparison was even brought up in court, and I just don't see it, partially because PED suspensions are collectively bargained, so there's no "arbitrary" assignment of punishment, and I also view PED issues as more of a league-wide problem. Sort of an "epidemic" if you will. Something that happens frequently enough that even the NFLPA acknowledged its a problem and needs to be addressed. 

Obviously don't view deflating footballs or natures of "cheating" in this context to be an epidemic, so I struggle with the comparisons there.

For me, I always thought the punishment was just sort of conjured out of thin air, and I always thought it was in many ways just a case of Roger making sure he never is viewed as going light in punishment ever again, on the heels of Rice/AP. He completely whiffed on judging the temperature of the room in those cases, and I think he whiffed on this one too... just in the other direction.

So would you rather them handle it case by case with no precedent in place then? I think the NFL is trying to avoid that entirely by basically saying if you break a rule that could potentially affect the outcome of a game, you're gonna face a suspension.

[rmcjacket23]

Just now, BmoreBird22 said:

So would you rather them handle it case by case with no precedent in place then? I think the NFL is trying to avoid that entirely by basically saying if you break a rule that could potentially affect the outcome of a game, you're gonna face a suspension.

In this case, pretty much yes, considering there really is no precedent. 

As the first appeal showed us, they pretty much attempted to make a case that this falls in line similar to PED usage, but as I said, I don't buy that and neither did Judge Berman.

[52520Andrew]

Adam Schefter ‏@AdamSchefter  23h23 hours ago

Tom Brady not ready to accept court ruling today - far from it, per sources. Mulling options with legal team. But this is not yet over.

 

Yay, this is STILL going on(note the sarcasm, it is heavy)

[rmcjacket23]

12 minutes ago, 52520Andrew said:

Adam Schefter ‏@AdamSchefter  23h23 hours ago

Tom Brady not ready to accept court ruling today - far from it, per sources. Mulling options with legal team. But this is not yet over.

 

Yay, this is STILL going on(note the sarcasm, it is heavy)

Yup, will be interesting to see what happens.

I can't imagine the Supreme Court would really want to hear this case, but its "high profile" enough that they could want to look at it.

[beanfigger]

1 hour ago, rmcjacket23 said:

In this case, pretty much yes, considering there really is no precedent. 

As the first appeal showed us, they pretty much attempted to make a case that this falls in line similar to PED usage, but as I said, I don't buy that and neither did Judge Berman.

This most recent judge did accept the PED comparison as reasonable. Like you said, all subjective.