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

[AsianRice]

We do have fake Ravens fans with the Pats under skin.....That's not even the point when delusional Pats fans kept on fighting against the facts....The organization just don't get a cheat name by accident.....

[rmcjacket23]

And the Odyssey continues...

[Steve0x]

Goodell should get tougher. Tell Brady ok,,lets make it 6 games now. You wanna challenge me some more ? 

[The Mom Gene]

These courts... and the Supreme Court...  They aren't even going to agree to hear this nonsense.

 

[ludy51]

The judge should just throw this out

[Steve0x]

10 minutes ago, The Mom Gene said:

These courts... and the Supreme Court...  They aren't even going to agree to hear this nonsense.

 

You mean the kangaroo circus? 

[rmcjacket23]

26 minutes ago, The Mom Gene said:

These courts... and the Supreme Court...  They aren't even going to agree to hear this nonsense.

 

Where have I heard this before...

...maybe before each of the last two times that a court who had no business hearing this nonsense agreed to hear this nonsense...

Edited May 23, 2016 by rmcjacket23

[The Mom Gene]

1 hour ago, rmcjacket23 said:

Where have I heard this before...

...maybe before each of the last two times that a court who had no business hearing this nonsense agreed to hear this nonsense...

These guys won't... 

[52520Andrew]

Via Schefter

As of today, Deflategate is 491 days old. It has lasted nearly 7 times longer than Kim Kardashian's marriage to the Hawks' Kris Humphries.

[rmcjacket23]

12 minutes ago, The Mom Gene said:

These guys won't... 

Heard that one too...

Edited May 23, 2016 by rmcjacket23

[The Mom Gene]

17 minutes ago, rmcjacket23 said:

Heard that one too...

Saying it again.

[Tank 92]

1 hour ago, rmcjacket23 said:

Heard that one too...

You said they would laugh it out of court last time. If you repeat that you will be correct this time.  lol

[rmcjacket23]

3 minutes ago, Tank 92 said:

You said they would laugh it out of court last time. If you repeat that you will be correct this time.  lol

Hence why I keep saying "I've heard that one before"...I was one of the people saying it.

[K-Dog]

Really at this point, nothing would surprise me. 

[lgcs27288]

I would really like to think the courts would choose other more important and pressing issues. However, in this day and age I wouldn't be surprised if they are watering at the mouth for this one only because it is high profile.

[rmcjacket23]

14 hours ago, lgcs27288 said:

I would really like to think the courts would choose other more important and pressing issues. However, in this day and age I wouldn't be surprised if they are watering at the mouth for this one only because it is high profile.

Well and it hasn't had anything to do with football deflation for quite some time. NFL is fighting to uphold their CBA rights, and Brady's camp/NFLPA are fighting the notion that Goodell overstepped his rights under the CBA.

Has the potential to set some vague "precedence" in future court cases, so possible the court wants to hear this again.

[Grapple Raven]

On ‎5‎/‎23‎/‎2016 at 6:45 PM, lgcs27288 said:

I would really like to think the courts would choose other more important and pressing issues. However, in this day and age I wouldn't be surprised if they are watering at the mouth for this one only because it is high profile.

Trust me, the courts have more of the Nation's pressing business than to deal with this case, lol.  The Courts generally do not like dealing with collective bargaining issues either since most aren't governed by the Nation's law but by laws of their own creation as in the CBA.  While this case is probably important to those involved (ie, NFL and NFLPA) it isn't important in the eyes of the judicial system as it relates to their charge/duty. When you think about it, based off what Brady's attorneys' are going to argue in their appeal for an "en bank" hearing to the U. S. Second Circuit Court of Appeals...they are arguing that what happened to Brady affects the other 1600 players of the NFLPA.  Usually in the courts eyes that doesn't effect a substantial number of Americans to warrant taking a second look at the case.

If they turn down Brady's appeal, that may be all he is looking for as it would prompt his attorney's to ask for a stay while they appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court, and that stay could allow him to play the four games at the start of the season. I think that is what Brady is looking for.  Brady has less than a 1% chance in having his case heard by the U.S. Supreme Court.

 

[rmcjacket23]

40 minutes ago, Grapple Raven said:

Trust me, the courts have more of the Nation's pressing business than to deal with this case, lol.  The Courts generally do not like dealing with collective bargaining issues either since most aren't governed by the Nation's law but by laws of their own creation as in the CBA.  While this case is probably important to those involved (ie, NFL and NFLPA) it isn't important in the eyes of the judicial system as it relates to their charge/duty. When you think about it, based off what Brady's attorneys' are going to argue in their appeal for an "en bank" hearing to the U. S. Second Circuit Court of Appeals...they are arguing that what happened to Brady affects the other 1600 players of the NFLPA.  Usually in the courts eyes that doesn't effect a substantial number of Americans to warrant taking a second look at the case.

If they turn down Brady's appeal, that may be all he is looking for as it would prompt his attorney's to ask for a stay while they appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court, and that stay could allow him to play the four games at the start of the season. I think that is what Brady is looking for.  Brady has less than a 1% chance in having his case heard by the U.S. Supreme Court.

 

If he gets a stay (which he probably will), he's playing all of 2016, and could easily go on longer than that. By the time it gets to a point where the stay is asked for and granted, you're looking at sometime this summer. There's no shot that the Supreme Court would agree to hear a case six months later. My guess is it would take at least 9-12 months, putting you sometime around next summer before the Supreme Court even hears this.

What I think would be incredibly awesome and the biggest slap in the face to this farce would be if Brady can manage to drag this out under a stay for another 20 months or so and retire before he ever serves a game.

That, I think, would just put a cherry on top of the whole thing. Doubtful his legal team could prolong that long, but its kind of hard to see many scenarios where Brady is actually suspended in 2016.

Edited May 26, 2016 by rmcjacket23

[BmoreBird22]

On 5/23/2016 at 1:06 PM, rmcjacket23 said:

Where have I heard this before...

...maybe before each of the last two times that a court who had no business hearing this nonsense agreed to hear this nonsense...

Well, this is almost guaranteed because I believe 0.03% of cases since 2000 have been heard by a full panel of appellate judges, so...

[ludy51]

Shouldn't the title be one word, "DeflateGate"?

[BujuBanton]

On May 26, 2016 at 9:33 AM, rmcjacket23 said:

If he gets a stay (which he probably will), he's playing all of 2016, and could easily go on longer than that. By the time it gets to a point where the stay is asked for and granted, you're looking at sometime this summer. There's no shot that the Supreme Court would agree to hear a case six months later. My guess is it would take at least 9-12 months, putting you sometime around next summer before the Supreme Court even hears this.

What I think would be incredibly awesome and the biggest slap in the face to this farce would be if Brady can manage to drag this out under a stay for another 20 months or so and retire before he ever serves a game.

That, I think, would just put a cherry on top of the whole thing. Doubtful his legal team could prolong that long, but its kind of hard to see many scenarios where Brady is actually suspended in 2016.

That is a very plausible scenario. Brady and company have the resources to drag this out for quite some time. It would be ironic if they were able to hold out until he retires and not all that surprising. Best case scenario is to just beat them with Brady!

[TheRavenouseD2008]

Wouldn't it be shocking to find out Brady had something to do with the recent Goodell is dead  hack.

[rmcjacket23]

Is it possible this farce is finally over? Maybe? Possibly? Hopefully? Probably not?

[Cville-Raven]

This ride never ends

[Moderator 3]

He's going to drag it out until he retires.

[Tank 92]

Would they dare have the cojones to waste the time of the Supreme Court?  That's all that's left.  

[rmcjacket23]

2 minutes ago, Tank 92 said:

Would they dare have the cojones to waste the time of the Supreme Court?  That's all that's left.  

Up to the Supreme Court to decide if its worth wasting their time.

[The Mom Gene]

Like I said.  They won't hear it.  They have way too much on their plates right now than to worry about Tommy's suspension. 

[Grapple Raven]

The fact that the entire 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals panel seated to hear Brady's appeal denied Brady an en banc hearing is a death knell to Brady and he should listen to it! Ruth Bader Ginsburg, the U.S. Supreme Court Justice is in charge of hearing a petition to stay Brady's appeal if Brady files one, which he probably will file a petition to grant a stay.   I doubt he will be granted the petition by Ginsburg due to the fact that it was the full appeals bench that upheld the suspension, which seems to indicate that the court system is through with this case as it sees it as having no merit.

If Ginsburg were to grant a stay, it means that Brady's 4 game suspension would just be put off towards the end of the season, and if the U. S. Supreme Court denies the Brady case a hearing, then the 4 game suspension will be upheld and Brady would have to serve it.  If Ginsburg refuses to grant Brady a stay then the suspension is upheld.

Brady only has one shot left, and that is to appeal his case to the U. S. Supreme Court which a long shot, an extreme long shot.  The U. S. Supreme Court hears cases that set a precedent on American Law that affect all Americans, Brady's case is an arbitration case over a Collective Bargaining agreement which deals with a labor dispute, which doesn't apply to the criteria of a precedent setting case. The court typically doesn't hear labor dispute issues as it doesn't fall under the spectrum of American Law, therefore it wouldn't affect a large majority of Americans, so the court would most likely refuse to hear it.

 

[Tank 92]

1 hour ago, rmcjacket23 said:

Up to the Supreme Court to decide if its worth wasting their time.

Point being it's a waste of time, period.