[News] Steve Bisciotti's Statement On Deflategate Reports

[Tank 92]

By NFL standards, yes.

 

By legal standards, no. There's basically no such thing, from a legal standard, of "simple to prove and indefensible".

 

Standards of proof are very different.

 

And for the record, taking it to court is pretty much a win-win for Brady in any possible scenario. The absolute WORST case scenario for him is that his text messages are entered into discovery, it shows he did deflate the balls intentionally (something that the public already thinks he did), and his suspension is upheld... only he likely delayed the process by at least a couple months and potentially an entire season. So at the end of the worst case scenario, the only thing that happens is a delayed punishment and the public being validated for something they already thought happened and will still think happened even if its proven it didn't happen in a court of law.

 

Things that he could easily gain from going to court:

 

1. He could be entirely vindicated from a legal and suspension standpoint (unlikely, but possible). While it won't completely salvage his reputation, because the public universally indicts celebrities for offenses with or without evidence or proof and doesn't care about actual facts, it will undoubtedly help his reputation.

 

2. It will undoubtedly delay the process, possibly to the level that he can play all of 2015 while its under appeal in court.

 

3. He could have the suspension reduced.

 

4. His legal team could bring to light all of the hypocrisies of the NFL and shed some light on what could only be described as sort of a "half-hearted" investigation of such a ridiculously minor rules infraction that a good judge would literally laugh them out of the room.

Seems you are missing the point. He failed to cooperate with the investigation, period. That's water under the bridge and can't be changed. What, do you think he gets a "do over" just because he could then be forced to turn over texts and email? I don't see a court of law entering into a judgement that would forgive obstructing the investigation.

[Sheldon Glickler]

What a biased site. I just post a long reply to Tank 92 where I showed he/she is wrong. There was no bad language in there. The closest thing was the use of "cry-baby". The post appeared and I read what I wrote. Now it has mysteriously disappeared. I guess this site just doesn't tolerate either an opposing viewpoint -- or FACTS.

[TXRavensFan]

What some people seem to be forgetting is that this is a labor issue that would be taken to court - the federal court will not be re-trying the case to determine Brady's guilt or innocence, so different levels of "proof" are largely irrelevant. Federal courts are notoriously reluctant to hear such cases once they've been through arbitration.

 

In essence, any court case would be Brady arguing that the arbitration was not fair and did not conform to the procedures outlined in the CBA and accepted when he signed his contract or that the NFL violated its own rules in the process. Most commentators agree that this is basically his only chance of winning such a case, and I'm not so sure how good the odds are, since the CBA gives Goodell the ability to determine punishments AND act as an arbitrator.

Edited July 27, 2015 by TXRavensFan

[donkeyking64]

Correct. The easiest argument right from the outset was why on Earth the NFL lets teams handle the balls to begin with.

 

But then again, if it were me, I'd let every team inflate or deflate the balls to whatever specs they wanted. If everybody has the same access and ability to do what they want with them, then there's no competitive advantage.

 

Either give them full access or no access. The concept of allowing them to manage and manipulate the balls during the week and then have them "tested" before the game to meet some vague and borderline irrelevant standard of deflation that the NFL likely conjured out of thin air is the biggest waste of time ever.

I think that's a great point. 

 

Where your argument is potentially weakened is everyone who states that less inflation gives the RBs and WRs an advantage to not fumbling. HOWEVER, like you said...and has been pointed out - if Aaron Rodgers wants them more inflated, his teammates have to get used to that...and they do 

 

That's what they are used to. I honestly believe the fumbling issue is what everyone wants to latch on to to be able to sufficiently influence the idea of cheating. After all, doesn't a more inflated ball have the ability to go further?

[berad]

What a biased site. I just post a long reply to Tank 92 where I showed he/she is wrong. There was no bad language in there. The closest thing was the use of "cry-baby". The post appeared and I read what I wrote. Now it has mysteriously disappeared. I guess this site just doesn't tolerate either an opposing viewpoint -- or FACTS.

 

It was a baiting reply, trying to start a flame war. Calling the Ravens head coach a "cry-baby" in the middle of an unfounded, trolling, pointed claim is not allowed.

 

This thread is also not going to be used for the Patriots comment-crusade of half-truths, red herrings, pseudo-science, and 'hey they did it, too' abatement that we've seen on just about every site referencing this controversy.

[Ravensuperfan1]

Brady should be suspended at least 6 games. Patriot fans and conspiracy nuts go home

[rmcjacket23]

What some people seem to be forgetting is that this is a labor issue that would be taken to court - the federal court will not be re-trying the case to determine Brady's guilt or innocence, so different levels of "proof" are largely irrelevant. Federal courts are notoriously reluctant to hear such cases once they've been through arbitration.

 

In essence, any court case would be Brady arguing that the arbitration was not fair and did not conform to the procedures outlined in the CBA and accepted when he signed his contract or that the NFL violated its own rules in the process. Most commentators agree that this is basically his only chance of winning such a case, and I'm not so sure how good the odds are, since the CBA gives Goodell the ability to determine punishments AND act as an arbitrator.

That is correct... they aren't re-trying the case. BUT, the facts of the case certainly come into play when you're attempting to argue that the investigation and ruling were not fair and did not conform with standard procedures that were collectively bargained.

 

You COULD (though unlikely to succeed) argue that its impossible to say that you had a fair investigation, when the investigation yielded a result that didn't actually happen (if Brady still says he's innocent of all of it). Not a very good argument obviously, but certain facts of the case will certainly come out. The fact that we're discussing his texts and emails being apart of the discovery in court is evidence alone that a judge will still have to hear and agree with certain facts.

 

If determining innocence of guilt is largely irrelevant, then his texts and emails are largely irrelevant also, because the only thing they would prove is innocence or guilt.

[donkeyking64]

Seems you are missing the point. He failed to cooperate with the investigation, period. That's water under the bridge and can't be changed. What, do you think he gets a "do over" just because he could then be forced to turn over texts and email? I don't see a court of law entering into a judgement that would forgive obstructing the investigation.

I think a court would give a hard look at the manner in which he was disciplined. That's the real issue. 

 

There is no precedent for 4 games in the RealWorld. In the NFL they can do as they please. You have to remember that the fine for this thing is at least $25,000. To your point he was "obstructing" the investigation BUT the way the RealWorld works is that there needs to be some precedent already established that says the NFL can give him 4 games when he obstructs the investigation. 

 

As we all know, there was not such a precedent. It doesn't matter if we agree that 100% of Brady's NFL discipline was due to him not handing over text messages, nor does it matter that 100% of the team's penalty was due to a previous record. That stuff doesn't matter in the RealWorld Court of Law

[rmcjacket23]

You're right in that it's the 'manufacturer recommended inflation range' because that is the size that the rubber bladder inside is meant to hold without the ball being too squishy or too taught/over-inflated. What if the basis is as simple as wanting the footballs to look uniform and properly inflated? Uniform standards are for aesthetics. I assume Wilson wants their product to look as good as possible on the field, as well.

Why does it matter the basis of the standard, in any case? Personal disagreement of a rule (that he agreed to / established) is not a license to break it. If Brady had an issue with the ranges, he should have petitioned the league off the field, not instructed equipment managers to make his own adjustments in a bathroom after stealing the balls from the officials locker room. That's a strawman argument, anyways, because that apparently was not the case - remember Brady played the ignorant game when the news first broke?

It matters a very large amount when you're appealing something like this to a party that can look at this objectively AND, most importantly, had nothing to do with formulating the basis for the rule to begin with.

 

There are countless examples in a court of law where judges, jury's, etc. have thrown out perfectly valid cases based on the fact that the law is ambiguous or even baseless. And what do you know, in most cases, the law gets completely changed right after that.

 

In this case, you've already got the league backpedaling, since they're now "changing" a rule, even though they didn't really change the rule at all... they simply increased the standards by which they enforce it, because they did a horrific job of enforcing it initially.

 

Saying "well just follow the rule because its a rule" is a horrific, horrific, horrific justification for anything, and its actually goes against everything this country was entirely founded upon. Not saying this needs to rise to that level, but the "doesn't matter what the rule is... just follow it" just doesn't hold up. Its a very antiquated and outdated way of looking at things. In a sport that is known for its innovation and evolution, if a single person can't even explain what the goal of the rule is and what parties benefit or are hurt by it, then its time for a change to the rule.

 

The NFL literally changed nothing here.

[donkeyking64]

You're right in that it's the 'manufacturer recommended inflation range' because that is the size that the rubber bladder inside is meant to hold without the ball being too squishy or too taught/over-inflated. What if the basis is as simple as wanting the footballs to look uniform and properly inflated? Uniform standards are for aesthetics. I assume Wilson wants their product to look as good as possible on the field, as well.

Why does it matter the basis of the standard, in any case? Personal disagreement of a rule (that he agreed to / established) is not a license to break it. If Brady had an issue with the ranges, he should have petitioned the league off the field, not instructed equipment managers to make his own adjustments in a bathroom after stealing the balls from the officials locker room. That's a strawman argument, anyways, because that apparently was not the case - remember Brady played the ignorant game when the news first broke?

Brady has looked awful as in an idiot and he's also looked awful as an arrogant guy. 

 

I'm not a Pats fan I'm a Ravens fan. I do respect what this guy did when he was essentially an afterthought in his draft class. All that said - we all know the NFL pulls everything out of it's rear. Bountygate - the story and the aftermath. Ray Rice - you didn't know what happened in the elevator and Ray Rice was ambiguous when he told you the story. What else did I miss?

 

This is the classic story of the jerk boss and the jerk employee. I gotta go with the jerk employee on this one. I'm sorry...

 

What's most stupid about this is that NFL's lack of conviction and resolution is telling of their inability to lead. Don't get me started with the Junior Seau story

[berad]

It matters a very large amount when you're appealing something like this to a party that can look at this objectively AND, most importantly, had nothing to do with formulating the basis for the rule to begin with.

 

There are countless examples in a court of law where judges, jury's, etc. have thrown out perfectly valid cases based on the fact that the law is ambiguous or even baseless. And what do you know, in most cases, the law gets completely changed right after that.

 

In this case, you've already got the league backpedaling, since they're now "changing" a rule, even though they didn't really change the rule at all... they simply increased the standards by which they enforce it, because they did a horrific job of enforcing it initially.

 

Saying "well just follow the rule because its a rule" is a horrific, horrific, horrific justification for anything, and its actually goes against everything this country was entirely founded upon. Not saying this needs to rise to that level, but the "doesn't matter what the rule is... just follow it" just doesn't hold up. Its a very antiquated and outdated way of looking at things. In a sport that is known for its innovation and evolution, if a single person can't even explain what the goal of the rule is and what parties benefit or are hurt by it, then its time for a change to the rule.

 

The NFL literally changed nothing here.

 

I gave you one explanation for the inflation guidelines on the football. That's my 'off the top of the head' reasoning. Do you care to refute it?

 

What does the United States founding have to do with the inflation standards of a private organization of clubs with their own rules? That's a grandiose false equivalence. No one's civil rights are being infringed, the equipment was not up to standard (seemingly for an unfair advantage) and now people are paying the consequence. If Brady wants to play with leather purses instead of inflated footballs, he's more than welcome to start his own league. I said if Brady had an issue with the rule, he should voice it to whomever is on the competition committee rather than have equipment managers steal footballs and deflate them in a bathroom - I'm repeating myself already...

[berad]

Brady has looked awful as in an idiot and he's also looked awful as an arrogant guy. 

 

I'm not a Pats fan I'm a Ravens fan. I do respect what this guy did when he was essentially an afterthought in his draft class. All that said - we all know the NFL pulls everything out of it's rear. Bountygate - the story and the aftermath. Ray Rice - you didn't know what happened in the elevator and Ray Rice was ambiguous when he told you the story. What else did I miss?

 

This is the classic story of the jerk boss and the jerk employee. I gotta go with the jerk employee on this one. I'm sorry...

 

What's most stupid about this is that NFL's lack of conviction and resolution is telling of their inability to lead. Don't get me started with the Junior Seau story

 

They react to the publicity generated. The best team and one of the best players in the league engaging in what appears to be cheating (when they've already earned a reputation for such) was met with a harsh response.

 

At the time, Ray Rice's 2-game suspension for domestic violence was one of the harshest the NFL had ever given down due to that crime. Countless players got nothing more than a stern talking to - if that... some players had their domestic violence incidents justified by their owner. When the video came out, and the response was overwhelming negative, they had to act. Suspended him with an indefinite ban that Rice had to go through the courts to overturn.

 

Bountygate, again huge negative response pointed towards the integrity of the on-field product and the intentional injury to its athletes. Don't know what part of that is iffy, the Saints and Greg Williams targeted players for injury and paid out bounty sums to those who did it.

 

Junior Seau - don't know what to say about that? He had CTE and committed suicide? I might be missing part of the story, based on what you said.

[rmcjacket23]

I gave you one explanation for the inflation guidelines on the football. That's my 'off the top of the head' reasoning. Do you care to refute it?

 

What does the United States founding have to do with the inflation standards of a private organization of clubs with their own rules? That's a grandiose false equivalence. No one's civil rights are being infringed, the equipment was not up to standard (seemingly for an unfair advantage) and now people are paying the consequence. If Brady wants to play with leather purses instead of inflated footballs, he's more than welcome to start his own league. I said if Brady had an issue with the rule, he should voice it to whomever is on the competition committee rather than have equipment managers steal footballs and deflate them in a bathroom - I'm repeating myself already...

1. I seriously doubt Wilson is overly concerned about the levels at which their footballs are inflated in an NFL game... they're just extremely happy to be the exclusive provider of footballs for the NFL at all, since they know they aren't the only possible provider. The Patriots apparently deflated footballs "significantly" by the publics standards, yet I guarantee precisely ZERO of them said anything about how deflated they looked when they were watching the game.

 

Sorry, but given the publicity Wilson gets for being the exclusive provider of NFL footballs, I have a sneaky suspicion they won't get too upset if Brady deflates some of them to a lower level than they'd like. Not sure why you think thats a valid reason for Wilson or the NFL caring. I think you're reaching a bit there.

 

2. It doesn't, nor could any of my post be even construed as violating somebodies civil rights. Not sure why you would even bring that up.

 

My point, as I clearly stated, was simply that the "just follow the rule because I say so" argument is incredibly weak. The very fact that this conversation is occuring is because not everybody follows that mantra of being a part of the herd that gets led around by its "leader". The basis for any rule, regardless of whether its a law or a rule I make for my children, is important. That way, when somebody questions why I don't let my kids eat a box of Oreos before bed, I can explain it rationally without pounding my fist on the table and saying "because I said so". Needless to say, I wouldn't have much credibility as a parent if I did that.

 

Ironically, we've already seen this happen in the last few months. With the "trickeration" the Pats used against us, the NFL simply sat down, looked at the rule (or lack thereof) and determined "you know what, this makes no sense whatsoever". And what do you know... a rule change occurs.

[rmcjacket23]

They react to the publicity generated. The best team and one of the best players in the league engaging in what appears to be cheating (when they've already earned a reputation for such) was met with a harsh response.

 

At the time, Ray Rice's 2-game suspension for domestic violence was one of the harshest the NFL had ever given down due to that crime. Countless players got nothing more than a stern talking to - if that... some players had their domestic violence incidents justified by their owner. When the video came out, and the response was overwhelming negative, they had to act. Suspended him with an indefinite ban that Rice had to go through the courts to overturn.

 

Bountygate, again huge negative response pointed towards the integrity of the on-field product and the intentional injury to its athletes. Don't know what part of that is iffy, the Saints and Greg Williams targeted players for injury and paid out bounty sums to those who did it.

 

Junior Seau - don't know what to say about that? He had CTE and committed suicide? I might be missing part of the story, based on what you said.

The Seau story is really a non-story. Basically, they won't allow his family to speak at his HOF induction about him.

 

Its actually a policy that has already existed, because the HOF speeches have gotten incredibly too long AND in particular the speeches for deceased inductees have become tedious and just reiterate the video package they produce for them.

 

I don't really have a problem with the HOF's stance, and to the OP's point, the NFL actually has very little to do with that at all. The Pro Football HOF is NOT run by the NFL... its a completely separate entity.

[riseNConquer81]

 

It was a baiting reply, trying to start a flame war. Calling the Ravens head coach a "cry-baby" in the middle of an unfounded, trolling, pointed claim is not allowed.

 

This thread is also not going to be used for the Patriots comment-crusade of half-truths, red herrings, pseudo-science, and 'hey they did it, too' abatement that we've seen on just about every site referencing this controversy.

Yes. Exactly. Thank you.

What a biased site.[...] I guess this site just doesn't tolerate either an opposing viewpoint -- or FACTS.

put simply: we dont tolerate trolls, our mods do their jobs well, and when you want to bring some actual facts, we'll be more than happy to entertain your informed and resonable argument. sit back for a minute and peep our forum culture...THEN try to participate.

[berad]

The Seau story is really a non-story. Basically, they won't allow his family to speak at his HOF induction about him.

 

Its actually a policy that has already existed, because the HOF speeches have gotten incredibly too long AND in particular the speeches for deceased inductees have become tedious and just reiterate the video package they produce for them.

 

I don't really have a problem with the HOF's stance, and to the OP's point, the NFL actually has very little to do with that at all. The Pro Football HOF is NOT run by the NFL... its a completely separate entity.

 

I see, I do remember hearing about that.

[riseNConquer81]

I hope the Pats have to travel to Baltimore in the playoffs and get curb stomped

I feel you and agree, but unfortunately their division is a joke and ours is the best in the league.

Its not impossible, but im not holding my breath either.

If the Pats ever have to visit Baltimore in the playoffs though, it will be a very bad day for them. Cant imagine how much more Brady would suck against our defense with home field advantage than he usually does.

[berad]

1. I seriously doubt Wilson is overly concerned about the levels at which their footballs are inflated in an NFL game... they're just extremely happy to be the exclusive provider of footballs for the NFL at all, since they know they aren't the only possible provider. The Patriots apparently deflated footballs "significantly" by the publics standards, yet I guarantee precisely ZERO of them said anything about how deflated they looked when they were watching the game.

 

Sorry, but given the publicity Wilson gets for being the exclusive provider of NFL footballs, I have a sneaky suspicion they won't get too upset if Brady deflates some of them to a lower level than they'd like. Not sure why you think thats a valid reason for Wilson or the NFL caring. I think you're reaching a bit there.

Yes, but those are just assumptions. It was weak reason, yes, but I'm playing devil's advocate and giving a reason. Perhaps a better reason is a relatively level equipment standard for both the offense and, more importantly, defense to expect similar things when playing the game.

 

2. It doesn't, nor could any of my post be even construed as violating somebodies civil rights. Not sure why you would even bring that up.

 

My point, as I clearly stated, was simply that the "just follow the rule because I say so" argument is incredibly weak. The very fact that this conversation is occuring is because not everybody follows that mantra of being a part of the herd that gets led around by its "leader". The basis for any rule, regardless of whether its a law or a rule I make for my children, is important. That way, when somebody questions why I don't let my kids eat a box of Oreos before bed, I can explain it rationally without pounding my fist on the table and saying "because I said so". Needless to say, I wouldn't have much credibility as a parent if I did that.

 

Ironically, we've already seen this happen in the last few months. With the "trickeration" the Pats used against us, the NFL simply sat down, looked at the rule (or lack thereof) and determined "you know what, this makes no sense whatsoever". And what do you know... a rule change occurs.

The civil rights comment was to downplay the severity of the situation instead of citing founding tenants of the nation. It's air pressure in a rubber bladder inside of a football. Although, if you were inclined, you could call this the Boston PSI Party - that doesn't exactly have a ring to it but bear with me.

 

I don't think I said that a baseless rule should be followed just for the sake of it. I also don't believe the rule is baseless. Here's what the NFL rulebook has to say on it. http://static.nfl.com/static/content/public/image/rulebook/pdfs/5_2013_Ball.pdf

Rule 2 The Ball

Section 1

BALL DIMENSIONS

The Ball must be a “Wilson,” hand selected, bearing the signature of the Commissioner of the League, Roger Goodell.

The ball shall be made up of an inflated (12 1/2 to 13 1/2 pounds) urethane bladder enclosed in a pebble grained, leather case (natural tan color) without corrugations of any kind. It shall have the form of a prolate spheroid and the size and weight shall be: long axis, 11 to 11 1/4 inches; long circumference, 28 to 28 1/2 inches; short circumference, 21 to 21 1/4 inches; weight, 14 to 15 ounces.

The Referee shall be the sole judge as to whether all balls offered for play comply with these specifications. A pump is to be furnished by the home club, and the balls shall remain under the supervision of the Referee until they are delivered to the ball attendant just prior to the start of the game

That specifically mentions the dimensions of the football, maybe having the bladder at that range of PSI will give you those dimensions. Any more or less and those get thrown off, leading to different equipment than players are used to.

 

I did, however, say if Brady has an issue he should challenge the league off the field about it, not (allegedly lol) have equipment managers deflate them in a bathroom after stealing them.

[rmcjacket23]

Yes, but those are just assumptions. It was weak reason, yes, but I'm playing devil's advocate and giving a reason. Perhaps a better reason is a relatively level equipment standard for both the offense and, more importantly, defense to expect similar things when playing the game.

 

The civil rights comment was to downplay the severity of the situation instead of citing founding tenants of the nation. It's air pressure in a rubber bladder inside of a football. Although, if you were inclined, you could call this the Boston PSI Party - that doesn't exactly have a ring to it but bear with me.

 

I don't think I said that a baseless rule should be followed just for the sake of it. I also don't believe the rule is baseless. Here's what the NFL rulebook has to say on it. http://static.nfl.com/static/content/public/image/rulebook/pdfs/5_2013_Ball.pdf

That specifically mentions the dimensions of the football, maybe having the bladder at that range of PSI will give you those dimensions. Any more or less and those get thrown off, leading to different equipment than players are used to.

 

I did, however, say if Brady has an issue he should challenge the league off the field about it, not (allegedly lol) have equipment managers deflate them in a bathroom after stealing them.

Sure, but remember the last time they implemented this change, when they allowed teams to start taking custody of the balls, none of the players really lobbied for it. They ASKED guys like Brady and Manning if they would prefer the change, and of course they said yes.

 

I understand what the rule is... I'm saying its tough to justify what the purpose of the rule is. Again, the fact that we are even having the conversation of why the balls should be 12.5 to 13.5, and the "best" justification either of us came up with (and I agree I have no justification for it... hence why I'm arguing against it) is that maybe Wilson doesn't want their balls looking deflated on TV is sort of an indictment of why the purpose of the rule doesn't make a whole lot of sense.

 

With most rules, its easy to understand why it exists. Its easy to understand why the NFL developed harsher rules on helmet to helmet contact, just like its easy to understand why you can't tackle a receiver when the balls in the air.

 

In this case, I'd say its actually quite difficult to understand why the air pressure of the football is a relevant rule. There's pros and cons to both sides of having an extremely deflated football, just like there's pros and cons to both sides of having an extremely inflated football. Its a simple concept of preference by the players using it, and given that both teams use whatever balls they want, it seems less relevant in my eyes. If both teams were using the same footballs, and simply couldn't agree on the proper weight, then the rule makes all the sense in the world.

 

That's not whats happening here.

[Grapple Raven]

What some people seem to be forgetting is that this is a labor issue that would be taken to court - the federal court will not be re-trying the case to determine Brady's guilt or innocence, so different levels of "proof" are largely irrelevant. Federal courts are notoriously reluctant to hear such cases once they've been through arbitration.

 

In essence, any court case would be Brady arguing that the arbitration was not fair and did not conform to the procedures outlined in the CBA and accepted when he signed his contract or that the NFL violated its own rules in the process. Most commentators agree that this is basically his only chance of winning such a case, and I'm not so sure how good the odds are, since the CBA gives Goodell the ability to determine punishments AND act as an arbitrator.

 

Agree TXRavensFan!  If Brady and his legal team would think this is good for Brady to take this further by arguing the point that the maximum punishment for Brady should be a $25,000 fine, which is the amount stipulated in the NFL’s game operations manual, or that Brady's four game suspension is unfair or unprecedented, they need to read it again, lol.  There is a clause in the rule from the operations manual that stipulates:

“If any individual alters the footballs, or if a non-approved ball is used in the game, the person responsible and, if appropriate, the head coach or other club personnel will be subject to discipline, including but not limited to, a fine of $25,000.”

The bolded, underlined text is a very important fact to remember in this case because it does not limit the NFL Commissioner to just fining Brady or anyone else implicated for that matter.  A factor that Brady's legal team have seemed to overlook, lol.

 

[riseNConquer81]

Guys:

Brady was suspended for conduct detrimental. If he goes to court, that's what he's going to have argue against. all the rules about the balls and whatever new procedures they're dropping into the league in 2015 are almost irrelevant. Even if you pretend he's completely clear of any deflategate involvement (lmao, he's not), the real problem (at least as far as a court would be concerned since that's the way his punishment is worded) is that he wasnt cooperative. And he cant argue that he was not given how the investigation unfolded.

[BmoreBird22]

Guys: Brady was suspended for conduct detrimental. If he goes to court, that's what he's going to have argue against. all the rules about the balls and whatever new procedures they're dropping into the league in 2015 are almost irrelevant. Even if you pretend he's completely clear of any deflategate involvement (lmao, he's not), the real problem (at least as far as a court would be concerned since that's the way his punishment is worded) is that he wasnt cooperative. And he cant argue that he was not given how the investigation unfolded.

Someone finally understands what this was all about

[rmcjacket23]

Guys: Brady was suspended for conduct detrimental. If he goes to court, that's what he's going to have argue against. all the rules about the balls and whatever new procedures they're dropping into the league in 2015 are almost irrelevant. Even if you pretend he's completely clear of any deflategate involvement (lmao, he's not), the real problem (at least as far as a court would be concerned since that's the way his punishment is worded) is that he wasnt cooperative. And he cant argue that he was not given how the investigation unfolded.

Up to the legal system I guess.

 

A good lawyer, and undoubtedly he has one, would say "standard rulebook punishment is $25K, and you gave my client $2M and four games". Explain.

 

And then the conversation goes from there. If the NFL is good enough to argue that what Tom did was 80 times for detrimental than the rulebook punishment, then so be it.

 

I, again, think this is all moot, because this has settlement through arbitration or before the lawsuit even happens written all over it. Me personally, I'd set the over/under of the likelihood of Brady actually serving four games at about 1%, and I'd take the under. 1-2 seems likely in my judgment. 

 

At the very least, Tom has nothing to lose by pursuing this in court. He can delay the outcome, have a decent chance of getting it reduced one way or another, and the worst thing that can happen to him is he's essentially validated as a liar (which the public has already indicted him for) and his suspension is upheld. Very little risk, plenty of reward.

[stampedehero]

Of course Biscotti does not want to make Goodells notorious list

[gooftroop]

Up to the legal system I guess.

 

A good lawyer, and undoubtedly he has one, would say "standard rulebook punishment is $25K, and you gave my client $2M and four games". Explain.

 

And then the conversation goes from there. If the NFL is good enough to argue that what Tom did was 80 times for detrimental than the rulebook punishment, then so be it.

 

I, again, think this is all moot, because this has settlement through arbitration or before the lawsuit even happens written all over it. Me personally, I'd set the over/under of the likelihood of Brady actually serving four games at about 1%, and I'd take the under. 1-2 seems likely in my judgment. 

 

At the very least, Tom has nothing to lose by pursuing this in court. He can delay the outcome, have a decent chance of getting it reduced one way or another, and the worst thing that can happen to him is he's essentially validated as a liar (which the public has already indicted him for) and his suspension is upheld. Very little risk, plenty of reward.

Oh, I think there's plenty of risk by going to court. It's one thing to be perceived as a liar, it's quite another to have it "proven". I doubt Team Brady will make the decision to go to court without deliberating the matter very seriously.

Edited July 28, 2015 by gooftroop

[Mad Scientist Too]

No, just like Ray Rice & Adrian Peterson, Brady cannot play until the court makes their decision (basically overturning the suspension). Until that time, he's at home (insert joke here).

I stand corrected. Maybe I was thinking of baseball.

[January J]

Up to the legal system I guess.

A good lawyer, and undoubtedly he has one, would say "standard rulebook punishment is $25K, and you gave my client $2M and four games". Explain.

And then the conversation goes from there. If the NFL is good enough to argue that what Tom did was 80 times for detrimental than the rulebook punishment, then so be it.

I, again, think this is all moot, because this has settlement through arbitration or before the lawsuit even happens written all over it. Me personally, I'd set the over/under of the likelihood of Brady actually serving four games at about 1%, and I'd take the under. 1-2 seems likely in my judgment.

At the very least, Tom has nothing to lose by pursuing this in court. He can delay the outcome, have a decent chance of getting it reduced one way or another, and the worst thing that can happen to him is he's essentially validated as a liar (which the public has already indicted him for) and his suspension is upheld. Very little risk, plenty of reward.

if he takes it all the way to court to vindicate himself and then the text messages come out and verify he was indeed behind all of this (and possibly even bribed the ball boys to keep their mouth shut) I most definitely think he should be FURTHER punished and repremanded by the league. In that case the original suspension and fine would have been submitted before the said facts were released, and would constitute further punishment. Not sure how they would handle that , but he definitely has a lot to lose in terms of his legacy regardless. Sure, it's already tarnished quite a bit in the eyes of non pat fans - but if text messages are revealed and there is visual proof his legacy will take a hit In the eyes of football historions, other players/ coaches around the league, analysts , etc... even some pat fans and kids that look up to him will be extremely dissapointed. So yes , I would call him on his bluff, bc Id bet he has absolutely no intention of taking it to court, and id argue that he does have quite a bit to lose. Esp if the suspension is reduced to two games, which IMO is most likely, he will cut his losses and be done with it. Edited July 28, 2015 by January J

[rmcjacket23]

if he takes it all the way to court to vindicate himself and then the text messages come out and verify he was indeed behind all of this (and possibly even bribed the ball boys to keep their mouth shut) I most definitely think he should be FURTHER punished and repremanded by the league. In that case the original suspension and fine would have been submitted before the said facts were released, and would constitute further punishment. Not sure how they would handle that , but he definitely has a lot to lose in terms of his legacy regardless. Sure, it's already tarnished quite a bit in the eyes of non pat fans - but if text messages are revealed and there is visual proof his legacy will take a hit In the eyes of football historions, other players/ coaches around the league, analysts , etc... even some pat fans and kids that look up to him will be extremely dissapointed. So yes , I would call him on his bluff, bc Id bet he has absolutely no intention of taking it to court, and id argue that he does have quite a bit to lose. Esp if the suspension is reduced to two games, which IMO is most likely, he will cut his losses and be done with it.

But all you're doing is reaffirming an indictment you've already made about him. You aren't gaining any new information that way... all you're really doing at that point is saying "I told you so".

The media doesn't really care about things like cheating when it comes to actually projecting a career out of a player, specifically in the NFL. I tell the story of Brian Cushing ad nauseum to prove just how hypocritical and "non-caring" the media is about cheaters in football. They let guys in the HOF who have cheated, abused drugs, been arrested multiple times, etc.

I can guarantee this... if anyone thinks deflating some footballs and lying about it is going to prevent Tom Brady for going into the HOF on the first ballot, you will be very, very, very disappointed approximately five years after he retires.

At the end of the day, that largely defines a players legacy. We know coaches think Brady is great, even after this whole process. We know his peers think he is great, even after this whole process (Ravens players included in that).

So, short of pulling some sort of Aaron Hernandez-esque rampage, Brady goes into the HOF when he's first eligible, and people who are actually in the football business think he's one of the best players they've seen. From a legacy standpoint, that's pretty much all that matters. If a large segment of total strangers that may or may not even understand football don't like him, needless to say, I don't think he will have a problem living with that.

[rmcjacket23]

No, just like Ray Rice & Adrian Peterson, Brady cannot play until the court makes their decision (basically overturning the suspension). Until that time, he's at home (insert joke here).

Well, until he files for an injunction, of course. Which, most likely, he will.

 

http://www.businessinsider.com/patriots-deflategate-tom-brady-suspension-2015-7

 

By several legal accounts I've seen, this wouldn't be too difficult to accomplish.

[January J]

But all you're doing is reaffirming an indictment you've already made about him. You aren't gaining any new information that way... all you're really doing at that point is saying "I told you so".

The media doesn't really care about things like cheating when it comes to actually projecting a career out of a player, specifically in the NFL. I tell the story of Brian Cushing ad nauseum to prove just how hypocritical and "non-caring" the media is about cheaters in football. They let guys in the HOF who have cheated, abused drugs, been arrested multiple times, etc.

I can guarantee this... if anyone thinks deflating some footballs and lying about it is going to prevent Tom Brady for going into the HOF on the first ballot, you will be very, very, very disappointed approximately five years after he retires.

At the end of the day, that largely defines a players legacy. We know coaches think Brady is great, even after this whole process. We know his peers think he is great, even after this whole process (Ravens players included in that).

So, short of pulling some sort of Aaron Hernandez-esque rampage, Brady goes into the HOF when he's first eligible, and people who are actually in the football business think he's one of the best players they've seen. From a legacy standpoint, that's pretty much all that matters. If a large segment of total strangers that may or may not even understand football don't like him, needless to say, I don't think he will have a problem living with that.

can't argue with most of that, but I would argue that if it goes to court and then the texts are revealed, it actually is saying a lot more. Yes the underlying fact about him obstructing is the same, but the fact that he took it so much farther and wasted so much time and money and now there is definitive proof that he lied it's no longer just about there not being reasonable doubt and just punishing him for obstructing the investigation, but then it'd be clear that he was the one behind the deflating. Some say that the punishment was more about the obstruction than the actual wells report. It's not clear what actually held more weight. Either way if the texts are revealed and indicate that he was lying- he has now wasted a lot of people's time and now the science behind the wells report doesn't have to be questioned and now becomes moot. Not to mention if this is revealed in the court he could potentially face some type of perjury charge. Not sure on that and he may have to actually testify beforehand so I shouldn't speculate, and I highly doubt it comes to that anyway bc a court won't take this seriously enough to see the case.