NFL.com: Tom Brady's four-game suspension reinstated

[MrSilverMaC]

This is getting very close to the whole days of thunder japanese inspection.

Brady isn't a spring chicken anymore and this suspension is a perishable item.

If he can drag this out another year or two he may get to retire with the whole thing unresolved.

Wouldn't that be a giant f.u. to Goodell from brady.

As much as I despise cheaters, and wholeheartedly believe Brady is one, I think that scenario would be hilarious.

[Jumbo]

http://abcnews.go.com/Sports/wireStory/engineering-physics-professors-weigh-brady-appeal-39340643?yptr=yahoo   Engineering and Physics Professors Weigh in on Brady Appeal

 

 

Nearly two dozen engineering and physics professors weighed in Tuesday with a federal appeals court being asked to review New England Patriots quarterback Tom Brady's four-game suspension for "Deflategate."

 

Papers filed with the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals said these experts believe the 2nd Circuit's ruling upholding the suspension lacks any scientific proof and the appeals judges should reconsider an April decision that reinstated Brady's suspension.

 

"In the name of science, we support the petition for rehearing," the papers said.

 

 

 

 

 

[TheGreatBuzz]

Isn't this all about if Goodell has the power and not if the balls were deflated?

[Destino]

I say let the scientists figure it out. The NFL needs to find an equal number of scientists and then have them fight each other. Last man standing, is proven right. Science!

[GoSkins0721]

Isn't this all about if Goodell has the power and not if the balls were deflated?

 

Ding ding ding! Give that man a kewpie doll!

 

 

[SkinsGuy]

Isn't this all about if Goodell has the power and not if the balls were deflated?

 

Yes.

 

This court that made the ruling to reinstate Brady's suspension are merely deciding on whether or not Goodell has the authority under the CBA the NFL negotiated with the NFLPA to make such a ruling.

 

Whether Brady was involved in deflating footballs to get an unfair advantage has no bearing on their ruling.

[TheGreatBuzz]

Yes.

 

This court that made the ruling to reinstate Brady's suspension are merely deciding on whether or not Goodell has the authority under the CBA the NFL negotiated with the NFLPA to make such a ruling.

 

Whether Brady was involved in deflating footballs to get an unfair advantage has no bearing on their ruling.

So than why the scientists?

[GoSkins0721]

So than why the scientists?

 

Because NE fans are wicked delusional. As is Tommy Boy...

[Taylor 36]

So than why the scientists?

Because, even if the CBA gives Goodell the right to discipline Brady the way he did, it is unconstitutional for any employer to discipline an employee without having cause and evidence.  So, the CBA gives Goodell the right to discipline and act as jury, judge, and executioner when a player breaks the rules, but the law of the land makes it illegal for him to discipline a player if the player committed no violations.  People sue for wrongful termination, demotion, and reprimands all the time because of this. In this case, the science proves that the so called evidence the NFL is using to punish Brady is completely invalid.  Therefore, Goodell doesn't have the right to discipline Brady.  It is actually a very valid argument.

 

Of course, those who just hate the Pats and Brady don't care about the truth nor the fact that 3 of the 4 Colts' balls that were tested right before the start of the second half (20 minutes longer back in the warm air than the Pats balls) were also "deflated" under regulation.  This could have happened to any team, and if it would have happened to the Redskins and RGIII or Cousins was being suspended for four games based on what the NFL has on Brady, the same folks cheering this Brady suspension would be up in arms.  It so sad how people operate sometimes. 

[TheGreatBuzz]

I'm not trying to rehash all the merits of the case so your points about the Colts, etc I'm not going to address.  But wouldn't it be a matter of if the NFL says he broke the rules?  A business doesn't have to prove it in a court of law, they just have to show they have a system and used it.  And they did. 

[Taylor 36]

I'm not trying to rehash all the merits of the case so your points about the Colts, etc I'm not going to address.  But wouldn't it be a matter of if the NFL says he broke the rules?  A business doesn't have to prove it in a court of law, they just have to show they have a system and used it.  And they did. 

To that point, the NFL would make a mockery of itself if it tried to sell the court that it had a system and used it properly when it came to PSI levels.  The entire "system" was a joke from start to finish.  The way that balls were handled and measured is an indictment on the NFL, not on Brady or any other player, coach, equipment manager or anyone else on any team.  The NFL has to prove that he broke the rules, and all they have is a BS report that was done by an inside guy that omitted many facts and came up with it "probably" happened the way the NFL said it did.  And, yes, a business does have to prove in a court of law that rules were broken when the disciplined employee takes the matter to court, which is exactly what has happened in this case.  Otherwise, businesses would fire and demote employees left and right because a manager or director didn't like them and simply say they broke a rule. That is against federal laws.

 

To put it another way, Goodell can't just suspend a player because he thinks that it's more probable than not that the player used PED's.  If he did, he would have to have proof, like a failed drug test. Otherwise, the player could sue Goodell and the league.  This is essentially the same thing. Goodell is suspending Brady because of what he thinks probably happened, but legally, he has no proof. The 21 scientists' report is proving that the so-called evidence that Goodell and the league are trying to use is actually only evidence of how science works, not that balls were manually deflated. The supposed test the league used is beyond faulty and doesn't stack up with science and fact. Therefore, the league has nothing proof-wise to discipline Brady on in the first place, which negates the issue of whether or not Goodell has the right to discipline players that have broken the rules according to the CBA in this case.  

[SkinsGuy]

So than why the scientists?

 

I have no idea.

 

They weren't deciding whether he or the Patriots did it or not. The court basically said Goodell did have the authority and it was something they had to work out for themselves, and not use the court.

 

 

Because, even if the CBA gives Goodell the right to discipline Brady the way he did, it is unconstitutional for any employer to discipline an employee without having cause and evidence

 

 

Mind telling me which one of our Constitutional Amendments Roger Goodell, and the NFL are violating?

[pjfootballer]

I'm still trying to figure out why some of our fans are so passionate about defending Brady. I pretty much don't care at this point. Suspend him, don't suspend him. Just get this **** off the front page and let's move on.

[Taylor 36]

Mind telling me which one of our Constitutional Amendments Roger Goodell, and the NFL are violating?

The Human Resource Law and Federal Labor Management Act both include lengthy sections on due process for labor disputes and invoke the Fifth Amendment, where the employer must present evidence of cause for termination or other disciplinary actions that results in a reduction or garnishing of wages of an employee. 

[Taylor 36]

I'm still trying to figure out why some of our fans are so passionate about defending Brady. I pretty much don't care at this point. Suspend him, don't suspend him. Just get this **** off the front page and let's move on.

For me, it's not so much about defending Brady as it is about defending common sense, not being apathetic to the over-reaching injustice of Goodell and the NFL (not just when it affects the Redskins), and not being okay when someone, anyone, is being **** on in an obvious witch hunt. Some people seem to enjoy it because of their dislike of the person; I find that very sad and short-sighted. No matter how big of a jerk someone thinks Brady is, the NFL should not be allowed to do what they are doing.  They shouldn't have been allowed to do what they did to us with Capgate, and, yes, I still **** about that injustice.  Because, again, I can't be apathetic to behavior like that. 

[SkinsGuy]

The Human Resource Law and Federal Labor Management Act both include lengthy sections on due process for labor disputes and invoke the Fifth Amendment, where the employer must present evidence of cause for termination or other disciplinary actions that results in a reduction or garnishing of wages of an employee. 

 

Apparently, the judges disagreed with you. Or at least decided this shouldn't be a matter for the courts.

 

And I think you are misunderstanding that act you cited. An employer doesn't have to give a reason for firing someone, because they don't owe you employment. As long as they can show it wasn't for discriminatory reasons (race, religion, gender, etc.), they can fire you for any reason.

 

Discipline you as well. The court is only trying to decide if Goodell exceeded his authority or not.

 

However, I really think the courts want Brady and the NFL to deal with this themselves.

[GoSkins0721]

Apparently, the judges disagreed with you. Or at least decided this shouldn't be a matter for the courts.

 

And I think you are misunderstanding that act you cited. An employer doesn't have to give a reason for firing someone, because they don't owe you employment. As long as they can show it wasn't for discriminatory reasons (race, religion, gender, etc.), they can fire you for any reason.

 

Discipline you as well. The court is only trying to decide if Goodell exceeded his authority or not.

 

However, I really think the courts want Brady and the NFL to deal with this themselves.

 

 

My defense of Goodell in this case comes from a non-legal understanding of the case. 

 

I'm too lazy to go back through my old posts to find the information I posted before, but it goes something like this: 

After the 1st Patriot misstep around the illegal filming of games/practices ALL of the owners agreed that ALL employees would fully cooperate with future investigations. I don't recall the punishments that would be levied if they didn't. But, Brady's refusal to turn over his phone during the initial investigation should be enough for Goodell to punish him because of this agreement. Now, all of the legalese around whether Goodell can do this because of the CBA needs to be deciphered by the lawyers. 

 

I've said this before: this was not about the deflating of the balls. It's about the planned scheme to alter game approved footballs. Altered more or less than allowed by NFL rules? Who gives a ****? They took the balls from the refs into a room away from prying eyes and altered the balls in some way. That's against the rules. You cannot alter game approved footballs. Period. And they did. That's why they're being punished. 

 

Similarly...a MLB pitcher cannot take game baseballs - after they have been rubbed with mud by the Umps - and alter them EXCEPT when they are on the mound. If they do, they're cheating. Doesn't matter what they do to the baseballs - shove it in their shorts to rub against their nutsack for good luck? It's not allowed. Period. 

[pjfootballer]

I've said all along, he's not being punished for deflating footballs. He's being punished for lying/covering it up.

[grego]

For me, it's not so much about defending Brady as it is about defending common sense, not being apathetic to the over-reaching injustice of Goodell and the NFL (not just when it affects the Redskins), and not being okay when someone, anyone, is being **** on in an obvious witch hunt. Some people seem to enjoy it because of their dislike of the person; I find that very sad and short-sighted. No matter how big of a jerk someone thinks Brady is, the NFL should not be allowed to do what they are doing. They shouldn't have been allowed to do what they did to us with Capgate, and, yes, I still **** about that injustice. Because, again, I can't be apathetic to behavior like that.

Its not obvious that he was involved in deflating footballs, and equally obvious that he attempted to cover it up by destroying evidence?

The "obviousness" of his guilt is what I can't get past, and his brazen "f u" attitude about it - rather than taking the punishment, is infuriating.

[SkinsFTW]

I'm pretty sure that if the Ceo of the company I worked for demanded that I fork over my personal cell phone so they could try to find evidence that I was in on anything at all I'd have to tell him to pack sand.

Either that or I'd send him the bill.

[TheGreatBuzz]

I'm pretty sure that if the Ceo of the company I worked for demanded that I fork over my personal cell phone so they could try to find evidence that I was in on anything at all I'd have to tell him to pack sand.

Either that or I'd send him the bill.

Your employment contract probably doesnt say the same things as Brad's. Just a guess.

[SkinsFTW]

Your employment contract probably doesnt say the same things as Brad's. Just a guess.

Brady had no obligation under any contract or agreement to give up his cell phone because any such contract would have violated his rights.

Basically the cba gives Goodell the same power the cops have when they throw somebody on the ground and rough them up and claim that they resisted arrest because he can decide based on whether or not Brady "cooperated" or not.

Brady, under no obligation to do so, refused to give Goodell his cell phone therefore he was uncooperative. Guilty!!!

[TheGreatBuzz]

Brady had no obligation under any contract or agreement to give up his cell phone because any such contract would have violated his rights.

Basically the cba gives Goodell the same power the cops have when they throw somebody on the ground and rough them up and claim that they resisted arrest because he can decide based on whether or not Brady "cooperated" or not.

Brady, under no obligation to do so, refused to give Goodell his cell phone therefore he was uncooperative. Guilty!!!

I am in no position to interpret his contract or debate the legality of different clauses. But the majority of people talking about it disagree with you.

[tshile]

Because, even if the CBA gives Goodell the right to discipline Brady the way he did, it is unconstitutional for any employer to discipline an employee without having cause and evidence. So, the CBA gives Goodell the right to discipline and act as jury, judge, and executioner when a player breaks the rules, but the law of the land makes it illegal for him to discipline a player if the player committed no violations. People sue for wrongful termination, demotion, and reprimands all the time because of this. In this case, the science proves that the so called evidence the NFL is using to punish Brady is completely invalid. Therefore, Goodell doesn't have the right to discipline Brady. It is actually a very valid argument.

.

The same CBA that stipulates equipment tampering is a 25k fine, not a 4 game suspension.

I'm still trying to figure out why some of our fans are so passionate about defending Brady. I pretty much don't care at this point. Suspend him, don't suspend him. Just get this **** off the front page and let's move on.

I hate Goodell 10000000x more than I could ever hate the Patriots or brady.

Anything that embarrasses him, I'm rooting for.

When the lights went off during the super bowl my first thoughts were 'Hah Goodell, eat that you <stuff>'

Screw that dude

[SkinsFTW]

I am in no position to interpret his contract or debate the legality of different clauses. But the majority of people talking about it disagree with you.

http://blog.constitutioncenter.org/2015/08/cellphone-privacy-the-workplace-and-nfl-superstar-tom-brady/

"If this sounds like a Fourth Amendment issue, the concept is related. The amendment famously states that people have the right “to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures” and such information can only be inspected via a warrant.

But as Goodell would be the first person to acknowledge, the Brady investigation as a civil workplace matter doesn’t give the NFL any direct legal power to compel Brady to surrender evidence, such as cellphone records.

In Goodell’s 20-page statement on the Brady matter, Goodell said that “neither the NFL or any NFL member club has subpoena power or other means to compel production of relevant materials or testimony.”

However, Goodell also said that under the collective bargaining agreement between the NFL and the player’s union, the NFL can consider the extent of cooperation of league or club employees during a workplace investigation in evaluating sanctions."