Author Topic: #DeflateGate (Court of Appeals Reinstates Suspension)  (Read 596253 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Re: #DeflateGate
« Reply #2640 on: September 01, 2015, 02:58:56 AM »

Offline colincb

  • NCE
  • Rajon Rondo
  • *****
  • Posts: 5095
  • Tommy Points: 501
Anything can happen, but I suspect Berman realized a settlement was extremely unlikely before the second hearing and his questions at that hearing indicated which way he was leaning.

Re: #DeflateGate
« Reply #2641 on: September 01, 2015, 08:10:54 AM »

Offline Moranis

  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 33461
  • Tommy Points: 1533


The whole point of a compromise is that both sides start at extremes and work their way towards a common ground in the center. Doesn't make sense for the NFL to start much lower than what they did.

Sure, but at this point in the process, you'd think the sides would have found more middle ground than "3 games and admission of guilt + crime of perjury."
Not if Brady was at no suspension at all.  If both sides are taking unreasonable positions (at least to the other), then neither side is going to move first.  Pretty classic negotiation.
2023 Historical Draft - Brooklyn Nets - 9th pick

Bigs - Pau, Amar'e, Issel, McGinnis, Roundfield
Wings - Dantley, Bowen, J. Jackson
Guards - Cheeks, Petrovic, Buse, Rip

Re: #DeflateGate
« Reply #2642 on: September 01, 2015, 08:16:09 AM »

Online Roy H.

  • Forums Manager
  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 58540
  • Tommy Points: -25636
  • Bo Knows: Joe Don't Know Diddley


The whole point of a compromise is that both sides start at extremes and work their way towards a common ground in the center. Doesn't make sense for the NFL to start much lower than what they did.

Sure, but at this point in the process, you'd think the sides would have found more middle ground than "3 games and admission of guilt + crime of perjury."
Not if Brady was at no suspension at all.  If both sides are taking unreasonable positions (at least to the other), then neither side is going to move first.  Pretty classic negotiation.

Yeah, exactly.  To Patriots fans, 3 games and an admission of guilt is an unreasonable position.  To the NFL, 1 game and no admission is unreasonable.  It's hard to criticize one side and not the other in terms of failure to reach settlement.

I'm curious if two games plus Brady "not contesting" the findings of the arbitration would have been satisfactory to either side, and if so, which side turned it down.


I'M THE SILVERBACK GORILLA IN THIS MOTHER——— AND DON'T NONE OF YA'LL EVER FORGET IT!@ 34 minutes

Re: #DeflateGate
« Reply #2643 on: September 01, 2015, 08:41:22 AM »

Offline footey

  • Reggie Lewis
  • ***************
  • Posts: 15965
  • Tommy Points: 1833


The whole point of a compromise is that both sides start at extremes and work their way towards a common ground in the center. Doesn't make sense for the NFL to start much lower than what they did.

Sure, but at this point in the process, you'd think the sides would have found more middle ground than "3 games and admission of guilt + crime of perjury."
Not if Brady was at no suspension at all.  If both sides are taking unreasonable positions (at least to the other), then neither side is going to move first.  Pretty classic negotiation.

Yeah, exactly.  To Patriots fans, 3 games and an admission of guilt is an unreasonable position.  To the NFL, 1 game and no admission is unreasonable.  It's hard to criticize one side and not the other in terms of failure to reach settlement.

I'm curious if two games plus Brady "not contesting" the findings of the arbitration would have been satisfactory to either side, and if so, which side turned it down.

In the context of the Wells Report findings ("general awareness", "more likely than not", the PSI levels being off (as conceded in Wells Report)  by about 0.1 to 0.2 of a PSI), the schedule of fines for equipment violations set forth in the rule book, the high likelihood that any deflation was caused by operation of the ideal gas law, the "deflategate" texts from the two guys dated months before the Colts play-off game, that Brady never was found to ask for any balls below the 12.5 legal limit, that other equipment tampering has either been ignored or admonished with warning (Vikings heating balls), that refusal to turn over phones has only met wtih a fine (Brett Favre), to suggest the NFL's position of 3 games was just as reasonable as Brady's offer of a one game suspension, is nonsensical to me.

This is 31 teams ganging up on the team that is the most successful football team in this century, out of jealousy and spite.  And for a perceived lack of sufficient punishment for Spygate. 

Re: #DeflateGate
« Reply #2644 on: September 01, 2015, 09:16:47 AM »

Offline Moranis

  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 33461
  • Tommy Points: 1533


The whole point of a compromise is that both sides start at extremes and work their way towards a common ground in the center. Doesn't make sense for the NFL to start much lower than what they did.

Sure, but at this point in the process, you'd think the sides would have found more middle ground than "3 games and admission of guilt + crime of perjury."
Not if Brady was at no suspension at all.  If both sides are taking unreasonable positions (at least to the other), then neither side is going to move first.  Pretty classic negotiation.

Yeah, exactly.  To Patriots fans, 3 games and an admission of guilt is an unreasonable position.  To the NFL, 1 game and no admission is unreasonable.  It's hard to criticize one side and not the other in terms of failure to reach settlement.

I'm curious if two games plus Brady "not contesting" the findings of the arbitration would have been satisfactory to either side, and if so, which side turned it down.
And frankly we have no idea if Brady even offered to accept a one game suspension.  The reports are along the lines of he would have accepted a 1 game suspension, not that it was ever offered.  There is a very large difference between those two things.
2023 Historical Draft - Brooklyn Nets - 9th pick

Bigs - Pau, Amar'e, Issel, McGinnis, Roundfield
Wings - Dantley, Bowen, J. Jackson
Guards - Cheeks, Petrovic, Buse, Rip

Re: #DeflateGate
« Reply #2645 on: September 01, 2015, 09:22:20 AM »

Online Roy H.

  • Forums Manager
  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 58540
  • Tommy Points: -25636
  • Bo Knows: Joe Don't Know Diddley
Quote
In the context of the Wells Report findings ("general awareness", "more likely than not", the PSI levels being off (as conceded in Wells Report)  by about 0.1 to 0.2 of a PSI), the schedule of fines for equipment violations set forth in the rule book, the high likelihood that any deflation was caused by operation of the ideal gas law, the "deflategate" texts from the two guys dated months before the Colts play-off game, that Brady never was found to ask for any balls below the 12.5 legal limit, that other equipment tampering has either been ignored or admonished with warning (Vikings heating balls), that refusal to turn over phones has only met wtih a fine (Brett Favre), to suggest the NFL's position of 3 games was just as reasonable as Brady's offer of a one game suspension, is nonsensical to me.

I still don't understand why people knock the "more likely than not" standard.  It's been the burden of proof in civil cases for literally hundreds of years.  It's hardly shocking, or worthy of criticism.

As for the other issues, you don't really examine the evidence at this stage.  It's not about who has the facts on their side.  Rather, it's about who has a stronger legal position.  Most experts concede that that is the NFL, although the Judge in this matter may rely on procedural issues to vacate the arbitration award.  (I'd be very surprised if the Judge made a finding that Goddell was partial, though.  That would essentially render that portion of the CBA meaningless, and Judges in general won't touch collectively bargained agreements).

So, yes, in terms of the strength of legal positions, the NFL's offer of 3 games is on par with Brady's offer of 1 game.


I'M THE SILVERBACK GORILLA IN THIS MOTHER——— AND DON'T NONE OF YA'LL EVER FORGET IT!@ 34 minutes

Re: #DeflateGate
« Reply #2646 on: September 01, 2015, 09:34:07 AM »

Offline D.o.s.

  • NCE
  • Cedric Maxwell
  • **************
  • Posts: 14061
  • Tommy Points: 1239
I'm curious if two games plus Brady "not contesting" the findings of the arbitration would have been satisfactory to either side, and if so, which side turned it down.

My suspicion is that Brady's half would have turned it down because of the 'not contesting' part of it. From the look of it, he really believes (like most Patriots fans) that everything he did was within the realm of legitimacy, both on the field and in following his legal team's advice off the field.

The Patriots have to see how Jimmy G will do anyway. Brady is old, and more importantly his legacy is already sewn up -- a legacy that isn't legitimately affected by Deflategate in anyway unless he stops fighting the findings of the Wells Report. I think that's much more important for him than playing a month of NFL football.
At least a goldfish with a Lincoln Log on its back goin' across your floor to your sock drawer has a miraculous connotation to it.

Re: #DeflateGate
« Reply #2647 on: September 01, 2015, 09:41:20 AM »

Offline D.o.s.

  • NCE
  • Cedric Maxwell
  • **************
  • Posts: 14061
  • Tommy Points: 1239
This is 31 teams ganging up on the team that is the most successful football team in this century, out of jealousy and spite.  And for a perceived lack of sufficient punishment for Spygate.

No, I don't think so, although I think it is a popular narrative for Patriots fans. IMO it was a perfect storm of a noteworthy/newsy team being caught doing something fairly run-of-the-mill, but certainly illegal, that the NFL front office decided to use as a foolproof way to reassert some of their authority among the eyes of the viewership and their owners. Of course, the fact that it blew up in their face is the delicious twist to it.

Was the fine increased because of previous organizational behavior? Certainly. Is it a witch hunt to 'get' the Patriots? I don't think so. Just because you get a bigger fine for driving with a suspended license the second time doesn't mean the court is out to get you, you know?
At least a goldfish with a Lincoln Log on its back goin' across your floor to your sock drawer has a miraculous connotation to it.

Re: #DeflateGate
« Reply #2648 on: September 01, 2015, 09:48:22 AM »

Offline Vermont Green

  • Ed Macauley
  • ***********
  • Posts: 11225
  • Tommy Points: 860
I am going to post some thoughts as a prediction so I can be on the record and see how I do.  I am an engineer, not a lawyer so the Ideal Gas Law is my strength, not jurisprudence.  As an engineer, I see no proof that the balls were even tampered with so in my mind, nothing else really matters.  But I am an engineer and not a judge and I believe the judge, based on reported statements, is not seeing that point as definitively as me.  He seems to think that the guys may have done something even if Brady did not specifically order it.

On the law side, based on what I have read, I think the judge can rule that even though the collective bargaining agreement does stipulate that Goodell can arbitrate these matters, there is still an implied requirement for the NFL to execute this role in a reasonably fair manner.  I predict that the judge is going to say that the NFL abused the power granted to them in the CBA and went way overboard.  If this had actually been a fair and reasonable arbitration, then the judge would be very reluctant to overturn but since the NFL turned this into a kangaroo court, it is not really arbitration and the judge should have much more latitude to overturn.

The ruling will be in favor of Brady and the NFL will be ordered to rehear the arbitration but to do so in a way that meets the standard of a real arbitration if they want it to be upheld.  What happens from there, who knows.  I am not sure that there is a scenario where Goodell can preside over an arbitration and have it be fair.


Re: #DeflateGate
« Reply #2649 on: September 01, 2015, 10:03:14 AM »

Offline kozlodoev

  • NCE
  • Kevin Garnett
  • *****************
  • Posts: 17914
  • Tommy Points: 1294
Quote
In the context of the Wells Report findings ("general awareness", "more likely than not", the PSI levels being off (as conceded in Wells Report)  by about 0.1 to 0.2 of a PSI), the schedule of fines for equipment violations set forth in the rule book, the high likelihood that any deflation was caused by operation of the ideal gas law, the "deflategate" texts from the two guys dated months before the Colts play-off game, that Brady never was found to ask for any balls below the 12.5 legal limit, that other equipment tampering has either been ignored or admonished with warning (Vikings heating balls), that refusal to turn over phones has only met wtih a fine (Brett Favre), to suggest the NFL's position of 3 games was just as reasonable as Brady's offer of a one game suspension, is nonsensical to me.

I still don't understand why people knock the "more likely than not" standard.  It's been the burden of proof in civil cases for literally hundreds of years.  It's hardly shocking, or worthy of criticism.

As for the other issues, you don't really examine the evidence at this stage.  It's not about who has the facts on their side.  Rather, it's about who has a stronger legal position.  Most experts concede that that is the NFL, although the Judge in this matter may rely on procedural issues to vacate the arbitration award.  (I'd be very surprised if the Judge made a finding that Goddell was partial, though.  That would essentially render that portion of the CBA meaningless, and Judges in general won't touch collectively bargained agreements).

So, yes, in terms of the strength of legal positions, the NFL's offer of 3 games is on par with Brady's offer of 1 game.
The problem is that when you combine the findings of the Wells report: "more likely than not" + "at least generally aware", you have a punishment that doesn't fit the crime. This is partially because civil law standard is intended to be used in proceedings that typically result in monetary fines.

Another problem is that you go from "at least generally aware" in the Wells report to "orchestrating a conspiracy" on appeal and it just doesn't add up.
"I don't know half of you half as well as I should like; and I like less than half of you half as well as you deserve."

Re: #DeflateGate
« Reply #2650 on: September 01, 2015, 10:05:29 AM »

Offline kozlodoev

  • NCE
  • Kevin Garnett
  • *****************
  • Posts: 17914
  • Tommy Points: 1294
I am going to post some thoughts as a prediction so I can be on the record and see how I do.  I am an engineer, not a lawyer so the Ideal Gas Law is my strength, not jurisprudence.  As an engineer, I see no proof that the balls were even tampered with so in my mind, nothing else really matters.  But I am an engineer and not a judge and I believe the judge, based on reported statements, is not seeing that point as definitively as me.  He seems to think that the guys may have done something even if Brady did not specifically order it.
The problem is that whether or not the balls were deflated is not on trial here. Therefore, what anyone thinks on that matter is irrelevant. The judge is going to rule on whether Goodell appropriately levied his punishment under the CBA -- although I am unsure whether his task is to confirm the penalty itself or the arbitration result.
"I don't know half of you half as well as I should like; and I like less than half of you half as well as you deserve."

Re: #DeflateGate
« Reply #2651 on: September 01, 2015, 10:22:50 AM »

Offline PhoSita

  • NCE
  • Robert Parish
  • *********************
  • Posts: 21835
  • Tommy Points: 2182
Just because you get a bigger fine for driving with a suspended license the second time doesn't mean the court is out to get you, you know?


I think it's more like the local cops pulling over the town heel for going 42 in a 30.  The guy they pull over happens to be a notorious jerk -- hollering at women, getting too drunk in bars, and he also owns a local business and recently laid off some of the cops' friends. 

So they contrive excuses to search his car so they can find his stash of weed that he keeps under the seat.  They put him in jail for the night. They fine him the highest possible amount.  And then they impound his car and make him jump through hoops for two weeks just to get it back. 
You’ll have to excuse my lengthiness—the reason I dread writing letters is because I am so apt to get to slinging wisdom & forget to let up. Thus much precious time is lost.
- Mark Twain

Re: #DeflateGate
« Reply #2652 on: September 01, 2015, 10:27:58 AM »

Offline PhoSita

  • NCE
  • Robert Parish
  • *********************
  • Posts: 21835
  • Tommy Points: 2182


The whole point of a compromise is that both sides start at extremes and work their way towards a common ground in the center. Doesn't make sense for the NFL to start much lower than what they did.

Sure, but at this point in the process, you'd think the sides would have found more middle ground than "3 games and admission of guilt + crime of perjury."
Not if Brady was at no suspension at all.  If both sides are taking unreasonable positions (at least to the other), then neither side is going to move first.  Pretty classic negotiation.

Yeah, exactly.  To Patriots fans, 3 games and an admission of guilt is an unreasonable position.  To the NFL, 1 game and no admission is unreasonable.  It's hard to criticize one side and not the other in terms of failure to reach settlement.

I'm curious if two games plus Brady "not contesting" the findings of the arbitration would have been satisfactory to either side, and if so, which side turned it down.


Reduced suspension to 2 games and Brady saying nothing seems like a reasonable outcome for both sides, to me.  Brady doesn't get to comment on the NFL backing down, or how this demonstrates that there wasn't sufficient evidence, or whatever.  Shut your mouth, sit out two weeks, and play when you get back.



I still don't understand why people knock the "more likely than not" standard.  It's been the burden of proof in civil cases for literally hundreds of years.  It's hardly shocking, or worthy of criticism.


I think what gets people is that proving something that is vague and tepid to begin with -- "general awareness" -- by a legitimate but relatively forgiving standard of "more likely than not" really makes the punishment seem excessive.

"More likely than not" that you were "generally aware" of something sounds, from a common sense perspective, like a fairly low likelihood that you were really heavily involved in anything.  It sounds like guilt by association.  Which in this case, it kinda is.
You’ll have to excuse my lengthiness—the reason I dread writing letters is because I am so apt to get to slinging wisdom & forget to let up. Thus much precious time is lost.
- Mark Twain

Re: #DeflateGate
« Reply #2653 on: September 01, 2015, 10:39:03 AM »

Offline Vermont Green

  • Ed Macauley
  • ***********
  • Posts: 11225
  • Tommy Points: 860
I am going to post some thoughts as a prediction so I can be on the record and see how I do.  I am an engineer, not a lawyer so the Ideal Gas Law is my strength, not jurisprudence.  As an engineer, I see no proof that the balls were even tampered with so in my mind, nothing else really matters.  But I am an engineer and not a judge and I believe the judge, based on reported statements, is not seeing that point as definitively as me.  He seems to think that the guys may have done something even if Brady did not specifically order it.

The problem is that whether or not the balls were deflated is not on trial here. Therefore, what anyone thinks on that matter is irrelevant. The judge is going to rule on whether Goodell appropriately levied his punishment under the CBA -- although I am unsure whether his task is to confirm the penalty itself or the arbitration result.

I agree that "whether or not the balls were deflated is not on trial" to a point.  The judge did ask a lot of questions about the evidence and the what exactly it was that Brady may or may not have been aware of.  I agree that the judge is not going to rule "I vacate because I don't believe the NFL proved the balls were deflated" but he seemed to be concerned about what and when the infraction may be/have occurred as this goes to the reasonableness of the overall arbitration process.

My point is that this so called arbitration by Goodell is not going to be given the same deference that a real arbitration process would be given.  This is just my opinion or prediction.  To some degree, I am incorporating some points I heard Roger Abrams make on TV.  He is a Law Professor at Northeastern and has worked on MLB labor cases as I understand it.  Of course basing my opinion on my interpretation of his opinion means that I don't expect anyone to take this very seriously or to have this change their mind on the issue.  It is just fun to play along at home, like watching Jeopardy.

Way back when, when Goodell released the 4 game suspension and the fines and draft picks, I predicted that Goodell would lose his job over this.  I still think the NFL is going to move on from Goodell, not right away, but at a convenient time in the relatively near future.  But who knows what the NFL will do.

Re: #DeflateGate
« Reply #2654 on: September 01, 2015, 10:43:06 AM »

Offline D.o.s.

  • NCE
  • Cedric Maxwell
  • **************
  • Posts: 14061
  • Tommy Points: 1239
Just because you get a bigger fine for driving with a suspended license the second time doesn't mean the court is out to get you, you know?


I think it's more like the local cops pulling over the town heel for going 42 in a 30.  The guy they pull over happens to be a notorious jerk -- hollering at women, getting too drunk in bars, and he also owns a local business and recently laid off some of the cops' friends. 

So they contrive excuses to search his car so they can find his stash of weed that he keeps under the seat.  They put him in jail for the night. They fine him the highest possible amount.  And then they impound his car and make him jump through hoops for two weeks just to get it back.

Hahahahahah well I was trying to be diplomatic but yeah your equivocation works much better.
At least a goldfish with a Lincoln Log on its back goin' across your floor to your sock drawer has a miraculous connotation to it.