Brady 4 Game Suspension Upheld

[smuggler]

The legal precedent that Doty set aside was setting aside a binding arbitration. Even when arbitrators err, their rulings are pretty much universally upheld because it's quite the nasty legal can of worms to introduce legally binding agreements as debatable in court. I have heard, and I am no legal expert, that Peterson will lose ultimately because the higher court, while not disagreeing with Doty about the incorrectness of the arbitration, will nevertheless throw out his ruling due to the simple fact that Peterson had legally agreed to Goodell's crooked deal.

[pbmax]

The legal precedent that Doty set aside was setting aside a binding arbitration. Even when arbitrators err, their rulings are pretty much universally upheld because it's quite the nasty legal can of worms to introduce legally binding agreements as debatable in court. I have heard, and I am no legal expert, that Peterson will lose ultimately because the higher court, while not disagreeing with Doty about the incorrectness of the arbitration, will nevertheless throw out his ruling due to the simple fact that Peterson had legally agreed to Goodell's crooked deal.

It is a high hurdle. But after a Federal Court rules (re: Rice), the arbitrator must incorporate that ruling into their deliberations. This one did not even consider it.

We may find out soon. The appeal is still alive despite not being a hot topic. And the contempt of court hearing for Goodell placing Peterson back on the exempt list is set for Aug 13.

[pbmax]

Rodgers made it into the Brady appeal transcript. NFLPA was trying to ascertain the different treatment of previous instances of fooling around with the football's physical condition. First they asked about the Panthers warming the ball versus the Vikes, then Rodgers talking about ball pressure after the Patriots game:


Q: Let me ask you next about the following. Are you aware -- let's take a look at NFLPA Exhibit 177.
You will see this is a report quoting Aaron Rodgers that took place during the November 30th game
between the Packers and the Patriots. And you will see that Mr. Rodgers was quoted 7 as saying, "I like to push the limit to how much air
we can put in the football, even go over what they allow you to do and see if the officials take air out of it."
Do you see that?
A. Yes.

Q. Did you or anyone in your office conduct any 14 investigation of Mr. Rodgers for making that
statement?
A. No, sir.

Q. Would you agree with me that if Mr. Rodgers 18 was pushing the limit of how much air could be in a 19 football, that that would be him at least being
generally aware of activities to try to violate the NFL rules regarding pressure for footballs?
A. The way I'm reading, this is a post-game 23 comment and there is no need for us to react or 24 overreact.

Q. So this was not important enough for you to
react to Mr. Rodgers saying he liked to push the limit and see if officials caught it; that was not a serious thing for you to react?
A. In a post-game interview. Because if the testing of the games (sic) pre-game and all balls were in regulation, there is no need for us to react for post-game comment.

Q. So in your view, Mr. Rodgers not even being investigated and Mr. Brady being suspended for four games for allegedly being generally aware of someone else's activities, you think that's a consistent treatment, in your mind?
A. This is a post-game comment.


Clearly someone is not aware that Rodgers also commented about this on his radio show. Which would make it a pre-game comment as well.

Page 248-249, http://static.nfl.com/static/content...0000506502.pdf

[pbmax]

Page 254-55

Q. You were asked about Aaron Rodgers. It's NFLPA Exhibit 177. Do you have that?
A. Yes, sir.

Q. You were asked about a quote, and I note in the quote it says something about to see if the officials take the air out of it. And you were
asked whether you did an investigation.
Did you have any information that either
Mr. Rodgers or anyone from the Packers had actually tampered with a football after the officials
measured it?
A. No, sir.

Q. Did you have any information or any evidence that either Mr. Rodgers or anyone associated with the Packers actually used the football in that game or any other game in which the inflation was not properly done on the footballs after the officials
had measured it?
A. No, sir.

Q. Or at any time, did you have information that the packers or Mr. Rodgers used the football that was not properly inflated?
A. Not at all.

Q. If you had such knowledge and such evidence, would you have conducted an investigation?
A. What we would have done is our normal protocol. Before games, we would have tested the ball.

[pbmax]

Stephanie Stradley @StephStradley
Finished #Deflategate transcript. Can see why NFL wanted sealed. They want to win bc legal standard favors them. Not bc Brady did anything.

http://www.stradleylaw.com/nfl-brady...te-transcript/

[mraynrand]

I 15 wonder if Rodgers 12 knows that comments 18 about circumventing rules 51 are never allowed. For example, Charles Woodson 21 used to talk about holding 84 as much as he could if he could get away with it. Ed Hochuli 85 didn't like it, but wood was never suspended.

[sharpe1027]

Isn't the more relevant issue that the deflation was occurring after the inspection? What Rodgers did is (relatively) upfront and (arguably) within the procedures. The only way it gains an advantage is if the NFL is incompetent. The other is fraudulent and clearly outside the procedures.

[mraynrand]

It would be fun to put Rodgers, Brady, a pump and a football together in a room and see what happens. Kind of like an epistasis test for you biologists out there.

[pbmax]

Isn't the more relevant issue that the deflation was occurring after the inspection? What Rodgers did is (relatively) upfront and (arguably) within the procedures. The only way it gains an advantage is if the NFL is incompetent. The other is fraudulent and clearly outside the procedures.

Sure. Both in terms of the integrity of the game rules and the actual effect on the game. But the generally aware standard plus the inferences made by the texts only hint at Brady's knowledge of tampering after inspection.

Even reading Brady as generally evasive and willfully destroying possible evidence, there is no direct evidence he knew about deflating after the fact.

So you can start an investigation of Rodgers last year, find a number of footballs from low temperature games below 12.5 at halftime (or warm temperature games above 13.5), and suspend him for his comments and failure to turn over texts.

I have no doubt Brady rode his equipment crew like rented mules to get the balls down to the barest minimum they could get away with, just as Rodgers is looking for balloon specs. But the evidence that Brady knew about methods to evade the rules after inspection is sorely lacking.

I would however, on principle, go along with sanctioning Hoody just on general principle. Same with Goodell for destroying the tapes of Hoody's malfeasance.

[mraynrand]

Rodgers made it into the Brady appeal transcript. NFLPA was trying to ascertain the different treatment of previous instances of fooling around with the football's physical condition. First they asked about the Panthers warming the ball versus the Vikes, then Rodgers talking about ball pressure after the Patriots game:


Q: Let me ask you next about the following. Are you aware -- let's take a look at NFLPA Exhibit 177.
You will see this is a report quoting Aaron Rodgers that took place during the November 30th game
between the Packers and the Patriots. And you will see that Mr. Rodgers was quoted 7 as saying, "I like to push the limit to how much air
we can put in the football, even go over what they allow you to do and see if the officials take air out of it."
Do you see that?
A. Yes.

Q. Did you or anyone in your office conduct any 14 investigation of Mr. Rodgers for making that
statement?
A. No, sir.

Q. Would you agree with me that if Mr. Rodgers 18 was pushing the limit of how much air could be in a 19 football, that that would be him at least being
generally aware of activities to try to violate the NFL rules regarding pressure for footballs?
A. The way I'm reading, this is a post-game 23 comment and there is no need for us to react or 24 overreact.

Q. So this was not important enough for you to
react to Mr. Rodgers saying he liked to push the limit and see if officials caught it; that was not a serious thing for you to react?
A. In a post-game interview. Because if the testing of the games (sic) pre-game and all balls were in regulation, there is no need for us to react for post-game comment.

Q. So in your view, Mr. Rodgers not even being investigated and Mr. Brady being suspended for four games for allegedly being generally aware of someone else's activities, you think that's a consistent treatment, in your mind?
A. This is a post-game comment.


Clearly someone is not aware that Rodgers also commented about this on his radio show. Which would make it a pre-game comment as well.

Page 248-249, http://static.nfl.com/static/content...0000506502.pdf

Judge Chamberlain Haller: "Mr. Gambini, That is a lucid, intelligent, well thought-out objection."
Vinny Gambini: "Thank you, Your Honor."
Judge Chamberlain Haller: "Overruled."

[sharpe1027]

Sure. Both in terms of the integrity of the game rules and the actual effect on the game. But the generally aware standard plus the inferences made by the texts only hint at Brady's knowledge of tampering after inspection.

Even reading Brady as generally evasive and willfully destroying possible evidence, there is no direct evidence he knew about deflating after the fact.

So you can start an investigation of Rodgers last year, find a number of footballs from low temperature games below 12.5 at halftime (or warm temperature games above 13.5), and suspend him for his comments and failure to turn over texts.

I have no doubt Brady rode his equipment crew like rented mules to get the balls down to the barest minimum they could get away with, just as Rodgers is looking for balloon specs. But the evidence that Brady knew about methods to evade the rules after inspection is sorely lacking.

I would however, on principle, go along with sanctioning Hoody just on general principle. Same with Goodell for destroying the tapes of Hoody's malfeasance.

I see your point, but there still seems to be a substantive diference. In one instance the QB openly explained what was going on and hid nothing. In fact, there seems to be no wrong doing under the rules and he would probably be allowed to continue with the same process.

In the other, there was fraud occurring with cover-up after-the-fact. The inference seems pretty strong to me. I think that had Brady merely thought it was the same situation as Rodgers, this thing would have been over in about 1 day.

[pbmax]

I see your point, but there still seems to be a substantive diference. In one instance the QB openly explained what was going on and hid nothing. In fact, there seems to be no wrong doing under the rules and he would probably be allowed to continue with the same process.

In the other, there was fraud occurring with cover-up after-the-fact. The inference seems pretty strong to me. I think that had Brady merely thought it was the same situation as Rodgers, this thing would have been over in about 1 day.

Well, we only have Rodgers comments in this reality. But imagine what his comments sound like if there is video of the equipment guys stealing off with the footballs prior to games or if the Bears complained during a game. Is there anything so terribly wrong with re-inflating an official deflated ball back to 13.5 according to the team gauge?

You just need another piece of kindling to produce some smoke if you have teams out to get you (Jets, Ravens, Colts, Brett Favre with the matches).

But what the investigator is after with Vincent about the Vikes/Panthers and Rodgers is the inconsistent criteria of an investigation and punishment. With the Vikes, it was a news story and then fines and warning. Rodgers got nothing. The reason an investigation was triggered for the Pats was because two teams complained (Ravens to Colts, Colts to League). But the trigger was a game ball that a Colts player thought was under inflated. And remember that the Colts ball boys were reportedly seen on the sidelines with inflation needles.

So, you want an inference? The Colts were in charge of the ball that caused the investigation.

At that point, the League was measuring balls with no accurate basis for comparison. And if you consult someone who does not insist on incorrectly applying the Ideal Gas Law, the balls were all within expected tolerances during a wet and cold game.

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/01/30/sp...after-all.html

So the League is now maintaining they are consistent in applying the in-game standard, when they have no idea what that standard should have been.

[pbmax]

Argument for why the Ideal Gas law is a fine enough stand-in for the pressures/temps under consideration and a mention of Carnegie Mellon's test that revealed that wet leather (assuming no leaks) could drop pressure in the balls another .7 PSI.

http://www.elsevier.com/connect/can-...-nfl-footballs

[Guiness]

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/01/30/sp...after-all.html

So the League is now maintaining they are consistent in applying the in-game standard, when they have no idea what that standard should have been.

The guys behind the shield are looking more and more like an idiot midget behind a curtain

[pbmax]

Another thing to consider is that the formative experience Brady talks about, aside from wishing to have the treatment of game balls placed under the teams again, are his comments about the 16 PSI game balls they used.

I think the story was that the Game Official found them low (or this was back when the Officials controlled access all the way through) and reinflated them well above the current standard.

So to pull a Brady or Rodgers (tempt fate with blow min or above max) inflation game is dangerous if the effect is to put the Officials back in charge of inflation.

Its also why you might want a second visit with the balls after inspection.

[pbmax]

The guys behind the shield are looking more and more like an idiot midget behind a curtain

Its classic Roger. Have no plan for bad outcomes, be presented publicly with a bad outcome, make it up as you go along and pretend that was the plan all along.

[sharpe1027]

The inference and lack of credibility of Brady seems to have been a major rationale for the decision.

Apparently, Brady destroyed a phone that was only 4 months old, on the same day he was interviewed. His explanation is that it was his normal procedure, but he still had an older phone that was not destroyed. The destroyed phone just happened to be in the critical time period. -- How unfortunate.

Deflate' was a term they used to refer to losing weight. -- Strange coincidence.

http://deadspin.com/the-full-story-o...one-1722190784

[smuggler]

Brady and the League both bad, but only one still has (vague) plausible deniability... Sorry Roger!

[pbmax]

The timing does look fishy as does the implementation. Why does he still have the previous phone from the previous year?

And I'll give Wells this, contrary to most of the news coverage at the time, he is not asking for the phone, he is trusting the player and agent or lawyers to do the search.

However, I am not sure this makes a difference. Brady is still bound by a different set of rules than NFL employees so the idea of precedence (see Favre, Brett and Jets masseurs) is an important one. He then turns over the records of all his calls and texts at a subsequent meeting after he is aware that the lack of cooperation is cited as part of his guilt. Goodell then deems this too much work to do, despite the easy calculation that only 28 NFL people would need to be identified and contacted.

So is this a passive aggressive grudge match where one side wants to be able to force the other to do its bidding or is there truly concealment going on? Since the NFL has the phones of all the equipment guys, you need to envision a currently unknown line of communication for it to be on Brady's phone and not the team phones.

[Cheesehead Craig]

Maybe there were naked pics on his phone of the wifey (or someone else) doing something naughty and destroying it saved his marriage. That's worth a 4 game suspension.