2016 NFL THREAD - Super Bowl 51 - Patriots' Day: V - Screw Goodell

[King Postwhore]

It would have to be in two years and he has a 4 year deal with no decline in his play which is for us fans something I thought I'd never see this level of play for this long.  I dread the day he does retire.

[cramx3]

I'm sure every Pats fan dreads that day and the day Belichick retires too. 

[King Postwhore]

For sure.  I'm not so sure about him retiring either. 

[Bruinsfan25]

I understand him fighting so I can't fault him for it but I just want to move on from it. The other concern is that if he does keep fighting and they make a decision during the season he could potentially miss the last 4 games or even playoff games and that would be way worse.

[King Postwhore]

Yeah I know but he is going to fight until the end so I'm not going to fret over it because it will happen.

[mikeyd23]

I understand him fighting so I can't fault him for it

Really? I can. His union signed an employment agreement giving Goodell specific power to do exactly what Goodell did. He was working fully within his contractual rights per the labor agreement.

Not to mention Tom wants to take this to the Supreme Court. I'll say that again, the Supreme Court. Does no one else find that absolutely ridiculous? It literally saddens me that with all the trouble in this country, with all the attention actual important matters deserve from the highest court in the country, that their time would potential be taken up by a game. Thankfully, it looks like it won't be.

[El Barto]

I don't know if he'll bother with the SC. Personally, I wouldn't have even appealed last ruling. I do suspect he'll sue the league for whatever sort of defamation this is, and I've got no problem with that. The man has created a tremendous legacy for himself, and now he gets saddled with a "yeah, but. . ." that's arbitrary and undeserved because he works for a bunch of petty egotists.

[Bruinsfan25]

I understand him fighting because no one wants to be falsely accused of something but at the same time I'd like to move on from this mess. I have a feeling he'll keep fighting though, like Tom once said "I didn't come this far to come this far."

[dparrott]

The Rams in-season practice facility is around 5 miles away from me and their practices won't be public.  Dammit. 

[mikeyd23]

I don't know if he'll bother with the SC. Personally, I wouldn't have even appealed last ruling. I do suspect he'll sue the league for whatever sort of defamation this is, and I've got no problem with that. The man has created a tremendous legacy for himself, and now he gets saddled with a "yeah, but. . ." that's arbitrary and undeserved because he works for a bunch of petty egotists.

He tried to keep it going, but it got rejected the other day, by the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.

https://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/17045257/new-england-patriots-qb-tom-brady-deflategate-appeal-denied-2nd-us-circuit-court

I understand him fighting because no one wants to be falsely accused of something but at the same time I'd like to move on from this mess. I have a feeling he'll keep fighting though, like Tom once said "I didn't come this far to come this far."

Not sure what you think Tom is fighting for at this point. My understanding is that he is going after the NFL and Goodell to try to say Goodell didn't have the power to suspend him for the offense, not to somehow prove he had nothing to do with deflating balls. Like the article I linked above says, unfortunately for Tom, Goodell is judge, jury, and executioner. But the irony of all ironies is that the NFLPA (representing Tom and every other player in the league) agreed to the contract that currently gives Goodell all that power.

[King Postwhore]

The Rams in-season practice facility is around 5 miles away from me and their practices won't be public.  Dammit.

That's weird.  All teams have open practice for at least 2 weeks.

[King Postwhore]

I don't know if he'll bother with the SC. Personally, I wouldn't have even appealed last ruling. I do suspect he'll sue the league for whatever sort of defamation this is, and I've got no problem with that. The man has created a tremendous legacy for himself, and now he gets saddled with a "yeah, but. . ." that's arbitrary and undeserved because he works for a bunch of petty egotists.

From what we've heard here, he is going forward until he can't anymore.  They knew the chance was very slim for the re hearing in the second court but the lawyer they got has gone before the SC 80 times.  So that's their goal.

[Stadler]

I don't know if he'll bother with the SC. Personally, I wouldn't have even appealed last ruling. I do suspect he'll sue the league for whatever sort of defamation this is, and I've got no problem with that. The man has created a tremendous legacy for himself, and now he gets saddled with a "yeah, but. . ." that's arbitrary and undeserved because he works for a bunch of petty egotists.

He tried to keep it going, but it got rejected the other day, by the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.

https://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/17045257/new-england-patriots-qb-tom-brady-deflategate-appeal-denied-2nd-us-circuit-court

I understand him fighting because no one wants to be falsely accused of something but at the same time I'd like to move on from this mess. I have a feeling he'll keep fighting though, like Tom once said "I didn't come this far to come this far."

Not sure what you think Tom is fighting for at this point. My understanding is that he is going after the NFL and Goodell to try to say Goodell didn't have the power to suspend him for the offense, not to somehow prove he had nothing to do with deflating balls. Like the article I linked above says, unfortunately for Tom, Goodell is judge, jury, and executioner. But the irony of all ironies is that the NFLPA (representing Tom and every other player in the league) agreed to the contract that currently gives Goodell all that power.

I think at this point you have to assume that this is not about Tom Brady personally, but is using the brand "Brady" to address larger, labor-related issues.  It is for that reason that I believe it may be likely that the SC would take this.  Again, not because of "Brady" the man, but because it addresses a key labor relations issue. 

[El Barto]

I don't know if he'll bother with the SC. Personally, I wouldn't have even appealed last ruling. I do suspect he'll sue the league for whatever sort of defamation this is, and I've got no problem with that. The man has created a tremendous legacy for himself, and now he gets saddled with a "yeah, but. . ." that's arbitrary and undeserved because he works for a bunch of petty egotists.

He tried to keep it going, but it got rejected the other day, by the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.

https://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/17045257/new-england-patriots-qb-tom-brady-deflategate-appeal-denied-2nd-us-circuit-court

I understand him fighting because no one wants to be falsely accused of something but at the same time I'd like to move on from this mess. I have a feeling he'll keep fighting though, like Tom once said "I didn't come this far to come this far."

Not sure what you think Tom is fighting for at this point. My understanding is that he is going after the NFL and Goodell to try to say Goodell didn't have the power to suspend him for the offense, not to somehow prove he had nothing to do with deflating balls. Like the article I linked above says, unfortunately for Tom, Goodell is judge, jury, and executioner. But the irony of all ironies is that the NFLPA (representing Tom and every other player in the league) agreed to the contract that currently gives Goodell all that power.

I think he has a couple of fights here. For one, he's trying to duck the suspension. I don't think that was ever going to happen. Stadler's probably correct that he's looking to take up the cause because he's in a position to do so. I don't see this working out, either. Last, I think he's trying to protect his reputation. I still think there's some sort of defamation suit in his future, and that'll work out well for him.

[mikeyd23]

I think at this point you have to assume that this is not about Tom Brady personally, but is using the brand "Brady" to address larger, labor-related issues.  It is for that reason that I believe it may be likely that the SC would take this.  Again, not because of "Brady" the man, but because it addresses a key labor relations issue.

I would agree. And I ask honestly, how is this a labor-related issue that actually holds water? Goodell was given the power he exercised by the labor agreement the labor union negotiated. Isn't this simply just a case of the union recognizing, "hey we made a bad deal, we should probably take note for 2020 when we have to renegotiate this thing and have some checks and balances in here for discipline"...?

[El Barto]

I believe there was an expectation that the commissioner would use that power justly. This didn't happen. Whether or not that expectation is actually an obligation is I suspect what they're arguing about.

[mikeyd23]

I believe there was an expectation that the commissioner would use that power justly. This didn't happen. Whether or not that expectation is actually an obligation is I suspect what they're arguing about.

Right but if they gave Goodell total control over discipline how can you determine he didn't act justly? He believed Tom deserved to be suspended, he had the power to suspend, and he did. Period. It's not like he punched Tom in the balls and made a your mom joke.

[El Barto]

Judges are afforded the same role. If one decides to convict somebody despite a lack of evidence that wasn't misrepresented, is it a just ruling? Do we say "well he chose a bench trial so fuck'em?"

[King Postwhore]

I believe there was an expectation that the commissioner would use that power justly. This didn't happen. Whether or not that expectation is actually an obligation is I suspect what they're arguing about.

Right but if they gave Goodell total control over discipline how can you determine he didn't act justly? He believed Tom deserved to be suspended, he had the power to suspend, and he did. Period. It's not like he punched Tom in the balls and made a your mom joke.

When you manipulate the investigation like they did with the report, they had an NFL official edit the Wells Report, you give 4 games for possibly knowing and then change when you go to court and not say it's for not cooperation in the investigation when in the Wells Report Ted Wells said Tom cooperated. You are abusing the power you were given in the CBA.  That's just a few things.

By hey, I guess the players are now paying for not fighting to get that off the CBA.  2020 there will be a strike.

[mikeyd23]

When you manipulate the investigation like they did with the report, they had an NFL official edit the Wells Report, you give 4 games for possibly knowing and then change when you go to court and not say it's for not cooperation in the investigation when in the Wells Report Ted Wells said Tom cooperated. You are abusing the power you were given in the CBA.  That's just a few things.

By hey, I guess the players are now paying for not fighting to get that off the CBA.  2020 there will be a strike.

I've never seen evidence the NFL manipulated the Wells Report. If they did, they did a pretty bad job editing it, since it basically didn't draw any stiff conclusion. If you're going to go to the trouble of tampering, tamper so the report actually supports your side of the argument. 

Also, players have been suspended four games for less than this before, so I still can't understand (beyond name recognition) why this specific instance has been so drawn out. 

[King Postwhore]

You haven't been following then.  For sure they've changed their tune a thousand times.  For example, they interviewed both Jaskremski & McNally 4 times.  They wanted a 5th and the Pats denied them.  One works full time at another job and only does the home games for the Pats and lives 2 hours away from Foxboro.

The league then stated they were refused to interview them when in fact they did 4 times for both.

[Destiny Of Chaos]

Brady has announced that he will no longer proceed with the legal process.

Bout time he took his punishment like a man. Hope he enjoys his 4 week vacation.

[mikeyd23]

You haven't been following then.

Well I haven't been following it from the greater Boston area, so I guess random conspiracies about the number of interviews of ball boys didn't make it on my radar. 

Brady has announced that he will no longer proceed with the legal process.

Bout time he took his punishment like a man. Hope he enjoys his 4 week vacation.

Thank the Lord. 4 weeks off, well deserved.

[King Postwhore]

Well, well.  So everybody outside N.E. should be happy.  Interested in seeing how Jimmy G does.

[bosk1]

Not everyone.  I hate the Pats, and I still think it is bogus.

[King Postwhore]

Not everyone.  I hate the Pats, and I still think it is bogus.

Majority.

I do wonder how much this will be a big deal or not for the next CBA.  A players lifespan in football is short so would they take less money to lessen Goodell's power?  I'm thinking most won't.  But if you look how Goodell handled the NO Saints, The Ray Rice incident, Deflategate, and the Miami incident it should be a big red flag for players to allow Goodell to arbitrarily make up the rules as he sees fit.

Still 4 years away so we'll see if other items like this pop up to keep the focus on Goodell or it clams down over time.

[pogoowner]

I think the entire thing is bogus as well. Even if there was clear cut evidence against Brady, the penalty is excessive for something as insignificant as the deflation of a football.

And I'd just rather watch one of the greatest quarterbacks of all-time than watch Jimmy Garappolo.

[Destiny Of Chaos]

I think the entire thing is bogus as well. Even if there was clear cut evidence against Brady, the penalty is excessive for something as insignificant as the deflation of a football.

And I'd just rather watch one of the greatest quarterbacks of all-time than watch Jimmy Garappolo.

And I'd rather one of the greatest QBs of all time not feel the need to cheat, but it is what it is.

[cramx3]

Im going to look at the bright side of this since Im not a Pats fan and a fan of an NFC team... this may make the AFC more competitive for the playoffs 

[King Postwhore]

Yet it was never proven that he did cheat.   The NFL themselves said that they had no proof in court. 

To me, this is why it should be troubling for players and fans.  If you got railroaded like this at work you would fight to your last breath but out in the internet world, it's take your medicine like a man Tom. 

Just imagine they had no proof you stole something at work yet they suspended you for it?  Yeah, nobody looks at it that way.

Im going to look at the bright side of this since Im not a Pats fan and a fan of an NFC team... this may make the AFC more competitive for the playoffs 

 

[Destiny Of Chaos]

Im going to look at the bright side of this since Im not a Pats fan and a fan of an NFC team... this may make the AFC more competitive for the playoffs 

I don't think it changes much. I think they still win the East easily. Might just impact their chances at a bye week or homefield advantage. 

[King Postwhore]

Im going to look at the bright side of this since Im not a Pats fan and a fan of an NFC team... this may make the AFC more competitive for the playoffs 

I don't think it changes much. I think they still win the East easily. Might just impact their chances at a bye week or homefield advantage.

That certainly helped the Broncos this year.


Home field only doesn't help with the Ravens.  Those SOB's can win in Foxboro.

[mikeyd23]

And I'd rather one of the greatest QBs of all time not feel the need to cheat, but it is what it is.

This.

How is the penalty of a 4 game suspension excessive for cheating? Most players get suspended for things that are off the field. This directly effected the on-the-field game and jeopardized the integrity of the entire league.

Just imagine they had no proof you stole something at work yet they suspended you for it?  Yeah, nobody looks at it that way.

This is actually exactly how I have been looking at it. My employer, whether I liked it or not, would have every right to do that. Also, "no proof" is a big stretch...What do you want as far as proof, Tom to admit it?

[King Postwhore]

Do you not get that the NLF said in open court that they had no evidence that Tom had any part in this.  An owner could not do that to an employee.  That leaves the door open for lawsuits and companies do not like getting dragged to court.

Come on, lets be real, it started as a vendetta from the other owners then it became about the power of discipline.  The league opened themselves to this and it almost cost them.  They should have fined the team and let it be.  No team would fight a fine to something like that.

[cramx3]

Im going to look at the bright side of this since Im not a Pats fan and a fan of an NFC team... this may make the AFC more competitive for the playoffs 

I don't think it changes much. I think they still win the East easily. Might just impact their chances at a bye week or homefield advantage.

That's what I was meaning, playoff race, not the actual playoffs.