Lots of people don't understand sunk costs. I'm glad you do.
Once someone is drafted, you can always discuss whether they should have been drafted where they were, but that is completely irrelevant to determining whether someone should stay on a team or have the play time they do. You play guys who give you the best chance to win.
Aaron Williams, Bills DB. Edelman was diving for the pylon, Williams comes in from the side, diving for the tackle. Puts his facemask into Edelman's back, lands on his legs. Didn't look like a bad hit at all, but he didn't get up.
I take a stronger position. I personally believe not deflation occurred. To make the conclusion that it did, you have to ignore Walt Anderson's recollection as to which gauge he used. If you believe Walt, then the measurements at halftime nearly exactly match what you would expect them to be given the temperature difference. Everyone wants to conveniently ignore that the Colts balls were 3 of 4 "underinflated" at halftime, despite their preference being for even higher PSI than Brady has claimed to prefer.
Ultimately the NFL clearly never cared about footballs prior to this incident. (See: Jay Feeley, Panthers/Vikings, Aaron Rodgers, Brad Johnson) They had no idea how the science worked. (See: Troy Vincent's statements) They did not have any procedure for recording pressures, etc. Someone (whether officially or unofficially) wanted to catch the Patriots doing something that they may or may not have been doing, and did a terrible job of doing so.
Note: I am not saying that they are 100% innocent. I am saying that the evidence as it currently exists doesn't prove they are guilty. Anyone conclusively saying otherwise is just projecting their own desires and opinions. Anyone claiming otherwise is being willfully ignorant.
That being said, whether or not you believe ball tampering occurred, or whether you believe Brady was involved, or whether you believe that had any impact on the team's success for the past 15 years has NOTHING to do with today's ruling.
Pats fan here. I don't post often (and rarely during the offseason, which the preseason counts as). Additionally, I am an attorney, though I do not practice labor law.
Ultimately this came down to whether the NFL's kangaroo court and ad hoc procedures ran afoul of law of the shop/fairness/notice rules. Berman says they do. The NFL can (and should) appeal. I skimmed the opinion, and didn't see anything that appeared crazy to me, so assuming Berman and his law clerks (law clerks are usually recently graduated law students who are top of their class at their respective schools, especially in a location like the Southern District of New York) did their job right and didn't miss any applicable case law, I don't see a reason why this should be overturned.
It basically is saying you can't punish an employee* for something you never punish anyone else for, or that they are unaware they can be punished for, and if you do, you need to give them adequate chance to have a fair hearing.
* This is important. We talk a lot about players and wins and losses, but ultimately Brady, like Rice, Feeley, the Saints players, etc, are employees being punished by their employer. This case (and any appeals) are WAY MORE IMPORTANT than wins and losses on a football field, if you care about employees having any rights in disputes with their employers.
You can form your own opinion as to whether you think anyone actually deflated footballs, and if they did, whether Brady was involved. Clearly regional biases will come into play. But that isn't what this case was about.
I get that I am a Pats fan you don't want to hear this but: Why not give credit to Butler? There are numerous games each season where a QB tries to throw one or more times near the goal line rather than the OC calling a running play. Why not give any credit to Butler?
Pats have been RIPE FOR THE SLAUGHTER on this site and a certain other that shall remain nameless for YEARS. Brady may not be tearing up records the past couple years, but he can still make all the throws, is as healthy as he has ever been recently, and doesn't rely on mobility at all. He is probably good for another three years barring significant injury.
It doesn't say what the gun charge is. It could be as minor as not having proper storage, or failure to license in the local state, where in a previous home state it wasn't required. It is pretty common for people in places that have lax gun laws to travel to different states and accidentally run a foul of stricter laws.