EM31 Posted July 31, 2015 Share Posted July 31, 2015 So here is the offer. Let the NFL look at the phone records from the cloud. If (big if) there is no smoking gun beyond that which has already been obtained from the "Deflator" and his buddy then no punishment. Simple. If there is a smoking gun in there then the 4-game suspension for Tom Brady stands and if that information points to others in the organization then the NFL reserves the right to go after those other parties. Protect Brady's privacy any way you like by having a neutral 3rd party confine the search to this subject only. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LouisvilleSlugger25 Posted July 31, 2015 Share Posted July 31, 2015 I think by negotiations, they mean discussing a reduction of the suspension from 4 to 2 games and not figuring out what was on Brady's cell phone. Whether there is something on the phone, or not, is not the deciding factor in this case. There were other grounds for the suspension. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dbatesman Posted July 31, 2015 Share Posted July 31, 2015 Link? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jet Fan RI Posted July 31, 2015 Share Posted July 31, 2015 Not sure what your comments have to do with the thread title. But with respect to that title, I find the judge's direction to be worrisome. Surely the judge realizes the whole reason that there is a court case at all is because the commissioner ruled that the appeal had no merit and, in view of the further evidence of cell phone destruction, the original ruling of a 4-game suspension was fully warranted. It seems to me that the judge's direction is tantamount to concluding the commissioner's ruling was unjustified. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
#27TheDominator Posted July 31, 2015 Share Posted July 31, 2015 The statement only said to discuss settlement "if they have not already done so" and was primarily aimed at toning down the rhetoric. Too many statements aimed at the press and they don't like that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LouisvilleSlugger25 Posted July 31, 2015 Share Posted July 31, 2015 Not sure what your comments have to do with the thread title. But with respect to that title, I find the judge's direction to be worrisome. Surely the judge realizes the whole reason that there is a court case at all is because the commissioner ruled that the appeal had no merit and, in view of the further evidence of cell phone destruction, the original ruling of a 4-game suspension was fully warranted. It seems to me that the judge's direction is tantamount to concluding the commissioner's ruling was unjustified. Judges ALWAYS try to get parties to resolve their disputes. Murders and rapists plea (settle) their cases all the time. If every case that was brought went to trial the court system would grind to a halt. This is standard operating procedure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jet Fan RI Posted July 31, 2015 Share Posted July 31, 2015 The statement only said to discuss settlement "if they have not already done so" and was primarily aimed at toning down the rhetoric. Too many statements aimed at the press and they don't like that. Still, in any "negotiation" it is only the league that has something to give, i.e., reducing the suspension. What, exactly, does Brady/the NFLPA have to give? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
#27TheDominator Posted July 31, 2015 Share Posted July 31, 2015 What you guys are actually worried about is the reasonableness of the penalty. I assume there will be a Douglas factors style analysis and the lack of any similar offenses can be problematic. The notoriety and damage to reputation is squarely on the side of the league. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
#27TheDominator Posted July 31, 2015 Share Posted July 31, 2015 Still, in any "negotiation" it is only the league that has something to give, i.e., reducing the suspension. What, exactly, does Brady/the NFLPA have to give? Withdrawing the appeal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EM31 Posted July 31, 2015 Author Share Posted July 31, 2015 I think one of the main issues was Brady's non-cooperation with the investigation and that could be rectified as part of an agreed upon settlement. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jet Fan RI Posted July 31, 2015 Share Posted July 31, 2015 Withdrawing the appeal. So, let's see. The league can reduce the suspension to a smaller number of games, or the NFLPA can just go away. That's a negotiation? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
#27TheDominator Posted July 31, 2015 Share Posted July 31, 2015 I think one of the main issues was Brady's non-cooperation with the investigation and that could be rectified as part of an agreed upon settlement. You can't rectify that. Mitigate it maybe, but that bell was rung. There was an investigation and he did not cooperate. The investigation is over. He can't cooperate with it now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
#27TheDominator Posted July 31, 2015 Share Posted July 31, 2015 So, let's see. The league can reduce the suspension to a smaller number of games, or the NFLPA can just go away. That's a negotiation? Yes it is. Consider the amount of time, money and press that will come from continuing this appeal. You do not see value for the league to have that end? The league had supposedly already offered 2 games with an admission of guilt. If the judge can swing 2 games with no admission it goes away. Win-win or lose-lose. It doesn't much matter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Miss Lonelyhearts Posted July 31, 2015 Share Posted July 31, 2015 Standard stuff in district court. They don't **** around with case management. The first pretrial is typically a couple of hours of arm-twisting and thirty seconds to set dates. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Savage69 Posted July 31, 2015 Share Posted July 31, 2015 A So, let's see. The league can reduce the suspension to a smaller number of games, or the NFLPA can just go away. That's a negotiation? Anyone remember when Bradway gave the OK in a Skin/Jet dispute in 2001 to a arbitrator that was a Redskin season ticket holder?? Now that was a fair negotiation..LOL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flgreen Posted July 31, 2015 Share Posted July 31, 2015 So, let's see. The league can reduce the suspension to a smaller number of games, or the NFLPA can just go away. That's a negotiation? I agree with most of what your saying. The only thing the NFL has to gain is some admission of involvement by Brady. I don't think he's going to do that at this point. Yes, very worrisome. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Il Mostro Posted July 31, 2015 Share Posted July 31, 2015 The NFL ruling was done in accordance with the CBA, as was the appeal. Brady had due process. Even if he is not happy the results, "negotiation" should not enter the conversation. The process is over. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bruce Harper Posted July 31, 2015 Share Posted July 31, 2015 Not sure what your comments have to do with the thread title. But with respect to that title, I find the judge's direction to be worrisome. Surely the judge realizes the whole reason that there is a court case at all is because the commissioner ruled that the appeal had no merit and, in view of the further evidence of cell phone destruction, the original ruling of a 4-game suspension was fully warranted. It seems to me that the judge's direction is tantamount to concluding the commissioner's ruling was unjustified. No. They always do this. I wouldn't read anything into it. However, if word gets back to the Judge that Brady is insisting on no suspension at all (as rumored) in negotiations I believe it greatly increases the chances that the four game suspension will be upheld. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bruce Harper Posted July 31, 2015 Share Posted July 31, 2015 The NFL ruling was done in accordance with the CBA, as was the appeal. Brady had due process. Even if he is not happy the results, "negotiation" should not enter the conversation. The process is over. Agreed. But if were the NFL I would offer 3 games so that the Judge will know who is being unreasonable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Long Island Leprechaun Posted July 31, 2015 Share Posted July 31, 2015 My uninformed take on the judge's direction was that it seemed to suggest a desire to get a quick resolution or expect that he will judge the matter quickly. He wants every effort made to avoid dragging this through his court and he is clearly speaking to the agent and Pats organization when he is stating that they should "tone down the rhetoric" since the NFL has not come out with anything other than the report itself. I would speculate this means that an injunction that drags this case on is unlikely. He ain't ol' Judge Doty, the player's eternal friend. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jet Fan RI Posted July 31, 2015 Share Posted July 31, 2015 The NFL ruling was done in accordance with the CBA, as was the appeal. Brady had due process. Even if he is not happy the results, "negotiation" should not enter the conversation. The process is over. Right. So I wonder why the judge ordered negotiation. Hope it really is just standard procedure. Because yes, the negotiations ended with the appeal decision. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Il Mostro Posted July 31, 2015 Share Posted July 31, 2015 Agreed. But if were the NFL I would offer 3 games so that the Judge will know who is being unreasonable. Flip a coin. Heads, it is 3 games. Tails, 6 games. And, televise it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.