PFSIKH Posted May 30, 2015 Share Posted May 30, 2015 I know you're trying to be level-headed, but your bias is shining thru. Brady obstructed the investigation because he had something to hide. Either for himself, or members of the coaching staff. An innocent man in the same situation gift-wraps his phone and delivers it with a nice card suggesting they look thru everything. It doesn't matter whose phone it is. This is not a first amendment case. An innocent man provides everything he has to prove his innocence, a guilty man withholds evidence. As is JN's. The endless back and forth is pointless as no matter what any arbitrator or commissioner does and says, judgement was passed months ago. There is no unbiased opinion on this matter. Even if this was an independent investigation, which it was was not, Brady would be a fool to give up his personal phone regardless of guilt or innocence. If your place of employment had an incident and your boss said hand me your phone and you did, you are a fool. It is not a criminal investigation. The commissioner does not have a right to look at his personal phone. Especially a commissioner who rules and makes up sh*t as he goes. Where is the NFL's definition on cooperation? I bet cooperation is defined in Roger's mind in lieu of any official NFL by-laws. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
afosomf Posted May 30, 2015 Author Share Posted May 30, 2015 As is JN's. The endless back and forth is pointless as no matter what any arbitrator or commissioner does and says, judgement was passed months ago. There is no unbiased opinion on this matter. Even if this was an independent investigation, which it was was not, Brady would be a fool to give up his personal phone regardless of guilt or innocence. If your place of employment had an incident and your boss said hand me your phone and you did, you are a fool. It is not a criminal investigation. The commissioner does not have a right to look at his personal phone. Especially a commissioner who rules and makes up sh*t as he goes. Where is the NFL's definition on cooperation? I bet cooperation is defined in Roger's mind in lieu of any official NFL by-laws. Ummm If I was innocent and I wanted to protect my legacy, i would have given phone, take a lie detector test, The facts are he lied in SB presser, he lied to Costas, was not cooperative during investigation, he is effen guilty and everyone knows it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jet Nut Posted May 30, 2015 Share Posted May 30, 2015 As is JN's. The endless back and forth is pointless as no matter what any arbitrator or commissioner does and says, judgement was passed months ago. There is no unbiased opinion on this matter. Even if this was an independent investigation, which it was was not, Brady would be a fool to give up his personal phone regardless of guilt or innocence. If your place of employment had an incident and your boss said hand me your phone and you did, you are a fool. It is not a criminal investigation. The commissioner does not have a right to look at his personal phone. Especially a commissioner who rules and makes up sh*t as he goes. Where is the NFL's definition on cooperation? I bet cooperation is defined in Roger's mind in lieu of any official NFL by-laws. What kind of foolish thinking is this? Who, other than the guilty make their phone some kind of off limits litmus test for anyone in the workplace. If your phone is used to tell other employees to do your bidding, your boss has every right to ask for your phone. If it's used to order subordinates to break rules, you will be asked for it. If it happened in your job and you refused. You wouldn't get suspended, they'd fire you. On the spot, screw investigations and appeals. More asinine thinking, with Brady's phone Goodell CANT make anything up. Without it Brady's brain dead atty. and Kraft can make up all the sh*t they want to dispute Wells findings. It's been pretty unanimous from the media that Brady should have given up his phone if he's not guilty. People have made ip their minds. Brady is on the bottom of the trusted celebrity list. People everywhere, outside of NE think the Pats & Brady cheated. Again. Their SBs tainted. All this twisting of every single point is doing nothing for you and your team Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dcat Posted May 30, 2015 Share Posted May 30, 2015 Pats fans: Shut up. Your QB cheated and lied. Probably has done so for many years. He got off light. For cheating and lying about it, not to mention obstructing the investigation, he should have been suspended for a full season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GimmeShelter Posted May 31, 2015 Share Posted May 31, 2015 As is JN's. The endless back and forth is pointless as no matter what any arbitrator or commissioner does and says, judgement was passed months ago. There is no unbiased opinion on this matter. Even if this was an independent investigation, which it was was not, Brady would be a fool to give up his personal phone regardless of guilt or innocence. If your place of employment had an incident and your boss said hand me your phone and you did, you are a fool. It is not a criminal investigation. The commissioner does not have a right to look at his personal phone. Especially a commissioner who rules and makes up sh*t as he goes. Where is the NFL's definition on cooperation? I bet cooperation is defined in Roger's mind in lieu of any official NFL by-laws. I thought they even suggested his lawyer could simply hand over only the the text exchanges with the two locker room attendants. Tommy boy balked at that. I have never seen you grasp at straw after straw to this degree before. It sucks that history will look back on NE's success as tainted but sooner or later you are going to have to come to terms with that fact. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PFSIKH Posted May 31, 2015 Share Posted May 31, 2015 Ummm If I was innocent and I wanted to protect my legacy, i would have given phone, take a lie detector test, The facts are he lied in SB presser, he lied to Costas, was not cooperative during investigation, he is effen guilty and everyone knows it. Give me what the NFL definition on cooperation? He was interviewed for a whole day an that is not cooperating? Okay. What were his lies? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PFSIKH Posted June 1, 2015 Share Posted June 1, 2015 What kind of foolish thinking is this? Who, other than the guilty make their phone some kind of off limits litmus test for anyone in the workplace. If your phone is used to tell other employees to do your bidding, your boss has every right to ask for your phone. If it's used to order subordinates to break rules, you will be asked for it. If it happened in your job and you refused. You wouldn't get suspended, they'd fire you. On the spot, screw investigations and appeals. More asinine thinking, with Brady's phone Goodell CANT make anything up. Without it Brady's brain dead atty. and Kraft can make up all the sh*t they want to dispute Wells findings. It's been pretty unanimous from the media that Brady should have given up his phone if he's not guilty. People have made ip their minds. Brady is on the bottom of the trusted celebrity list. People everywhere, outside of NE think the Pats & Brady cheated. Again. Their SBs tainted. All this twisting of every single point is doing nothing for you and your team There is this thing called the fourth amendment. While I agree, using Brady as an example, that he cannot expect privacy while at One Foxboro Place when he is utilizing their network with his phone. Like with most (or all) employers, there is a company policy that is signed (or by clicking an "ok") where you agree or can expect to be monitored whether it is company provided or personal device. If his company policy does not specifically state his phone is subject to a search then the NFL has no legal right to go through his phone. Yes, Roger Goodell could have suspended Brady right there, in theory, but the league would have faced a lawsuit. While the Patriots and/or Brady would have to fully disclose everything, it would also subject a biased and flawed report to scrutiny as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PFSIKH Posted June 1, 2015 Share Posted June 1, 2015 I thought they even suggested his lawyer could simply hand over only the the text exchanges with the two locker room attendants. Tommy boy balked at that. I have never seen you grasp at straw after straw to this degree before. It sucks that history will look back on NE's success as tainted but sooner or later you are going to have to come to terms with that fact. His attorney made a good point on this. Wells was bought and paid for by the league. Do you honestly believe if Yee said that is all the communication there was between Brady and the ball boys that they would believe them? No. There would be a bullet in there saying we requested them to provide texts pertaining to the incident and they elected not to. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larz Posted June 1, 2015 Share Posted June 1, 2015 Give me what the NFL definition on cooperation? He was interviewed for a whole day an that is not cooperating? Okay. What were his lies? really dude ? he said he didn't know who mcnally was for starters, and lied about the 50,000 yard ball he gave to him (as payment for the deflations, obv) credibility test for you; why would he lie about not knowing who mcnally was ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larz Posted June 1, 2015 Share Posted June 1, 2015 During his interview, Brady denied any knowledge of or involvement in any efforts to deflate game balls after the pre-game inspection by the game officials. He claimed that prior to the events surrounding the AFC Championship Game, he did not know McNally‟s name or anything about McNally‟s game-day responsibilities, including whether McNally had any role relating to game balls or the game officials. We found these claims not plausible and contradicted by other evidence. In fact, during his interview, Jastremski acknowledged that Brady knew McNally and McNally‟s role as Officials Locker Room attendant. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PFSIKH Posted June 1, 2015 Share Posted June 1, 2015 really dude ? he said he didn't know who mcnally was for starters, and lied about the 50,000 yard ball he gave to him (as payment for the deflations, obv) credibility test for you; why would he lie about not knowing who mcnally was ? Brady knew him by the nickname Burt (actual nickname is Bird). Not deflator either. Jaskstremski was the one that lied about the 50K ball. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SouthernJet Posted June 1, 2015 Share Posted June 1, 2015 Brady knew him by the nickname Burt (actual nickname is Bird). Not deflator either. Jaskstremski was the one that lied about the 50K ball. i think everyone by now agrees the cheating happened, question is when did it start? Day Brady came to NFL, 5 years ago, last year? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larz Posted June 1, 2015 Share Posted June 1, 2015 Brady knew him by the nickname Burt (actual nickname is Bird). Not deflator either. Jaskstremski was the one that lied about the 50K ball. fail Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Charlie Brown Posted June 2, 2015 Share Posted June 2, 2015 There is this thing called the fourth amendment. While I agree, using Brady as an example, that he cannot expect privacy while at One Foxboro Place when he is utilizing their network with his phone. Like with most (or all) employers, there is a company policy that is signed (or by clicking an "ok") where you agree or can expect to be monitored whether it is company provided or personal device. If his company policy does not specifically state his phone is subject to a search then the NFL has no legal right to go through his phone. Yes, Roger Goodell could have suspended Brady right there, in theory, but the league would have faced a lawsuit. While the Patriots and/or Brady would have to fully disclose everything, it would also subject a biased and flawed report to scrutiny as well. Please stop with the constitutional BOGUS arguments. The Fourth Amendment and so on all apply to GOVERNMENTAL overreach. The Government not PRIVATE ACTIVITY in general. The basic rule of law is that you are an employee at will absent a contract. The NFL labor relation agreement therefore, in general, relegates what determines a reasonable request or not. So even you cant be this silly! Do you think say, that when you work at a department store security guards can't check your bags upon your departure? Of course they can. OF COURSE THEY CAN!! And they don't have to give you a warrant and so on.... Or say your boss believes you are sending inappropriate texts messages to women using some kind of blocking device from your phone. Your employer then asks for your phone. You refuse. Do you honestly believe that your employer can not use your refusal to turn over the phone as one factor in your evaluation as to whether or not to retain you? Come on now! Not the only factor but A FACTOR!! Of course they can. And you would do the same thing if you ran a business. So Brady can argue he doesn't want to give over his phone, fine! But then it is perfectly legitimate for the NFL to make their own inferences into what he chooses to do or not to do. Period. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
indygirl4jets Posted June 2, 2015 Share Posted June 2, 2015 Sucks to be a Pats fan these days....must be tough to try to defend everything they have done. I almost feel sorry for them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jet Nut Posted June 2, 2015 Share Posted June 2, 2015 His attorney made a good point on this. Wells was bought and paid for by the league. Do you honestly believe if Yee said that is all the communication there was between Brady and the ball boys that they would believe them? No. There would be a bullet in there saying we requested them to provide texts pertaining to the incident and they elected not to. So you pretty much have it covered. The league launched an investigation, who would be expected to foot the bill? The NFL, who else? It's their investigation. No matter what they found you had the idiotic, well the league paid for the investigation excuse. Kind of like Kraft singing Wells praise before the investigation and doing a 180 when he didn't like the findings. Of course to do a other 180 when he was trashed everywhere outside of NE for sounding like a moron. And the 4th amendment is unwarrented searches and seizures, has nothing to do with asking for a phone records or his phone. Has nothing to do with investigations in a private business. He didn't give it up and he then doesn't get to cry that there's nothing on his phone but I'm not giving it up....because. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jet Nut Posted June 2, 2015 Share Posted June 2, 2015 Sucks to be a Pats fan these days....must be tough to try to defend everything they have done. I almost feel sorry for them. The league has convicted them of cheating, twice. The whole country believes they cheated. Players believe they cheated. But one guy thinks he's going to change our minds here. How tiring is that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drdetroit Posted June 2, 2015 Share Posted June 2, 2015 Cool. Who cares about `Boston area` fans. What's that? Southie? Everybody knows Boston is a crappy Red Sox first city. The NEW ENGLAND Patriots are out of Foxborough, NOT Boston, and rural New Englanders are fanatical about the Patriots. Cool. So rename them the Foxboro Cheaters Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drdetroit Posted June 2, 2015 Share Posted June 2, 2015 Sucks to be a Pats fan these days....must be tough to try to defend everything they have done. I almost feel sorry for them. I feel sorry for them too with their 4 Super Bowls in 15 years and having the greatest qb of all-time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drdetroit Posted June 2, 2015 Share Posted June 2, 2015 His attorney made a good point on this. Wells was bought and paid for by the league. Do you honestly believe if Yee said that is all the communication there was between Brady and the ball boys that they would believe them? No. There would be a bullet in there saying we requested them to provide texts pertaining to the incident and they elected not to. The nfl is a private entity and can investigate it's own internal affairs any way it wants as long as it complies with the CBA. Nobody said d-ck when a Red Sox former board member George Mitchell wrote the Mitchell a Report and tried to imply every Yankee since 1996 has been on steroids. The investigation was a sham orchaestrated by Kraft's lawyers. The patriots actually save a net $600-800k from the suspension, keep their HOF 38 yr old qb healthy for the last 3/4 of the season the only thing that was remotely severe was the first rd pick which really isn't a big deal how many crappy picks have they made over the years and still won the AFCE because their qb is Brady. A real investigator would have talked to Brady on day 1 and had his phone by day 2. You don't want to hand over your phone? One year suspension for interfering with an investigation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EM31 Posted June 2, 2015 Share Posted June 2, 2015 i think everyone by now agrees the cheating happened, question is when did it start? Day Brady came to NFL, 5 years ago, last year? You must have missed the talking points. Firstly it never happened at all and secondly, without admitting any guilt, if mistakes were made by some over zealous employee, then they were only made for the very first time in the AFC championship game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PFSIKH Posted June 2, 2015 Share Posted June 2, 2015 i think everyone by now agrees the cheating happened, question is when did it start? Day Brady came to NFL, 5 years ago, last year? Pretty hard when he came into the NFL as the league controlled the balls upto 2006 or 2007. After that sure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PFSIKH Posted June 2, 2015 Share Posted June 2, 2015 The nfl is a private entity and can investigate it's own internal affairs any way it wants as long as it complies with the CBA. Nobody said d-ck when a Red Sox former board member George Mitchell wrote the Mitchell a Report and tried to imply every Yankee since 1996 has been on steroids. The investigation was a sham orchaestrated by Kraft's lawyers. The patriots actually save a net $600-800k from the suspension, keep their HOF 38 yr old qb healthy for the last 3/4 of the season the only thing that was remotely severe was the first rd pick which really isn't a big deal how many crappy picks have they made over the years and still won the AFCE because their qb is Brady. A real investigator would have talked to Brady on day 1 and had his phone by day 2. You don't want to hand over your phone? One year suspension for interfering with an investigation. Actually Yankee fans did....."what about the Red Sox?" While I agree a real investigator would have started with Brady, he still has no right to the phone. This investigaot does not have warrant power. Is it in the CBA? And good luck with that suspension. Roger can and does weild the "it is in the CBA" sword with no issues, it goes both ways. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EM31 Posted June 2, 2015 Share Posted June 2, 2015 Actually Yankee fans did....."what about the Red Sox?" While I agree a real investigator would have started with Brady, he still has no right to the phone. This investigaot does not have warrant power. Is it in the CBA? And good luck with that suspension. Roger can and does weild the "it is in the CBA" sword with no issues, it goes both ways. They have the right to ask for his phone. He had the right to refuse. They have the right to draw conclusions from that refusal (and they did). He has nothing to say about that. If he wants to challenge those conclusions he han agree to provide his phone. Rinse wash repeat. If he is unhappy with the results of the appeal he can file a lawsuit in Federal court. The Jets can then subpoena his phone records as part of that case. How about them apples? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EM31 Posted June 2, 2015 Share Posted June 2, 2015 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PFSIKH Posted June 2, 2015 Share Posted June 2, 2015 Please stop with the constitutional BOGUS arguments. The Fourth Amendment and so on all apply to GOVERNMENTAL overreach. The Government not PRIVATE ACTIVITY in general. The basic rule of law is that you are an employee at will absent a contract. The NFL labor relation agreement therefore, in general, relegates what determines a reasonable request or not. So even you cant be this silly! Do you think say, that when you work at a department store security guards can't check your bags upon your departure? Of course they can. OF COURSE THEY CAN!! And they don't have to give you a warrant and so on.... Or say your boss believes you are sending inappropriate texts messages to women using some kind of blocking device from your phone. Your employer then asks for your phone. You refuse. Do you honestly believe that your employer can not use your refusal to turn over the phone as one factor in your evaluation as to whether or not to retain you? Come on now! Not the only factor but A FACTOR!! Of course they can. And you would do the same thing if you ran a business. So Brady can argue he doesn't want to give over his phone, fine! But then it is perfectly legitimate for the NFL to make their own inferences into what he chooses to do or not to do. Period. Brady is not "at-will". If he was, he or any NFL player for that matter could leave their team "at-will" and go to another team. That is what "at-will" essentially means. The employer and employee can arbitrarily end the 'relationship'. While a team can 'fire' a player, it is not without repercussions. They have a binding contract. The guranteed portion of the contract is a penalty to the team for termination of service. Not exactly the apples to apples oranges to oranges examples you gave. While a store guard can check a bag upon you departing a store, even they need to tow a line with their searches. They cannot target only minorities or women for example or they will see a lawsuit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larz Posted June 2, 2015 Share Posted June 2, 2015 pfsikh, you failed the credibility test you are a delusional fanboy did you go to the rally ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dcat Posted June 2, 2015 Share Posted June 2, 2015 They have the right to ask for his phone. He had the right to refuse. They have the right to draw conclusions from that refusal (and they did). He has nothing to say about that. If he wants to challenge those conclusions he han agree to provide his phone. Rinse wash repeat. If he is unhappy with the results of the appeal he can file a lawsuit in Federal court. The Jets can then subpoena his phone records as part of that case. How about them apples? Why would the Jets subpoena anything? The Jets would not be a party to the litigation. ??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EM31 Posted June 3, 2015 Share Posted June 3, 2015 Why would the Jets subpoena anything? The Jets would not be a party to the litigation. ??? Oops. Got me Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drdetroit Posted June 3, 2015 Share Posted June 3, 2015 Actually Yankee fans did....."what about the Red Sox?" While I agree a real investigator would have started with Brady, he still has no right to the phone. This investigaot does not have warrant power. Is it in the CBA? And good luck with that suspension. Roger can and does weild the "it is in the CBA" sword with no issues, it goes both ways. Show me where it says in the nflpa/nfl CBA the league can't subpoena a cell phone from one of its players for purposes of an investigation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EM31 Posted June 3, 2015 Share Posted June 3, 2015 Show me where it says in the nflpa/nfl CBA the league can't subpoena a cell phone from one of its players for purposes of an investigation. Wells can ask and Brady can say no and make that "no" stick. Wells in turn can draw conclusions that (a) Brady had something to hide and (b ) that he did not cooperate with the investigation. Brady has zero to say on either score, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PFSIKH Posted June 5, 2015 Share Posted June 5, 2015 Show me where it says in the nflpa/nfl CBA the league can't subpoena a cell phone from one of its players for purposes of an investigation. Show me were it says they can? Can you say with a straight face that the NFL players, some of whom live pretty outrageous lives (ex. Gronk) would agree to that? No f'ing way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CaliforniaJet Posted June 5, 2015 Share Posted June 5, 2015 It would be cool to see these scrubs without cheating, they haven't done that in a long ass time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AFCEastFan Posted June 5, 2015 Share Posted June 5, 2015 It would be cool to see these scrubs without cheating, they haven't done that in a long ass time. Not since February. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CaliforniaJet Posted June 5, 2015 Share Posted June 5, 2015 Not since February. They cheated in that game as well. Ohh wait, let me guess, you are one of the homers that thinks this just happened in the Colts game? LMAO Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.