But now Tom's suspension has been upheld... not because Goodell is an ass, but because Tommy Terrific destroyed his cell phone the same day he met with NFL investigators, and he lied about it. Insert sad clown here ==><==. So excuse me as I laugh my butt off and I happily celebrate Deflategate 2, which is when the balloon filled with the flaming BS of Patriot's dupes everywhere got deflated by the act of their hero. Sadly, though, today is not entirely perfect. I got a speeding ticket today despite being white. What has this world come to?
Tom Brady is the kindest, bravest, warmest, most wonderful human being I've ever known in my life.
ReplyDeleteLOL! Nice Manchurian Candidate reference! :D
ReplyDelete:-)
ReplyDeleteBut cheating is how the Patriots win. What will they do now?
ReplyDeleteProbably find another way to cheat. It's not like their fans care if they cheat. They are in paranoid delusion land and the "Greatriots" can do now wrong.
ReplyDeleteI loved him. He was much better than Cats (Jags, Bengals, Lions, Wild). I would watch him again and again.
ReplyDeleteP.S. In my best Rev. Jim, what does a yellow light mean?
slooooow down ;-)
ReplyDeleteThat was an SLN skit, but I can't think of it. Was it a Buckwheat skit?
OT: If I don't get Captain America up this week, expect a double next week with Ant Man.
ReplyDeleteWell, the Commissioner may not have the last laugh.
ReplyDeleteThe NFLPA is appealing the decision to a federal court- chosen strategically- with a sympathetic judge (read: pro any labor union) in the People's Socialist Republic of Minnesota. (Who would've guessed?)
Of course, if the NFLPA wins, the NFL will appeal to another court and so on and s on... This will probably only end when the season starts and Brady either does or doesn't have his hands under the center's butt. (Make of that what you will.)
Rustbelt, That is definitely possible, but I think it's unlikely. It is almost impossible to get a federal judge to overturn the ruling of an arbiter. Basically, you need to prove that there is no way the guy acted reasonably. With the revelation that Brady destroyed potential evidence, Brady is doomed.
ReplyDeleteRight now, his supporters have settled on the argument that the information could have been gotten some other way, but courts have zero sympathy for this argument for the obvious reason that they can't let people destroy evidence.
They are also going back to (1) how none of this mattered, (2) how there is no proof Brady did anything, and (3) that it's unfair to let Goodell judge his own office's decisions. First, there is proof, so (2) is wrong. But the destruction of the cell phone wipes out that argument in any event. As to this mattering (1), the NFL has a right to police the integrity of the game. That wipes out the first argument, legally speaking. Finally, as to the fairness, that was collectively bargained and they can't overturn a negotiated labor agreement in this manner.
So they don't really have much of an argument left.
OT, but it's pretty wild that Obama is cutting Pollard loose. My suspicion is that he is hoping to mute Israeli criticism of the Iran deal, though I doubt there is a formal quid pro quo.
ReplyDeleteUpdate: It's a good thing Brady's drones in the media are mindless. Many are running with his deceptive statement that he didn't destroy his phone, it broke and he tried to get the missing messages from the phone company.
ReplyDeleteFirst, whether it broke or he broke it is irrelevant. He should not have destroyed the sim card. Secondly, what BRADY admitted was not that he tried to get messages, he offered to help the NFL go to the phone company to get the phone numbers of the people he sent messages too and then the NFL could go talk to them and see if they kept the messages and if they were willing to share them. HUGE difference.
But somehow, the difference escapes his defenders in the media.
That's called bias... which is exactly what the MSM does to conservatives.
Anthony, No doubt, giving back one spy will make it all better when Iran sets off a nuclear bomb over Tel Aviv.
ReplyDeletePersonally, I think the bigger danger is Saudi, however. I can absolutely see a nuclear war between Iran and Saudi coming soon.
Brady sounds a lot like Hillary, Lerner, Hillary, Kerry, Hillary, Obama, Hillary, Holder and Hillary, to name just a few examples of other liars.
ReplyDeleteToo bad he wasn't in Obama's admin., then Obama and company can cover for him. Of course, the media already is, but most sports fans ain't as easily fooled as the average voter is.
Maybe someone should just ask the NSA.
ReplyDeleteHa, I read this comment at ESPN's site:
ReplyDelete"There's no evidence". Signed: Aaron Hernandez, OJ Simpson, Tom Brady, Casey Anthony, and PATRIOTS FANS."
Maybe they should ask the NSA! LOL!!!!!!
ReplyDeleteBravo, Ben!
BTW, I have been reading all of your posts, Andrew, Bev, and Kit. You guys are doing a fantastic job. Haven't had a lot of time to comment, unfortunately.
ReplyDeleteI'm neither a Brady nor a Patriot fan but I think the NFL is on shaky ground here. They don't have definitive proof that he did anything wrong or that deflating the footballs had any effect on the game. They did acknowledge that there was inadequate oversight of the games balls which led to multiple changes in how they are to be handled in the future. Basically the NFL admitted by making the changes that they had no idea what the condition the footballs where in at game time. The NFL is also sending a weird message where you punch your wife you get 1 game but you mention to your equipment manager you like your balls on the softer side you get 4 game suspension. The commissioner gained nothing by over-turning and allowing it to go to court is a win-win for him no matter the outcome. Brady and the players association also have a case that since the commissioner works for and is paid by the owners, he really is not a biased arbitrator. This might be interesting to watch.
ReplyDeleteThanks Ben! :D
ReplyDeleteKoshcat, The problem with the bias argument is that this is what the union agreed to. Also, it's wrong to view this as a court situation. The league is basically an employer, and normally, an employer owes you nothing, especially not an unbiased decision maker. The only reason the players even have an appeals process is that they got one in collective bargaining.
ReplyDeleteIn terms of lack of proof, whether or not there was an underlying "crime" is irrelevant in this case because Brady refused to cooperate and (now we learn) destroyed evidence. Those actions alone allow the NFL to suspend him. That said, there is actually very strong circumstantial evidence. Also, the disappearance of his cell phone basically wipes out any good faith argument by Team Brady as to a lack of evidence.
On the domestic abuse thing, that is how collective bargain works... it results in strange rulings were some things end up being punished more than others even if it seems crazy after the fact. The problem here is that "league integrity" issues are treated more harshly than "player discipline" issues. Rice fell into the player discipline category. That said, after Rice, the league informally imposed a 10+ game suspension for domestic violence through Greg Hardy and Adrian Peterson, which the players union is now fighting.
Andrew, it's not that you got a ticket. It's that you lived to tell about it. When a white man gets pulled over, he can have a tantrum, throw things, attack the officer and grab his gun as part of the process. But if a black person says "Yassir" in the wrong tone, he's dead on the spot.
ReplyDeleteKoshcat, Let me add a couple points, which I think are an important point.
ReplyDeleteI think one of the problems in understanding all of this is that our society has become legalistic in the sense that people think that court rules and procedures apply to much more in life than they do. When people talk about their rights and the such, they don't seem to realize that those rights only apply against the government. You have no freedom of speech, for example, when it comes to an employer. Yet, people have wrongly assumed that the rights you hear about are absolute and apply in things like the employment context as well.
Things like employment rights are very narrow, even in leftist states and even in union situations. And often those rights are merely procedural, such as having the right to file a protest of the company's action with the company or some labor council. Moreover, having a right to protest does not equate, as people think it does, into having a right to win or having guarantees of a certain level of fairness.
What's more, the standards in these things are very low. The standard set up between the NFL and the union for the initial decision is "more likely than not" -- which is the civil suit standard. Yet, people keep talking about this as if it were a criminal matter and demanding beyond a reasonable doubt. Even those who don't go that far are asking for the middle standard of "clear and convincing evidence." None of that applies.
What's more, on an appeal, the standard essentially becomes "was the lower decision arbitrary or capricious," which is a higher standard than an appellate court will take on a civil case, and is basically impossible to overturn. That's why big companies love arbitration... they get a biased arbitrator and no appeal rights as a practical matter.
Further, people are making a mistake by looking at evidence in isolation. They cast doubt on a couple pieces individually and then think that means the case falls flat. But that's not how decisions get made. Decisions get made by applying the standard to the entire collection of evidence collectively... "is ALL of this TOGETHER enough," not "Is this enough? Is this enough? Huh, none of this is enough alone."
I see this more and more these days as people have come to blend the legal system in with non-legal matters in our society.
tryanmax, Sadly, that is probably an accurate assessment of what these people think, especially people like Turdburglar.
ReplyDeleteI'll tell you what though. I tried driving within the law for a few hours and I found it made me a horrible driver. I spent far too much timing trying to control the speed of my car rather than watching the road. And with the number of women texting these days, you need your eyes on the road.
In fact (true story) I watched a woman drive through a red light this morning six seconds after the other side turned green and after people had already crossed through the intersection. She was texting and never even stopped. Everyone else ended up scattered in the intersection.
No cop of course. Never is... because they're out making money for the city from speeders.
So, Brady sent his cell phone to the same place that Hillary sent her emails?
ReplyDeleteKit, Yep. And both are super duper innocent.
ReplyDeleteI understand that this is a labor dispute rather than a criminal one. As far as I can tell there, no law has been broken. Brady has a contract with the Patriots and he feels that the punishment given to him is outside the realm of that contract. We are talking about $5 million. Most who have played in the NFL state that if you aren't pushing up against the rules or breaking them, you aren't trying hard enough. I think Brady and the Patriots embarrassed the NFL with their little stunt but I don't think the punishment fits the crime. For example, yesterday running back from the Steelers had his 3 game suspension dropped to 2 games. This was due to a marijuana possession which is still a crime in Pennsylvania.
ReplyDeleteI'm not sure this situation fits into a clean labor dispute as other industries because of the individual contracts each player signs. What is interesting about the whole thing is it seems like the Patriots and Bellicheck have sort of thrown Brady under the bus. Yes, they were punished as well but they also have maintained that they had nothing to do with it. Kraft was support of Brady at first. The issue is even if Brady ordered the deflation he didn't actually deflate the balls and it was the team's responsibility, not the NFL's and not Brady's, to ensure the footballs met standards.
Oh and cell phone thing is b.s. If my employer asked me for my personal cell phone, I also would tell them to f*** off. They have no right to it and unless they had a court order to seize it, Brady can do whatever he wanted with it. It does show that Brady is an idiot because I would have "lost" the phone deep sea fishing. The texts are recoverable anyway so it is a non-issue.
ReplyDeleteKoshcat, The Steelers thing is where the collective bargaining agreement comes in. The penalties for drug offenses are specifically identified. One game for first offense, two for second, then four, then a season. Slightly different for "performance enhancing drugs." Brady falls into a different section of the rule book where the punishments are a lot harsher -- look at the Saints "bountygate," which is the closest approximation.
ReplyDeleteWhat's more, the NFL has a bias for admission or guilt and repentance. When a player appeals and basically says, "I was wrong, please forgive me," they all but automatically get their suspensions reduced. Brady and the Patriots have not only refused to admit guilt, they've been smearing the NFL constantly since the initial investigation began.
As for throwing Brady under the bus, the Patriots did that initially I thought but the blowback was so harsh from their fans that they went about face. Consequently, Kraft's statement today struck me as an attempt to win back their hardcore fans by going way too far in attacking the NFL.
I think the Patriots made a lot of enemies among the other owners today.
"Much better than Cats ..." was from the golden era, AKA the Hartman years. Jon Lovitz played a hypnotist who brainwashed his audiences.
ReplyDeleteStop me before I sub-reference again ...
The hell with this so-called "Golden Boy," too, who pisses me off even further since he'll receive more punishment than Hillary will for actual crimes. Same slobbering sycophantic situation, though. No wonder I wait till the playoffs to watch the NFL.
ReplyDeleteAndrew, I think you are just jealous of Tom because you don't look as good in a pair of Uggs. That would be a better punishment. "Mr. Brady, you have been found guilty of maybe thinking about cheating although there was no real rule against it. Therefore, you must play the first 4 games in a pair of Uggs."
ReplyDelete