Brady suspended 4 games; NE loses a 1st, 4th, and $1M

[MikeO]

NFLPA and Brady have caved! They are willing to accept a reduced suspension for Brady only if it states its because he was unwilling to cooperate with the investigation. No admission of having deflated footballs.

Adam Schefter reporting this this morning. Court is about to start up 

[Phishfan]

This was in the news yesterday. The NFL has been adamant that Brady capitulate entirely during all negotiations. I don't like the idea of reducing the suspension though. I've felt all along Brady's cover up is worse than any actions carried out by the equipment staff.

[bsmooth]

After what the judge said to the NFL today, concerning their lack of fairness in the arbitration, and the penalty itself, it seems as if there is less pressure for Brady to cave at all.

[MikeO]

also came out today that if this isn't resolved by Sep 4th then Brady starts his suspension on Sep 5th. I have a feeling this might drag out a while

[EDGECRUSHER]

The media is making it sound like Brady is very likely to walk with no penalty at all. This would open up a huge can of worms for arbitrators rulings that the court system will never be able to handle.

[Pappy13]

The sports media is clueless about this. They don't know anything more than the average fan.

[MikeO]

Sounds like the judge KNOWS he has to side with the NFL because of the CBA but is trying to shame the NFL into making a deal with the NFLPA/Brady to reduce the sentence so he doesn't have to give a judgment because the NFL's case is kinda weak in some areas. That's how I am seeing this

[EDGECRUSHER]

I hope so, because not only should Brady be suspended for cheating, but by disregarding an arbitrators ruling, you essentially make them all worthless and open to appeals within the court system. I know that may not sound like a lot, but it's a huge frigging deal. It's essentially the end of the arbitration process because the losing side will always appeal the ruling and it could be tied up in court for months or years.

I know the NFL case is weak and really relies "Oh come on, OF COURSE he cheated" evidence, but both sides agreed to this and once again fuck Tom Brady.

[Pappy13]

Sounds like the judge KNOWS he has to side with the NFL because of the CBA but is trying to shame the NFL into making a deal with the NFLPA/Brady to reduce the sentence so he doesn't have to give a judgment because the NFL's case is kinda weak in some areas. That's how I am seeing this

He doesn't have to side with the NFL he merely has to say that he will not overrule the decision because it was already ruled on and that power had already been given to the NFL because of the CBA. He's not siding with the NFL, merely following the law.

[MikeO]

He doesn't have to side with the NFL he merely has to say that he will not overrule the decision because it was already ruled on and that power had already been given to the NFL because of the CBA. He's not siding with the NFL, merely following the law.

That's a nice play on words lawyer speak, but if that is his judgement/decision...he's siding with the NFL at the end of the day

[Pappy13]

That's a nice play on words lawyer speak, but if that is his judgement/decision...he's siding with the NFL at the end of the day

The way I look at it, "siding with the NFL" is a play on words. A no decision favors the NFL, but it's not technically siding with the NFL. The courts try to stay out of the arbitration process rather than "side" with either side. He could say that he doesn't even agree with the decision to suspend Brady but that he's upholding it anyway because there's not sufficient evidence that the NFL did anything wrong in making that decision. That's not siding with the NFL.

My definition of "siding with the NFL" would be if this goes to trial and they uphold the suspension. Don't forget that the NFL filed this lawsuit asking for the judge to approve their decision to suspend Brady. Not really sure how a "no" decision would be "siding" with the NFL.

[Spider-Dan]

I agree with Pappy.  There is a difference between the court saying "We have evaluated both sides and we agree with the NFL's decision," and "We decline to intervene in the NFL's decision-making process."

[MikeO]

I agree with Pappy.  There is a difference between the court saying "We have evaluated both sides and we agree with the NFL's decision," and "We decline to intervene in the NFL's decision-making process."

Either way the NFL wins and gets what it wants...so its a play on words and how ya want to spin it. End of the day Brady sits for 4 games

[bsmooth]

Either way the NFL wins and gets what it wants...so its a play on words and how ya want to spin it. End of the day Brady sits for 4 games

The term is semantics. However that type of judgment would not be semantics. It would be a court following previous jurisprudence and deciding to not intervene in the arbitrator's area. That is not a validation of what the NFL did.

[MikeO]

The term is semantics. However that type of judgment would not be semantics. It would be a court following previous jurisprudence and deciding to not intervene in the arbitrator's area. That is not a validation of what the NFL did.

If Brady is out 4 games and the judge keeps that FOR WHATEVER REASON, the NFL lawyers and league officials will go back to the office order a big lunch and pop the champagne cause they got what they wanted at the end of the day. That's reality