Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Bawse

Brady Suspended 4 Games, Pats Lose 1St Round Pick In 2016, Fined $1 Mill

162 posts in this topic

The 4 game checks probably Brady doesn't blink an eye lid at either.

Man I understand competitive advantage and all but what does this do to Brady's and the Patriots ethos they are supposed to be that organisation that seems to be ahead of the rest but now with this does this leave a bad stain on history for this team.

Those 4 games will cost Brady $2million. It's enough to make him notice, I think.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Brady hasn't had the opportunity to face his accusers in court yet. The NFL haven't proven he did anything. They have a case, that is it.

He had it and he passed on it.

RfW1VRQ.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Brady hasn't had the opportunity to face his accusers in court yet. The NFL haven't proven he did anything. They have a case, that is it.

This isn't a criminal trial. They have a case. It's been decided. It may be appealed. But until it is, complaining about the process and burden of proof is silly. They met the burden.

ya_boi_j likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Those 4 games will cost Brady $2million. It's enough to make him notice, I think.

You think Brady cares about a lousy $2M? That is pocket change to him in his situation being married to a supermodel wife.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Probability is the standard of proof in every court in this country for most civil actions. This notion that "probably" isn't good enough is frankly ridiculous.

Benefit of the doubt is too, and there are gaping holes filled with doubt in this case.

The league decided the outcome before the investigation. There's no evidence. Not documentation. This would get laughed out of court.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Benefit of the doubt is too, and there are gaping holes filled with doubt in this case.

The league decided the outcome before the investigation. There's no evidence. Not documentation. This would get laughed out of court.

No, it wouldn't. Also, "benefit of the doubt" is not a standard of proof anywhere. "Beyond a reasonable doubt" is the burden in criminal trials, but not in civil actions.

This isn't even a civil action. It's a private disciplinary proceeding that is subject to review under the CBA. People treating it like its the OJ trial are woefully misinformed.

Jigglypuff, Vogelgryff and Bawse like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No, it wouldn't. Also, "benefit of the doubt" is not a standard of proof anywhere. "Beyond a reasonable doubt" is the burden in criminal trials, but not in civil actions.

This isn't even a civil action. It's a private disciplinary proceeding that is subject to review under the CBA. People treating it like its the OJ trial are woefully misinformed.

I understand that. I just think that as this isn't a criminal trial, the NFL (which doesn't have to present its case to anybody, unless there is an appeal) should have concrete evidence before slandering an athlete's reputation. That's it. As far as I can see, the NFL have not done that.

JDaveG likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I understand that. I just think that as this isn't a criminal trial, the NFL (which doesn't have to present its case to anybody, unless there is an appeal) should have concrete evidence before slandering an athlete's reputation. That's it. As far as I can see, the NFL have not done that.

I suppose it depends on what one means by concrete.

I'm fine with the punishment. He'll appeal it and get it reduced and the Patriots will bear the brunt of the punishment anyway.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No, it wouldn't. Also, "benefit of the doubt" is not a standard of proof anywhere. "Beyond a reasonable doubt" is the burden in criminal trials, but not in civil actions.

This isn't even a civil action. It's a private disciplinary proceeding that is subject to review under the CBA. People treating it like its the OJ trial are woefully misinformed.

I meant "beyond a reasonable doubt", my apologies. I wrote that post in haste. I understand that the NFL isn't beholden to the same standards as the judicial system, but even still, this is all circumstantial evidence at best. A quarter season suspension, a 1st round pick and $1 million bucks shouldn't be levied on such flimsy evidence.

So tell me., what's the proof? Vague text messages? A pressure reading that was never documented, only known by a referee's memory? Said readings based on 2 pressure gauges that measured the the same balls 2 significantly different measurements of PSI? Even if all that didn't matter there is no evidence Tom Brady implicitly told anyone to drop the pressure below the league standard. It was extremely cold outside, the refs handled the balls after every snap, and the outcome of the game was absolutely not effected. The second half the Pats played better with properly inflated balls.

This isn't like the Saints case where there was documentation, a power point, not to mention they received a warning and kept it up.

If they did cheat, the NFL made it awfully easy for them by not setting any standards where it could be convincingly proven. Another case of an incompetent NFL covering it's incompetence with a heavy handed suspension.

Pacific_Falcon likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Those 4 games will cost Brady $2million. It's enough to make him notice, I think.

I wonder how suspension works with regards to guaranteed money in his contract.

Or if it only effects his base salary which is basically negligible.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The severity of the penalty is for failing to cooperate with the investigation. Basically, the league is socking them because they had to work much harder to find the evidence they used in the decision than they'd like to think was necessary. I have no doubts that it would be less than half as strong if Brady had simply said 'I asked them to help me condition the balls but neither they or I was aware that by doing so, we were in violation of the rules'.

The league would have punished him and the team, but not to the tune that they did for basically refusing to acknowledge that there was an investigation. People have more things to do than deal with such an embarrassing and immature episode. And if you're going to waste their time, they're going to make you pay for it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can't stand the team, can't stand the guys who played for them. Heath Evans, Tedi Bruschi. The whole system breeds smugness and victim syndrome.

Tedi Bruschi sounds like such a tool in this segment. Damien Woody acknowledges his respect for Tom Brady, but Bruschi is so hard on Tom Terrific's jock that he thinks that he's incapable of dirty thoughts, let alone cheating. SMH.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tULjStNOpVc

Knight of God likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tedi Bruschi sounds like such a tool in this segment. Damien Woody acknowledges his respect for Tom Brady, but Bruschi is so hard on Tom Terrific's jock that he thinks that he's incapable of dirty thoughts, let alone cheating. SMH.

Bruschi is a doof man. I don't back people up that hard, especially when it comes to football. Tom Brady has been caught, period. Its okay, now after it all you defend them? You didn't defend the Saints, Falcons, Vikings, or anyone else. In fact you said it wasn't enough.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry, he's not a repeat offender imo. Anywho, he got 4 games, team lost picks and a fine. Be relieved and rejoice

Think that Goodell got it right this time. Brady got suspended for not coming clean. Basically, everybody thinks it was too light or too severe, which means that Goodell hit the sweet spot this time. 4 games for Rice would have been taken a lot better than 2 games.

I think there's a very real possibilty that Goodell basically covered up spygate for the Pats, told them to never to do anything like that again, is p#ssed that they did something like that again, and that's the reason for the heavy penalty. So, in sense, the Pats are repeat offenders.

Wouldn't be surprised if he appeals it, and they reduce it to 2 games during the easiest part of the schedule.

ya_boi_j likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You think Brady cares about a lousy $2M? That is pocket change to him in his situation being married to a supermodel wife.

Ever rich person cares about money. If they didn't, then they wouldn't be rich.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bruschi is a doof man. I don't back people up that hard, especially when it comes to football. Tom Brady has been caught, period. Its okay, now after it all you defend them? You didn't defend the Saints, Falcons, Vikings, or anyone else. In fact you said it wasn't enough.

Bruschi will always be a patriot homer. Journalists are supposed to be unbiased, he played his entire career as a patriot, so he has biased opinions towards them. That is why i do not listen to a word he says. And he will defend them no matter what they do. Any kind of punishment handed down would have been too much in his eyes, even if it was only a 10,000 dollar fine.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bruschi will always be a patriot homer. Journalists are supposed to be unbiased, he played his entire career as a patriot, so he has biased opinions towards them. That is why i do not listen to a word he says. And he will defend them no matter what they do. Any kind of punishment handed down would have been too much in his eyes, even if it was only a 10,000 dollar fine.

Man, I don't like watching anything he's on. They need their own channel with all of their agents and shills running around.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Man, I don't like watching anything he's on. They need their own channel with all of their agents and shills running around.

I honestly believe they shouldn't have former players as analysts, alot of them have their heads stuck up their own arses. Bruschi and Sapp are the worst, I'm not putting Sapp and bruschi at the same level. If I had to pick between them, I would pick bruschi, but until bruschi jumps off the fence from the Patriots to analyst, I will never trust a word he says.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pats dont care, they still have their Superbowl, Brady should of been suspended from that game.

Penalties are meaningless now

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I honestly believe they shouldn't have former players as analysts, alot of them have their heads stuck up their own arses. Bruschi and Sapp are the worst, I'm not putting Sapp and bruschi at the same level. If I had to pick between them, I would pick bruschi, but until bruschi jumps off the fence from the Patriots to analyst, I will never trust a word he says.

and that was my 100th post, I can now start a thread.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I honestly believe they shouldn't have former players as analysts, alot of them have their heads stuck up their own arses. Bruschi and Sapp are the worst, I'm not putting Sapp and bruschi at the same level. If I had to pick between them, I would pick bruschi, but until bruschi jumps off the fence from the Patriots to analyst, I will never trust a word he says.

Well, Jamie Dukes doesn't do all of that. So many others do, but like Howie and Wilcots, they are professionals. You have to keep it professional and not play with it.

Falconsfan567 likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If the Pats had lost the Super Bowl the penalty would have been much lighter b the NFL has an issue much larger than ball inflation on its hands. Two of the last six Super Bowl champs have been busted for playing outside the rules. The penalty for a champ cheating should be higher, because if cheating becomes a prerequisite to winning a title, the entire credibility of the league goes out the window. B

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I honestly believe they shouldn't have former players as analysts, alot of them have their heads stuck up their own arses. Bruschi and Sapp are the worst, I'm not putting Sapp and bruschi at the same level. If I had to pick between them, I would pick bruschi, but until bruschi jumps off the fence from the Patriots to analyst, I will never trust a word he says.

To be fair, any studio exec would tell you that having Bruschi speak about this is advantageous because he can provide "insider information" as an ex-Patriot who was a teammate of Brady. He can give an accurate representation of Brady's character and personality. The fact that he is partial to the Patriots is pretty low down on their list of priorities.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites