What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

Patriots being investigated after Colts game (4 Viewers)

Percent of NFL teams actively trying to steal play sheets?

  • 0%

    Votes: 90 33.0%

  • 25%

    Votes: 91 33.3%

  • 50%

    Votes: 19 7.0%

  • 75%

    Votes: 16 5.9%

  • 100%

    Votes: 57 20.9%
  • Total voters
    273
Not sure I really want to bump this as it's been beaten to death and we are all sick of Deflategate, Does anyone know what happens if the 2nd Circuit court does not render a decision to rehear the case by the time the season starts, does Brady have to serve the suspension? Or would he get to play until all his appeals are exhausted?

I thought the sequence was to have things play out in the 2nd Circuit, and if Brady loses then petition a stay from the Supreme Court until they decide if they will hear the case or not. If the 2nd Circuit takes months and months to determine if it will take on a rehearing en banc, can Brady play while they decide?

 
Anarchy99 said:
Not sure I really want to bump this as it's been beaten to death and we are all sick of Deflategate, Does anyone know what happens if the 2nd Circuit court does not render a decision to rehear the case by the time the season starts, does Brady have to serve the suspension? Or would he get to play until all his appeals are exhausted?

I thought the sequence was to have things play out in the 2nd Circuit, and if Brady loses then petition a stay from the Supreme Court until they decide if they will hear the case or not. If the 2nd Circuit takes months and months to determine if it will take on a rehearing en banc, can Brady play while they decide?
Click to expand...
I'm not the legal expert, but as of right now, he's suspended.  There hasn't been any legal change to that, that I'm aware of.  Maybe he can ask for a stay of the suspension while the appeal is pending, but I don't think that has happened yet.

 
Anarchy99 said:
Not sure I really want to bump this as it's been beaten to death and we are all sick of Deflategate, Does anyone know what happens if the 2nd Circuit court does not render a decision to rehear the case by the time the season starts, does Brady have to serve the suspension? Or would he get to play until all his appeals are exhausted?

I thought the sequence was to have things play out in the 2nd Circuit, and if Brady loses then petition a stay from the Supreme Court until they decide if they will hear the case or not. If the 2nd Circuit takes months and months to determine if it will take on a rehearing en banc, can Brady play while they decide?
Click to expand...
As far as I know, no. He'd be suspended.

 
Yeah I'm pretty sure that wasn't something they considered seriously. The court approved an expedited decision, we should be hearing about it now as we're already on the far end of the expected range. I would be shocked if it went into August.

If they hear it he will ask for a stay, if they don't they will petition the Supreme Court and he will ask for a stay. I like his odds to start the season.

We could be hearing about this for another two years :bag:

 
Last edited by a moderator:
msommer said:
What a tremendous waste of the SCOTUS' time that would be (not to mention Giselle's money)
Click to expand...
I'm sure Tom has his own money for this one.

Although, I think at this point, I'd take the month vacation, save the money, burn the league at the stake alive when I returned and make damned sure that when the day comes for me to retire and be asked to be part of functions that support the NFL that good old hall of fame number 12 was conspicuously absent from any and all good will endeavors for the NFL.   

 
I doubt the SCOTUS hears it, less than a percent. But he hasn't wavered thus far, said when they appealed the 2nd circuit that they were taking it as far as they could, so I expect them to pursue it at least.

Off topic, 2QB league, 9 games of Brady or Mike Evans?

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Shutout said:
Probably that whole "every citizen is entitled to due process" thing.
Click to expand...
:lmao:  Cmon the Supreme court hears less than a 100 cases a year out of thousands  requested,  Do you really think a case involving deflated footballs and a 4 game suspension is worthy of their time and consideration?

 
Godsbrother said:
:lmao:  Cmon the Supreme court hears less than a 100 cases a year out of thousands  requested,  Do you really think a case involving deflated footballs and a 4 game suspension is worthy of their time and consideration?
Click to expand...
The case is about arbitration not footballs or any suspension.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
And the court reads briefs on all those thousands of cases before deciding which ones to take.  That's actually a positive here...this one is so well publicized they can probably skip straight to voting to not review it without all the usual advance reading.

 
Should have just used a private text message server with the ball boys. You don't get in trouble when you do that, silly Tommy.

 
Godsbrother said:
on Brady's behalf and request.

I don't think this is worthy of Supreme Court review.  You and I obviously disagree, it's okay.
Click to expand...
I never said the SCOTUS should hear it, I do disagree with your initial post, it's not about a person or some rule that nobody cared or cares about in a game.

 
Run It Up said:
The case is about arbitration not footballs or any suspension.
Click to expand...
To be fair, it's about the arbitration proceedings of the NFL only - not of all unions in general.  The NFL may be the only union out there were there is a commissioner who is the "judge, jury and executioner."  If this case is heard (very unlikely) any decision rendered will only apply to the NFL for the duration of the current CBA.

 
Godsbrother said:
:lmao:  Cmon the Supreme court hears less than a 100 cases a year out of thousands  requested,  Do you really think a case involving deflated footballs and a 4 game suspension is worthy of their time and consideration?
Click to expand...
Point taken. I am taking it completely for face value in that it is not about the specific football issue but the legality of the process and how that could affect millions of workers in grievance and arbitration ventures.  Most of the time, the guy wanting something changed (Brady in this case) is being fueled by a self-serving motive but often, IF the case SHOULD be reviewed, it has broad-reaching positive impact. 

It's like let's say I was a crotchety old man who was mad because people never stopped at the stop sign close to my house.  I'm afraid my dog is going to get hit or my car gets side-swiped.  So I gripe and it becomes a huge issue.   The courts agree with me and implement new laws which, in effect, end up showing over time that it prevents accidents by 15% and saves x numbers of lives.  I got my self-serving motive itch scratched but someone, somewhere along the way saw that this was bigger than me and was important. 

I don't know Brady's case well enough to know the mindthink but IF it is something where the highest court in the land should be reviewing this to determine due process and could serve us all, I'm for it. I'd be more likely to follow the case just because it is also football related, anyways. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
matttyl said:
To be fair, it's about the arbitration proceedings of the NFL only - not of all unions in general.  The NFL may be the only union out there were there is a commissioner who is the "judge, jury and executioner."  If this case is heard (very unlikely) any decision rendered will only apply to the NFL for the duration of the current CBA.
Click to expand...
That is on the players for giving him that power in the last CBA.  I am sure that will be a major point of contention the next time around, but for now they likely just have to suck it up and accept that Goodell not only has too much power, but will continue to abuse it. 

 
Ghost Rider said:
That is on the players for giving him that power in the last CBA.  I am sure that will be a major point of contention the next time around, but for now they likely just have to suck it up and accept that Goodell not only has too much power, but will continue to abuse it. 
Click to expand...
Very clever of Goodell to abuse the power to a point where the union will push hard to take it from him in the next CBA.  That way the league can demand something they want, like the 18-game schedule, in return for something the players should have held out for LAST time around.

 
I would put the chances of the Supreme Court taking this case at less than 5%.  Imagine the newspaper headlines when this issue is suddenly more important than the rest of the backlog.  Plus with 8 justices, the chance that the NFLPA gets a 5/3 ruling or better could be slim.  If the vote was tied, it would go to what the appellant court said (which ruled in favor of the NFL).  

The CBA sucks in these cases, but it is what the players agreed to.  I am sure the next CBA will address all of this, but the owners would be stupid to just cave on this for no other considerations.  

 
Run It Up said:
I doubt the SCOTUS hears it, less than a percent.
Click to expand...
Yes: the average case appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court has a little less than a 1% chance of being heard, and this one's chances seem far below average.

The issue presented in this case will be something like: "Does an arbitrator exceed his authority by upholding a disciplinary decision on grounds other than those that the discipline was originally based on?" I don't think it's exactly a burning question that is splitting the Circuit Courts.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Can't wait for the "The Sapreme Cawht doesn't know the first thing about lawh" rhetoric that will hover like a cloud above New England if they take the case and rule against Brady.

 
Tom Brady is a cheater, and he deserves this suspension.

...in case those facts hadn't already been mentioned in this thread.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Dr. Octopus said:
The Supreme Court is not part of "due process".
Click to expand...
The Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution each contain a due process clause. Due process deals with the administration of justice and thus the due process clause acts as a safeguard from arbitrary denial of life, liberty, or property by the Government outside the sanction of law.[1] The Supreme Court of the United States interprets the clauses more broadly because these clauses provide four protections: procedural due process (in civil and criminal proceedings), substantive due process, a prohibition against vague laws, and as the vehicle for the incorporation of the Bill of Rights. Due process ensures the rights and equality of all citizens.

I won't argue the nits of it all and I admittedly am no expert but in the broad sense, I see the Supreme Court as a very important piece and safeguard of the process of protecting rights of citizens.

 
Tom does not have the right to play in the NFL.  I've read every single law in the United States.  I didn't see his name mentioned once.  Time to take your medicine Tom.  

 
Sabertooth said:
Tom does not have the right to play in the NFL.  I've read every single law in the United States.  I didn't see his name mentioned once.  Time to take your medicine Tom.  
Click to expand...
To me this isn't about football hardly at all. It is about getting the rights correctly and protecting the rights of citizens (not the right to play in the NFL or anything). 

Recently, in my community, a man who was in jail for 22 years was released as a free man because new evidence proved he was not guilty of the crime he was sentenced to.  Part of the release also outlined that the case wasn't handled correctly and his rights and due process were not upheld.

My take is, whatever the outcome, please try protect the process citizens have and not allow one man to be judge, jury, executioner, and situational decision-maker. 

 
Shutout said:
To me this isn't about football hardly at all. It is about getting the rights correctly and protecting the rights of citizens (not the right to play in the NFL or anything). 

Recently, in my community, a man who was in jail for 22 years was released as a free man because new evidence proved he was not guilty of the crime he was sentenced to.  Part of the release also outlined that the case wasn't handled correctly and his rights and due process were not upheld.

My take is, whatever the outcome, please try protect the process citizens have and not allow one man to be judge, jury, executioner, and situational decision-maker. 
Click to expand...
Of course it isn't to you.  To me, this is a waste of taxpayer money.   

 
Shutout said:
My take is, whatever the outcome, please try protect the process citizens have and not allow one man to be judge, jury, executioner, and situational decision-maker. 
Click to expand...
...but that is exactly the terms that the NFLPA and the league agreed to.

Zero chance the SCOTUS wastes their time with this case, and even less of a chance(if that were even possible) they rule in Brady's favor.

It's now official, Brady will serve his suspension.

 
spider321 said:
...but that is exactly the terms that the NFLPA and the league agreed to.

Zero chance the SCOTUS wastes their time with this case, and even less of a chance(if that were even possible) they rule in Brady's favor.

It's now official, Brady will serve his suspension.
Click to expand...
You're right. It is the rules agreed to and will probably go just as you say. Just to add a bit of something to chew on (and not saying it plays out here or even should): Just because two parties agreed to it doesn't make it what should be and sometimes the event is really just the vehicle to get the more pressing issue on the table.  Change starts somewhere if it is warranted (Again, not saying it is or should be..just theoretical).

 
Shutout said:
I can appreciate that.  I see a lot of waste of taxpayer money. I'm probably numb to it but I definitely can appreciate your point there.
Click to expand...
And what the #### is the point of the NFL regulating the air in a ball anyway?  I mean, they make up these stupid convoluted rules like "football move" and "complete the process" to drive up points.  Defensive backs can't even touch receivers anymore without ticky tacky calls that everybody hates.  If you want more scoring, let the qbs decide which weight they want.  I can't think of a single reason to have this rule.  

 
Win, win, for Brady and the Patriots now that this is a done deal.

Brady never accepted a suspension without exhausting all of his options ... which would have shown a level of guilt had he just rolled over.

Patriots get a chance to showcase Garopolo,  with one year left on his contract, with the chance of moving him for a 2nd round draft pick next offseason (ala Matt Cassel). I could see KC making that move again. Maybe Cleveland.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
sure - why not ? oh wait...  nobody ever checked ... because it was a witch hunt from the beginning

Patriots = low balls on 10 12 tested = intentional deflating = investigation = QB's fault

Colts = low balls on 3 of 4 tested .... oh wait, we're out out of time ..... focus on Patriots

it went something like that

 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

GregR
Rule changes NFL owners are discussing
Replies
18
Views
754
ghostguy123
ghostguy123
BustedKnuckles
Injury report is game within the game
Replies
6
Views
478
Mark Wimer
Mark Wimer

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 5 (members: 0, guests: 5)
Top