NFL upholds Brady's 4 game suspension

[Rogah]

Cmon' Rogah, are you a Yankees and Lakers fan too?

I am not going to play this game, especially from a lowlife Orioles fan. I hate both the team's you listed, but I am in this forum to talk football, not discuss team loyalties of second-rate sports which I don't follow all that closely in the first place, so any further questions along the same lines will be ignored.

 

[burmafrd]

I am not going to play this game, especially from a lowlife Orioles fan. I hate both the team's you listed, but I am in this forum to talk football, not discuss team loyalties of second-rate sports which I don't follow all that closely in the first place, so any further questions along the same lines will be ignored.

just like you ignore Brady's LIES?

 

[Rogah]

The Federal Court in New York has been historically more Corporate friendly in Labor disputes BUT anything can happen in Court. The League feels that they have a better chance in NY versus Minnesota due to the years of losses they have taken in Minnesota dating back to a case John Mackey filed against the League and Pete Rozelle; the Reggie White free agency case; and most recently the Adrian Peterson case...among others. However, the Judges in New York may still be swayed by the NFLPA.

Something very ironic happened over this whole thing.

Let's face it, both sides were forum shopping. But what happened was The league's filing in their forum went to a democrat-appointed judge who is seen as left-of-center. The PA's filing got assigned to a republican-appointed judge who is seen as right-of-center.

I know you can't make any assumptions based on the above, but I did think it was pretty funny.

 

[TellerMorrow34]

Good. They should have upheld it.

Now of course they're suing and crying like babies because obviously the rules only apply to every other team in the NFL, but not the Patriots.

 

[erod]

On a funny note, there's a banner being flown over the Patriots camp today by a Jets fans that says "Cheaters look up here!"

 

[slick325]

Something very ironic happened over this whole thing.

Let's face it, both sides were forum shopping. But what happened was The league's filing in their forum went to a democrat-appointed judge who is seen as left-of-center. The PA's filing got assigned to a republican-appointed judge who is seen as right-of-center.

I know you can't make any assumptions based on the above, but I did think it was pretty funny.

I did notice that Rogah, but Judges for the most part are swayed by their love of the law more than politics. Chief Justice Earl Warren was appointed by Eisenhower and viewed as a conservative yet presided over the most liberal Supreme Court in the history of the Nation often voting with liberal Justices. Associate Justice Sandra Day O'Connor was appointed by Reagan and viewed as a conservative but often was the swing vote during the final decade or so of her tenure. Associate Justice Thurgood Marshall was appointed by LBJ and considered a liberal in every sense of the word but recused himself from the Ali Draft Trial (mainly because he was Solicitor General of the U.S. when the Case made its way to the Supreme Court but he also let it be known that he would have voted against Ali and with conservatives had he sat on the case).

Those are just some examples but Judges sometimes go against the perception or political appointment based on the facts before them and the law that is at issue.

Should be an interesting case (Brady v. NFL).

 

[JohnnyHopkins]

Hey, all of you internet attorneys on this forum have been helpful (and REALLY entertaining!), but I am pretty dang interested to see how this is ruled upon by a Federal judge. Should be even more fun when the losing side brings it back up during the next round of labor negotiations.

 

[erod]

Hey, all of you internet attorneys on this forum have been helpful (and REALLY entertaining!), but I am pretty dang interested to see how this is ruled upon by a Federal judge. Should be even more fun when the losing side brings it back up during the next round of labor negotiations.

Judge told them to go back and negotiate it. We'll see what happens.

 

[DallasEast]

I am not going to play this game, especially from a lowlife Orioles fan. I hate both the team's you listed, but I am in this forum to talk football, not discuss team loyalties of second-rate sports which I don't follow all that closely in the first place, so any further questions along the same lines will be ignored.

lol.

You're not talking football in this forum. You're not discussing player transactions, strengthes and weaknesses of positions, coaching philosophies, team schedules, injuries, etc.

You're strictly defending Tom Brady and the New England Patriots against the allegations of cheating while playing football. You're on a personal crusade. You're fighting with testimonials and graphs and personal opinions, etc., etc., all in hopes of winning an argument. Newsflash. Your jihad ran its course months ago. No one will ever hand you a trophy as The Great Patriots Defender. You're never going to win. All of your efforts are in vain. You're simply going to keep spinning Patriots rhetoric until you wear yourself out (and that's not going to be anytime soon).

Let's keep it real outside of Tom Bradyland. You're not engaging in football conversation. You're General Santa Anna at the Battle of San Jacinto. You're General Burnside at the Battle of Fredericksburg. You're Lt. Colonel Custer at the Battle of Little Bighorn. You keep spitting on your white flag and determined to keep on trying to skate uphill but nothing about your campaign has anything to do with x's and o's. Don't make your illusion something it's not.

 

[Rogah]

I did notice that Rogah, but Judges for the most part are swayed by their love of the law more than politics.

I agree that a Judge's love of and dedication to the law tends to be above the typical partisan rhetoric we see from politicians. However, you can't discount the fact that this judge has a record which tends to put him further to the left than the one in Minnesota.

The ruling from the Judge in Minnesota was pretty harshly worded. It was a pretty sharp rebuke towards the NFLPA saying "the court sees little reason for this action to have been filed in Minnesota at all" (emphasis his, not mine) and also "it makes eminent sense the NFL would have commenced its action seeking confirmation of the award in the Southern District of New York. Why the instant action was filed here, however, is far less clear."

Despite his playing dumb, he knows full well why the NFLPA filed in Minnesota. But looking at his harshly worded rebuke of the NFLPA makes one think that they just might be better off with the friendly judge (in an unfriendly district) than they would have been with the unfriendly judge (in a friendly district).

 

[Rogah]

lol.

You're not talking football in this forum. You're not discussing player transactions, strengthes and weaknesses of positions, coaching philosophies, team schedules, injuries, etc.

Um, newsflash: Tom Brady is a football player. The Patriots are an NFL team. This is a football issue. This is an NFL issue. You can call it a crusade all you want, but at least it is on topic here in the NFL Zone subforum.

(BTW, this topic also happens to be the #1 sports story of the past 6 months, so stop acting like I'm the only one in here talking about it)

Neither the Lakers nor the Yankees are NFL teams. Those discussions belong down below in the "Sports Zone" sub-forum.

 

[DallasEast]

Um, newsflash: Tom Brady is a football player. The Patriots are an NFL team. This is a football issue. This is an NFL issue. You can call it a crusade all you want, but at least it is on topic here in the NFL Zone subforum.

Neither the Lakers nor the Yankees are NFL teams. Those discussions belong down below in the "Sports Zone" sub-forum.

The only correct thing here is what in bold. It is a issue where a player is being punished for circumventing league rules. You'll get yourself back on the right track once you actually start talking about something from the playbook.

 

[DallasEast]

NFL Zone
For posting and discussing anything and everything about the NFL.
http://cowboyszone.com/forums/nfl-zone.3/

Discussing how the NFL upheld Brady's suspension = talking about a league action.

Discussing how Brady threw a touchdown pass to Gronkowski - talking about a football play.

Anyone can discuss anything related to the NFL but every topic is not directly related to another. It's not complicated.

 

[Rogah]

NFL Zone
For posting and discussing anything and everything about the NFL.
http://cowboyszone.com/forums/nfl-zone.3/

Discussing how the NFL upheld Brady's suspension = talking about a league action.

Discussing how Brady threw a touchdown pass to Gronkowski - talking about a football play.

Anyone can discuss anything related to the NFL but every topic is not directly related to another. It's not complicated.

I agree it's not complicated. Why you said to me (direct quote, your words): "You're not talking football in this forum." is a complete mystery when clearly any discussion about this whole nontroversy, suspension, appeal and court filing is NFL related.

 

[DallasEast]

I agree it's not complicated. Why you said to me (direct quote, your words): "You're not talking football in this forum." is a complete mystery when clearly any discussion about this whole nontroversy, suspension, appeal and court filing is NFL related.

It's like a brick.

Here are your words:

...I am in this forum to talk football...

Again, you are not "talking football." You are "talking" about a league issue. I mean seriously. When you're watching a Patriots game, are you seeing Goodell on a pass rush sacking Brady? The answer is no. This topic is more applicable to league news concerning stadium construction than it is about the game of football.

 

[Nightman]

I did notice that Rogah, but Judges for the most part are swayed by their love of the law more than politics. Chief Justice Earl Warren was appointed by Eisenhower and viewed as a conservative yet presided over the most liberal Supreme Court in the history of the Nation often voting with liberal Justices. Associate Justice Sandra Day O'Connor was appointed by Reagan and viewed as a conservative but often was the swing vote during the final decade or so of her tenure. Associate Justice Thurgood Marshall was appointed by LBJ and considered a liberal in every sense of the word but recused himself from the Ali Draft Trial (mainly because he was Solicitor General of the U.S. when the Case made its way to the Supreme Court but he also let it be known that he would have voted against Ali and with conservatives had he sat on the case).

Those are just some examples but Judges sometimes go against the perception or political appointment based on the facts before them and the law that is at issue.

Should be an interesting case (Brady v. NFL).

You could say that a Federal judge that favors the Union would also favor the CBA and respect arbitration.

I am no expert but it seems to me that Brady needs to get an injunction or the point is moot. And injunctions are hard to get in labor disputes with CBAs. Brady has to show he has a good chance of winning and that he will be irreparably harmed by serving a 4 game suspension.

If he gets the injunction he will keep fighting to the Supreme Court to clear his name and by the time he ever gets his suspension upheld he might retire like PWilliams did.

 

[Rogah]

It's like a brick.

Here are your words:
Again, you are not "talking football." You are "talking" about a league issue. I mean seriously. When you're watching a Patriots game, are you seeing Goodell on a pass rush sacking Brady? The answer is no. This topic is more applicable to league news concerning stadium construction than it is about the game of football.

Deflategate is an NFL issue and is perfectly on topic for this forum.

 

[DallasEast]

Deflategate is an NFL issue and is perfectly on topic for this forum.

It's a perfect topic for the forum. It is not "talking football." It's not the same thing.

 

[Rogah]

It's a perfect topic for the forum. It is not "talking football." It's not the same thing.

Gimme a break with the semantic argument. I consider this whole thing an on-topic football issue. Saying "it's a league issue, not a football issue" is just an excruciating parsing of words.

 

[DallasEast]

Gimme a break with the semantic argument. I consider this whole thing an on-topic football issue. Saying "it's a league issue, not a football issue" is just an excruciating parsing of words.

There is nothing semantic about it. No one's sparsing words. No one's saying you can't post or create threads about the topic like you have for months already. It's simply being pointed out to you that your conversation is not about football but about the enforcement of league rules. Are you this dogmatic with people in your every day life or just about anything related to the New England Patriots on this site?