Re: Top non cheating NFL teams since 2000

by George1963 Wed Aug 05, 2015 7:26 pm

Conduct: "The act, manner or process of carrying on." - Webster's Dictionary.

Would destroying a phone be considered conduct?

by guppy Thu Aug 06, 2015 8:48 pm

George1963 wrote:Conduct: "The act, manner or process of carrying on." - Webster's Dictionary.

Would destroying a phone be considered conduct?

It would. Would that be the phone that Ted Wells said he didn't want? And that he only was requesting Brady's agent to provide a writing transcribing any relevant texts, and that Brady got rid of that phone after his lawyers made it clear to Wells that they were not turning the phone over under any circumstances?

Brady said this:
"Most importantly, I have never written, texted, emailed to anybody at anytime, anything related to football air pressure before this issue was raised at the AFC Championship game in January."

He's not stupid. Do you seriously think he would have made such a statement if it could easily be proven false by simply looking at the phones, tablets, or computers, whatever of everyone on his contact list? He did turn over the phone's billing statement which showed the phone numbers of all incoming and outgoing calls. There were a lot of numbers, but his agents told the league that only 28 numbers were people affiliated with the NFL in some way, so they could go talk to them, but the NFL was not interested in doing that.

by George1963 Fri Aug 07, 2015 7:50 am

Conduct: "The act, manner or process of carrying on." - Webster's Dictionary.

Would destroying a phone be considered conduct?

It would. Would that be the phone that Ted Wells said he didn't want?

He destroyed it before Wells said he didn't want it.

Would it be conduct to say you destroy your phones when you're done with them when one you stopped using in Nov 2014 still exists? Or would that just be a very suspicious lie?

by George1963 Fri Aug 07, 2015 1:21 pm

He's not stupid. Do you seriously think he would have made such a statement if it could easily be proven false by simply looking at the phones, tablets, or computers, whatever of everyone on his contact list?

If he was confident that everyone on his contact list would have either already destroyed any evidence or would refuse to cooperate. Yea.

And no. I have no proof that this is the case. What I do have is proof that he refused to cooperate in a very easy way to disprove that.
And has been caught lying about his reasons.
His lawyer has said on the record that the NFLPA advised him against letting the league anywhere near his phone.
The NFLPA has said that they had no contact with him until after his interview with Wells.

And AGAIN, what does a word of this have to do with the case RIGHT NOW?
This is all spin to try to sway opinion from Brady/NFLPA/Patriots. I thought they/you hated that?
Was the process followed?
That's all there is right now and I think it was.
I'd tell you if I thought it wasn't.
I've seen people that I KNEW did it, saw them do it, but I knew were going to win on appeal because of an error by me or the county attorney

I've seen a lot of court cases and you have to separate out what matters from what doesn't.
I don't see how Brady can win in court.
I can see the judge saying the system sucks, (I don't think it does and neither did a majority of the owners and the union in 2008 when they granted the commissioner broader powers than he already had) but it's the system that was agreed to.

by guppy Fri Aug 07, 2015 5:59 pm

George1963 wrote:
I don't see how Brady can win in court.

I think he's the underdog in court because of the courts' general overall reluctant to interfere in arbitration decisions, absent gross error in procedure, improper application of law, or a decision that is on its face found by the court to be "arbitrary and capricious".

I can see the judge saying the system sucks,

I can see the judge saying, "If I were sitting in Goodell's chair, based on this record, I may have decided the outcome differently than he did. However, that is not the standard of review that I employ now in reviewing the record before me. It is of no matter that I may have, or would have, decided the case differently where I sitting in Goodell's chair. The question before me is, was there a gross abuse of discretion by Goodell, or was there error in the process enough for me to either vacate the decision, or send it back to arbitration for further proceedings consistent with my opinion as set forth below."

Question. If the judge sends the case back and tells the sides to do it over, the right way this time, do the parties then settle rather than continue to drag it out? God help us. But anything is possible.

by George1963 Fri Aug 07, 2015 10:12 pm

I can see the judge saying the system sucks,

I can see the judge saying, "If I were sitting in Goodell's chair, based on this record, I may have decided the outcome differently than he did. However, that is not the standard of review that I employ now in reviewing the record before me. It is of no matter that I may have, or would have, decided the case differently where I sitting in Goodell's chair. The question before me is, was there a gross abuse of discretion by Goodell, or was there error in the process enough for me to either vacate the decision, or send it back to arbitration for further proceedings consistent with my opinion as set forth below."

He'll make a decision. Try to get them to work something out before, but he won't send it to an arbitrator.

Question. If the judge sends the case back and tells the sides to do it over, the right way this time, do the parties then settle rather than continue to drag it out? God help us. But anything is possible.

No. I read something from a "source" that the Brady/NFLPA settlement offer was no suspension, no fine, and an apology from the league.
And the union bitched that the league never made a counter offer. Why would they?

That's not an offer. That's an "FU our heels are dug in".
At this point Brady's being used by the union and the only reason I can think of that's he's allowing it is that he'll be able to say he fought it to the end and never admitted anything.

by Sponsored content