- Thread starter
- #1
BigKen
Day to Day
I watched a non-sports program last night and to my surprise a huge segment was dedicated to the Tom Brady/NFLPA/NFL showdown in New York City this morning. It was interesting because none of the commentators appeared to have any bias whatsoever. The legal guys were really sharp. They seemed to center on the negatives that both sides will have to overcome.
1. The hearing will be formal and very calculated. Every question asked will be lawyered up. The reason? Anything said in this hearing is admissible in court.
2. The negative for Brady is that he was unwilling to turn over his cell phone to Ted Wells. Wells then asked for any texts or emails associated with anything to do with deflation of footballs or the AFC Championship Game before or after the game. Brady refused again. This is the single strongest argument against Brady.
3. The negatives for the league are long and I can't remember all of them but these are the ones I do remember.
- Goodell has stated publicly that he did not order the ball investigation at the AGCCG.
* If he didn't, who did? Did the Commissioner authorize it
* If the league suspected that balls were tampered with, how could they allow the balls to be used in the game?
* If the league commissioned Ted Wells to investigate the incidents suspected, what were his direct
instructions? If you're paying someone $4M, you must have a goal for the investigation.
* How were the penalties determined? What was the benchmark used?
One of the legal beagles said that if Brady is not satisfied with the result of this hearing and decides to go to federal court, it could effect professional sports across the board and the way that leagues have set themselves up to hand out penalties and suspensions. It could possibly force every league to change contract language and change everything they've been doing since the beginning. He said he thought that this could be a landmark case "against" professional sports and that the MLB, NHL and NBA may have representatives at the hearing.
His final statement was that:
"The Tom Brady Appeal could well PEEL the layers away from everything that could be legally questioned against every professional sports organization".
1. The hearing will be formal and very calculated. Every question asked will be lawyered up. The reason? Anything said in this hearing is admissible in court.
2. The negative for Brady is that he was unwilling to turn over his cell phone to Ted Wells. Wells then asked for any texts or emails associated with anything to do with deflation of footballs or the AFC Championship Game before or after the game. Brady refused again. This is the single strongest argument against Brady.
3. The negatives for the league are long and I can't remember all of them but these are the ones I do remember.
- Goodell has stated publicly that he did not order the ball investigation at the AGCCG.
* If he didn't, who did? Did the Commissioner authorize it
* If the league suspected that balls were tampered with, how could they allow the balls to be used in the game?
* If the league commissioned Ted Wells to investigate the incidents suspected, what were his direct
instructions? If you're paying someone $4M, you must have a goal for the investigation.
* How were the penalties determined? What was the benchmark used?
One of the legal beagles said that if Brady is not satisfied with the result of this hearing and decides to go to federal court, it could effect professional sports across the board and the way that leagues have set themselves up to hand out penalties and suspensions. It could possibly force every league to change contract language and change everything they've been doing since the beginning. He said he thought that this could be a landmark case "against" professional sports and that the MLB, NHL and NBA may have representatives at the hearing.
His final statement was that:
"The Tom Brady Appeal could well PEEL the layers away from everything that could be legally questioned against every professional sports organization".