Football Brady v. NFL: No Settlement; Judge Berman to Decide - Page 4

Amnorix · 08-31-2015, 01:45 PM

Can't find the old thread. Brady and Goodell were back in NYC today for settlement talks. No progress.

Judge Berman said he would likely decide "in the next day or two" and definitely before September 4th.

Interesting how the narrative among the national writers has evolved.

http://sports.yahoo.com/news/roger-g...180816187.html

NEW YORK – They arrived surrounded by lawyers, each wearing a blue suit and displeased expression. Here was Roger Goodell and here was Tom Brady back in federal court in a fight over power, ego and legacy, as much as whether the footballs were deflated in January's AFC championship game.

New York Giants owner John Mara came in an attempt to soften the face of the league's side a bit. Jay Feely, a long-time NFL kicker and friend of Brady's from back at the University of Michigan, arrived to stand by his side.

Once again, nothing worked. A private meeting in front of Judge Richard M. Berman yielded nothing. No one budged. No one backed down. No settlement was reached.
And now both sides roll the dice and sit and wait for a ruling.

"Tomorrow or the day after," Berman said of when he would likely announce whether to vacate Brady's four-game suspension. He assured it would come before Sept. 4, when both sides requested an answer so the New England Patriots can begin preparing for the season opener with or without their star quarterback.

So that's that, all or nothing, all or everything, all eyes on the court docket here.

For Brady it's either a quarter of the season lost or a measure of redemption gained. For Goodell it's either a reaffirmation of the totality of his authority or another humiliating public defeat.

There may be appeals and requests for stays and thus months still to go, what will be won, what may not be done. None of that minimized the tension and drama inside Berman's 17th-floor courtroom here on Monday, when a case that started as a curiosity on that playoff night boiled toward a milestone, if not a conclusion.

Berman clearly knows how he is going to rule and likely has much of the decision already written. He's read and heard it all over the past month. There were no new arguments on Monday. The chief attorneys, Daniel Nash of the NFL and Jeffrey Kessler of the NFL Players Association, both merely stood and praised the efforts of all sides even though, as sometimes happens, they just couldn't reach a settlement.

"This is a time Mr. Nash and I are going to agree," Kessler joked.

The inability to find common ground is not a surprise. Tom Brady was simply never going to admit he had any role in the tampering of those footballs, or even that the footballs were ever tampered with in the first place.

First off, after he said as much under oath and then introduced the transcript into federal court, doing so would risk a perjury charge. More importantly though, it would be a complete reversal, making him a liar and a cheat, crushing his image among not just fans but, most importantly according to those that know him best, his own children.

He also very well may be innocent. The NFL never produced much of a case against him, let alone that the footballs were even unnaturally deflated.

So the only way a settlement could go down was for Goodell to drop any demands for an admission of guilt. He'd have to settle for Brady merely acknowledging a failure to fully cooperate with the investigation. That, however, would be a serious concession from a commissioner who's built his career on cracking heads among misbehaving players.

So there was the irresistible force clashing with the unmovable object, each willing to lose in court as long as he could still save face.
It has been, if nothing else, a remarkable showdown of oversized personalities.

In court Monday, the two men, rich and famous and atop their chosen professions, refused to even look at each other.

When the session was adjourned, both were forced to awkwardly wait for the galley to clear out of media and observers, leaving them within a few feet of each other a couple table rows apart.

Brady stood first and wandered over to one wood-paneled wall of the ornate courtroom. He stuffed his hands in his pocket, looking as intense as any tight fourth-quarter drive. Feely stood by his side and the two eventually hugged.

Goodell, seated in front, stood slowly and also put his hands in his pocket, looking down and then turning in the opposite direction of Brady, trying to wear a face of nonchalance.

Eight months into this scandal, after swings of allegations and misrepresentations, of false media leaks and broadside-legal attacks, the distrust and disgust were clear: Two men known for their ability to smoothly glide through life, with fashion and fabulous hair, looked strangely uncomfortable.

No one ever wants to sit in this position, leaving it to another man, federal judge or not, to declare whether he or she is a cheat or a fraud or a bully or a bum.

Here these two are though, going down that awkward path together. Their lives are seemingly too charmed for this, yet they were like a couple of rivals on opposite sides of the schoolyard, unwilling to even acknowledge the other's presence in front of onlookers.

The stakes seem higher for Goodell, if only because his legal argument here is based on the 1981 Supreme Court decision MLBPA v. Garvey, which essentially prohibits judges from interfering with the decision of arbitrators even if they are horrendously flawed or based on inaccurate facts. Arguing you have the right to be a dictator isn't ideal in public relations terms.

As such, Goodell and the NFL could certainly prevail in front of Berman but do so via a ruling full of the same kind of harsh verbiage that the judge used during two prior public sessions.

It's clear that no matter which way Berman goes, he looked upon the NFL's judicial system in general, and the league's conduct in this case specifically, as lacking any semblance of fairness or competency. He could unload in the ruling and leave Goodell laid out, even if he's technically victorious.

That's the risk Goodell was willing to take. And one Brady is willing to go with, essentially entering the verdict stage with a two-pronged chance at redemption – either total or at least in the court of public opinion. A loss and a four-game suspension would hurt, but he could at least point to an impartial federal judge down in New York agreeing that Goodell is out of line.

It's certainly reasonable that the NFL initially erred when it failed to comprehend Ideal Gas Law and thus initially thought any Patriots football that measured below 12.5 pounds per square inch of inflation was a sign of nefarious conduct. It immediately went after a speeding ticket like a homicide case.

But by the time the league should've have dialed it back, it had already leaked prejudicial stories and begun building a case against Brady and two Patriots locker room attendants. The NFL never was able to find a smoking gun or much more than suspicions, but that didn't matter.

The NFL not only never backed down, it just kept doubling down, believing the full force of the league's power – both in the CBA and in its ability to manipulate national reporters – would overwhelm Brady.

The league may be correct and on the verge of a show-of-force victory. It may be wrong and headed for a comeuppance.

It's all up to Judge Berman now. Who knows what he thinks and who knows what he'll rule. On Monday he seemed eager to make it known though as he sent the two men in fancy blue suits off into the Manhattan morning, Goodell via a black Escalade, Brady in a Chevy Suburban. Each is left awaiting his word.

The QB v. the Commissioner, it's all or everything now.

Just Passin' By · 08-31-2015, 03:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tombstone RJ

IF Brady had just cooperated and not destroyed evidence, I'M absolutely positive Goodell would have lowered the suspension to maybe 2 games. This situation rests on Brady's shoulders more than the furer's shoulders IMHO.

Bullshit.

Amnorix · 08-31-2015, 04:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tombstone RJ

This chart is completely worthless. It doesn't track fumbles, but rather fumbles LOST. Because the lucky bounce of who gets a fumble really matters for purposes of seeing whether the ball was monkeyed with. Yeah...no.

It would be good to know if that stat is just counting offensive plays (where the Patriots controlled the ball) versus special teams plays (where they do not), but we have no idea.

It also doesn't seem to factor in fumbles at home (where McNally and the needle supposed lived) versus the road (where he did not, and where the Patriots have less control over their environment. More on this in a subsequent post.

Brock · 08-31-2015, 04:01 PM

I don't see how the judge has any reason to interfere in this dispute.

**Dave Lane** · 08-31-2015, 04:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MagicHef

I can. The NFLPA negotiated the current CBA and agreed to give the commissioner the power he has. He used that power, the NFLPA is now trying to argue against the CBA they agreed to.

IMO, he'll throw it out, maintaining Brady's suspension.

If there is no proof of any guilt can he just use his power willy nilly?

Amnorix · 08-31-2015, 04:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tombstone RJ

Those are dome teams you idiot.

Right, because dome teams clearly fumble less at home. Oh wait, except they don't. (You idiot).

Quote:

Teams generally fumble slightly more often at home than on the road because they get to run more plays at home than on the road. As for the cold weather in Foxborough playing a role, the following sample of home and road dome and bad-weather teams shows little rhyme or reason for home-road splits.

Home-road fumble splits for selected teams (2012-2014)

Team Conditions Home Fumbles Road Fumbles
Saints Dome 17 20
Falcons Dome 24 14
Colts Retractable Roof 36 21
Rams Dome 30 27
Browns Bad Weather 25 15
Bills Bad Weather 35 31
Packers Tundra 22 20
Patriots Bad Weather 21 20
NFL Average Varying 26.0 24.2
Football Outsiders

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2...mble-advantage

Amnorix · 08-31-2015, 04:07 PM

Another point re fumble stats:

Quote:

Note One: Fumble totals are small.

The average offense fumbles 16.55 times per season, or just over once per game. Small numbers are statistically finicky in a number of ways. They are heavily distortion-prone, for example. The difference between the fourth-least fumble-prone team over the last three seasons (the Browns, with 41 fumbles) and the 20th (the Bears, with 50) is nine fumbles: an average of three per season. Imagine all of the factors that can affect a three-fumble-per-year swing—a third-string quarterback in the huddle, one or two extreme-weather games, a tough division, etc.—and you realize that you must treat the data gingerly.

So I can give you ONE good reason why the Patriots fumble less -- Tom Brady (other than 2008) basically never missed a snap, and he's amazingly elusive in the pocket. He rarely fumbles, and the Patriots are really good on the C-QB and QB-RB exchanges. The consistency of having him there alone help explain (partly) the low fumble rate.

Which is also reflected in Indy's good fumble rates in the chart above. It's less the DOME, and more the existence (and consistent ability to show up) of one PEYTON MANNING. Falcons and Ryan, and Saints/Brees, is similar. It also explains why the Jaguars, Vikings, and other great weather and/or Dome teams AREN'T on the list.

Amnorix · 08-31-2015, 04:10 PM

Wow, didn't know this:

Quote:

The January study looks damning: It shows the Patriots as a far-fringe statistical outlier. But the Sharp study has several problems. One of them has already been hinted at: Using "plays per fumble" as a metric mathematically magnifies tiny changes in very volatile data. But there is a much simpler problem: The Sharp study eliminated dome teams before collecting the data!

Eliminating dome teams compensates for any impact weather might have on fumble tendencies. It also eliminates the Saints, probably the most Patriots-like team of the last decade in every way except climate. The Saints have been contenders with stable, high-quality coaching and quarterback play for most of the last six seasons. Not coincidentally, their fumble rates have been lower than the Patriots' rates over the last three years.

The Falcons, another team with stable quarterback play and coaching for several recent seasons, are also chopped off the back of any study that eliminates dome teams. Assuming Lucas Oil Stadium is considered a dome because of its retractable roof, some signature Peyton Manning seasons were also excluded from the mix.

Such omissions would make sense if domed stadiums had a major impact on fumble totals. That is not the case, as one of the earlier tables illustrated. The Saints, notorious for massive home-road splits, fumbled 17 times at home in the last three years, 20 times on the road. The Falcons fumbled 24 times at home, 14 times on the road. The Lions, who mix dome home games with annual trips to places like Chicago and Green Bay, fumbled 31 times at home in the last three years, 28 times on the road. The Rams, who are likely to deal with extreme heat, damp conditions or nerve-racking crowd noise in NFC West road games, fumbled 30 times at home, 27 times on the road in the last three seasons.

Weather has, at most, a tiny impact on fumble totals. Sack rates and the presence of a backup quarterback in the lineup have much greater impact. Any attempt to isolate Tom Brady's fumble tendencies that excludes Drew Brees, Matt Ryan and several seasons of Peyton Manning is going to include some massive built-in distortions.

TEX · 08-31-2015, 04:12 PM

So sick of Tom Brady and the Patriots...

Amnorix · 08-31-2015, 04:15 PM

Last one.

Quote:

To get a sense of how all of these forces interact, compare the 2012 to 2014 Patriots to the 2012 to 2014 Bengals. The Patriots have had eight fewer fumbles than the Bengals in three seasons; the Bengals surrender 1.54 fumbles per 100 plays, near the middle of the pack and .35 fewer fumbles per 100 plays than the Patriots. Andy Dalton has started all 48 games in three years, though backups Bruce Gradkowski and Jason Campbell managed to squeeze in two fumbles in extremely limited playing time. Dalton is no Brady, but he holds on to the football. Bengals quarterbacks only suffered one fumble per seven sacks. The Bengals also protect Dalton well. He and his subs have suffered just 98 sacks in three seasons. Bengals quarterbacks only fumble 0.45 times per 100 plays, a lower rate than Brady and the Patriots.

The Bengals are a perennial playoff team that plays in a somewhat-cold-weather city in a cold-weather division. Their fumble rates are similar to the Patriots' rates because their quarterback is usually healthy and well protected. The eight-fumble difference in three years starts to shrink when you look at who is doing the fumbling.

The same thing happens when the Patriots are compared to the Ravens, who have an even lower fumble rate. It happens when the Patriots are compared to the Saints and Falcons, except that weather can be cited as a greater factor. It even happens in comparison to the Packers and Panthers, a pair of teams that have had to rely on backup quarterbacks in recent years but still have fumble rates comparable to the Patriots'. The Patriots' fumble rate is no outlier. It's part of a cluster of quality teams with stable quarterback situations. The Patriots just have more quality and stability than every other team of our generation.

Tombstone RJ · 08-31-2015, 04:37 PM

Quote: