Tom Brady walks on water. Or at least, he knows where the stumps are.
Judge rules in favor of Tom Brady in Deflategate; NFL will appeal
NEW YORK -- A federal judge erased New England Patriots quarterback Tom Brady's four-game suspension Thursday for a Deflategate controversy that the NFL claimed threatened football's integrity.
U.S. District Judge Richard M. Berman said NFL commissioner Roger Goodell went too far in affirming punishment of the Super Bowl-winning quarterback, criticizing him for dispensing "his own brand of industrial justice." Brady has insisted he played no role in a conspiracy to deflate footballs below the allowable limit at last season's AFC Championship Game.
...
The suspension was "premised upon several significant legal deficiencies,'' Berman wrote in his opinion, noting that an arbitrator's factual findings are generally not open to judicial challenge.
The judge said that Brady had no notice he could receive a four-game suspension for general awareness of ball deflation by others or participation in any scheme to deflate footballs and for not cooperating with an investigation.
"Brady also had no notice that his discipline would be the equivalent of the discipline imposed upon a player who used performance enhancing drugs,'' Berman said.
The judge also said Brady was denied equal access to investigative files, including witness interview notes, and didn't have a chance to examine one of two lead investigators, NFL executive vice president Jeff Pash.
The NFL will appeal because they believe their own concussion cover-up and their lawyers are the ones who have played too long without helmets. On one side we have one of the NFL's greatest stars; on the other, a bunch of lawyers and a commissioner. Do the fans really want to talk contract law or football? Summer is winding down, the leaves are turning, and we are ready for football. OK, also Yankee playoff baseball, one wildcard game only, but still...
SHOULDA PLAYED BALL... Tom Brady will be on the field and Kentucky clerk Kim Davis (D) will be in the Big House. God may be on her side but she was in court, not church.
WORKING ON HIS STAND-UP: White House flack Josh earnest can't be serious in the Kim Davis case:
“Every public official is subject to the rule of law,” Mr. Earnest said. “No one is above the law. That applies to the president of the United States and it applies to the clerk of Rowan County, Kentucky, as well.”
Gee, does it apply to Hillary Clinton and her personal email server? Did it apply when Obama decided that Congress was too balky in the DREAM Act, so he imposed it by way of prosecutorial discretion and executive fiat? is any leader of any sanctuary city anywhere facing hard time for refusing to cooperate with the Feds on immigration law?
OK, Hillary and Obama can lawyer up, they have the Department of Justice in their back pocket,and Eric Holder was never going to pursue a sanctuary city. In the current climate "the law" means "whatever you can get away with", which strongly overlaps with "who is in with the 'in' crowd". Kim Davis is out of fashion so its off to jail for her.
The Kentucky clerk who refuses to issue a wedding license to a gay couple is now in custody for contempt of something..
Posted by: glasater | September 03, 2015 at 01:10 PM
Sounds as if this is an open thread. So, let's be happy that we are going to see Tom Brady in September and another great athlete a little later on.
http://espn.go.com/horse-racing/story/_/id/13565101/american-pharoah-continue-racing-owner-ahmed-zayat-says
Posted by: Thomas Collins | September 03, 2015 at 01:11 PM
As far as the Yankees go, let's not forget the run the Rangers are making. It could be Rangers/Yankees competing for the last AL playoff spot during the last week of the season.
Posted by: Thomas Collins | September 03, 2015 at 01:12 PM
See p. 7 of the ruling where Berman emphasizes that the Wells Report admits that the science isn't definitive for culpability.
Posted by: The science wasn't settled. Paid handsomely for, though. | September 03, 2015 at 01:16 PM
I should have made note that the Kentucky clerk is a D!
Posted by: glasater | September 03, 2015 at 01:18 PM
Roger turned this into a fight over his power under the CBA and lost. He should rescind the Pats' penalty and resign in disgrace.
Posted by: MarkO on laptop pretending to listen | September 03, 2015 at 01:18 PM
This is just Goodell's latest high exposure screw up in dishing out discipline. This commissioner role is something he's been ill equipped to handle.
Posted by: Captain Hate on the iPad | September 03, 2015 at 01:34 PM
Wait, is this the Kentucky clerk thread?
Posted by: Eric in Boise | September 03, 2015 at 01:35 PM
Here is a link to an article on the Kentucky clerk.
http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/09/03/us-usa-gaymarriage-kentucky-idUSKCN0R13S220150903
Posted by: Thomas Collins | September 03, 2015 at 01:39 PM
Popping up all over the place
https://twitter.com/davidwade/status/639463279228780544/photo/1?ref_src=twsrc^tfw
Posted by: Rocco | September 03, 2015 at 01:48 PM
It should really be the Taylor Swift's new privileged, white colonialist, oppressive hegemony video thread.
#WhiteGirlsMatter
Posted by: Beasts of England | September 03, 2015 at 01:53 PM
Well that didn't work
Posted by: Rocco | September 03, 2015 at 01:54 PM
Like I say I hold no brief for Brady, but 'against Zur and the Kodan Armada' I mean the NFL Owners,
Posted by: narciso | September 03, 2015 at 01:57 PM
Heh, maryrose, I'm gonna wash and dry that cloth until it's in tatters. One of the truly great gaffes of all time.
Posted by: What was she thinking? | September 03, 2015 at 01:59 PM
Now how did that happen? I was responding to a comment by maryrose on the last thread.
Is it me or typepad?
Posted by: Only my keyboard knows for sure. Shirley, it is I. | September 03, 2015 at 02:03 PM
Maybe Brady deflated Rutgers' footbals.
Posted by: henry | September 03, 2015 at 02:15 PM
Deflategate entirely predictable. Kentucky clerk jailed? Wow. This will lead to something large, I think. Kennedy's chickens coming home...
Posted by: Skoot | September 03, 2015 at 02:16 PM
This is an open Freaker's Ball Thread. Every post is welcome.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uo9bKdIG_Yw
Well, I guess within reason.
Posted by: Thomas Collins | September 03, 2015 at 02:17 PM
I don't know why people think Brady has been vindicated. His suspension has been lifted, but the Berman ruling was on the NFL's failure to follow union personnel rules, not on Brady's involvement in deflation. No judge has ruled on the merits of that charge.
BTW, who knew JOMers could be so pro-union? ;)
Posted by: Porchlight | September 03, 2015 at 02:18 PM
from our lurking friend:
Please tell this to Janet re "The State Dept. is corrupt."
"Ya think?"
Posted by: henry | September 03, 2015 at 02:21 PM
The Trumpster is having a presser. It is something!
Posted by: glasater | September 03, 2015 at 02:23 PM
He could never really be vindicated, Porchlight, because we don't really know what transpired between Brady and his ballwashers. However, I would question whether he or the Pats really need vindication. I think the overall record indicates the Pats are well within the professional sports' "law of the street" with respect to rule stretching. When Brady and Aaron Rodgers go into the Pro Football HOF, I'm not going to be focused on Brady's possible role in ball deflation, and Rodgers' admitted role in ball inflation.
Posted by: Thomas Collins | September 03, 2015 at 02:26 PM
He could never really be vindicated, Porchlight, because we don't really know what transpired between Brady and his ballwashers.
That is true, but it only reinforces my point. This ruling does not say anything about Brady wrt deflation. It only says that the NFL's specific choice of punishment was arbitrarily/inappropriately applied. A lighter punishment, say a $25K fine, might have sailed through unchallenged by the union - we can't know.
Posted by: Porchlight | September 03, 2015 at 02:29 PM
Heh, Berman's nailed Goodell with a 'rules violation'.
Posted by: He used a bent needle legal gauge. | September 03, 2015 at 02:33 PM
http://www.wsj.com/articles/the-snapback-snow-job-1441301210
Posted by: clarice | September 03, 2015 at 02:33 PM
Goodell could have gotten out of this so easily, just by blaming the refs.
Posted by: Deflecting blame, and all, and he'd be right, too. | September 03, 2015 at 02:35 PM
When Brady and Aaron Rodgers go into the Pro Football HOF, I'm not going to be focused on Brady's possible role in ball deflation, and Rodgers' admitted role in ball inflation.'
TC, isn't that another way of saying "he's a great QB and the Pats are a great team, so it doesn't really matter"? Understandable from a fan's POV, sure, but...
Posted by: Porchlight | September 03, 2015 at 02:35 PM
This ruling does not say anything about Brady wrt deflation.
Technically yes, but Berman did highlight the fact there is no evidence in his ruling. Which is like him putting up a billboard saying, "There is no 'there' there. You idiots never should have wasted the courts time on this nonsense."
Posted by: Some Guy | September 03, 2015 at 02:35 PM
Are all the city/county clerks in Colorado, et al., who issued licenses for recreational marijuana (illegal under Federal law) businesses in jail?
Posted by: Beasts of England | September 03, 2015 at 02:36 PM
Good question, Beasts.
Posted by: sbw | September 03, 2015 at 02:37 PM
btw, anyone hear if Mark Brunnell cried when he heard the ruling?
Posted by: Some Guy | September 03, 2015 at 02:37 PM
Are all the city/county clerks in Colorado, et al., who issued licenses for recreational marijuana (illegal under Federal law) businesses in jail?
Is Zero in jail?
Posted by: Some Guy | September 03, 2015 at 02:40 PM
I totally agree it should never have gone to court. That said, the ruling was, essentially: "you never told Brady he could get suspended for deflating footballs, so you can't suspend him for it now" . . . which is beyond ludicrous.
Maybe we should make a new Seinfeld episode? Nah, it's been done: "Was that wrong?"
Posted by: Cecil Turner | September 03, 2015 at 02:43 PM
Technically yes, but Berman did highlight the fact there is no evidence in his ruling.
Can you point to this part of the ruling? There is much discussion of evidence, but IANAL so I wasn't able to figure out where exactly he says that.
Posted by: Porchlight | September 03, 2015 at 02:44 PM
Glad to know that a not guilty verdict would never be considered vindication.
Tough crowd.
Posted by: MarkO on laptop pretending to listen | September 03, 2015 at 02:45 PM
The more important part of the ruling was regarding the withholding of investigative files and testimony that prejudiced Brady's ability to vindicate himself in the appeal.
The notice issue was important only in vacating the arbitration and suspension, rather than returning it to Goodell to f*** it up again.
Posted by: Some Guy | September 03, 2015 at 02:47 PM
The good news for Pats fans is that nobody else cares. Considering they demolished the Colts in the second half with overinflated footballs, it obviously didn't matter. But vindication? [/eyeroll]
And I'll be chuckling snarkily if it gets overturned on appeal and Brady misses more important later games.
Posted by: Cecil Turner | September 03, 2015 at 02:48 PM
heading out will return later
Posted by: Some Guy | September 03, 2015 at 02:48 PM
Glasatar,
Liked that ending where he introduced the Secretary of State of Indonesia.
Lol!
Posted by: Miss Marple | September 03, 2015 at 02:51 PM
As with many such controversies exoneration means nothing, if it challenges the narrative
Posted by: narciso | September 03, 2015 at 02:51 PM
Glad to know that a not guilty verdict would never be considered vindication.
MarkO, how is it a "not guilty" verdict? Berman did not saythat Brady was not guilty. He did not rule on Brady's guilt (or non-guilt) at all.
Posted by: Porchlight | September 03, 2015 at 02:53 PM
Can we beat up on the Yankees now? (no particular reason, but they deserve it on general principles same as Brady and the Pats)
Posted by: henry | September 03, 2015 at 02:55 PM
I do wonder if the gloating Pat fans, will think this is so wonderful if the appeal goes against them and Brady must sit out playoff games?
Trump takes the pledge. That is the right thing to do, and the smart thing for the frontrunner. I think his only real misstep was failing to make a pledge. I now must worry about the Richard Lugar's in the rest of the pack, I suppose.
And finally, Hillary is trying furiously to spin a former campaign worker and then IT employee at State taking the their right to not testify since it might tend to INCRIMINATE him ( and his boss). OOPS.
Posted by: GMax | September 03, 2015 at 02:59 PM
Brady wiped his phone... but vindicated.
Hilligula got some guy to wipe her
don't go thereserver and take the 5th with the FBI and State IG as well as with Congress so no evidence*. Does that vindicate Hilligula??Why is Brady special?
* ht Chitown lurking unit.
Posted by: henry | September 03, 2015 at 03:01 PM
Heh, the NFL got im'Pash'ioned.
Posted by: Who Dame Justice would destroy, she first makes 'Pash'ionate. | September 03, 2015 at 03:06 PM
IT technician
Pleads the fifth, Hilligula
Just pleads for a fifth
Posted by: Captain Haiku | September 03, 2015 at 03:07 PM
I don't think the NFL will win the appeal. The science is unsettling.
Posted by: If it gets to that. | September 03, 2015 at 03:07 PM
Has anybody argued that Hillary was a victim of bad process?
Posted by: Bang that gavel. | September 03, 2015 at 03:09 PM
Porch,
The NFL's application to confirm the arbitration award was denied. Brady's motion to vacate the award was granted.
In other words, all the allegations and conclusions of guilt were stricken. That's what happens with a not guilty verdict.
No one is adjudicated innocent.
Posted by: MarkO on laptop pretending to listen | September 03, 2015 at 03:10 PM
Kim, yes... the whole "Classification process is too confusing" excuse has been active for at while now.
Posted by: henry | September 03, 2015 at 03:11 PM
Here is a link to the decision:
http://www.bostonherald.com/sites/default/files/blog_posts/NFL.pdf
Posted by: MarkO on laptop pretending to listen | September 03, 2015 at 03:11 PM
Good one Captain Haiku!
Posted by: Buckeye | September 03, 2015 at 03:14 PM
Well
I feel better now knowing others share my concerns
Berman says. No there there
That is his opinion
I choose to disagree with that
So when Minnesota Vikings player was suspended for child discipline considered abuse he was told ahead of time that he would miss the season
As long as players know ahead of time then they won't be tempted to throw away their cellphones or engage in sheepish press conferences
Posted by: maryrose | September 03, 2015 at 03:14 PM
Well, there's a fallacy there somewhere, Henry. Oops, I guess you were joking.
Posted by: My bad. | September 03, 2015 at 03:15 PM
The judge most certainly did not say Brady was innocent such as was the case in the Duke LAX case when the state attorney took the unusual step of declaring they had done nothing wrong. The judge just shoved Macy's Christmas tree up Goodell's fat ass for conducting a slipshod investigation to which King Roger said MOAR PLEEZE.
Even in the Duke LAX case there are still loons who considered them guilty of SOMETHING. Not to point any fingers but such people have been known to fellate Willard and Eldrick.
Posted by: Captain Hate on the iPad | September 03, 2015 at 03:16 PM
I'm with Jimmy on this; absent some substantial civil rights violation (which I see none of in Berman's decision) if an employer wants to discipline an employee it's none of the government's damned business.
Posted by: Ignatz Ratzkiwatzki | September 03, 2015 at 03:18 PM
The Kentucky clerk who refuses to issue a wedding license to a gay couple is now in custody for contempt of something..
She shouldn't be in contempt. The judge ruled wrongly, and the marshals should have refused to take her into custody.
I'm sorry. If the President of the United States can refuse to obey or enforce any law he doesn't like; and if he can order his underlings to do likewise, then I don't see why this clerk, or anyone else, has any obligation to execute a law with which she disagrees, and I don't see why she should be subject to any punishment for doing so.
Posted by: James D | September 03, 2015 at 03:20 PM
Porchlight, I'd say the same thing about a receiver who made it into one NFL game and used stickum. If anything, I'd likely to be harsher on the Brady's and Rodgerses of the world, just as I am harsher on Nolan Ryan for occasionally pitching in from of the rubber with his zillion mile an hour fastball.
Some Guy, my reading of the opinion is that if Judge Berman had concluded the procedures were sufficient, and Brady had received sufficient notice of possible penalties, Judge Berman would have deferred to the factual finding of scheme, due to the great deference owed to the factual findings of a properly conducted arbitration proceeding.
Posted by: Thomas Collins | September 03, 2015 at 03:20 PM
Ted Wells was involved in baseball's investigating steroids and gave Big Papi a pass while coming down hard on other players, so no we can not use this thread to beat up the Yankees.
Posted by: Peter | September 03, 2015 at 03:21 PM
The Richard Lugars in the pack are always who you have to worry about, not the conservatives. But as Reagan proved with John Anderson, if you run a superb campaign, no problem.
Posted by: Captain Hate on the iPad | September 03, 2015 at 03:21 PM
The important thing here is...
...I can't wait for Trump's tweet response.
Posted by: Jeff Dobbs | September 03, 2015 at 03:22 PM
I am first and foremost a fighter for the underdog
How else could I be a Browns fan
Posted by: maryrose | September 03, 2015 at 03:22 PM
Peter, I think Wells may have taken undue grief in this whole matter. Certainly Wells and his cohorts are smart enough to know that "generally aware" might not cut the mustard (or properly calibrate the gauge, as it were). Perhaps Team Wells told Goodell it couldn't in good conscience go beyond "generally aware", which left it to Goodell to cook up "scheme".
I know, go ahead and say it. TC is defending the big firm lawyers.
Posted by: Thomas Collins | September 03, 2015 at 03:24 PM
The Browns will rise again, maryrose.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=19KabU3SVFw
Posted by: Thomas Collins | September 03, 2015 at 03:25 PM
Kim, Brady spoke to the investigators without recourse to the 5th or "what difference at this point does it make." He is merely a player on a team that nobody likes. Hillary is pure evil.
Posted by: henry | September 03, 2015 at 03:26 PM
But while we wait for Trump's response to the PGA....we have this:
Posted by: Jeff Dobbs | September 03, 2015 at 03:28 PM
Jeff
I would be interested in your take on this Brady decision
Posted by: maryrose | September 03, 2015 at 03:28 PM
So guccifer apparently turned the emails to the fbi, re the daily mail.
Posted by: narciso | September 03, 2015 at 03:28 PM
I don't really know much about it TC, I am just repeating stiff I read on some Yankee fan forum. Everybody cheats as they said in the movie Breaking Away
Posted by: Peter | September 03, 2015 at 03:28 PM
I'll bet Trump has employed more Mexicans in good jobs than the PGA poo-bahs.
Posted by: Thomas Collins | September 03, 2015 at 03:29 PM
Yes, as much as I regard Brady as a whiny vag, he's an infinitely better human being than Sir Edmund Hillary Rodham.
Posted by: Captain Hate on the iPad | September 03, 2015 at 03:30 PM
I agree with Jimmyk and Iggy
Posted by: maryrose | September 03, 2015 at 03:32 PM
Golf is having enough problems with courses closing than for the PGA to cop a snotty attitude toward someone whose popularity is on the rise.
Posted by: Captain Hate on the iPad | September 03, 2015 at 03:33 PM
The person who hacked into Hillary Clintons email server has pulled the emails off the block and turned them over to the FBI, RadarOnline.com has exclusively learned.
After speaking with my lawyers the hacker told Radar exclusively, I was advised I could not legally sell these, and to get rid of them and turn in everything I had to FBI.
... at least, now, we can find out just how serious Hillary was into Yoga
Posted by: Neo | September 03, 2015 at 03:34 PM
Cecil
I disagree with the statement that other teams don't care
Of course we do care because we have to play the Patriots
Posted by: maryrose | September 03, 2015 at 03:36 PM
maryrose:
I would be interested in your take on this Brady decision
This is the greatest decision since that time I chose decaf for my after lunch coffee an hour ago.
No, wait. I forgot that time I decided to plug my phone in before the battery died 10 minutes ago.
Best decision since then, definitely.
Posted by: Jeff Dobbs | September 03, 2015 at 03:36 PM
The Night They Drove Old Hillary Down
Posted by: Neo | September 03, 2015 at 03:37 PM
If The Hill pulls off the "Keeping POTUS Hopes Alive While Negotiating Plea Bargain To Avoid Club Fed" yoga position, I tip my PSI gauge to her.
Posted by: Thomas Collins | September 03, 2015 at 03:38 PM
Insty commenter re Despicable She: "At least she didn't refuse to issue a license to some gays."
Indeed.
Posted by: Eric in Boise | September 03, 2015 at 03:43 PM
"The State Dept. is corrupt."
"Ya think?"
Hah! I realize that sounded kinda silly. I just meant that all the way down...it is a mess over there.
The archiving people, the people responsible for setting up computers for new people at State, the computer security people, ....
Where were all those people & departments?
And, you know, there are tons of classes, annual tests, PC crap that fed. employees have to take & attend...did any of Hillary's crew have to do those things?
Did Huma take the LGBT sensitivity training?
Did Mills pass the racial sensitivity training?
Posted by: Janet | September 03, 2015 at 03:44 PM
glasater - from the Daily Caller a reminder:
LUN
Posted by: Frau Edith Steingehirn | September 03, 2015 at 03:45 PM
"Did Huma take the LGBT sensitivity training?"
I don't know about the GBT part, but I covered the L in personal training sessions with her.
Trust me, she is very sensitive.
Posted by: Hillary Clinton | September 03, 2015 at 03:49 PM
"Some Guy, my reading of the opinion is that if Judge Berman had concluded"
Of course, at that point he'd be restrained by precedent. Of course if my aunt had nuts...
Posted by: Some Guy | September 03, 2015 at 03:49 PM
Ha! TC. the cankles twisted while Huma takes a dive and foundation empties pockets pose might be a good name
Posted by: Peter | September 03, 2015 at 03:51 PM
"I do wonder if the gloating Pat fans, will think this is so wonderful if the appeal goes against them and Brady must sit out playoff games?"
There is no reason the Court of Appeals will lift a finger to resolve this in an expedited manner. IOW, it won't be ruled on anytime this season or the postseason.
I'm not certain the CA will even agree to hear the case because Berman used CA2 case law in his opinion.
Posted by: Some Guy | September 03, 2015 at 03:56 PM
Some Guy
You are back
What do you think of other comments wrt Brady decision
Posted by: maryrose | September 03, 2015 at 03:56 PM
Tammy Bruce was slattering everybody in the Kentucky marriage license dust up including the drama queen homos with visions of being a victim.
Posted by: Captain Hate on the iPad | September 03, 2015 at 03:58 PM
Still catching up, was there a specific comment maryrose?
Posted by: Some Guy | September 03, 2015 at 03:58 PM
So the Millis cop shooting yesterday was a shooting by the cop, who then crashed his car and set it on fire.
I like defending the police and this guy makes it harder.
Posted by: Jane | September 03, 2015 at 04:00 PM
You mean ex cop, he has been summarily fired and probably will face some criminal charges...
Posted by: GMax | September 03, 2015 at 04:04 PM
Jane: D'OH
Posted by: Dave (in MA) | September 03, 2015 at 04:13 PM
Maybe he crashed because he fell asleep while driving or was dicking around with his phone, and tried concocting a more heroic-sounding story.
Posted by: Dave (in MA) | September 03, 2015 at 04:17 PM
Some Guy, I'll bet the NFL bargains for "general awareness" justifying a penalty in the next CBA. In any event, I find it ironic that the Wells Report boxed in the NFL.
Now THAT's a yoga position, Peter!
Posted by: Thomas Collins | September 03, 2015 at 04:17 PM
Some Guy, I don't think CA-2 will summarily dismiss the NFL's appeal. But I agree that CA-2 is not going to adjust its winter schedule to accommodate the NFL Management Council. This is hardly a matter justifying expedited review. Of course, the NFL Management Council probably considers it comparable to US v. Nixon.
Posted by: Thomas Collins | September 03, 2015 at 04:20 PM
Comments by Iggy Jimmyk Porch and cecil
Posted by: maryrose | September 03, 2015 at 04:21 PM
Success of winning an appeal in CA-2 for civil cases = 7.5%
Posted by: Some Guy | September 03, 2015 at 04:22 PM
Virginia's Attn. General did the same thing - http://legalinsurrection.com/2014/01/virginia-ag-mark-herring-refuses-to-do-his-job-and-defend-state-law-on-marriage/
"Newly-elected Virginia AG Mark Herring announced he will be joining the plaintiffs in lawsuits challenging the state’s ban on gay marriage. So not only is he declining to defend Virginia’s gay marriage ban, which was passed with 57% of the vote (including Herring’s) in 2006, but he is arguing for the courts to strike it down as unconstitutional.
If the people of Virginia wanted to repeal the ban, the proper remedy would be to repeal the ban." ...
"AG Mark Herring is tasked with defending the law of Virginia in court. If Herring wanted to declare it unconstitutional, he should have tried to become a judge rather than running for AG." ...
Posted by: Janet | September 03, 2015 at 04:23 PM
TC
Some Guy
I am now cynical enough to believe if Pats are winning case will be held up
If Pats lose 4or5games at the beginning case will proceed
Posted by: maryrose | September 03, 2015 at 04:23 PM
Wildest scenario, maryrose: Pats and the Second Circuit NY Football Giants end up in Super Bowl for third time. Rumors arise that a decision is coming down late in the first week between the conference championship games and the Super Bowl. A true JOM threadbuster!
But if it's Browns vs. Pats in the AFC Championship Game, maryrose, wouldn't you want Brady to play so your team would have a chance to stop Tom's drive toward Super Bowl number five?
Posted by: Thomas Collins | September 03, 2015 at 04:28 PM
maryrose, I don't even understand Iggy's (or jimmy's) comment.
This was a civil and labor law case which the courts are the only possible venue. The government isn't sticking it's nose in, the parties sought remedy in court which happens all the time.
Posted by: Some Guy | September 03, 2015 at 04:32 PM