Brady will be playing week one.

I see a request for change of venue coming...

 

They cant get a change of venue, it's about the process used to determine the penalty, and under the CBA the process is in accordance with the articles of the CBA, it's too late now to try and change the contract agreement to fit bradys whiney fit......

 

well, i'll just take my deflated balls and go home. does someone have a phone i can borrow to call home?

 

Oh shoot, I would loan you mine but I just smashed it with a sledgehammer yesterday. I do that every time I'm getting ready to get a new phone.

 

I haven't followed this case since the very early days so I don't know most of the details. I'll say this though, I would never hand over my phone unless compelled to by a court. I don't care what I did at work, my boss will never get his hands on my cell phone. That's my personal, private information and nobody else is entitled to view it under any circumstances. I don't blame Brady for refusing to hand over his phone, if that is in fact what even happened.

 

The CBA stats you candidly COOPERATE with any on going investigation. Brady was one of the key components to getting the deal done and now doesn't like it because it is being used against him.

 

naked pictures

 

ball boys.

 

Minnesota has deferred the case to New York.

 

No not good at all. Like most actual lawyers have said the CBA gives goodell total power on issues like these and courts don't like going against CBAs unless human rights have been violated because what is the point of a CBA if you can just challenge it in court. I fully expect the courts to hold up the 4 games because really their hands are tied.

 

Am I the only one who is surprised we haven't heard Clark rub it in every ones face that the Steelers warned them of this in the CBA and everyone wrote it off as the Steelers hated Goodell and were just tired of getting fined.

 

Did you throw up a little when you typed that?

 

This move likely seals Brady's fate. But there are two interesting arguments the NFLPA is going to make (according to Chris Mortensen):

1. Brady was never told of consequences of not surrendering texts. Precedence has been set on this with the Peterson case.
2. Lack of cooperation is not a grounds for punishment. Precedence was set on this with Vilma.

An injunction is till possible.

But here's my irritation, now: where was the NFLPA and its "You're not fair, Roger!" BS when Riethlisberger was suspended for SIX FRIGGIN' GAMES over a mere accusation that did not result in any charges being filed???

It's interesting that Ben was never charged with a crime and got suspended. Pats lineman Nick Kaczur got busted with felony possession of a narcotic and got...nothing.

 

I was thinking the same thing all week! Clark nailed this one and now all these teams that followed the leader with Brady and such are having to try and go to court. What was so hard about wanting a neutral arbitrator and a defined set of punishments?

EDIT!: He is talking on Twitter about it though. Not gloating as far as I can see, but Pats fans were trying to argue with him....

https://twitter.com/realrclark25

I think you're mashing things up a bit here. I'd have to go back and look at it, but I think Ben told them to back down on it.

 

The thing about Ben's suspension is that it was in the early days of the Goodell gestapo routine. At that time the Rog was just throwing piles of crap at the wall and seeing what would stick and how much he could get away with. He was trying to show the league how all powerful he could be. James Harrison also felt the brunt of it for getting flagged and fined every other week....for tackling the QB.

 

What are the odd's of Brandy getting a injuction,