"I believe Goodell railroaded Tom Brady" UPDATE: Transcripts Released - NFL, RAVENS & COLTS EXPOSED

[SAJ!!]

giants fans who say this shyt ether themselves so hard. so you beat a team that cheated? as in, the team that, under this hypothetical, should not have even been in the super bowl, and in their place should have been the chargers/ravens, who could have just as easily beaten the giants in both years, thus leaving the giants with 0 super bowls since the first Bush administration?


That just casts further doubt onto the Giants' two trophies from that timeframe, which is why it's so much more embarrassing for all giants fans who continue echoing this sentiment just like yours

If that was the case, the 2005 Steelers shouldn't have won their Super Bowl.

Both the Giants and the Steelers showed that it doesn't matter what kind of record you have, anybody can win a championship on any given Sunday.

Anybody.

 

[Brady-Carter]

@BarNone Can you explain this to me.



A couple legal eagles on Pats forums have tried. Like this..

IANAL, but I have studied estoppel (since I once worked a field where the concept mattered).

Estoppel is a principle that limits the ability to file cases. Collateral estoppel is specifically the idea that you can't relitigate an issue that has already been decided. As others have noted, in this specific case, it means that because the NFL has already litigated the issue of notices with the NFLPA (and lost), it may not be possible for them to re-litigate it, although I believe that the NFL could overcome this by arguing that this is somehow fundamentally different.

It also applies here on the grounds that if someone in an official capacity makes a statement on which you rely, you can hold them responsible for it. For example, if an insurance agent claims that a policy covers X, when in fact it doesn't, the insurance company can be held responsible if X happens. Hmmm, I wonder where that happened here.

Apparently it is just Brady's lawyers adding a bit of creativity on top of all their other arguments. But why the Wow?

 

[Brady-Carter]

 

[No1]

@BarNone Can you explain this to me.



A couple legal eagles on Pats forums have tried. Like this..



Apparently it is just Brady's lawyers adding a bit of creativity on top of all their other arguments. But why the Wow?

Wait, what's happening with Brady's attorneys? I don't know what I'm responding to. For some reason I don't always see things embedded on here when I'm using chrome. It's really annoying.

 

[Brady-Carter]

Wait, what's happening with Brady's attorneys? I don't know what I'm responding to. For some reason I don't always see things embedded on here when I'm using chrome. It's really annoying.

NFL and NFLPA just filed more briefs to the Federal court. This dude is tweeting it all out.

Daniel Wallach (@WALLACHLEGAL) on Twitter

My question is about this tweet.

Brady special: NFL is "collaterally estopped" from contesting notice arguments raised by NFLPA by virtue of Adrian Peterson decision. Wow!

I don't get the wow. In regards to "collaterally estopped"

EDIT: I think I got it. Kessler is just showing off and twisting the knife.

Basically says the NFL cannot make any counterarguments to the "no notice" argument of the NFLPA because of the Adrian Peterson ruling on same notice issue.

A few people here explained it well. Its just a legal principle that you can't relitigate the same issue between the same parties. The NFL lost the notice issue in previous cases and thus may be estopped from relitigating.

A brilliant argument by Kessler - just have to see if Berman agrees.

It is minor compared to the rest of the brief apparently.

 

[Brady-Carter]

NFL pretty much admits wells was not Independent.

 

[No1]

NFL and NFLPA just filed more briefs to the Federal court. This dude is tweeting it all out.

Daniel Wallach (@WALLACHLEGAL) on Twitter

My question is about this tweet.



I don't get the wow. In regards to "collaterally estopped"

EDIT: I think I got it. Kessler is just showing off and twisting the knife.





It is minor compared to the rest of the brief apparently.

It is a good argument though. So basically, once you have an issue that is decided in a prior proceeding, the same two parties cannot then re-litigate that same issue. Basically, Kessler is saying that the type of notice the NFL is required to give to a member of the NFLPA was already decided in the Adrian Peterson case so the NFL is barred from arguing what should or should not constitute proper notice. That issue was already decided. Given that decision, the NFLPA would then apply the rule derived from the previous case and say that the NFL failed to give Tom Brady notice under the prevailing standards of the CBA.

 

[Brady-Carter]

I know it will never happen b/c the NFL would invoke attorney client privilege. But good lawd it would it be crazy if Wells notes and Emails where made public. shyt the Way Goodell an the league have straight up lied about things, that we would have never known if Brady's testimony was not made public. I can only imagine what the NFL hid in regards to the Wells report. Jesus, Jeff Pash Edited the Wells report for christ sakes..

 

[No1]

I know it will never happen b/c the NFL would invoke attorney client privilege. But good lawd it would it be crazy if Wells notes and Emails where made public. shyt the Way Goodell an the league have straight up lied about things, that we would have never known if Brady's testimony was not made public. I can only imagine what the NFL hid in regards to the Wells report. Jesus, Jeff Pash Edited the Wells report for christ sakes..

Only Pats fans know these things. No one else is as invested.

 

[Maluma]

Only Pats fans know these things. No one else is as invested.

because they're extremely uncomfortable (and possibly triggered) with the idea that the pats could be so good the last 15 years while not even cheating

 

[GOATpernick]

Pats fans when Garoppolo goes 4-0

 

[Maluma]

Pats fans when Garoppolo goes 4-0

only for Brady to finish off the season with 15 straight wins?


unless they play the giants in february again. then 14-1

 

[cook]

Sohh is it safe to say the tide has now turned?

 

[Da King]

Sohh is it safe to say the tide has now turned?

 

[cook]

tried tell yall this was gonna happen :mannybeli: