Quote:
Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop
IIRC, at the end of the decision, the judge specifically points out that he did not reach the question of whether there was evidence that Brady had done what the NFL said he had done.
|
Yes. Exactly what I said.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop
But your characterization of the issues in the decision in the last two sentences above is not right. The judge did not find that the giving Goodell the power he had was necessarily a problem. Goodell misused that power specifically in this case, by denying Brady due process -- essentially, notice and a hearing -- in multiple ways.
|
I started to post a long response on the opinion, but I just don't fucking care. In any case, the judge was not tasked with determining whether Brady cheated or not, made no such decision on whether he did, and therefore the only vindication Brady has is based on Goodell's actions after the fucking fact, not on what he is alleged to have done.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop
I think it's hard to read the decision and escape the conclusion that the judge factually disagreed with Goodell's conclusions, especially because he details how the NFL changed the way it characterized what Brady did over time, without any new evidence.
|
Ha ha ha. No it's not. It's hard for a Patriots fan to come to any conclusion other than they each want to take Brady in their mouth.
TM
