Obnoxious Football Trash Talk Thread

[GenIke]

 

[bob1852]

You cant honestly believe Brady didn't know how his balls were handled/set up.

Cape certainly does, because they're in his mouth 24/7.

 

[Roadliner]

Sadly I'm thinking the Pack has a good chance at taking it this year. I will be surrounded by so much green and Yellow celebration... ugh lol:cross:

 

[fosaisu]

The DUI, I don't know what is said about that in the ruling BUT weed is against the rules and has been for a very long time. So it is ok to break this rule because it is just weed?

You missed my point. I'd put Hernandez's murder in the same category with the weed and DUI. They're all misdeeds/crimes/whatever committed by players off-field that have zero direct impact on the game. The NFL chooses to punish for off-field behavior (above and beyond the punishments already handed down by society), but there's no reason those punishments need to correlate with punishments for misbehavior that impacts the game directly (PEDs, Bountygate, Deflategate, etc.)

It's silly to say "Player X got a four game suspension for beating his kid, Brady's infraction was way less severe." Of course it was. Beating your wife or kid is objectively worse than even the worst forms of cheating, and football is just a game after all. But that doesn't mean that the NFL doesn't have a special interest in protecting the integrity of the game rules. So it doesn't seem strange to me that the DUI/weed guy gets a lighter punishment from the National Football League than the guy that cheated at football.

 

[HoppyDaze]

Weed is against the rules for player conduct, yes, but affects the integrity of the player,

what?

 

[HoppyDaze]

Sadly I'm thinking the Pack has a good chance at taking it this year. I will be surrounded by so much green and Yellow celebration... ugh lol:cross:

Better get home field because you won't win in Seattle...ever.

 

[HoppyDaze]

Cape certainly does, because they're in his mouth 24/7.

real mature AZ

 

[Roadliner]

what?

I'm saying what fosaisu said basically.. much less eloquently. The weed/dui comparisons are talking about player integrity.. they do something off the field that does not affect the game itself.

 

[bluemoose]

This thing will drag on. Ultimately the suspension will be upheld. Brady will miss the first 4 games of the season. Course he will be 46 by then, and have a ring for every finger of both hands, but you will have your justice.

 

[fosaisu]

This thing will drag on. Ultimately the suspension will be upheld. Brady will miss the first 4 games of the season. Course he will be 46 by then, and have a ring for every finger of both hands, but you will have your justice.

It would be interesting if they stay Brady's suspension pending a court appeal and then he misses game in mid/late this season instead when it's upheld. I imagine the Pats would not be in love with that option. Either way, we'll all get to keep talking about deflategate instead of whatever the Pats have going on this season.

 

[captianoats]

For those of you whining saying this shouldn't be about the breaking of the phone, it should be about balls, I want you to think about this....

The collective bargaining agreement that Brady signed says that he will cooperate fully with the investigation. Breaking the phone is a direct violation of that in my opinion. So he did both, cheat in a way that directly affects the game, and something against the union rules.

 

[jbaysurfer]

^ Well, he violated the contract, to put a finer point on it. He broke his employment agreement....and I fully agree.

 

[bluemoose]

For those of you whining saying this shouldn't be about the breaking of the phone, it should be about balls, I want you to think about this....

The collective bargaining agreement that Brady signed says that he will cooperate fully with the investigation. Breaking the phone is a direct violation of that in my opinion. So he did both, cheat in a way that directly affects the game, and something against the union rules.

Your opinion is dumb.

 

[Cape Brewing]

The collective bargaining agreement that Brady signed says that he will cooperate fully with the investigation.

Really? Show me that language.

 

[Darwin18]

It would be interesting if they stay Brady's suspension pending a court appeal and then he misses game in mid/late this season instead when it's upheld. I imagine the Pats would not be in love with that option. Either way, we'll all get to keep talking about deflategate instead of whatever the Pats have going on this season.

What is this court that you are speaking of? Deflate gate isn't a legal investigation and it doesn't involve the legal system. Goodell can and will make up the rules if he wants to, and there's not very much anyone can do.

 

[Roadliner]

What is this court that you are speaking of? Deflate gate isn't a legal investigation and it doesn't involve the legal system. Goodell can and will make up the rules if he wants to, and there's not very much anyone can do.

His lawyers are planning or at least reportedly planning to sue the NFL over the ruling.

 

[h22lude]

For those of you whining saying this shouldn't be about the breaking of the phone, it should be about balls, I want you to think about this....

The collective bargaining agreement that Brady signed says that he will cooperate fully with the investigation. Breaking the phone is a direct violation of that in my opinion. So he did both, cheat in a way that directly affects the game, and something against the union rules.

If that is a clause in his agreement, then fine him for that. The punishment for that and the actual appeal should be separate. There are two issues here. The first one is obviously whether or not he purposely had balls deflated under 12.5psi. The second is not cooperating with the investigation. Him not cooperating with the investigation should have nothing to do with the appeal. Goodell should hear the facts about the actual deflating of the football and make a ruling on that. Then, if that agreement does exist, make a ruling on not cooperating. The Chargers were fined $20k for not giving up towels. So fine him $20k for not giving up his phone.

His lawyers are planning or at least reportedly planning to sue the NFL over the ruling.

What are the rules on that? I believe if a player appeals a punishment and would have to serve a suspension right away, they actually don't serve the suspension until the appeal is over. Is it the same with going to court? Or did I just make that whole thing up lol

 

[HoppyDaze]

really? Show me that language.

english

 

[captianoats]

If that is a clause in his agreement, then fine him for that. The punishment for that and the actual appeal should be separate.

Fine, he gets two games for flattening his balls and two games for being a moron and breaking his phone. Is that separate enough?

 

[HoppyDaze]

Patriots could sign unknown QB Dom Grady

 

[Roadliner]

What are the rules on that? I believe if a player appeals a punishment and would have to serve a suspension right away, they actually don't serve the suspension until the appeal is over. Is it the same with going to court? Or did I just make that whole thing up lol

The court could issue an injunction which would stop the punishment from being able to be enacted until after their ruling.

The real problem with that being an actually valid option is Article 46 of the Collective Bargaining Agreement between the NFL and the NFLPA, which confirms the Commissioner’s authority to impose discipline for conduct by a player that is ‘detrimental to the integrity of, or public confidence in, the game of professional football

Basically Brady signed a form that says the commissioner's decision is final and should be upheld. So it's hard to argue that he agreed with it then, but doesn't now.

 

[h22lude]

The court could issue an injunction which would stop the punishment from being able to be enacted until after their ruling.

The real problem with that being an actually valid option is Article 46 of the Collective Bargaining Agreement between the NFL and the NFLPA, which confirms the Commissioner’s authority to impose discipline for conduct by a player that is ‘detrimental to the integrity of, or public confidence in, the game of professional football

Basically Brady signed a form that says the commissioner's decision is final and should be upheld. So it's hard to argue that he agreed with it then, but doesn't now.

I may have read an old CBA but I don't take Article 46 to me the commissioner's say is final. To me it seems like it is stating the order in which things happen and the timeline that must follow. It also doesn't mention anything about what happens if it goes through appeal and into court. I'm sure at the end of the day Goodell has the power to do what he wants.

On a side note, the CBA has some interesting stuff in it. They get $113 a day for meals on traveling days...because the millions they get paid isn't enough. They also get paid almost $200k if your team wins the 3 playoff games and the SB.

EDIT: It looks like the NFLPA does plan to file and has asked the court to make a decision before the first game or to grant an injunction to let him play until a decision is made.

 

[PackerfaninSanDiego]

they really need to get this done by Aug 29th, so I can decide if Brady is going to be my back up qb for Rodgers.

 

[h22lude]

they really need to get this done by Aug 29th, so I can decide if Brady is going to be my back up qb for Rodgers.

Seeing as their bye week is week 7, I think you are safe in getting Brady as your back up. If nothing else, it stops someone else from getting him. Then you can trade him after week 7.

 

[captianoats]

Really? Show me that language.

I had a copy of it saved on my phone, but alas it broke right after you asked. But trust me, it's all there and it all says I'm right c

 

[TheDudeLebowski]

they really need to get this done by Aug 29th, so I can decide if Brady is going to be my back up qb for Rodgers.

Bad decision. Rodgers is a backup.

http://seattle.cbslocal.com/2015/06/25/report-wilsons-contract-demands-top-aaron-rodgers-deal/

 

[Roadliner]

I may have read an old CBA but I don't take Article 46 to me the commissioner's say is final. To me it seems like it is stating the order in which things happen and the timeline that must follow. It also doesn't mention anything about what happens if it goes through appeal and into court. I'm sure at the end of the day Goodell has the power to do what he wants.

On a side note, the CBA has some interesting stuff in it. They get $113 a day for meals on traveling days...because the millions they get paid isn't enough. They also get paid almost $200k if your team wins the 3 playoff games and the SB.

EDIT: It looks like the NFLPA does plan to file and has asked the court to make a decision before the first game or to grant an injunction to let him play until a decision is made.

(d) Decision. As soon as practicable following the conclusion of the
hear-ing, the hearing officer will render a written decision which will
constitute full, final and complete disposition of the dispute and will be
binding upon the player(s), Club(s) and the parties to this Agreement with
respect to that dispute. Any discipline imposed pur-suant to Section 1(b)
may only be affirmed, reduced, or vacated by the hearing officer, and may
not be increased.

sub section d of Article 46. The hearing offer being Goodell on this one of course. Just how I'm reading it, and I'm no lawyer, but the hearing officer has given his decision, and it is binding. Only he would be able to change said ruling as per the signed agreement, no?

 

[h22lude]

(d) Decision. As soon as practicable following the conclusion of the
hear-ing, the hearing officer will render a written decision which will
constitute full, final and complete disposition of the dispute and will be
binding upon the player(s), Club(s) and the parties to this Agreement with
respect to that dispute. Any discipline imposed pur-suant to Section 1(b)
may only be affirmed, reduced, or vacated by the hearing officer, and may
not be increased.

sub section d of Article 46. The hearing offer being Goodell on this one of course. Just how I'm reading it, and I'm no lawyer, but the hearing officer has given his decision, and it is binding. Only he would be able to change said ruling as per the signed agreement, no?

Interesting take on it. I see what you mean. I took that as the hearing officer can only reduce or remove the penalty but not increase it. Your reading it as only the hearing officer can change the sentence and no one else.

 

[Roadliner]

lol gotta love interpretation, huh?

 

[ComcastWineRookie]

tom brady set the record straight