On Tuesday, New England Patriots quarterback Tom Brady will be under oath instead of under center. Brady and representatives from the NFLPA are meeting with NFL commissioner Roger Goodell at the NFL’s headquarters to discuss Brady’s suspension for his alleged role in Deflategate. This will be Brady’s opportunity to try to get his four game suspension reduced or, hopefully, completely vacated.
It is expected that Brady and the NFLPA will take the case to federal court if the NFL does not reduce his suspension. I believe (as do many NFL fans) that Brady’s suspension will be reduced to two games, but not vacated altogether. Goodell has gone down too far into the rabbit hole that is Deflategate to let Brady off the hook completely, but if Ray Rice can talk the commissioner into a reduced suspension, Brady should be able to get his suspension cut in half.
That being said, it’s laughable that Brady was suspended at all (let alone for four games) in the first place based on the complete joke that is the Ted Wells report and Tom Brady’s suspension should be vacated. The Wells report had more holes in it than a piece of Swiss cheese. To suspend Gisele’s husband because the Wells report claimed it had “established that there is substantial and credible evidence to conclude Brady was at least generally aware of the actions of the Patriots’ employees involved in the deflation of the footballs and that it was unlikely that their actions were done without his knowledge” is a joke of epic proportions. Wells will be present at the hearing and available to answer any questions Goodell or Brady’s camp may have, and believe me, there are questions that need to be answered.
On May 14, NLFPA general counsel Tom DePaso sent a four-page letter to the NFL, detailing key points of Brady’s appeal.
Two of the issues that Brady’s camp will reportedly bring up are points that need to be raised and discussed.
Brady’s counsel plans to argue that the penalties Brady received are “grossly inconsistent” when compared with the NFL’s discipline in the past for similar alleged conduct. Brady’s camp will also highlight how the Wells report “grasps at dubious, contradictory and mischaracterized circumstantial evidence” and the report is therefore a “legally inadequate basis upon which to impose unprecedented discipline.”
It is necessary that Brady’s counsel raise these two issues in Tuesday’s meeting. Goodell and the NFL have been wildly inconsistent when it comes to doling out punishment and their handling of Deflategate was no different. Brady’s camp is also correct to argue that the Wells Report is inadequate, especially when used to impose unprecedented discipline.
Many people are saying that Brady must answer questions, (and maybe he does have to), but Goodell and the NFL must answer questions too, even if the appeal won’t lead to a full exoneration of Brady, even though it should.
Main Photo:
