The court clearly did not exonerate Brady. In fact the court did not address whether or not Brady was responsible for or aware of the deflated balls. The court-as WV wrote-was concerned more with procedural due process. The court relied upon some NLPA disciplinary cases that had been decided before and based on the constitutional requirement of due process found in favor of Brady. The rational for the decision is found on pages 19, 20 of the opinion:

It is the “law of the shop” to provide professional football players with advanced notice
as to what is prohibited conduct and potential discipline…Any discipline program requires
the people understand what results will occur if they breach established rules.

Apparently because the NFL-different than having a substance abuse policy in place-did not have a policy relating to taking air out of footballs Brady was denied due process because he had no notice of potential consequences (LOL). Of course the NFL’s response on appeal will be “who knew”…And I think they have a good reason to appeal the decision. The court was also concerned over the fact that the arbitrator’s ruling did not specify how much of the suspension was related to deflating balls, destroying evidence, and lack of cooperation. Apparently the NFL was required to designate one game for this, two games for that, and one game for this. (LOL) Finally the court was critical of the NFL for not turning over some evidence and not allowing its staff to be deposed.

I believe the NFL’s appeal will address the inherent authority the commissioner has in protecting the integrity of the game along with whatever limitations there are pursuant to the CBA. I think they win on the sound reasoning that they cannot be expected to have advance knowledge of all types of conduct (deflating footballs) that constitutes a detriment to the integrity of the game and proscribe a policy dealing with it including notice of possible discipline. Otherwise a Brady could offer the following defense: I had no idea that I could be suspended for taking air out of a football. Maybe being warned but suspended 4 games and losing a bunch of dough-no way!

I’m not a Chomsky fan but I have to agree with him here. We are becoming a nation of people who distrust education and won’t take the time and effort to educate themselves. We distrust those that are more intelligent or are perceived to be. We want simplistic answers that satisfy our basic instincts. We distrust those that are different than us and even dislike them. We adore sloganism and shy from independence and find comfort in group think. We are fearful of change. We want and “need” to believe in the divine nature of our nation. We boast because we need someone to hear how good we are.

A witches brew.

I remember watching Warner in his first regular season game. I can’t recall who they were playing but I was impressed with his ability to drive the team and his seemingly deadly accuracy and no mistakes. I saw the game in a sport’s bar in Sacramento and said to fan next to me: Well this guy might not be so bad after all.

On Bradford: I saw only the highlights last night but wow did he look good. He threw zingers and deadly accurate. 10 for 10 and 3 TDs. I hope he remains healthy.

wv wrote:

The documents, dating back to 2005, stem from a civil lawsuit filed by Andrea Constand — one of the dozens of women who have publicly accused the comedian of sexual assault.

Yeah-I just read that today in the paper. The only explanation I can come up with is that an intent to sexually assault a victim is not the same as actually assaulting her. So if there was no proof of the actual assault then in his lawyer’s mind why lie about the purchase? Obviously neither the lawyer nor Cosby had any idea of what might be coming 10 years later.

Depends on the Civil action. His admission may have no relevance at all with the claims so at the time he may have believed his honesty was no harm no foul. However now…

But to give a decent answer one needs a copy of the deposition so as to view the context.

bnw wrote:

I might be wrong but I’ve always thought the present flag-the one subject to controversy-had little to do with heritage or state rights but was placed in governmental offices (So Carolina State Capitol) in 1962 as a direct response to federal civil rights legislation and anti segregation laws. That’s not heritage-unless one considers race discrimination heritage. There is a lot of good tradition and values that are part of the south but this particular flag does not represent that. It’s about slavery and segregation -period. Indeed when the south seceded from the Union they had several flags none of which was the one we know today.

I knew that. The flag was Lee’s army flag in northern Virginia. But it was not used in governmental buildings until it was used as a response to the Civil Rights Act-in 1962-at least that’s what I recall.

• This reply was modified 8 years, 10 months ago by waterfield.

I might be wrong but I’ve always thought the present flag-the one subject to controversy-had little to do with heritage or state rights but was placed in governmental offices (So Carolina State Capitol) in 1962 as a direct response to federal civil rights legislation and anti segregation laws. That’s not heritage-unless one considers race discrimination heritage. There is a lot of good tradition and values that are part of the south but this particular flag does not represent that. It’s about slavery and segregation -period. Indeed when the south seceded from the Union they had several flags none of which was the one we know today.

• This reply was modified 8 years, 10 months ago by waterfield.
• This reply was modified 8 years, 10 months ago by waterfield.

Just so many WV. One that stands out is because it was one of my first memories. 1949 in the rain-Coliseum-Rams playing the Eagles for the NFL Championship. Pouring, pouring rain. Mom was afraid I would die soaking wet. So she kept giving me a flask with bourbon-I think Jim Beam-so I would stay warm. On the Eagle side of the Coliseum. Rams could not do anything in the mud but the Eagles HOF fullback Steve Van Buren could. Eagles 14-Rams 0.

Another: was at the 51 NFL Championship game against the Browns in the Coliseum. Van Brocklin to Fears -71 yards for winning TD. We (mom and I again) were on the 20 yd line Ram side right where Van Brocklin let the pass go.

Lucky enough to be at most if not all the significant Ram games at the Coliseum when they were there including the Tony Guillory blocked punt and Gabriel to Casey in the corner!

Was there when Marchetti tore off Les Richter’s helmet and beat him over the head with it. Directly in front of where I was sitting. Terrible scene.

Lots more including the initial game played in St. Louis at Edward Jones. The real story there is staying in a bed and breakfast in East St. Louis-that’s right East St. Louis if you catch my drift.

Thinking of you and your family. She must have been surrounded by lots of love.

Not sure what you mean by an “impersonal nanny state”-at least in the context of my post.

I think every human being should wright a novel. We would then really learn about human values and “personalities”.

W/ these kids? Only to the extent the former is an excuse for the latter. I suppose someone might use Lorenz’s “butterfly effect” and connect the two.

Nobody told you ? I think this was nominated for several academy awards including Best Picture. I loved the quirkyness of the film. Especially the chase in the snow. One of those old time Hollywood movies where you can go with your family and just have an enjoyable evening.

I’m assuming “favorite” means which ones I enjoyed the most in terms of ranking:

The Imitation Game
The Theory of Everything
Grand Budapest Hotel (just fun)
Wild
American Sniper (although I suppose it’s not an “enjoyable” movie-walked away from it in silence)
Birdman (another not “enjoyable” movie-dark, lonely, but well done.

However, keep in mind WV-I actually enjoy movies on the Hallmark channel -so there.

I haven’t seen Whiplash, Foxcatcher, or Still Alice although I hear they are really great. I’m not into dark movies-I was forced to see Birdman and while it was a great film it’s not my type of movie. But I have a feeling it will garner a whole lot of Oscars. I also saw Sniper only because some friends wanted to see it with us and have dinner. But it was a very well done film-notwithstanding the political debate. Bring back the musicals ala “Chicago”.

I have to say this: It seems to me that there are more really done well movies out there now than ever before. Of course there are the crashing cars and explosion movies for young adults that make tons of dough for the studios.

• This reply was modified 9 years, 2 months ago by waterfield.

“What if you put his torment up against the fact that the war had no justification. Looks different doesn;t it. Which is probably why they didn’t tell THAT story”

They didn’t need to tell THAT story. Everyone I know understands the motives for the invasion was a pretext but still believe THIS discussion is silly.