Following NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell's decision yesterday to uphold Patriots QB Tom Brady's four-game suspension, the NFLPA intended to file a federal appeal in Minnesota, where U.S. District Judge David Doty "has historically ruled in favor of players in labor cases against the NFL," according to a source cited by Lorenzo Reyes of USA TODAY. Another source said that the union also "plans to ask the court to either rule before the Patriots' Sept. 10 opener or grant an injunction that lets Brady play until it does." However, the NFL "took a clever step in this legal battle" by having its management council preemptively file a request yesterday for a U.S. District Court in Manhattan to "confirm the NFL’s decision to uphold Brady’s suspension." It is a tactic "often used in high-stakes litigation when an organization anticipates an adversary will sue to prevent the case from being heard in an unfavorable venue." Former NFL Counsel for Operations & Litigation Jodi Balsam said, "Courts are very protective of their jurisdiction." Reyes notes for the NFLPA to "get its wish, it needs to persuade the judge in New York to pass a motion to hold the lawsuit in abeyance in favor of proceeding in Minnesota." But Balsam added, "Courts are very reluctant to do that. ... I don’t think the Manhattan court is going to defer" (USA TODAY, 7/29).
JUDGEMENT DAY: In Boston, Ron Borges writes the league’s "pre-emptive strike indicates how high the stakes have become and Brady should realize what that means." It means the NFL will "bury him if they can." The "face of the league is always trumped by saving face, which is now what this is all about" (BOSTON HERALD, 7/29). Also in Boston, Ben Volin reports Brady "likely will face an uphill battle to win his lawsuit, which will focus on flaws in the NFL’s discipline and appeals processes." Federal courts "are often loathe to step in and handle matters already decided by arbitrators." But Brady and the NFLPA might as well "dive in headfirst and go for it," because they "have nothing to lose" (BOSTON GLOBE, 7/29). ESPN's Tim Hasselbeck noted Brady has "gone down a road in terms of trying to clear his name" and has "dug a pretty big hole" for himself. Hasselbeck: "I don't know that turning back is an option for him now" ("NFL Live," ESPN, 7/28). ESPN.com's Lester Munson wrote Brady "will not succeed" in federal court. His effort to stop the suspension "is doomed" for two reasons. Federal judges are "reluctant to reconsider the rulings of arbitrators," and Goodell came up with a decision on Brady "that is brilliantly reasoned, meticulously detailed, and well-written." Goodell's "recitation of the evidence of the tampering with game balls is powerful, and his description of Brady's attempt at a cover-up is persuasive" (ESPN.com, 7/28). TSN.ca's Eric Macramalla wrote under the header, "Legal Look: Brady Faces Uphill Battle" (TSN.ca, 7/28). SI.com's Michael McCann wrote under the header, "Why Goodell Ruled Against Brady In Deflategate, And Brady's Next Steps" (SI.com, 7/28).
HARD EVIDENCE YET TO BE SEEN: In N.Y., Mike Lupica writes there is still "no more hard evidence against Brady, which means evidence that will stand up in a real court rather than Goodell’s." Pittsburgh-based sports attorney Jay Reisinger: "At the end of the day, there is still zero credible evidence that Brady had a hand in deflating those footballs. ... There is still no direct witness and no electronic evidence.” Reisinger believes that what may "ultimately sink this discipline against Brady" is that Goodell "was the one acting" as judge, jury and executioner. Reisinger: "You keep coming back to that. The person who imposed the discipline is the one who heard this thing, which I believe was a tremendous mistake on his part" (N.Y. DAILY NEWS, 7/29). In Chicago, David Haugh writes after losing yesterday's battle, Brady "showed no signs of relinquishing New England's war with Goodell" (CHICAGO TRIBUNE, 7/29). In N.Y., Gary Myers writes Goodell's "reputation and Brady's legacy" are at stake in this legal battle. Myers: "May the best lawyer win" (N.Y. DAILY NEWS, 7/29).
NO END IN SIGHT: The WALL STREET JOURNAL's Jason Gay writes it is "amazing that this saga is still not over." Gay: "Phones come and go, but football is the American obsession, and Deflategate never sleeps" (WALL STREET JOURNAL, 7/29). In Chicago, Mike Imrem writes, "If we're lucky, these deflategate follies will continue for a while longer. Really, it has been so amusing to this point. ... Never has so little hot air caused such a comical commotion the way deflategate has" (Chicago DAILY HERALD, 7/29). Also in Chicago, Rick Telander writes under the header, "Deflategate, Starring Tom Brady And Roger Goodell, Is Sheer Absurdity" (CHICAGO SUN-TIMES, 7/29). In Toronto, John Kryk notes it "could take months just to determine which U.S. federal court would hear the union’s appeal," and perhaps "years to reach a final verdict." Kryk: "Appealing? Not very" (TORONTO SUN, 7/29).
