Last Thursday, the home of the American Revolution once again celebrated freedom from tyranny, for their savior, Tom Brady, was released from his four game suspension and allowed to pursue life, liberty, and his fifth championship ring. Brady would not be free, however, if it wasn’t for Justice Richard Berman and his recognition of some major flaws in the decision issued by Roger Goodell.
Surely, this will result in the rejoice of many loyal members of Pats nation. For those who want fully comprehend the logic behind this verdict though, it is first important to understand the events that got us to this point.
After the incident at the AFC Championship Game against the Indianapolis Colts, Brady was investigated by Ted Wells, a private investigator. Wells interviewed Brady, as well as Jim McNally and John Jastremski, equipment personnel who were working that game. Based on these interviews, the investigator constructed the now infamous “Wells Report,” which claims that McNally did release air from the game balls, and that “it is more probable than not that Brady was at least generally aware” of the deflation.
It was based on this report that Brady was suspended for four games. The New England Patriots also were fined 1 mil. And lost two draft picks. Brady, with the backing of the NFL Players Association, appealed the four game suspension, but the appeal was to be heard by Commissioner Goodell under the CBA agreement the NFL lobbied for several years ago.
Brady and the NFLPA asked Goodell to recuse himself as arpitrator, since they planned to call Goodell to the stand. This motion was denied by the commissioner however, and Goodell upheld the four game suspension. Goodell argued that Brady “knew about, approved of, consented to, and provided inducements and rewards in support of a scheme by which, with Mr. Jastremski’s support, Mr. McNally tampered with the game balls.”
Perhaps the most prominent aspect of this case that tipped the scales in Brady’s favor was the distinction between the Wells Report and Goodell’s decision. Goodell assigned much more blame to Brady than Wells’ claim of the quarterback being “generally aware”. Justice Berman found that Brady’s awareness was not grounds to warrant a four game suspension, because Brady did not know that being “aware” of locker room misconduct was prohibited. Berman wrote, “No NFL policy or precedent notifies players that they may be disciplined for general awareness of misconduct by others.”
Justice Berman also noted that it was not made clear which part of the four game suspension was for deflating footballs, and which part was for failure to cooperate. Brady destroyed his phone before his interview with Wells, but he had his lawyer provide records relevant to the case.
The other big part of Berman’s decision was the NFL policy that Brady was accused of violating; engaging in conduct detrimental to the integrity of the game. Berman noted that other cases where players were accused of conduct detrimental (Adrian Peterson and Ray Rice namely), they were accused of such after they were found in violation of the domestic abuse policy. Conduct similar to deflating a football, or equipment violations, fall under the Player Policies, which usually result in a fine. Berman brought up the Brett Farve picture scandal, in which Farve was only fined under the Player Policies.
The Patriots begin their search for ring number five Thursday night against the Steelers. Goodell said he would not attend.
