Can you show me these suspension rules and fine structure? Cuz judges don't throw out suspensions for being arbitrary when they are in writing and are set policy. I agree that one would assume it should be detailed out but it keep biting Rog on the ass because he wants to keep the decision making fluid and under his control.
Simple fact is that no matter how u slice it, Rog has been screwing the pooch and you simply don't have evidence destroyed unless there is something very damning in it. If there is not then you just created a world of mistrust around you. And now it is coming out that he lied about the amount of evidence, the duration, and pretty much everything else.
And to the largest fines in NFL history, the cheating was unprecedented as well. Tell the fans and other teams that those fines are commensurate with what has been taken from them. They are not.
I think you can look up the CBA online. This isn't a big secret though Stu, it's been this way for awhile, many years. Each "crime" or whatever has specific penalties for first time, second time and so on. That's why the second time and third time the penalties get harsh and players can even get kicked out of the league, like Blackmon and Josh Gordon did recently did after several failed tests/issues. That's to ensure that there is equal, or close to it, treatment for all of the players.
In the Rice case Goodell had always stuck to the "first time" two game suspension that he had ALWAYS used and gave Rice 2 games. Then the video surfaced and the outcry from the public was so bad because they could SEE it, where there was no video of any other guys punching their lady in the face, so no major outrage. Hypocritical yes but its' true, the video changed things and Goodell responded with a longer suspension. It was overturned in court. It would be like you getting caught for a misdemeanor like shoplifting or something and getting a year in jail. In that instance the judge isn't allowed by law to assign that stiff of a penalty and so it would appealed and overturned.
In Brady's case there IS NO punishment for deflating balls, so it's arbitrary to begin with whether the commissioner CAN suspend him. You can bet it'll be an addendum to the CBA pretty soon though. That and without any direct evidence no judge in the world is going to say "yup, four games it is". It was a really simple open and shut case. There was no other decision for the judge and his opinion on football air pressure, the Patriots, Kraft or Goodell doesn't matter. The law is the law.
Just like the CBA is the CBA. If the NFL agrees to suspend a player for 4 games for their second failed drug test (I think the first time they get a pass) he cannot give them 6 games or 8 games.
As far as Goodell destroying evidence, hell yes he did it as fast as he could. And
not IMO as a favor to the Patriots or Kraft because by then he was likely pissed as hell that they did it after being told to stop, then getting a memo to stop. He was protecting the NFL. Imagine if that shit leaked out!!! Wow there would be hell to pay so he did the smartest thing. I would have done the same I think. I don't know if you recall what happened with the press conference..........essentially part of the deal was that Belichik was going to admit that he was wrong to ignore the memo and apologize for taping signals. Instead he got up to the podium, admitted nothing and claimed he just misunderstood the memo. This is AFTER he met with Goodell and had said he would admit to it publicly. Supposedly Goodell was livid. And that's led to a frosty relationship between he and the Patriots/Kraft. Which is why I think it's funny that people think he shows favoritism, when he just stepped out of bounds in an attempt to punch them back over deflategate.
As far as the fines I understand what you are saying. But what could he do? He had to protect the NFL, and had he done what people would have liked then the outcry would have been worse.
Here is a link to the CBA..........
https://nfllabor.files.wordpress.com/2010/01/collective-bargaining-agreement-2011-2020.pdf
So I hope this helped clarify a few things, I could tell by the first line in your post you misunderstood.
Anyway to me the union bears some of the culpability because they negotiated some less than harsh penalties for some not so nice crimes, like domestic violence. But the owners had to make concessions because they were not negotiating off of the 55/45 split, that's why there was a lockout if you recall. The union let them have that, but in return got some things in exchange, I just wish they would have taken a few issues more seriously, like domestic violence.
