As the Greg Hardy appeal lingered without resolution, many assumed the same thing wouldn’t happen in the Tom Brady case, given it’s much higher profile
A full five weeks since the hearing, there’s still no ruling on the question of whether Commissioner Roger Goodell will uphold, modify, or scuttle the four-game suspension he previously approved.
Last week, Goodell insisted that there’s no “timeline” for a decision. Technically correct because there’s no specific date by which a ruling is required, the Collective Bargaining Agreement nevertheless requires a ruling “as soon as practicable,” fancy lawyer talk for “as soon as possible.”
It was possible for the league to digest the convoluted 243-page report from Ted Wells and issue a four-game suspension to Brady in only five days. Why would it take seven times that amount for Goodell to review work he already has approved?
Some believe the delay is aimed at squeezing Brady into a settlement that perhaps would entail a shorter suspension. Some believe the delay is intended to keep Brady and the NFLPA from having enough time to challenge the case in court. Some believe the delay results from the fact that Goodell and the league office simply don’t know what to do.
Despite the absence of a specific timeline in the CBA, Goodell surely will issue a ruling by Labor Day, given that the Patriots are due to host the Steelers three days later in the regular-season opener. It would only be fair to issue a ruling before camp opens, so that the Patriots can properly divvy up reps in advance of Week One.
Regardless, this shouldn’t have taken 35 days and counting for a ruling to emerge. Whatever the other reason(s) for the delay, it’s becoming more and more clear that this exercise is about more than simply trying to engage in a second look at a decision to which Goodell previously gave the green light.