Snoop Dogg isn’t a fan of the Tom Brady decision

Getty Images

A well-established bandwagon-hopper who seems to gravitate to the Steelers isn’t happy with the court decision that makes Patriots quarterback Tom Brady available for the Week One game against Pittsburgh.

Rapper Snoop Dogg posted a video online complaining about the reversal of the suspension by Judge Richard Berman.

“Yeah, the NFL overturned Brady’s sh-t,” Snoop Dogg said. “I can’t do nothing but smoke. That’s bullsh-t. You might as well overturn all the homies that got weed cases in the league, too. If you all are gonna do that. Keep it real.”

On one hand, he has a point. The NFL shouldn’t care about players smoking marijuana on their own time — especially in Colorado and Washington, where it’s now legal. On the other hand, the substance-abuse policy is separate from the policies that applied to Brady.

Brady was never told he could be suspended for his actions. Players know they can be suspended for smoking marijuana. And that’s ultimately why Brady will be playing against Snoop’s Steelers in six days.

It’s also why Steelers running back Le’Veon Bell and receiver Martavis Bryant won’t be.

88 responses to “Snoop Dogg isn’t a fan of the Tom Brady decision

  1. yep, snoop isnt an idiot, he knows the nfl.
    essentially this decision was saying well slam players for all kinda stuff that doesnt have anything to do with football, but if u cheat u get let off
    SMH!

  2. Snoop Dog and Lil Wayne are just typical bandwagon fans… Lil Wayne used to be a Vikings fan in 2009/10(During Saints/Vikings Champ game) and now he’s a lifelong, loyal Packers fan lol

  3. Its just an equipment violation, which is a $25,000 fine, whats the big deal?

    Therefore, he violated the rule by 10 balls per game for about 4 years, at $25,000 per violation, that comes out to about a $16 million dollar fine.

    Pay up.

  4. ravenbiker says:
    Sep 4, 2015 11:41 AM
    What part of ‘But not limited to a $25000 fine’ was not clear to Brady?
    ====•=
    What part of “Brady was never told he could be suspended for his actions” don’t you understand?

    It’s clear in the rules if you smoke you get suspended (although I agree it’s a stupid rule)

    No where, and no one, has ever been suspended for an equipment violation, let alone one that can’t be proven, even with a $5mil investigation that concludes “he may be aware” that SOMEONE ELSE “may have” done something.

    The whole thing is stupid, the NFL front office sucks. Plain and simple.

  5. There’s a difference between enjoying some smoke in your own house and getting caught smoking while you’re driving to the airport to fly out to face you’re opponent. Cannabis should certainly be legal but driving around high shouldn’t – even if it isn’t nearly as impairing as driving drunk.

  6. Whatever let’s you sleep at night Snoop. In the mean time, I’ll wait for the video he puts out every year ripping the Steelers for losing so badly.

  7. Why should you have to be told that you will be suspended for cheating and not cooperating with a league investigation? That should be common sense. What an unbelievable, enabling statement it is to say “well, he didn’t know he could be suspended for lying, cheating and not cooperating”! Wow.

  8. Why is he wearing a Steelers hat after he made that espn documentary about how big of a Raider fan his along with Ice Cube. Aren’t the Steelers hated by true Raider fans? Just keeping it real… yaaaa knooooow!

  9. So do players know you can’t get the grounds crew to strategically place divots in the field. I completely believe Brady had no idea he would get in trouble for conspiring with the equipment guys.

  10. What part of ‘But not limited to a $25000 fine’ was not clear to Brady?
    ===
    The part where that policy applies to clubs, not players.

  11. Brady was never told he could be suspended for his actions.
    ———–
    I guess he was also never told that repeated hits to the head cause brain issue, or that sticking a fork into a toaster is a bad idea too.

    Yeah, he had no idea there would be repercussions for cheating. Maybe he thought that Goodell would sweep it under the rug, AGAIN.

  12. “Therefore, he violated the rule by 10 balls per game for about 4 years, at $25,000 per violation, that comes out to about a $16 million dollar fine.

    Pay up.”

    Where’s your proof of one rule violation, let alone 10*4*16? He was only found guilty of being “generally aware” of someone else’s rule violation. If that’s the case then Rothlesberger should be suspended a game each for Bell and Bount’s possession if he can be found to be generally aware of it. Did he ever talk to them in the locker room? Has he provided autographs to them or their family members? Let’s see his phone! What is big Ben hiding?

  13. marvsleezy says:
    Sep 4, 2015 11:47 AM

    Its just an equipment violation, which is a $25,000 fine, whats the big deal?

    Therefore, he violated the rule by 10 balls per game for about 4 years, at $25,000 per violation, that comes out to about a $16 million dollar fine.

    Pay up.
    ————————————————————-
    No proof needed of course. Just some hack on the internet who thinks he did it, even though a $5 million investigation couldn’t even prove that the balls had been deflated, at all, by anyone, even in one game.

    When a judge who is truly independent took a look at this, he figured out the NFL was full of crap in about 5 minutes.

  14. Snoops gotta point. Who is a fan of the Tom Shady decision besides New Englanders? Shady Brady will never be respected by the players and greatest qbs ever and thats more then any tainted asterisk superbowl win.

  15. boston444 says:
    Sep 4, 2015 11:38 AM

    Legaratte Blount is suspended that game for possession too but let’s not mention that of course

    —————————————————————

    . . . for an offense that occurred when he was . . . a Pittsburgh Steeler.

  16. “Brady was never told he could be suspended for his actions.” What a joke. So this is what Brady walks for? So now it’s not a crime unless the victim first announces to the perpetrator that he’s breaking the law?

    When the Ravens complained that the Patriots were illegally substituting, they were snidely told they should read the rule book. Well what, the illegal deflation of footballs isn’t also covered in that book? Suddenly Tommy doesn’t have to take his own advice, because it’s up to the league to read the rule book to him?

    And you wonder why this is all so outrageous to anyone outside New England.

  17. steelcurtainn says:
    Sep 4, 2015 12:09 PM
    Snoops gotta point. Who is a fan of the Tom Shady decision besides New Englanders? Shady Brady will never be respected by the players and greatest qbs ever and thats more then any tainted asterisk superbowl win.

    ——————————–

    Only every credible journalist who doesn’t work for ESPN….

    Here’s a fun game you can play with your friend. Pick a completely random thing and accuse your friend of it. Then take his cellphone and go through his e-mail and texts for the last year. See if you can take any of those texts out of context and use them to convict your friend of the imaginary crime….$10 says you win every time.

  18. LOL. Remember that time Snoop had to defend himself in court when he was accused of murder? Give me a break, Snoop. You of all people should understand what it’s like to be falsely accused and people get all over your case due to your fame.

  19. ravenbiker says:
    Sep 4, 2015 11:41 AM

    What part of ‘But not limited to a $25000 fine’ was not clear to Brady?
    —————–

    The part where that is a team fine, and not a player fine.

    If you had been paying attention over the last few months, you would know that players aren’t given access to the rule book that governs team penalties.

    Does that answer your question?

  20. ampatsisahypocrite says:
    Sep 4, 2015 12:30 PM

    When the Ravens complained that the Patriots were illegally substituting, they were snidely told they should read the rule book. Well what, the illegal deflation of footballs isn’t also covered in that book? Suddenly Tommy doesn’t have to take his own advice, because it’s up to the league to read the rule book to him?
    ———————-
    The answer to your question is actually no, deflation of footballs is not covered in the rulebook. It’s in the Game Day Operations Manual, which is not given to the players. Sorry to eviscerate your argument, but I thought I would clear that up for you.

  21. Doped up and barely coherent, yet he sounds three times smarter than most of our dedicated Pats hater trolls.

  22. Yeah Snoopp it was BS. When Shady Brady keeps on tripping on his crank and black and yellow wins game one. You can light up a fatty.

  23. deacon85 says:
    Sep 4, 2015 12:50 PM
    ampatsisahypocrite says:
    Sep 4, 2015 12:30 PM

    The answer to your question is actually no, deflation of footballs is not covered in the rulebook. It’s in the Game Day Operations Manual, which is not given to the players. Sorry to eviscerate your argument, but I thought I would clear that up for you.
    ————————————-

    You “eviscerated” nothing. Allowed psi levels are also covered in the rule book, which are distributed to all players and displayed publicly. In fact, Brady himself referred to it in a page he had printed out from the rule book during the initial interview proceedings:

    “And then Reisner asked again why Brady picked 12.5 PSI.

    “We looked in the rule book,” Brady said.”

    I thought I would clear that up for you.

  24. ampatsisahypocrite says:
    When the Ravens complained that the Patriots were illegally substituting, they were snidely told they should read the rule book. Well what, the illegal deflation of footballs isn’t also covered in that book? Suddenly Tommy doesn’t have to take his own advice, because it’s up to the league to read the rule book to him?
    ————————————-
    a) the Pats were not illegally substituting, so being told to go away and read the rule book was the correct response. But the Ravens whined about it enough so this season it will be illegal.
    b) the “including but not limited to $25k” ball deflation penalty is against teams, not players. The players abide by a separate Fines Policy document. However, there’s no clear evidence that the balls were doctored – and no evidence Brady was involved, as admitted by the NFL’s lawyer Nash to Federal Judge Berman.
    Do you read anything on this website before spouting off?

  25. The NFL shouldn’t care about players smoking marijuana on their own time
    =====================================

    Is this what you teach your kids?

  26. With such a weak argument in the judgement in Brady’s favor, NE fans should be preparing themselves for Brady to miss at least that number of games before his 39th birthday, because a higher court is going to wad the 40 page decision up like every linebacker and DE is going to look to be doing on the field while he’s on it. Good luck with that Patriots nation.

  27. gofor2with3pointlead says:
    Sep 4, 2015 2:03 PM
    With such a weak argument in the judgement in Brady’s favor, NE fans should be preparing themselves for Brady to miss at least that number of games before his 39th birthday, because a higher court is going to wad the 40 page decision up like every linebacker and DE is going to look to be doing on the field while he’s on it. Good luck with that Patriots nation.

    ——-
    According to Judge Berman, the NFLPA’s weakest arguments were enough to vacate, they still have several more to go if the higher court kicks it back down. With the courts, I’ll never say never but, considering what Berman left to rule on if needed, chance are very slim that Brady will lose.

  28. streetyson says:
    Sep 4, 2015 1:34 PM

    a) the Pats were not illegally substituting, so being told to go away and read the rule book was the correct response. But the Ravens whined about it enough so this season it will be illegal.
    b) the “including but not limited to $25k” ball deflation penalty is against teams, not players. The players abide by a separate Fines Policy document. However, there’s no clear evidence that the balls were doctored – and no evidence Brady was involved, as admitted by the NFL’s lawyer Nash to Federal Judge Berman.
    Do you read anything on this website before spouting off?
    ——————————————–

    First, did I say the Pariots were illegally substituting? Talk about not reading before spouting off.

    And OK, if that that WAS the “correct response” then that makes the judge’s decision look even worse because, as you say so yourself, it’s the team’s and player’s responsibility to know the stinkin’ rules! But the judge does the opposite, and says Tom doesn’t have to know, that it’s the league’s job to inform him. Well, then, by that logic the Ravens are right because Goodell didn’t call up Harbaugh and tell him the substitution schemes were legal.

    Also it’s your OPINION there was no evidence, including circumstantial. The same way it’s Nash’s. Many people out there disagree.

  29. A man who got away with murder– literally– thinks it is a shame that Tom Brady won’t be punished for something he did not do.

    We are truly living in an age of decay.

  30. Personally, I can hardly wait to watch Brady’s head on a swivel. You think Jim Everett had happy feet. There are so many skeletons in this dudes closet, he’s gonna be running from ghosts that aren’t even there. Karma always gets you in the end. I wonder how Sam Adams goes with popcorn?

  31. As much as I don’t want to defend Brady, he lawyered up and took it to court. Every player has that option. Brandon Browner did and won, too. Spring for a lawyer, Snoop, and maybe some of the “homies” can beat their suspensions as well.

  32. Brady was never told he could be suspended for his actions.
    ===========

    Good point.

    Someone needs to tell the Pats that if they keep cheating they’ll be punished since they’ve done it so long without repercussion.

  33. gopblows says:
    Sep 4, 2015 12:14 PM

    Tom Brady & Crew will forever be linked to *******s
    ————————–

    Trophies? It’s okay that you can’t spell it.

  34. ampatsisahypocrite says:
    “First, did I say the Pariots were illegally substituting?”
    “Also it’s your OPINION there was no evidence, including circumstantial. The same way it’s Nash’s. Many people out there disagree.”
    ——————————-
    Wow! In answer to your earlier point first: yes if you repeat someone’s false claim (Pats “illegally substituting”), without qualifying it by saying you don’t believe it, and then use it support your argument that the Pats are being hypocritical when it comes to (what you see as) their illegal activity, then you too are very much saying the Pats illegally substituted. But the last point of yours is my favourite rabid hater-troll nonsensical rant of all time! The NFL’s own lawyer was forced to admit to the judge, under oath, that they had no evidence, but that’s not good enough for you, because you know Brady was guilty, you know… Now, not only is that an “opinion”, it’s a certified totally baseless one.

  35. streetyson says:
    Sep 5, 2015 7:29 AM

    Wow! In answer to your earlier point first: yes if you repeat someone’s false claim (Pats “illegally substituting”), without qualifying it by saying you don’t believe it, and then use it support your argument that the Pats are being hypocritical when it comes to (what you see as) their illegal activity, then you too are very much saying the Pats illegally substituted. But the last point of yours is my favourite rabid hater-troll nonsensical rant of all time! The NFL’s own lawyer was forced to admit to the judge, under oath, that they had no evidence, but that’s not good enough for you, because you know Brady was guilty, you know… Now, not only is that an “opinion”, it’s a certified totally baseless one.

    ———————————————

    1. No I did NOT say the substitutions were illegal. Your lame trick of logic to INFER I did doesn’t change that. And why do I need to “qualify” anything? The point isn’t even whether or not they were legal, the point was how Brady lectured others on their responsibility to know the rules — which doesn’t seem to apply to him when it comes time to be judged.

    2. Nash most certainly did NOT say there was no evidence in general — he was referring specifically to the absence of a smoking-gun text to bust Brady with. Here are his exact words: “Is there a text in which Mr. Brady instructs someone to put a needle in a football? No, there is not such direct evidence.”

    What you are doing is lying by omission, a typical Kool Aid drinker tactic. Here’s the part you’re leaving out:

    Nash claimed the totality of the evidence gathered by NFL investigator Ted Wells and his law firm — including a flurry of text messages about Brady sent between Patriots employees’ Jim McNally and John Jastremski after last season’s AFC Championship game — “clearly indicates Mr. Brady’s knowledge and encouragement of this activity.”

    Nash also mentioned the Patriot quarterback’s decision to ask an assistant destroy the cell phone he used in the months immediately before and after the game – right before he was interviewed by Wells – also infers “further evidence of culpability.”

    Evidence evidence evidence! Evidence everywhere! That’s what in FACT Nash is saying. Now what was that you were saying about “certifiably baseless opinions”?

    It’s just like the other guy who claimed the psi rule isn’t covered in the rule book, and then I posted Brady’s quote where he says he got the psi number from… the rule book.

  36. streetyson says:
    Sep 5, 2015 7:29 AM

    But the last point of yours is my favourite rabid hater-troll nonsensical rant of all time!
    ———————————————-

    Considering how you twisted one statement of Nash’s into complete factual misrepresentation and outright fibbing — I’d say YOURS is my “favorite rabid hater-troll nonsensical rant of all time!”

  37. Doesn’t take a brain surgeon to know not to destroy evidence. Why was only that particular phone broke & not the phone before or after? Why did Kraft so easily pay the fine? Why didn’t Belichick or Kraft have Brady’s back? Why were the 2 guys fired? Are they getting they’re jobs back or are they suddenly set up for life? Things that make me go “hmmmm”….once again cue stburke40’s wisdom.

  38. ampatsisahypocrite says:
    Considering how you twisted one statement of Nash’s into complete factual misrepresentation and outright fibbing — I’d say YOURS is my “favorite rabid hater-troll nonsensical rant of all time!”
    ————————————-
    Lol! But that’s exactly what you did, not me! Berman pushed Nash repeatedly to offer up some evidence that Brady was guilty, and you base your entire reasoning on just one of Nash’s weasely responses. However, if you look at that whole session you will see that Nash could only offer suspicions, not evidence. But you KNOW that Brady is guilty, so don’t waste time here buddy, get on the phone to Park Ave and give your evidence to Nash because he sure needs it dude.

  39. Brady was never told he couldn’t have equipment handlers sneak off to the bathroom to deflate footballs after inspection …….. LOL. You can’t make this stuff up. This morally decrepit team will eventually destroy the NFL because no one will take it seriously anymore

  40. Michael Vick didn’t know that he could get punished for dog fighting either. There are simply too many specific offenses to spell them all out in the CBA. Which is why Berman’s ruling is such a joke and will be overturned on appeal.

  41. Yea don’t think it should have to be explained that cheating and tempering with equipment is against nfl rules. I use to have respect for Brady but i think he got caught up in the Patriots beliefs of whatever it takes to get a super bowl ring. I don’t blame them though cause all that comes out of getting caught is a weak fine and a couple draft picks. Guess patriots didn’t know you can’t record other teams practice either. How times they gonna get caught. Think patriot is seriously wrong name. Maybe New England thieves or pirates.

  42. i want to be the first to nominate or should i say elect Tom Brady SAINT OF THE YEAR. May i say he is a shoe in for the Presidency in 2016. Hail Tom Brady!

  43. The balls are certified to be at a pressure within acceptable limits. The only way the balls can be less would be if they are tampered post certification. That is what Brady had the ball boys doing.

    So black guys getting suspension for smoking marijuana, but Brady conspires with multipple team employees on the hush and supposedly he is not aware?

  44. “Brady was never told he could be suspended for his actions. Players know they can be suspended for smoking marijuana. And that’s ultimately why Brady will be playing against Snoop’s Steelers in six days.”

    What a crock? Brady needed to be told it was wrong to cheat? Brady needed to be told it was illegal to surreptitiously violate the rules?

    You want to know how Brady (and the WHOLE world) knew it was wrong to cheat?

    Brady refused to produce his phone.

    Brady then had his phone completely destroyed.

    Brady used that phone to contact the equipment guys bazillions of times.

    Brady and the Patriots made up lies about the reason for the nickname “the Deflator.”

    Brady and Patriots refused to produce the Deflator for his final interview.

    And the Patriots FIRED the Equipment Guys — who they claim did nothing wrong. If they did nothing wrong, why were they each fired over this?

    Saying Brady got off because he was never told cheating was a punishable offense is LUDICROUS and INANE.

  45. streetyson says:
    Sep 6, 2015 2:48 PM
    Lol! But that’s exactly what you did, not me! Berman pushed Nash repeatedly to offer up some evidence that Brady was guilty, and you base your entire reasoning on just one of Nash’s weasely responses. However, if you look at that whole session you will see that Nash could only offer suspicions, not evidence. But you KNOW that Brady is guilty, so don’t waste time here buddy, get on the phone to Park Ave and give your evidence to Nash because he sure needs it dude.
    —————————————-

    No, once again my friend, that’s what YOU did. YOU took one quote of Nash’s specifically relating to texts, and broadened it out to mean he was talking about evidence in GENERAL. That’s what you call “weasely”… so maybe you deserve a spot in the Pats front office with slickster skills like this.

  46. Plus… I though I just saw an NFL special where Snoop was a USC (Matt Leinart) fan?
    It was the Rose Bowl between USC & Texas
    and sure enough Snoop was rooting for USC
    Now he’s on to Pittsburgh?
    C’mon.
    I guess he gave up on music.
    Now this guy just jump from bandwagon to bandwagon
    forgetting who or what he’s rooting for & saying?
    Slow down on the smoke Snoop.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Not a member? Register now!