Braun Suspended for Remainder of 2013 Season: Aaron Rodgers' Reaction

[bani1717]

Unless Braun comes out and says that he's been using his whole career going back to college, my guess is that the majority out there won't believe what he would say anyways. If he says he started using in 2011 (when TJ Quinn reported his relationship with Bosch started), many people will point to his prior lies and will not believe that it has only been going on for about 2 years. So even if he does hold a press conference when he's able, it won't really do a whole lot. This will take many years, many clean drug tests, and many "good deeds" before the dislike dies down.

[homer]

So Buster Olney posted the definition of a legal gag order on his Twitter today. He is saying that Braun is not legally prohibited from speaking and is not saying anything by choice. Anybody have an opinion on that?

[SRB]

I just want one thing to be clear, you think MLB would do this to Braun even if he were 100% innocent and did completely nothing wrong? If that is true I think you are letting your hometown bias sway your judgement way too much. I understand why he would take the suspension now, its pretty obvious. But I don't think MLB would go this far against a player if they weren't positive that the player were breaking the rules. And if they did ban him for life and he were completely innocent I'm sure the players' union would have his back. I just don't agree there is even a 2% chance, I would call it zero, that they could ban an innocent player for life.

I am not talking about absolutes of Braun being 100% innocent or 100% guilty because none of us can pretend like we know the answer to that question. Do I think that MLB would do this to Braun if they were convinced he took something but didn't have sufficient evidence to suspend him through the normal procedures? Absolutely. That's exactly what they're doing. But MLB was no less convinced that he took something in 2011, and they didn't have the evidence to back it up because of all the procedural errors.

 

My point all along has simply been that we do not have proof that Braun took PEDs, and that a guilty plea does not constitute evidence of guilt. That's all. I really don't know whether he took something or not (I don't care either, but that's a separate debate...), and I would prefer to reserve my subjective judgment on that issue until I actually see the Biogenesis evidence. Which coincidentally MLB has not leaked (despite leaking everything else) most likely because it is not as strong as the would like the public to believe.

 

And I have zero hometown bias with regard to MLB and sports media's handling of PEDs. I am equally disgusted for how they treat players I would otherwise detest; like the shameful display they are currently putting on trying to end A-Rod's career.

 

So Buster Olney posted the definition of a legal gag order on his Twitter today. He is saying that Braun is not legally prohibited from speaking and is not saying anything by choice. Anybody have an opinion on that?

Buster Olney apparently doesn't understand that there could be a legally-enforceable contractual agreement between MLB and Braun preventing him from saying anything.

[Storm]

SRB said "I am not talking about absolutes of Braun being 100% innocent or 100% guilty because none of us can pretend like we know the answer to that question. Do I think that MLB would do this to Braun if they were convinced he took something but didn't have sufficient evidence to suspend him through the normal procedures? Absolutely. That's exactly what they're doing. But MLB was no less convinced that he took something in 2011, and they didn't have the evidence to back it up because of all the procedural errors."

 

Well said. Thank you!!!

 

I really like how many here have convicted Braun without any hard evidence./s

[homer]

 

So Buster Olney posted the definition of a legal gag order on his Twitter today. He is saying that Braun is not legally prohibited from speaking and is not saying anything by choice. Anybody have an opinion on that?

Buster Olney apparently doesn't understand that there could be a legally-enforceable contractual agreement between MLB and Braun preventing him from saying anything.

 

 

Yeah, that's what I was thinking. There's more than one kind of legal "gag order".

[torts]

So Buster Olney posted the definition of a legal gag order on his Twitter today. He is saying that Braun is not legally prohibited from speaking and is not saying anything by choice. Anybody have an opinion on that?

 

he should probably stick to being a reporter about baseball... you know... his day job.

[wisniewski]

I agree with Bruce. If you don't idolize and worship pro athletes as super heroes this really doesn't come as a shock or provide some great outrage as a crime against humanity. I actually almost feel empathy for those that exhibit such delusion. These guys are just providing entertainment. Pro sports is just entertainment with little to no meaningful consequence to any of your real lives. Regardless of wins and losses ALL OF YOU still have to get up the next morning and go to work.

 

I still love Ryan Braun. Sure I'm going to miss him the rest of the year. But get the time served and move on. He made a mistake, he screwed up. Nobody's perfect. We all fall short of the glory.

 

Wish I had said it this way. ^

 

BRAVO!

 

It is a truly bizarre statement to make.

 

Can't tell if you're being sarcastic in response to what I said. I love Braun. I love him entertaining me the same way I love Jim Carrey entertaining me, or the same way I enjoyed Heath Ledger or Layne Staley.

 

Not quite sure what part of that is in any way a 'bizarre' statement. I can only infer that perhaps someone of your magnanimity and perfection would find it difficult identifying with those who are possibly not as pure and good.

[ilikewisco]

I really like how many here have convicted Braun without any hard evidence./s

 

Hard evidence is a 65 game suspension, he already was convicted.

 

I'll still root for Braun when he comes back next year and I would have been way more upset if this happened during a contending year. I'm just disgusted by his selfish motivation for trying to cover it up, he made his bed now he's gonna have to lay in it. I don't feel like he's been victimized at all. I also think this was not an isolated incident so I am very worried about his production going forward. I know that is just suspicion, but that is how I feel.

 

If MLB wants to let everyone use PED's that is fine with me, but as of now they don't. Braun did something to warrant a 65 game suspension, so that makes him a cheat.

 

Edit: In the eyes of the MLB he was 100% guilty, otherwise he would not be suspended. There is no such thing as 75% guilty or innocent, so why use percentages. You're either guilty or innocent of breaking the rules, no gray area.

[mothershipconnection]

Yeah, I'm not sure what the legal definition of a gag order has to do with it. I have a signed non-compete agreement with my employer which was not issued by a judge, yet I still can't open a competing business in my spare time or I'll be fired and sued.

So I guess he's pointing out that it's not a judge's gag order, but left out that it's probably a binding agreement that he not speak until given permission. Whoop-de-friggin'-doo! Functionally, what does it matter if the end result is that he's prohibited from talking?

[SRB]

Edit: In the eyes of the MLB he was 100% guilty, otherwise he would not be suspended. There is no such thing as 75% guilty or innocent, so why use percentages. You're either guilty or innocent of breaking the rules, no gray area.

I think we probably just disagree on this and that's not going to change, but by your reasoning we shouldn't have trials or rules of evidence in this country because prosecutors would never indict somebody if they weren't convinced they were guilty.

 

Furthermore, MLB still has a grudge from when he beat them via arbitration in 2011; they were utterly convinced that he took PEDs even before the Biogenesis stuff broke, so they were going to put the hammer on him whether or not the Biogenesis evidence was sufficiently good to pass muster as proof that he was truly guilty.

[ilikewisco]

Edit: In the eyes of the MLB he was 100% guilty, otherwise he would not be suspended. There is no such thing as 75% guilty or innocent, so why use percentages. You're either guilty or innocent of breaking the rules, no gray area.

I think we probably just disagree on this and that's not going to change, but by your reasoning we shouldn't have trials or rules of evidence in this country because prosecutors would never indict somebody if they weren't convinced they were guilty.

 

Furthermore, MLB still has a grudge from when he beat them via arbitration in 2011; they were utterly convinced that he took PEDs even before the Biogenesis stuff broke, so they were going to put the hammer on him whether or not the Biogenesis evidence was sufficiently good to pass muster as proof that he was truly guilty.

 

Agreed, we are coming at this from two totally different perspectives. Neither is wrong so we'll just agree to disagree on this one. And I doubt we will ever know one way or the other the way this has went. We can agree that we both will be pulling for Braun when he does come back next year no matter how this plays out.

[FVBrewerFan]

I am not talking about absolutes of Braun being 100% innocent or 100% guilty because none of us can pretend like we know the answer to that question.

 

Just an honest question, not trying to be snarky. Do you believe Braun himself that he's 100% guilty? You head him say he nade mistakes, and he's accepting the consequence right? Are you the only person who doesn't think he's talking about PEDs?

[dlk9s]

I think Braun is referring to not using pressure-treated wood on his deck, resulting in more maintenance and re-staining in subsequent years. Live and learn, I suppose.

[ilikewisco]

I'd go with the composite decking, much less maintenance.

 

Anyway, that was not me you are quoting there. I believe he was admitting to PED use.

[SRB]

I am not talking about absolutes of Braun being 100% innocent or 100% guilty because none of us can pretend like we know the answer to that question.

 

Just an honest question, not trying to be snarky. Do you believe Braun himself that he's 100% guilty? You head him say he nade mistakes, and he's accepting the consequence right? Are you the only person who doesn't think he's talking about PEDs?

I don't consider something Braun said in conjunction with a guilty plea MLB pressured him into taking to be evidence of anything. I doubt we will get the full story on that for quite a while, if ever. Hypothetical: if Commissioner Landis had offered Shoeless Joe Jackson a deal where if he admitted to cheating and served a 65-game suspension, he would have been allowed to continue his career, do you think he would have said what he needed to?

 

And I'm not the only person, since Gallardo has said as much that he still doesn't believe Braun took steroids, and I'm guessing he's a lot closer to the situation than Buster Olney or any of us.

[JimH5]

I don't consider something Braun said in conjunction with a guilty plea MLB pressured him into taking to be evidence of anything. I doubt we will get the full story on that for quite a while, if ever.

 

But if your scenario is correct, how would something like that ever remain secret--especially in the environment we're in, where this is the leakiest story in recent memory?

 

And what of the damage to the Brewers franchise? How would Attanasio allow for his team to take such a financial hit? The Brewers are in full scramble mode, to shift the marketing of the team. Braun is untradeable (at least at his pre-suspension value). Do you think the owner of the Milwaukee Brewers would allow the former owner of the Milwaukee Brewers to harm the franchise under false pretenses?

 

And do you honestly think the Commissioner would do such a thing to the team he built, in his own hometown? And even if you think he would do it, do you think he could get away with it?

[dlk9s]

Just an honest question, not trying to be snarky. Do you believe Braun himself that he's 100% guilty? You head him say he nade mistakes, and he's accepting the consequence right? Are you the only person who doesn't think he's talking about PEDs?

I don't consider something Braun said in conjunction with a guilty plea MLB pressured him into taking to be evidence of anything. I doubt we will get the full story on that for quite a while, if ever. Hypothetical: if Commissioner Landis had offered Shoeless Joe Jackson a deal where if he admitted to cheating and served a 65-game suspension, he would have been allowed to continue his career, do you think he would have said what he needed to?

 

And I'm not the only person, since Gallardo has said as much that he still doesn't believe Braun took steroids, and I'm guessing he's a lot closer to the situation than Buster Olney or any of us.

 

http://i.imgur.com/Xemhx2o.gif

[SRB]

I don't consider something Braun said in conjunction with a guilty plea MLB pressured him into taking to be evidence of anything. I doubt we will get the full story on that for quite a while, if ever.

 

But if your scenario is correct, how would something like that ever remain secret--especially in the environment we're in, where this is the leakiest story in recent memory?

 

And what of the damage to the Brewers franchise? How would Attanasio allow for his team to take such a financial hit? The Brewers are in full scramble mode, to shift the marketing of the team. Braun is untradeable (at least at his pre-suspension value). Do you think the owner of the Milwaukee Brewers would allow the former owner of the Milwaukee Brewers to harm the franchise under false pretenses?

 

And do you honestly think the Commissioner would do such a thing to the team he built, in his own hometown? And even if you think he would do it, do you think he could get away with it?

Maybe it won't remain secret, it's been like a week. But the discussion over this plea deal likely only involved a handful of people (Braun, his agent/advisors, top MLB executives, and maybe or maybe not an MLBPA rep) so there's not as much room for a leak regarding the specific content of those meetings. (*Edit* and it was, in fact, leaked that MLB was threatening a lifetime ban)

 

Attanasio has zero say in the matter as he is outranked on this by MLB and the rest of the owners. I doubt he even knew Braun was getting suspended until the day it was announced (at least, that's what the media reports seemed to indicate). The of the Rangers is probably not going to be too happy when Nelson Cruz (or Player X) is suspended next week, but it's likely going to happen.

 

Selig has no special sympathy for the Brewers at this point in his life. That should have been abundantly clear after the first suspension and its aftermath. And as to whether he will be able to get away with it; just watch what he's currently about to do to A-Rod. The MLBPA membership has become too greedy and will only put up a fuss anymore if it affects their own salaries. They don't mind turning on a few parriahs like Braun or A-Rod even if it means gutting the integrity of the CBA, so nobody's going to put up too much a fight, sadly.

[JimH5]

Selig has no special sympathy for the Brewers at this point in his life.

 

He lives here.

 

He single handedly brought the team here. He worked tirelessly on getting Miller Park. Most of his life has been spent on Milwaukee baseball.

 

He's giving his personal archives to the University of Wisconsin.

 

His and Sue's name is on many, many local charity groups' annual donors reports--often in the top categories of giving.

 

I refuse to believe that he doesn't have a soft spot for the Brewers. Not that I expect him to govern baseball in their favor--I just can't see him being so vindictive toward the franchise as to chase down a Brewers player and suspend him without valid justification.

[dlk9s]

Selig has no special sympathy for the Brewers at this point in his life.

I would wager any amount of money that you are totally wrong on this point.

[FVBrewerFan]

Hypothetical: if Commissioner Landis had offered Shoeless Joe Jackson a deal where if he admitted to cheating and served a 65-game suspension, he would have been allowed to continue his career, do you think he would have said what he needed to?

 

Of course he would. Do you know why? He was guilty. So, you're proving the point that Braun would have no reason whatsoever to make a plea deal if he wasn't guilty. I don't understand why you're holding on so strongly to this conspiracy theory. Braun fought this aggressively the last couple years. Why would he just roll over now and ruin his reputation if he wasn't guilty? Google Occam's Razor, I think it applies here.

[SRB]

Hypothetical: if Commissioner Landis had offered Shoeless Joe Jackson a deal where if he admitted to cheating and served a 65-game suspension, he would have been allowed to continue his career, do you think he would have said what he needed to?

 

Of course he would. Do you know why? He was guilty. So, you're proving the point that Braun would have no reason whatsoever to make a plea deal if he wasn't guilty. I don't understand why you're holding on so strongly to this conspiracy theory. Braun fought this aggressively the last couple years. Why would he just roll over now and ruin his reputation if he wasn't guilty? Google Occam's Razor, I think it applies here.

Really? Because he was literally acquitted by a jury. I guess it depends on whether you think there should be procedural safeguards and the consideration of actual evidence before branding somebody guilty, or if the subjective convictions of the Commissioner and a vindictive media are sufficient.

 

I suspect MLB used a similar tactic on Braun as they are now trying on A-Rod. They are reportedly telling him that if he doesn't accept a guilty plea, they're going to pursue a lifetime ban under the "just case" provision of the CBA, which is effectively unappealable: http://www.latimes.com/sports/la-sp-a-rod-steroids-20130730,0,6995037.story#axzz2aXBIv0iH

 

It's not a "conspiracy theory" to recognize pragmatic realities. But yeah, I'm sure Braun would have loved to stake $120M on being able to challenge that somehow, just so Buster Olney wouldn't be more mad at him than he already was.

[dlk9s]

Really? Because he was literally acquitted by a jury. I guess it depends on whether you think there should be procedural safeguards and the consideration of actual evidence before branding somebody guilty, or if the subjective convictions of the Commissioner and a vindictive media are sufficient.

 

So let me get this straight. You think MLB has zero evidence that Braun cheated and it's just Bud Selig deciding to personally screw over Braun because Braun found a way to win his appeal last year?

[torts]

Hypothetical: if Commissioner Landis had offered Shoeless Joe Jackson a deal where if he admitted to cheating and served a 65-game suspension, he would have been allowed to continue his career, do you think he would have said what he needed to?

 

Of course he would. Do you know why? He was guilty. So, you're proving the point that Braun would have no reason whatsoever to make a plea deal if he wasn't guilty. I don't understand why you're holding on so strongly to this conspiracy theory. Braun fought this aggressively the last couple years. Why would he just roll over now and ruin his reputation if he wasn't guilty? Google Occam's Razor, I think it applies here.

Really? Because he was literally acquitted by a jury. I guess it depends on whether you think there should be procedural safeguards and the consideration of actual evidence before branding somebody guilty, or if the subjective convictions of the Commissioner and a vindictive media are sufficient.

 

I suspect MLB used a similar tactic on Braun as they are now trying on A-Rod. They are reportedly telling him that if he doesn't accept a guilty plea, they're going to pursue a lifetime ban under the "just case" provision of the CBA, which is effectively unappealable: http://www.latimes.com/sports/la-sp-a-rod-steroids-20130730,0,6995037.story#axzz2aXBIv0iH

 

It's not a "conspiracy theory" to recognize pragmatic realities. But yeah, I'm sure Braun would have loved to stake $120M on being able to challenge that somehow, just so Buster Olney wouldn't be more mad at him than he already was.

 

that wont happen. the MLBPA will force there to be arbiters to hear the appeal. Selig assured MLBPA head Michael Weiner he wouldn't use the clause to negate players' rights, which, is exactly what this will do.

[SRB]

that wont happen. the MLBPA will force there to be arbiters to hear the appeal. Selig assured MLBPA head Michael Weiner he wouldn't use the clause to negate players' rights, which, is exactly what this will do.

I would hope so, but the MLBPA has sort of washed it hands of the steroids issue and I doubt they are going to put up much of a fight to help A-Rod. And what use is a vaguely worded "assurance" from Selig when the unambiguous language of the contract says he can suspend anybody he wants in the best interests of baseball. Would you want to stake $120M on the hope that you would somehow win an appeal in court (on what grounds)?

 

So let me get this straight. You think MLB has zero evidence that Braun cheated and it's just Bud Selig deciding to personally screw over Braun because Braun found a way to win his appeal last year?

No, like I said, I'm not dealing in absolutes. I think that MLB has insufficient evidence to suspend Braun through the proper channels, so they threatened him with overwhelming force in order to make him accept a convenient plea. That doesn't mean there's "zero evidence," it just means I'm not prepared to declare his plea "proof" that he's guilty.