Brady hearing over. One of the more interesting parts was when Judge Berman peppered Daniel Nash (attorney on behalf of NFL) on how the four-game suspension breaks down.
"Which of the four games was attributed to ball tampering and which to failure to cooperate?" Judge Berman asked.
"The award doesn't specify and there's no requirement to break it down that way," Nash replied. "Taking the record as a whole, (Goodell) determined four games."
Judge Berman then explored why Goodell compared the penalty Brady's alleged offense with that of steroid use.
"Clearly, it's a fair question to pose Mr. Goodell felt he had to explain (the penalty)," Judge Berman said. "But it only raised more questions because I still don't see how four games compares to a player using steroids or masking agents."
Nash countered by pointing to the "integrity of the game" clause, to which Judge Berman echoed an argument from the NFLPA that "everything goes back to the integrity of the game."
Among other things, Judge Berman used this line of questioning to once again poke holes in the NFL's case. His motive for a settlement here is clear and perhaps his trying to get the NFL to state how the suspension broke down was an attempt to nudge this case closer to a settlement.
"There are enough strengths and weaknesses on both sides," Judge Berman stated. "That would lead all the more to a settlement. That seems like the logical and rational outcome. It doesn't mean it's going to happen."