Chris Broussard: “When they announced the suspension of Stephen Ross the first thing that came to my mind was why wasn’t Brady suspended? I like Tom Brady, I’ll be the first to admit that, but I’m about objectivity. I would have even been fine with one game [suspension]. In 2019 when he was playing with the Patriots was the first incident of ‘tampering.’ You could certainly argue that the first meeting when Brady was with the Patriots was him just going to meet a fellow Michigan alum, and Brady didn’t know that Stephen Ross was going to start recruiting him, but the second time he can say ‘look, if we meet, don’t be bringing up all this mess.’ It wasn’t just Ross, it was another guy in the organization, Bruce Beal the vice chairman, who was also suspended. Bottom line is I thought Brady could have gotten a game, maybe two. I don’t know how he gets away scot-free. It just doesn’t seem fair, it takes two to tango. I’m not asking for four, I’m saying two, and one game would have been fine. This acts like he did nothing wrong.”
Rob Parker: “I think that Brady, knowing the Stephen Ross situation and going into that, didn’t think they were going to be friendly or going to play a round of golf, or going to watch a Michigan football game, he kind of knew what was going on and I think that’s why he’s culpable. I do think he knew Stephen Ross was interested in him because he had done it before.” (Full Segment Above)
Watch Chris Broussard and Rob Parker explain why they think Tom Brady should have also been suspended alongside Dolphins owner Stephen Ross for violating the league’s anti-tampering rules.
Check out the segment above as both Parker and Broussard detail why the damning findings of the report against the Dolphins franchise should make Brady guilty by association, and culpable for at least a 1-game suspension.