Things that Grind My Gears - the first in a recurring post

So, I was listening to Prime Time Sports and thought I had come up a good point to make about the NFL decision to fine Brett Favre for not cooperating but not to punish him for his alleged actions. After listening to Bruce Arthur make the point that the NFL could also have been sued by Sterger because of the workplace sexual harassment piece of the story, I came to the conclusion that this is why they were not as harsh as they were on Ben Rothleisberger - because any further punishment would be a tactic admitting on their part that they felt that Favre did this, and would weaken their defense of a certain to come lawsuit.

Of course, while looking for links to fill out the post, I found this blog post by Kevin Seifert, which makes the point that the statute of limitations has expired on Sterger, so she can't actually sue. Which ends up destroying my point and brings me back to square one - Why so light on Favre in the face of Rothleisberger's punishment?

In short, I hate it when blog posts get ruined by things like facts.