I know it's been mentioned, but since Sly is the only "witness" against the players here, if they found him uncredible as it pertains to Manning, why even bother with the others?
Just like in the Brady case, the underlying accusation is rendered irrelevant if a player doesn't fully cooperate, i.e. kiss Goodell... um... ring.
No evidence of tampering? So what? You didn't "repect mah authoritah" so here's a four-game suspension.
The only witness against you is unreliable? So what?
The only difference is that in the second case the NFL found itself in the position of discrediting the evidence against the players because Manning. But so what? None of this has anything to do with science, facts, evidence, logic, fairness or common sense.
I'm kind of hoping some Cowboys players go ahead and put the stickers honoring the slain Dallas cops on their helmets just to say "fuck you" to Goodell. Then for Goodell to suspend them for whatever integrity of the game-type bullshit reason.
Remember, that's what Spygate was about too, Belichik ignoring a stupid league memo about what exact locations were ok and not-okay to film from. The memo wasn't even a rule, just some nonsensical edict from Goodell. Belichick ignoring showed disrespect. That's what the penalties were for, dissing Goodell. Same with Brady. Same with the PED Five Minus One.