Lol, seriously? How much does Brady make PER GAME?
Ludicrous. They not only caught the Patriots cheating (again) they have proof! And they once again skate by with nothing but a slap on the wrist? Totally insane.
Jimsolo wrote: Lol, seriously? How much does Brady make PER GAME?
Ludicrous. They not only caught the Patriots cheating (again) they have proof! And they once again skate by with nothing but a slap on the wrist? Totally insane.
The million fine is on the team.
The lost earnings by Brady is closer to 2 million.
djones520 wrote: Well, may not be to little... how strong is their 2nd string QB? 4 games without him could cost them a chance for the playoffs.
Funny thing about team games though... there's 10 other offensive players out on the field at the same time. As Giselle so "eloquently" ranted about after the Pats got beat by the Giants in the Superbowl "Tom Can't throw the ball to himself!"
Yes, Brady makes a difference to that team, but he isn't THE team.
I love being right... My dad and I were just talking about this at dinner last night and he swore up and down that Brady wasn't going to get suspended.
If the NFL is lucky it'll get arbitrated to 2 games. If they're unlucky it will be thrown out because they have zero proof he had anything to do with the incident in question.
Did he probably? Sure. Can't prove it, though.
The monetary fines are a meaningless whisper on the wrist. They're not even a slap.
The draft picks mean a little more, but the patriots always hit in the late rounds.
djones520 wrote: Well, may not be to little... how strong is their 2nd string QB? 4 games without him could cost them a chance for the playoffs.
Yeah, it might cost them the playoffs this year. They already won the super bowl last year, and missing the playoffs to get a super bowl win is a price most people would probably be willing to pay. The penalty they should have suffered is the loss of their AFC championship game and super bowl wins. Take the trophies back, remove the wins from the record books, and let the 2014-2015 season have the permanent reminder of "no super bowl winner".
djones520 wrote: Well, may not be to little... how strong is their 2nd string QB? 4 games without him could cost them a chance for the playoffs.
Yeah, it might cost them the playoffs this year. They already won the super bowl last year, and missing the playoffs to get a super bowl win is a price most people would probably be willing to pay. The penalty they should have suffered is the loss of their AFC championship game and super bowl wins. Take the trophies back, remove the wins from the record books, and let the 2014-2015 season have the permanent reminder of "no super bowl winner".
Ha!
This is some of the most unintentionally hilarious stuff that you've ever written here on Dakka Dakka!
I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt and just go with...maybe you got caught in traffic today or something similar?
generalgrog wrote: My question is this...how much of an advantage did deflating the balls really give them?
Really enough for them to go to the superbowl?
But no one is really saying that's why they won the SB. If you and I are playing 40K and I'm cheating you, does my guilt depend on the game's result?
There's some evidence that indicates that the Pats fumbled at a rate far less than the league average. That can't ever be a conclusive thing, because of the nature of fumbles. But here's the thing -- if it didn't matter, then why instruct your equipment people to do it in secret and reward them for it? Clearly it mattered *to Brady*. Otherwise, why break league rules for nothing (even if only a minor rule)?
Still, the magnitude of the punishment (and I think it's very harsh for some underinflated footballs) is because of Spygate. In the eyes of the league, the Pats are repeat offenders. They got off incredibly lightly with Spygate, and were probably told not to let it happen again. And yet I *still* think they would have gotten off much more lightly had Brady owned it instead of lying through his teeth like he did. You kinda haveta throw the book at them at that point if you want to retain any credibility (and under Goodell the league has precious little of that left).
FWIW, I think Brady will get all 4 games. Look what's scheduled for game 5 -- a Sunday night game against Andrew Luck and the Colts. The NFL is only a place or two removed from pro wrestling with how this stuff is scripted.
Did anyone even read the wells report? Or just get the cliff notes from talking heads?
This is one of the single most rediculous witch hunts in professional sports history. The amount of ignorance of what was actually presented in the wells report is astounding to me. There is literally zero proof that Brady or anyone in the patriots organization did anything to tamper with the Footballs. In fact the wells report presents proof that Brady and the 2 guys in question (McNally and jastremski) tried to follow the rules to the letter of the law.
djones520 wrote: Well, may not be to little... how strong is their 2nd string QB? 4 games without him could cost them a chance for the playoffs.
Yeah, it might cost them the playoffs this year. They already won the super bowl last year, and missing the playoffs to get a super bowl win is a price most people would probably be willing to pay. The penalty they should have suffered is the loss of their AFC championship game and super bowl wins. Take the trophies back, remove the wins from the record books, and let the 2014-2015 season have the permanent reminder of "no super bowl winner".
One of the FB groups I'm in, I also suggested the NFL remove the SB title from the Pats.... But, it shouldn't go to the Seahawks, because it was the 49th Lombardi Trophy, and we hate the 9ers so much we gave it to NE in the first place.
Instead, I think an amicable solution to everyone involved is to give the Lombardi Trophy to Cleveland since, outside of Hollywood and video games, it's the only way they're gonna win a championship!
Relapse wrote:He's going to eat a poor bastard?!?!?!
I forgot a comma, but that version is even better really.
kronk wrote:By taking a break from body shots off of Gisele Bündchen and having body ham-on-rye off of Gisele Bündchen.
Every time someone acts like being married to Gisele is a bonus I remember the old adage about how no matter how good a woman looks someone, somewhere is tired of putting up with her.
This is one of the single most rediculous witch hunts in professional sports history. The amount of ignorance of what was actually presented in the wells report is astounding to me. There is literally zero proof that Brady or anyone in the patriots organization did anything to tamper with the Footballs. In fact the wells report presents proof that Brady and the 2 guys in question (McNally and jastremski) tried to follow the rules to the letter of the law.
Having played high school and college football I can honestly say that PSI for game balls is a major consideration for QBs, so there really is no question that it was adjusted by equipment personnel; it is just something that is done. The question is whether or not that adjustment broke an NFL rule.
For what its worth, I don't think Brady should have been suspended...I would have suspended Belichick.
dogma wrote: For what its worth, I don't think Brady should have been suspended...I would have suspended Belichick.
The way I see it, suspending Brady is the best way to punish the organization. The machine would run without Belichick just fine for a few games (and BB would probably find a way to circumvent the suspension anyway). A fine would have to be an ungodly amount of money for it to really sting. And the loss of draft picks does sting, but the hurt there comes 3 years down the road and not now. Losing Brady for a number of games hurts the Pats' SB chances THE year. And that's all they really care about in NE.
Again, I think the Pats would still have walked away with a slap on the wrist had Brady just owned it. It was awfully arrogant for him to think he could stroll to a podium wearing that hat and charm it all away.
The way I see it, suspending Brady is the best way to punish the organization. The machine would run without Belichick just fine for a few games (and BB would probably find a way to circumvent the suspension anyway).
You're probably right. I was thinking of a no-contact suspension, which the NFL may not be able to order.
So Brady and co. Have hired Jeff Kessler, pretty much the most prominent sports law/anti trust litigator out there. Brady and the patriots are gearing up for war on the NFL. With the absurdity of the "wells report" and Ted Wells abysmal conference call fail today coupled with the complete ineptitude of the NFL front office expect a lot of this suspension/punishment to get overturned and thrown out completely.
Chancetragedy wrote: So Brady and co. Have hired Jeff Kessler, pretty much the most prominent sports law/anti trust litigator out there. Brady and the patriots are gearing up for war on the NFL. With the absurdity of the "wells report" and Ted Wells abysmal conference call fail today coupled with the complete ineptitude of the NFL front office expect a lot of this suspension/punishment to get overturned and thrown out completely.
That isn't the argument I'm making, the only people making that argument are the ones who want to characterize it as a witch hunt.
I actually don't understand your argument as I have you on ban list for some reason(assuming something related to original story).
Literally none of my posts in this thread have been directed at or in response to anything you've wrote until now gorgon sorry if there was any misunderstanding. We'll have to agree to disagree about this being a witch hunt because the wells report has proved unequivocally that the patriots aren't cheaters and yet in the very same breathe procla Ms they are. And since you've been fairly moderate in this thread i don't think I'll keep you blocked.
The thing about the report with all its "more probable than nots" is that, if you already believed Tom Brady was innocent, the report won't change your mind, and if you already believed he was guilty, the report simply confirms your belief.
Anyway, if I heard right on the radio this morning, Game 4 of his suspension would be against the Cowboys. I'm cool with that. The 'Boys needs every chance they can get.
4 game suspension, 1 million dollar fine, loss of 2 draft picks. because the pats may or may not have done something.....Thank god actual Law isn't based on this because we would all be screwed.
Side note: SPYGATE: under NFL rules you are prohibited from recording any other team from the sidelines for purposes of gaining an advantage IN THAT GAME.
Bill studied the footage afterwards for the next time those two teams met. It actually wasn't a big deal, and the Jets coach who started the whole shenanigans said so himself.
"I didn't think it was any kind of significant advantage, but I wasn't going to give them the convenience of doing it in our stadium, and I wanted to shut it down. But there was no intent to get the league involved. There was no intent to have the landslide that it has become."
- Jets Head Coach Eric Mangini
So what you have here is Bill breaking a rule on a technicality and getting thrown under a bus.
Now onto the Deflate gate. remember the punishment posted above.
Vikings vs Panthers - Both teams found to be cheating by heating up the game balls during incredibly cold temperatures, not only were the teams warned before hand but the punishment was?.....Nothing, just a warning.
2012 the Chargers used towels with an adhesive applied to them to "dry" the balls. I would venture to say that is significantly more beneficial then under inflating a ball. What were the Chargers fined for this CLEAR violation>? 20,000 and no suspensions.
So please, everyone out their who thought this was a fair punishment, please explain.
2012 the Chargers used towels with an adhesive applied to them to "dry" the balls. I would venture to say that is significantly more beneficial then under inflating a ball.
If there is ANY moisture in the air whatsoever, that adhesive/tackiness makes the ball even more slick than if you had kept it "dry" with a towel. I played 4 years of HS football in Oregon, during which I think I had 6 games that DIDN'T have rain, fog, sleet, mud, or some other form of precipitation/leftover from precipitation on the field.... A wet ball actually became easier to grip and handle when it was water logged than it was if it had been dried and got water basically splashed or dripped onto it.
Now, it being San Diego, and there very rarely being any sort of water in the air, yeah, that could be an issue. But one that should be easily visible to the referees and rectified on the scene.
The point being, there are two cases of almost the exact same thing happening and the fines/penalties are SIGNIFICANTLY less then what was handed to the Patriots. So as I said earlier, someone explain to me why the 4 game suspension, 1million dollar fine (Biggest ever) and loss of 2 draft picks is warranted when similar plays went with nothing but a slight tap on the wrist.
if you read the report the only thing Brady failed to do was give them access to his private phone. The patriots were also thrown under the bus with "not cooperating" because they refused to make one of their employees sit for a 4th or 5th interview.
This sort of goes to back to my question of who has actually read the report? I have twice now.
Wells actually comments in it that Brady was extremely cooperative until wells asked for his phone. And upon legal advice Brady didn't turn it over. Here is Brady's only "possible" mistake Imo as they were given options that did not include handing over anything Brady's own camp hasnt vetted.
If we use the "science" reported in the wells report and use the same standard for judgement used on the colts balls for the patriots balls as well. 3 of the patriots balls were .2psi under the projected range of pressure drop, 5 were inside the range of projected psi loss, and 3 were over the range of projected psi loss provided by exponent(just as an FYI this is the company that has previously proven 2nd hand smoke DOESNT cause lung cancer)
Also buried in the report are statements that McNally repeatedly told the refs that Brady likes his footballs at 12.5. If he was planning on deflating them why even care what they are set at?
And if you actually put the texts provided in the report in order with their actual time stamps you realize there are clearly parts of the conversation missing. And the texts are provided in an intentionally misleading way.
Basically the NFL/Ted Wells thinks were all stupid and has tried to bury what a sham this whole thing is in footnotes and deep within the report hoping that people don't notice. And a lot of people are proving them right. Because we're a footnotes society who latch onto every rediculous media headline as if it's actual fact.
Wells actually comments in it that Brady was extremely cooperative until wells asked for his phone. And upon legal advice Brady didn't turn it over. Here is Brady's only "possible" mistake Imo as they were given options that did not include handing over anything Brady's own camp hasnt vetted.
While I agree that Brady shouldn't have been "forced" to hand over his phone, or at least not been dinged for following his own legal advice (what, are they going to find "adult" pictures of people other than Giselle on there?).... however, When have we ever really accepted the "word" of people who are clearly on the side of one party? By this I mean, why should anyone accept "Brady's own camp" saying, "ohh yeah, we checked his phone and it's wicked clean, yeah, nothin really to see except the text from his wife remindin' him not to lose his khaki's again, she dont want to pick him up from work again because it's wicked cold right now"
All this recent negative press has started to make me wonder how much longer Goodell is going to last??
That's probably exactly why Brady didn't go that route. Don't quote me on this but I believe Don Yee made a radio statement to that exact effect. Basically saying even if we went that route they wouldn't have believed us and we probably would have been dinged as uncooperative regardless. So they chose to just not hand over.
Which funnily enough none of the NFL front office including Goodell handed over their personal phones in the Mueller Ray Rice tape investigation. But yet they slammed Brady with a 4 game suspensions over following the lead of the NFL. Double standard much?
Basically it all comes down to Brady is not missing even a single game. This will all get thrown out of a court of law and I wouldn't be surprised if the patriots don't lose any draft picks either after Kraft fight the organizations punishment as well. Although the patriots organization have a lot less options in fighting their punishment.
Slightly better grip when throwing the ball. The biggest thing is that every QB has a certain type of PSI they feel comfortable with. But in this situation it was designed to help in the conditions on the field.
Ghazkuul wrote: Slightly better grip when throwing the ball. The biggest thing is that every QB has a certain type of PSI they feel comfortable with. But in this situation it was designed to help in the conditions on the field.
That, and the Patriots favor short passing routes, where an underinflated ball is no hindrance.
If the condition of the ball can be altered to give one team an unfair advantage, why in the hell would a professional sports organisation leave the teams to look after the ball themselves?
Any other sport I can think of the officials provide the ball, and take control of it during breaks in play. It’s just completely bizarre to me that a sport that is so heavily regulated like NFL would just trust the teams to bring their own gear.
sebster wrote: If the condition of the ball can be altered to give one team an unfair advantage, why in the hell would a professional sports organisation leave the teams to look after the ball themselves?
Any other sport I can think of the officials provide the ball, and take control of it during breaks in play. It’s just completely bizarre to me that a sport that is so heavily regulated like NFL would just trust the teams to bring their own gear.
And truth be told, I'm not even convinced it provides that big an advantage. We have multiple QBs going on record saying they prefer 'over-inflated' footballs (Aaron Rodgers, Philip Rivers). Anecdotally, I asked my uncle, who played QB at UK, and he said he wasn't even sure he'd be able to notice.
@Sebster -- They didn't used to let the teams do anything with the balls, but the problem ended up being that they'd use fresh footballs on Sundays, and they 'play' differently than ones that have been used. So in 2007 (I think) at the strong urging of a one Peyton Manning (former Colt QB, btw), the NFL now allows teams to 'break in' their footballs for the game (think a baseball mitt). I don't think the "breaking in" is a real question, but as you said, its more the controls weren't in place for the officials to adequate track the footballs and their pressure.
Now, to me, the lack of controls tells me that it's that little a concern for the officials and has very little impact on the game itself. Especially since after the 'tainted' footballs were repressured to the correct standards, then Patriots beat the crap out of the crybaby Colts.
I can't stand the Patriots, but this whole thing is a sham.
cincydooley wrote: @Sebster -- They didn't used to let the teams do anything with the balls, but the problem ended up being that they'd use fresh footballs on Sundays, and they 'play' differently than ones that have been used. So in 2007 (I think) at the strong urging of a one Peyton Manning (former Colt QB, btw), the NFL now allows teams to 'break in' their footballs for the game (think a baseball mitt).
Actually, Tom Brady co-led that charge with Manning in 2006, which I think is something the NFL took into consideration here. He'd previously gone on record about having a preference for certain PSI levels. I'm no lawyer, but that goes to motive, methinks.
Rick Gosselin (sp?) of the Dallas Morning News pointed out in a column how Brady's passer rating skyrocketed from 2006 on compared to the 2001-2005 period. Although I think there are a ton of other factors that played into that more than underinflated footballs. Even beyond maturity and experience, getting Randy Moss on the team in 2007 was more than a minor factor, right?
But Kraft, Brady and the Pats would do well to keep their traps shut and accept the punishment. Underinflated footballs aren't the kind of thing that should get asterisks placed next to the Pats' SB wins. It would have been a tempest in a teacup if they had just played ball (pun intended) when the whole thing broke. And it still won't be a big deal if they just let the storm pass. Keep the thing in the public consciousness by starting litigation, etc...different story.
Spygate, in comparison, was a big deal that could have had a more significant effect on game results. But that's over and done with and the evidence was destroyed.
Anyone consider that this punishment was more than the football?
Remember Spygate? Goodell took a feth - ton flack for destroying the tapes. He did that to partially cover the Pats and to get the issue off the media docket.
And now, this?
This is Goodell saying "I covered for you... and you still do this? Fine, it's hammer time!"
But Kraft, Brady and the Pats would do well to keep their traps shut and accept the punishment. Underinflated footballs aren't the kind of thing that should get asterisks placed next to the Pats' SB wins. It would have been a tempest in a teacup if they had just played ball (pun intended) when the whole thing broke. And it still won't be a big deal if they just let the storm pass. Keep the thing in the public consciousness by starting litigation, etc...different story.
Why should they?
The punishment here, especially considering the specious 'evidence,' is absurd.
sebster wrote: If the condition of the ball can be altered to give one team an unfair advantage, why in the hell would a professional sports organisation leave the teams to look after the ball themselves?
Any other sport I can think of the officials provide the ball, and take control of it during breaks in play. It’s just completely bizarre to me that a sport that is so heavily regulated like NFL would just trust the teams to bring their own gear.
I'm fine with the NFL providing game balls directly to officials and them having an official ball handler on each side of the field that provides new balls to the equipment manager as needed or directly to the players. Or put a locker on each end and near the middle on both sidelines that they can get to. Whatever it takes.
Easy E wrote: Brady was suspended more games than Ray Rice was initially. Really?
I guess according to the NFL, violence against women is just a case of "boys will be boys."
The NFL has pretty much no real credibility.
Even NHL officiating has more credibility, despite this year set a new record for most offside goals allowed! (and there's still better odds of the Loafs winning a Cup than video review being allowed by the league!)
Easy E wrote: Brady was suspended more games than Ray Rice was initially. Really?
I guess according to the NFL, violence against women is just a case of "boys will be boys."
To be fair, what Rice did had nothing to do with the actual game itself. I almost made the same point, because I think it's equally as absurd as you, but I think it's worth pointing out that hitting women, while deplorable, has no direct impact on fumble rates in an NFL game.
What the NFL needs to do is just let teams do whatever the hell they want with the ball. Why does it even matter what PSI or preparation process a team uses if they are the only ones using that ball?
And @Gorgon there is a 0.0% chance the patriots shut up and take the punishment because there is 0.0% evidence that they actually cheated. Everybody just keeps ignoring the fact the wells report PROVES THEY DIDNT CHEAT! But it's convenient for their hot sport takes so I don't blame them.
The biggest thing to remember is that people HATE winners as much as People LOVE winners. When a sports team or city is excessively good at a sport or sports they immediately draw two crowds. Band wagoners, people who literally change parts of their wardrobes to acquire a teams jersey's and clothing, also known as fair weather fans. And you get the haters. Case and point would be Boston. No city in America or Canada has as much success in sports as Boston. Red Soxs have won the world series in 2013, 2007 and 2004, The Boston Bruins won the Stanley Cup in 2011 and finished with the presidents trophy and made another appearance to the Stanley Cup playoffs in 2014. The Boston Celtics literally own about 25% of all NBA titles. So now with the patriots who won the super bowl in 2001, 2003, 2004 and 2014 and lost in the super bowl in 2007 and 2011, you have a team that literally draws the ire of all other sports fans. So realistically the report could have said donkeys were to blame but the hatred felt towards the patriots would not have diminished.
Chancetragedy wrote: What the NFL needs to do is just let teams do whatever the hell they want with the ball. Why does it even matter what PSI or preparation process a team uses if they are the only ones using that ball?
Agreed.
But then again I don't care if NFL players roid up, either. But then again, I prescribe to the Daniel Tosh school of thought:
They are not the only ones using the ball though, with every play the opponent has the opportunity to intercept and play the ball. Which, of course, is how this whole thing came to the forefront.
Chancetragedy wrote: And @Gorgon there is a 0.0% chance the patriots shut up and take the punishment because there is 0.0% evidence that they actually cheated. Everybody just keeps ignoring the fact the wells report PROVES THEY DIDNT CHEAT! But it's convenient for their hot sport takes so I don't blame them.
So then you really think that they'll be vindicated by litigation, and that will change hearts and minds?
I think most people know on some level that the actual "cheat" committed here is a minor thing. And if the Pats had treated it like a minor thing, it probably would have disappeared from public consciousness quickly.
Being obstructive, defiant and litigious is the opposite of treating it like a minor thing, and just ensures that it'll remain in the public consciousness. The Pats can't win this, and fighting it brings additional risks. What if Goodell and the NFL start talking more about Spygate and a possible pattern of behavior by the Pats? The Pats' name can turn to mud here if they aren't careful. Letting it go, and letting it go away is the best course of action, and the one I think they'll end up following.
Ghazkuul wrote: The biggest thing to remember is that people HATE winners as much as People LOVE winners. When a sports team or city is excessively good at a sport or sports they immediately draw two crowds. Band wagoners, people who literally change parts of their wardrobes to acquire a teams jersey's and clothing, also known as fair weather fans. And you get the haters. Case and point would be Boston. No city in America or Canada has as much success in sports as Boston. Red Soxs have won the world series in 2013, 2007 and 2004, The Boston Bruins won the Stanley Cup in 2011 and finished with the presidents trophy and made another appearance to the Stanley Cup playoffs in 2014. The Boston Celtics literally own about 25% of all NBA titles. So now with the patriots who won the super bowl in 2001, 2003, 2004 and 2014 and lost in the super bowl in 2007 and 2011, you have a team that literally draws the ire of all other sports fans. So realistically the report could have said donkeys were to blame but the hatred felt towards the patriots would not have diminished.
No city has had as much recent success as Boston. But then, not all cities have as much interest in all the major sports as Boston does...
The Habs have the most Cups in NHL history, and have made the play-offs all but a couple times across the past 10 years. Yet the only other pro team the city has are the Al's of the CFL. (who btw, until recently have been the CFL's version of the Patriots!)
But then, on the opposite end of the spectrum, no city has been as lamentable in all sports as Toronto... The Leafs suck. The Blue Jays suck. The Raptors suck. TFC has never once even made the play-offs. The Argos suck.
Yet for some reason, Toronto stadiums are always sold out crowds?
So I guess while half of people love to hate on winners, everyone must apparently love a loser?!
Chancetragedy wrote: And @Gorgon there is a 0.0% chance the patriots shut up and take the punishment because there is 0.0% evidence that they actually cheated. Everybody just keeps ignoring the fact the wells report PROVES THEY DIDNT CHEAT! But it's convenient for their hot sport takes so I don't blame them.
So then you really think that they'll be vindicated by litigation, and that will change hearts and minds?
I think most people know on some level that the actual "cheat" committed here is a minor thing. And if the Pats had treated it like a minor thing, it probably would have disappeared from public consciousness quickly.
Being obstructive, defiant and litigious is the opposite of treating it like a minor thing, and just ensures that it'll remain in the public consciousness. The Pats can't win this, and fighting it brings additional risks. What if Goodell and the NFL start talking more about Spygate and a possible pattern of behavior by the Pats? The Pats' name can turn to mud here if they aren't careful. Letting it go, and letting it go away is the best course of action, and the one I think they'll end up following.
The patriots name is already mud in the public consciousness. I do however think they will be vindicated in litigation if the punishment is reduced/overturned. I doubt it will change public perception but the NFL has already assured that won't happen with the fines/punishment/leaks/PRcampaign levied in their handling of this issue and previous ones.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
d-usa wrote: They are not the only ones using the ball though, with every play the opponent has the opportunity to intercept and play the ball. Which, of course, is how this whole thing came to the forefront.
Not true read the wells report. There was suspicions before the game and they were already planning on taking actions to check the balls and keep an eye on the patriots(which the refs failed MISERABLY at).
The 'heavy' penalty was made with the assumption that it would be appealed down to something more like 1 or 2 game suspension, $500K fine and a 4th round pick.
IF it doesn't get appealed down to that, then it will go to court.
As far as the Pat's 'name' and 'rep'?
That's already been settled for most everyone outside of the New England States - it is time for the Patriots and their fans to Embrace the Hate!
Alpharius wrote: The 'heavy' penalty was made with the assumption that it would be appealed down to something more like 1 or 2 game suspension, $500K fine and a 4th round pick.
Which is wrong on its face. The penalty should be appropriate at the outset.
Fuggin Roger Goddell. Dude makes $40MM a year and I'm not sure he'd be able to lead an elementary school line correctly.
Alpharius wrote: The 'heavy' penalty was made with the assumption that it would be appealed down to something more like 1 or 2 game suspension, $500K fine and a 4th round pick.
Which is wrong on its face. The penalty should be appropriate at the outset.
Fuggin Roger Goddell. Dude makes $40MM a year and I'm not sure he'd be able to lead an elementary school line correctly.
Eh...Goodell overreacted based on his handling of previous cases that unleashed a torrent of media criticisms. By overreaching here, Goodell will also be criticized. Mr. $40million/yr will be aight.
Chancetragedy wrote: What the NFL needs to do is just let teams do whatever the hell they want with the ball. Why does it even matter what PSI or preparation process a team uses if they are the only ones using that ball?
The thing is it isn't just the team providing the ball that is using it. The ball is an active element of all phases of the game, which means that its characteristics impact the opposing team as well; as such there needs to be some standard.
So I guess while half of people love to hate on winners, everyone must apparently love a loser?!
How else would you explain how Wrigley field is sold out, or nearly sold out day in and day out?
But then, if I stay with baseball... Tropicana field, where the TB Rays play is in a VERY unfortunate spot and so for much of the regular season the stadium isn't very full... until the team got good and suddenly it was a packed house in the playoffs.
The only teams I can think of that consistently fill their parks in any sport are the teams with the history. Joe Louis is almost always full, even if the Red Wings "suck", Lambeau Field is always packed. Centurylink field is packed (and the Kingdome before that) Oakland Coliseum is always full when the Raiders are playing, a bit less so when the As are playing. Dodger stadium draws people out, the SF Baseball Giants regularly fill out, etc.
The only teams I can think of that consistently fill their parks in any sport are the teams with the history. Joe Louis is almost always full, even if the Red Wings "suck", Lambeau Field is always packed. Centurylink field is packed (and the Kingdome before that) Oakland Coliseum is always full when the Raiders are playing, a bit less so when the As are playing. Dodger stadium draws people out, the SF Baseball Giants regularly fill out, etc.
The Raiders? The Raiders have literally the lowest attendance% per game of all of the NFL teams.
And when it comes to baseball, the Cardinals and Red Sox are the first two that come to mind.
@ensis just a little nitpick even though I agree with your overall statement and sentiment. But the Rays never sell out anything. Check their playoff attendance scores they are abysmal lol.
Automatically Appended Next Post: So is this just the new NFL thread by default now lol...
gorgon wrote: The Pats were a doormat playing an absolute dump of a stadium for most of my lifetime. They're nouveau riche to me.
The Steelers have sold out every home game since 1972.
Steelers fan then?
Hmmmm....
Goodell overreached here due to past bumblings in how The Shield has handled actual serious problems and issues of discipline.
He also overreached here to show that Bob Kraft being his 'friend' wasn't going to mean he was going to go easy on them - even though the Wells report said the head coach and the team weren't involved with the main issue here.
IF this goes to a truly 'Independent Arbitrator' it absolutely will result in reduced penalties.
IF it goes to Roger's usual 'go to guy', well, it might as well go right to court, because that's where it will end up.
And when it comes to baseball, the Cardinals and Red Sox are the first two that come to mind.
Probably true, but I wasn't going to mention the Red team that isn't a bird But there does seem to be a correlation between the age of the team and the number of fans at the park.
@ the person who mentioned the Raiders... funny you mention poorest attendance, because every time I see them on a televised game the stadium looks quite full. It certainly appears more full than say... Jacksonville. Seriously, how does Jacksonville still have a team?
cincydooley wrote: @Sebster -- They didn't used to let the teams do anything with the balls, but the problem ended up being that they'd use fresh footballs on Sundays, and they 'play' differently than ones that have been used. So in 2007 (I think) at the strong urging of a one Peyton Manning (former Colt QB, btw), the NFL now allows teams to 'break in' their footballs for the game (think a baseball mitt). I don't think the "breaking in" is a real question, but as you said, its more the controls weren't in place for the officials to adequate track the footballs and their pressure.
Hang on, so the officials let the players take balls to 'break them in', and presumably let the players do that breaking in in changerooms, away from the view of the public and officials? And then people were surprised when at least one team started using that breaking in process to do stuff that wasn't legal? That's amazing.
I mean, if these guys manipulated the ball in some way that was outside the rules, by all means punish them. But how did no-one see this coming? I’m coming at this from the point of view of cricket, a sport where the condition of the ball really matters. That is, games are won pretty regularly based on whether a team can get the ball to spin or swing, which is based largely on the condition of the ball.
Because a team can get a massive advantage from manipulating the ball it is always in the hands of the umpire when there’s a break in play. Even with that players have been caught manipulating the ball - but they’re limited to whatever they can get away with on the field in open view. The idea of letting players take the ball away to ready it for play, and just expecting they won’t do anything they can to get an advantage seems like extraordinary naivety.
Hang on, so the officials let the players take balls to 'break them in', and presumably let the players do that breaking in in changerooms, away from the view of the public and officials? And then people were surprised when at least one team started using that breaking in process to do stuff that wasn't legal? That's amazing.
Not exactly, I don't think.
Basically, the teams get to do whatever they want to the balls prior to the game. At game time, it appears the only thing the officials are checking the balls for is the air pressure, which they obviously aren't too concerned with because there was very little security/control around that process.
It's different than baseball or cricket, because the QB isn't throwing the ball to/at the other team like a pitcher/bowler does. So schmutz on the ball that gave it extra spin would matter less.
Again, I don't think most "football people" consider the pressure change that big a deal. It's mostly media and fan outrage, and IMO, it's nearly entirely because it's the patriots.
It's different than baseball or cricket, because the QB isn't throwing the ball to/at the other team like a pitcher/bowler does. So schmutz on the ball that gave it extra spin would matter less.
And yet there are numerous baseball players in the hall of fame who were notorious for their doctoring of the ball, and at least one made an entire career of it.
Also, I am surprised that, with Wilson being the sole provider of NFL footballs in much the same way that in a given Rugby Union Gilbert is the sole provider of balls (Aviva Premiership, Super Rugby, International matches, etc) that the NFL hasn't gone to a central system the way that Baseball, Rugby and even basketball do (Yes, I have actually seen a basketball ref change out a ball mid-game) Though baseball is really what I would consider a "semi-central" system but still works for this example.
That way, it creates a situation where it is the referees who air up, or have aired up, the equipment used, they have control of it until it is placed within the field of play, and players and teams do not have access to them in order to doctor, deflate, or "game" them up in any way. Yeah, I know that kickers in the NFL, as well as QBs need a few balls to warm up with, practice with etc. so I should think the team would still have its own supply for those purposes, but the actual game used equipment needs to be "league provided"
cincydooley wrote: Basically, the teams get to do whatever they want to the balls prior to the game. At game time, it appears the only thing the officials are checking the balls for is the air pressure, which they obviously aren't too concerned with because there was very little security/control around that process.
It's different than baseball or cricket, because the QB isn't throwing the ball to/at the other team like a pitcher/bowler does. So schmutz on the ball that gave it extra spin would matter less.
Again, I don't think most "football people" consider the pressure change that big a deal. It's mostly media and fan outrage, and IMO, it's nearly entirely because it's the patriots.
No, I get how it's different, and less of a big deal that ball tampering in other sports.
But at the same time, when you say 'the teams get to do whatever they want to the balls'... that isn't true, because they weren't allowed to adjust the air pressure. And even if its only one thing that players can't do, and even if its a pretty minor thing, letting players head off with the footballs unsupervised and just expecting that they won't do that one thing is just weird, I think.
That said, I do get that it's a pretty minor breach (I mean, even as a non-football person it seems pretty minor), it's just interesting how stuff like this works in other sports.
Alpharius wrote: IF it doesn't get appealed down to that, then it will go to court.
So, what exactly is it going to go to court for? If the NFL has any sense at all they have a rule saying "if you want to participate in our league you have to follow our rules", so what are they going to argue in court? It makes about as much sense as suing the NFL to get them to pick up a penalty flag.
Hang on, so the officials let the players take balls to 'break them in', and presumably let the players do that breaking in in changerooms, away from the view of the public and officials? And then people were surprised when at least one team started using that breaking in process to do stuff that wasn't legal? That's amazing.
It's also stupid because it takes about a week to properly "break in" a ball. When I was playing our offense would practice with the game balls for that very reason.
And yet there are numerous baseball players in the hall of fame who were notorious for their doctoring of the ball, and at least one made an entire career of it.
In college our QB used to hide an inflation needle in his wrist band, and that was just D3.
How else would you explain how Wrigley field is sold out, or nearly sold out day in and day out?
A hell of a bar scene, and the pretty girls that go with it.
This. Unfortunately you also get a lot of d-bags in skinny jeans with questionable facial hair choices.
There is also the nostalgia factor of a 101 year old ball park (with half as many urinals as it needs). Also, they're on WGN nearly every night, so they have a lot of fans nationwide.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Initial thoughts on that website. It's a horrendous misstep and a terrible terrible idea by the patriots.
I disagree, I think the patriots are well within their rights to blast the hell out of that useless report and to paint both the wells report and Goodell as useless and biased. The fact that the report specifically fails to blame Brady or the Patriots is the reason I say this. How can you punish a team as harshly as Goodell did based on a report that specifically says they couldn't find hard evidence or proof.
Ghazkuul wrote: How can you punish a team as harshly as Goodell did based on a report that specifically says they couldn't find hard evidence or proof.
Because there's a huge difference between "we can't find absolute proof that would meet the standards of a criminal case" and "we're not sure about this". Brady very clearly cheated and knew exactly what was going on, even if the NFL can't prove it beyond any possible doubt.
Ghazkuul wrote: How can you punish a team as harshly as Goodell did based on a report that specifically says they couldn't find hard evidence or proof.
Because there's a huge difference between "we can't find absolute proof that would meet the standards of a criminal case" and "we're not sure about this". Brady very clearly cheated and knew exactly what was going on, even if the NFL can't prove it beyond any possible doubt.
So in a case where they can't prove anything the Patriots should be fined 1million dollars, lose 2 draft picks and their starting quarterback for 4 games.
In a case where 3 separate teams were found to be cheating with CONCLUSIVE evidence, 2 teams were given a warning and 1 team was fined something stupid like 25k. Please explain that
Automatically Appended Next Post: Initial thoughts on that website. It's a horrendous misstep and a terrible terrible idea by the patriots.
I disagree, I think the patriots are well within their rights to blast the hell out of that useless report and to paint both the wells report and Goodell as useless and biased. The fact that the report specifically fails to blame Brady or the Patriots is the reason I say this. How can you punish a team as harshly as Goodell did based on a report that specifically says they couldn't find hard evidence or proof.
I agree with your sentiment, but it's clear you haven't read the website. It's frankly embarrassing some of the patriots "explanations" for the texts and some of the other stuff. Some of it I agree with but a lot of it makes the patriots look so guilty and I was 1000% on the patriots side until this, now I'm really starting to rethink my stance on their postion.
This also makes me think the patriots are not going to be taking an appeal to court as you don't come out and lay all your cards on the table if you were going to.
Ghazkuul wrote: How can you punish a team as harshly as Goodell did based on a report that specifically says they couldn't find hard evidence or proof.
Because there's a huge difference between "we can't find absolute proof that would meet the standards of a criminal case" and "we're not sure about this". Brady very clearly cheated and knew exactly what was going on, even if the NFL can't prove it beyond any possible doubt.
Wait...I think you had a brain fart or something?
"Brady very clearly cheated and knew exactly what was going on, even if the NFL can't prove it beyond any possible doubt."
Huh...okay - so essentially - the NFL can't prove it but we "clearly" know what is going on. That is an idiotic statement if if ever seen one.
On to more serious matters of dumbfethery - Refs can't even recall which gauged was used to measure the footballs at the start of the game (out of 2). Of these gauges it's been found that they don't produce consistent pressure readings with each other. Meaning you have no baseline and therefore can't even prove the balls were in fact under inflated and or properly inflated to begin with. Interestingly - 3/4 of the colts balls were also "underinflated" at half time (shall we just ignore this part). Also - 0 connection to Brady in any way other than a "more likely than not assumption" (not my opinion - it's the investigators own words). Get outta here man.
Here's my prediction to all you butt hurt patriot haters. Brady won't miss a single game because of this. Brady is GOAT.
Except that in the wells report the refs could recall what gauge they used, then wells had them say "it's certainly possible" to using a different gauge then Wells goes on to claim they said they "used the other gauge" because if he went on what the refs recalled it exonerates the patriots completely. But so many facts were completely disregarded because they didn't fit the NFL agenda.
According to the timeline of events laid out in the report, all but two of the Patriots’ game balls were properly inflated during the pregame inspection. Two tested below 12.5 psi, the low end of the threshold for game balls. The Colts’ game balls all tested at 13.1 or 13.0 psi, although “one or two footballs may have registered 12.8 or 12.9.” The report said it was evident the Colts were targeting 13.0 psi for their footballs, which were all within the “permissible range.”
Furthermore:
Each of the Patriots’ 11 footballs tested at halftime measured below the 12.5 psi benchmark. Four Colts balls tested were between 12.5 and 13.5 psi. Only four of the Colts’ balls were tested because officials were running out of time before the start of the second half. The Patriots’ footballs were inflated to proper levels for the rest of the game.
This is what I've been harping on the entire time haha. there is so much misinformation going on its crazy. Anybody who has actually read the wells report understands what a crock it is and how biased it is it's crazy.
Ghazkuul wrote: So in a case where they can't prove anything the Patriots should be fined 1million dollars, lose 2 draft picks and their starting quarterback for 4 games.
In a case where 3 separate teams were found to be cheating with CONCLUSIVE evidence, 2 teams were given a warning and 1 team was fined something stupid like 25k. Please explain that
The other teams should have been punished more for cheating with the balls. Though, to be fair, their losing records are kind of their own punishment. That's probably why nobody really cared about Atlanta using fake crowd noise and still having a terrible season.
Ghazkuul wrote: How can you punish a team as harshly as Goodell did based on a report that specifically says they couldn't find hard evidence or proof.
Because there's a huge difference between "we can't find absolute proof that would meet the standards of a criminal case" and "we're not sure about this". Brady very clearly cheated and knew exactly what was going on, even if the NFL can't prove it beyond any possible doubt.
Again, I'll direct you to Jonathan Vilma's case during the Bounties thing in New Orleans.
Brady isn't going to miss a game, and the NFL is going to have egg on it's face, again.
Xenomancers wrote: Huh...okay - so essentially - the NFL can't prove it but we "clearly" know what is going on. That is an idiotic statement if if ever seen one.
No, you just don't understand the difference between absolute proof and proof beyond any reasonable doubt. The fact that nobody has a video of the balls being deflated or a signed confession from Brady is irrelevant because there's no other plausible explanation for the facts. We know that:
1) The balls were under-inflated.
2) A Patriots employee was caught on camera taking the balls into a bathroom after walking past other, more convenient, bathrooms.
3) No low-level employee is going to tamper with the balls used by the team's future-hall-of-fame quarterback without that quarterback's permission.
Any alternative theory for what was going on is about as plausible as the conspiracy theories about black helicopters and mind control in the chemtrails.
Chancetragedy wrote: Kronk that's wrong. Read page 69 and 73 of the wells report. 1 gauge measure 3/4 colts balls at under 12.5.
Are you going with the "crooked needle" theory?
Crooked needle theory? No theory here, I'm basing my arguments on facts presented in the wells report not the spin attached to it. Science in the wells report proves that the patriots balls measured at half time of AFCCG show that due to the ideal gas law 8/11 patriots footballs were in the expected range of PSI loss. And 2 of those that were out of range were less than .2 psi out of that range. So 10/11 patriots footballs were within normal error of what science proves. In my mind this shows there was zero tampering on footballs that the refs state explicitly were set to 12.5-12.6PSI at the start of the game.
Ghazkuul wrote: So in a case where they can't prove anything the Patriots should be fined 1million dollars, lose 2 draft picks and their starting quarterback for 4 games.
In a case where 3 separate teams were found to be cheating with CONCLUSIVE evidence, 2 teams were given a warning and 1 team was fined something stupid like 25k. Please explain that
The other teams should have been punished more for cheating with the balls. Though, to be fair, their losing records are kind of their own punishment. That's probably why nobody really cared about Atlanta using fake crowd noise and still having a terrible season.
It could also be a situation where we have a timeline.... I'd bet that the NFL, in warning the first team caught with flat balls, the NFL sent that exact same warning to the whole league. The second team, if a bit later in time, the League resent the warning, this time reinforcing the idea that this applies to EVERYONE, not just the team caught. 3rd team the League is like, "OK guys, clearly you aren't getting the message, give me 25k... STOP DOING THIS!!!!" Then the Pats get caught, and by now they have to be, "for feths sake guys!! how bloody hard is it to keep a ball inflated right!?"
Also, the League doesn't have to operate under the "innocent until proven guilty" logic that actual law does.... Just because they cannot reasonably prove anything, clearly in someone's mind up there, the Patriots couldn't clearly disprove the charges, and are thus being punished.
I think the site is a real mistake, and makes it look like *THEY* think their legacy hangs in the balance. It doesn't, at least not in the sense of their SB wins being in jeopardy, etc. As far as the actual penalties go:
4-game suspension -- They'll gut their way through those games and post the best record they can, then try to hit the ground running after Brady returns. The AFC East is the opposite of a murderer's row.
Fine -- Pocket change for Kraft; who cares.
Loss of draft picks -- Stings, but the roster repercussions won't truly be felt until 2018, maybe 2019. At that point, Brady and Belichick might both be retired, and stinking for a couple years might be the best course of action for a rebuild anyway.
If they felt the need to vent, then release a short statement saying WE WUZ ROBBED, BUT WE'RE MOVING ON. And then move on.
gorgon wrote: I think the site is a real mistake, and makes it look like *THEY* think their legacy hangs in the balance. It doesn't, at least not in the sense of their SB wins being in jeopardy, etc. As far as the actual penalties go:
4-game suspension -- They'll gut their way through those games and post the best record they can, then try to hit the ground running after Brady returns. The AFC East is the opposite of a murderer's row.
Fine -- Pocket change for Kraft; who cares.
Loss of draft picks -- Stings, but the roster repercussions won't truly be felt until 2018, maybe 2019. At that point, Brady and Belichick might both be retired, and stinking for a couple years might be the best course of action for a rebuild anyway.
I agree with you here, creating a website makes them look paranoid... and if they look paranoid about anything then, in the minds of many, they are that much more guilty of.... crimes.
2. While I hope that their "gutting through" involves being 0-4 when Brady comes back, you are right in that the rest of the AFC East is rather.... soft (cupcake isn't quite the right term... but it's close)
3. Assuming Brady serves all 4 games of the suspension, I believe it was pointed out earlier ITT, that Kraft will in essence "make" money with his little pocket change fine.
4. I tend to agree with you,, although Brady has given interviews stating he wants to be QBing well into his 40s (and he's not far off that right now)... so it may be that there may be an aging Brady, no Bellichick and a "rebuilding" terrible franchise.
Ghazkuul wrote: So in a case where they can't prove anything the Patriots should be fined 1million dollars, lose 2 draft picks and their starting quarterback for 4 games.
In a case where 3 separate teams were found to be cheating with CONCLUSIVE evidence, 2 teams were given a warning and 1 team was fined something stupid like 25k. Please explain that
The other teams should have been punished more for cheating with the balls. Though, to be fair, their losing records are kind of their own punishment. That's probably why nobody really cared about Atlanta using fake crowd noise and still having a terrible season.
It could also be a situation where we have a timeline.... I'd bet that the NFL, in warning the first team caught with flat balls, the NFL sent that exact same warning to the whole league. The second team, if a bit later in time, the League resent the warning, this time reinforcing the idea that this applies to EVERYONE, not just the team caught. 3rd team the League is like, "OK guys, clearly you aren't getting the message, give me 25k... STOP DOING THIS!!!!" Then the Pats get caught, and by now they have to be, "for feths sake guys!! how bloody hard is it to keep a ball inflated right!?"
Also, the League doesn't have to operate under the "innocent until proven guilty" logic that actual law does.... Just because they cannot reasonably prove anything, clearly in someone's mind up there, the Patriots couldn't clearly disprove the charges, and are thus being punished.
The time line was this,
2012: Chargers apply Stickum to game balls during game for competitive advantage. $20,000 fine
2014(December): Panthers/Vikings heat balls during game. An act actually forbidden in the rules. Both teams warned...thats it
2015: (January): Patriots balls possibly under inflated (possibly because we still can't prove they were fully inflated or under inflated because the NFL sucks) $1,000,000 fine, Loss of 2 draft picks (1st round and 4th round on following years) and Patriots lose one of the best ever quarter backs for 4 games.
Ghazkuul wrote: So in a case where they can't prove anything the Patriots should be fined 1million dollars, lose 2 draft picks and their starting quarterback for 4 games.
In a case where 3 separate teams were found to be cheating with CONCLUSIVE evidence, 2 teams were given a warning and 1 team was fined something stupid like 25k. Please explain that
The other teams should have been punished more for cheating with the balls. Though, to be fair, their losing records are kind of their own punishment. That's probably why nobody really cared about Atlanta using fake crowd noise and still having a terrible season.
It could also be a situation where we have a timeline.... I'd bet that the NFL, in warning the first team caught with flat balls, the NFL sent that exact same warning to the whole league. The second team, if a bit later in time, the League resent the warning, this time reinforcing the idea that this applies to EVERYONE, not just the team caught. 3rd team the League is like, "OK guys, clearly you aren't getting the message, give me 25k... STOP DOING THIS!!!!" Then the Pats get caught, and by now they have to be, "for feths sake guys!! how bloody hard is it to keep a ball inflated right!?"
Also, the League doesn't have to operate under the "innocent until proven guilty" logic that actual law does.... Just because they cannot reasonably prove anything, clearly in someone's mind up there, the Patriots couldn't clearly disprove the charges, and are thus being punished.
The time line was this,
2012: Chargers apply Stickum to game balls during game for competitive advantage. $20,000 fine
2014(December): Panthers/Vikings heat balls during game. An act actually forbidden in the rules. Both teams warned...thats it
2015: (January): Patriots balls possibly under inflated (possibly because we still can't prove they were fully inflated or under inflated because the NFL sucks) $1,000,000 fine, Loss of 2 draft picks (1st round and 4th round on following years) and Patriots lose one of the best ever quarter backs for 4 games.
You need to understand these are repeat offenders.
you need to realize that no they aren't. Spygate was proven to be a joke just like this. Bill's only violation was that he had the Camera on the field and not up in the press box. And the rules actually gave him a loop hole because they specify that you can't do that to gain in advantage IN THAT GAME. where as he only viewed the tapes after wards to use against that team the next game...something he is allowed to do by having a Camera in the press box. So it really didn't even matter.
And beyond that, THEIRS NO PROOF! lol, the patriots are being punished for something that the NFL thinks they did, not something they actually Did. Based on that reasoning, I think your a pedophile so IM going to have to arrest you now and confiscate your phone....as someone pointed out the NFL doesn't operate on the simple principle of Innocent until proven guilty, but you would think after a full on investigation where no proof was found they would at least have backed down and apologized.
Automatically Appended Next Post: *Side note: That pedophile thing isn't a personal insult or attack I was just using that as an example of how that reasoning goes.
2012: Chargers apply Stickum to game balls during game for competitive advantage. $20,000 fine
Stickum, IIRC has been a banned "substance" in the NFL since the late 70s or early 80s. As such, it's no wonder that the NFL would come down and fine the Chargers for doing something that has been illegal for some considerable time.
And unlike letting air out, it's VERY easy to tell when stickum or pine tar or any similar substance is applied.
Ie, this picture, taken when it was still legal to use such stuff:
I definitely remember seeing a picture of Jack Tatum, a DB on the Raiders round the same time as the pictured player, only he looked a bit like a green sasquatch he had so much grass stuck to the stickum stuck to his arms
Ghazkuul wrote: Bill's only violation was that he had the Camera on the field and not up in the press box.
That's still cheating. Call the punishment overkill if you want, but there's no doubt about their guilt.
And beyond that, THEIRS NO PROOF!
There's also no proof that you exist and aren't just my sockpuppet account (because I love arguing with myself).
Based on that reasoning, I think your a pedophile so IM going to have to arrest you now and confiscate your phone....
Except you have no evidence at all for that claim. There is significant evidence for the Patriots cheating, even if that evidence falls a bit short of being indisputable.
but you would think after a full on investigation where no proof was found they would at least have backed down and apologized.
No, because in the real world the standard of proof is not "beyond any possible doubt" with a signed confession from Brady himself that he ordered the footballs deflated. The investigation did find strong evidence that Brady cheated, and the theory that Brady cheated is overwhelmingly more plausible than any of the alternatives.
Actually the real world standard is "Beyond a possible doubt" at least in Western Countries. If your boss thought you stole something but couldn't prove it he couldn't fire you without the risk of being sued for wrongful termination.
in this case the proof isn't strong enough to even be considered "overwhelming" in fact its far more plausible (especially if you have read the actual reports) that this entire thing is because of inept referees with inaccurate gauges.
And lastly, if by some small chance the patriots did cheat here and it was entirely Brady's idea....why the massive discipline smack down? As shown above in other posts, 3 other teams have committed more egregious crimes and have had hard evidence against them and yet the biggest fine was 20,000.
Ghazkuul wrote: Actually the real world standard is "Beyond a possible doubt" at least in Western Countries.
In criminal trials it is. This is not a criminal trial, it is a sports league enforcing a penalty within its own rules. The standards of criminal trials don't apply, just like you can't demand proof "beyond any reasonable doubt" for a penalty flag.
As shown above in other posts, 3 other teams have committed more egregious crimes and have had hard evidence against them and yet the biggest fine was 20,000.
They should have been punished more, but perhaps the NFL's view was that having such a bad team is its own punishment.
Xenomancers wrote: Huh...okay - so essentially - the NFL can't prove it but we "clearly" know what is going on. That is an idiotic statement if if ever seen one.
No, you just don't understand the difference between absolute proof and proof beyond any reasonable doubt. The fact that nobody has a video of the balls being deflated or a signed confession from Brady is irrelevant because there's no other plausible explanation for the facts. We know that:
1) The balls were under-inflated.
2) A Patriots employee was caught on camera taking the balls into a bathroom after walking past other, more convenient, bathrooms.
3) No low-level employee is going to tamper with the balls used by the team's future-hall-of-fame quarterback without that quarterback's permission.
Any alternative theory for what was going on is about as plausible as the conspiracy theories about black helicopters and mind control in the chemtrails.
I understand that absolute proof and proof without a reasonable doubt are not met by this investigation. The very statement by Wells that Brady "more likely than not" is an admission of not ruling out a reasonable doubt.
Is it possible that some avid pats fans got a job ass ball boys for that patriots? Absolutely - in fact that is something you'd expect.
Is it possible that the balls boys overheard Brady's ball preference in a conversation and weren't actually ordered to deflate the balls, they just did it because they want their favorite team to go down in history as the greatest dynasty of all time? Uhh...Yeah that's definitely possible even dare I say...plausible?
Since you can't prove ether way - you have to go with what you know - which isn't very much. It's pure speculation to say the balls were under inflated granted the 2 gauges used to measure the balls are inconsistent with each other. Clearly they aren't functioning properly or at least one of them isn't - of which the refs can not recall which was used for which measurements. If this was a legal case - it would be thrown out instantly.
Also - why exactly aren't the colts losing a first round pick and having their star QB suspended for 4 games with a million dollar fine for a 25k punishable offense? There is just as much evidence that the colts were playing with under inflated balls too!!! Which even I, a man who thinks haters are out to get the patriots, can not believe is being ignored here.
Ghazkuul wrote: Actually the real world standard is "Beyond a possible doubt" at least in Western Countries.
In criminal trials it is. This is not a criminal trial, it is a sports league enforcing a penalty within its own rules. The standards of criminal trials don't apply, just like you can't demand proof "beyond any reasonable doubt" for a penalty flag.
As shown above in other posts, 3 other teams have committed more egregious crimes and have had hard evidence against them and yet the biggest fine was 20,000.
They should have been punished more, but perhaps the NFL's view was that having such a bad team is its own punishment.
Actually beyond a reasonable doubt is exactly the standard that is used in overturning plays in a challenge. Conclusive evidence is required to overturn a play. This is also the logical standard for basically every proof I have ever seen. I'm not sure why sports penalties should be removed from actual logical proofing. Especially when you consider how successful the patriots are and how many people whould go out of their way to make them look like cheaters. Take a look at any ESPN post related to the patriots. Youll have 20-30 trolls calling the patirots cheaters...usually...steelers fans/ seahawks fans/ and ravens fans...not so much the colts though - they are a respectable fan base and don't typically stoop that low.
Crooked needle theory? No theory here, I'm basing my arguments on facts presented in the wells report not the spin attached to it.
Crooked needle theory: The notion that the inflation needles used to test the Patriot's balls were crooked, and therefore could not be relied upon.
Oh haha I haven't heard that one yet. I thought you were referencing something about the gauge with the crooked needle the refs used during the game, but it was like that from factory so I'm sure it was fine.
Exactly what I was thinking in regards to reasonable doubt, Xenos.
Peregrine, have you ever actually watched an NFL game that had a challenge? They even require the refs use explanations to substantiate that they did or did not have conclusive evidence.
cincydooley wrote: Peregrine, have you ever actually watched an NFL game that had a challenge? They even require the refs use explanations to substantiate that they did or did not have conclusive evidence.
That's a limited number of plays, not every penalty flag. Let's say you're out of challenges. Can you demand that the ref pick up their flag because there isn't proof beyond any reasonable doubt that your player committed a penalty? Of course not.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Xenomancers wrote: Is it possible that the balls boys overheard Brady's ball preference in a conversation and weren't actually ordered to deflate the balls, they just did it because they want their favorite team to go down in history as the greatest dynasty of all time? Uhh...Yeah that's definitely possible even dare I say...plausible?
So this theory is that a low-level employee assumed that the team's future-hall-of-fame quarterback wanted deflated balls and deflated them without asking for confirmation of this assumption, despite knowing that if they were wrong they would be fired AND would have to forever live with the shame of knowing that they sabotaged their favorite player by giving him balls that were deflated below his preference?
If this was a legal case - it would be thrown out instantly.
But it isn't, and that's the point.
There is just as much evidence that the colts were playing with under inflated balls too!!!
There isn't. And there also isn't evidence that any Colts employee took a bag of balls into a bathroom (where they're conveniently out of sight of the cameras) or participated in conversations that reference deflating footballs.
I could ask you the same question: why are you so outraged about my "outrage" that you feel compelled to tell us all how you don't like it instead of just ignoring it?
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Xenomancers wrote: You disappoint me - normally you are very logical when I see you post - you seem content to ignore logic here.
What "logic" am I ignoring? Your claim that this would be thrown out instantly if it was a legal case is completely irrelevant because this is not a legal case. Your "logic" is about as relevant as claiming that Brady shouldn't be suspended because your forum name starts with 'X'.
That's a limited number of plays, not every penalty flag. Let's say you're out of challenges. Can you demand that the ref pick up their flag because there isn't proof beyond any reasonable doubt that your player committed a penalty? Of course not.
.
So is that a confirmation that you've never actually watched an NFL game, or at the very least don't know the rules? Do you call it "sportsball?" You can't challenge a penalty as they're considered judgement calls. You can challenge multiple types of plays that deal in facts. Which require conclusive evidence.
You've also completely ignored my urging for you to investigate the Jonathan Vilma case, in which his year long suspension was THROWN OUT BY A COURT.
You really seem to not know what you're talking about, at all, in this instance. Maybe stick to the online dating thread?
What "logic" am I ignoring? Your claim that this would be thrown out instantly if it was a legal case is completely irrelevant because this is not a legal case. Your "logic" is about as relevant as claiming that Brady shouldn't be suspended because your forum name starts with 'X'.
'
Except it isn't remotely irrelevant, as I've evidenced to you with Vilma MULTIPLE TIMES.
You disappoint me - normally you are very logical when I see you post - you seem content to ignore logic here. You MUST be a sea-hawks fan.
Hey now!!! I'm a Hawks fan, and I resent that remark good sir! In truth he sounds more like a 49ers fan
Nah, if he was a 49ers fan, he'd still be so salty about the no penalty call on the 4th and goal play when the Ravens beat the 49ers in the 2012 Harbaugh Bowl that he wouldn't care what Tom Brady did or didn't do.
cincydooley wrote: So is that a confirmation that you've never actually watched an NFL game, or at the very least don't know the rules? Do you call it "sportsball?" You can't challenge a penalty as they're considered judgement calls. You can challenge multiple types of plays that deal in facts. Which require conclusive evidence.
I guess you don't even bother to remember your own posts? Here's the conversation:
Me: you can't demand that the ref pick up the penalty flag because they didn't provide proof beyond any reasonable doubt that the player committed a penalty.
You: challenges have that standard of proof.
Me: not every play involves a challenge, so let's consider the ones that aren't challenged.
You: NO CHALLENGES ON PENALTIES.
YOU are the one who brought challenges into a discussion of penalty flags, so I guess that means that you've never watched an NFL game and call it "sportsball"?
YOU are the one who brought challenges into a discussion of penalty flags, so I guess that means that you've never watched an NFL game and call it "sportsball"?
In fact, no, I wasn't. Xeno was.
You've constantly questioned where the "burden of proof" figured into the NFL at all. Xeno introduced challenges, which DO require said burden of proof.
Then you followed with some nonsensical comment that linked penalties to challenges, which I refuted, as you can't challenge penalties.
All while continuing to ignore the Vilma case as a precedent for league suspensions getting tossed out by a court of law.
You're really struggling tonight, eh? Pretty disappointing rebuttal. Was your "I know you are but what am I" button broken?
regardless of the who said what nonsense, the fact remains that the "burden of proof" ALWAYS lies on the accuser, and with a precedent of a court of law taking up a case you can bet that the patriots will win in the end and if Goodell is a moron and tries to fight this to the end instead of using arbitration to reduce the fine/suspensions and give back the draft picks then Brady and Kraft will take him and the NFL to court and win. FACT!
So is that a confirmation that you've never actually watched an NFL game, or at the very least don't know the rules? Do you call it "sportsball?" You can't challenge a penalty as they're considered judgement calls. You can challenge multiple types of plays that deal in facts. Which require conclusive evidence.
Well, no, that's not true. Ultimately all plays are subject to judgment, the question is really only whether or not a team is allowed to subject that judgment to inquiry. An instructive example is that catches can be challenged, with one of primary standards being whether or not the receiver made a "football move". While not wholly arbitrary this standard is also not purely subject to fact.
Ok, if you're just going to jump into a conversation and ignore previous comments, then try to pretend that comments based on that history are wrong because you took them out of context, there's no point in having a discussion with you.
So is that a confirmation that you've never actually watched an NFL game, or at the very least don't know the rules? Do you call it "sportsball?" You can't challenge a penalty as they're considered judgement calls. You can challenge multiple types of plays that deal in facts. Which require conclusive evidence.
Well, no, that's not true. Ultimately all plays are subject to judgment, the question is really only whether or not a team is allowed to subject that judgment to inquiry. An instructive example is that catches can be challenged, with one of primary standards being whether or not the receiver made a "football move". While not wholly arbitrary this standard is also not purely subject to fact.
That's a good point. The whole nebulous "football move" thing is certainly still a judgement call. But even in that instance, on a challenge, there's still a considerable burden of proof (conclusive video evidence as they like to say on the TV) in order to overturn the original call on the field.
Regardless, challenges stand as a good exemplar of an area where the NFL does, in fact, deal with a distinct burden of proof.
And then again, there's the whole Vilma court case that I continue to reference that Peregrine continues to ignore as a precedent for penalties moving to a court of law.
Ok, if you're just going to jump into a conversation and ignore previous comments, then try to pretend that comments based on that history are wrong because you took them out of context, there's no point in having a discussion with you.
I didn't.
You don't have a fething clue what you're talking about. That's the real problem here.
Except it isn't remotely irrelevant, as I've evidenced to you with Vilma MULTIPLE TIMES.
It is largely irrelevant. In the Vilma case Vilma was speaking to the court of public opinion while using Federal courts as a forum, it is telling that his defamation suit was eventually dismissed.
Except it isn't remotely irrelevant, as I've evidenced to you with Vilma MULTIPLE TIMES.
It is largely irrelevant. In the Vilma case Vilma was speaking to the court of public opinion while using Federal courts as a forum, it is telling that his defamation suit was eventually dismissed.
Ghazkuul wrote: regardless of the who said what nonsense, the fact remains that the "burden of proof" ALWAYS lies on the accuser
In a CRIMINAL TRIAL. This is not a criminal trial.
In a civil case (which this will be, if it does go to court) the issue will be interpretation of contracts and rules. The court can decide if the NFL followed its own rules and contract obligations correctly, and throw out or modify the punishment if they feel that the NFL did not, but they're not determining guilt or innocence. If the NFL's policies and contracts with the players (and the players' union) says "guilty until proven innocent" then that's the standard that will be used.
Regardless, challenges stand as a good exemplar of an area where the NFL does, in fact, deal with a distinct burden of proof.
Sure, but the same is not true of off-field disciplinary action. In such a scenario the NFL has much more leeway, and the overall process is far different.
In fact, given that Brady and/or the Patriots would be the plaintiff in any hypothetical court case THEY would have the burden of proof. They would have to prove, by the standards of proof of civil court, that the NFL somehow violated its own rules and contracts or violated labor laws.
Regardless, challenges stand as a good exemplar of an area where the NFL does, in fact, deal with a distinct burden of proof.
Sure, but the same is not true of off-field disciplinary action. In such a scenario the NFL has much more leeway, and the overall process is far different.
In my opinion, when this goes to appeals the court will find that Goddell violated his the agreement with the NFLPA in hiring Wells, who has proven himself twice now to be of questionably impartiality, something required by the agreement. Its why the statements from the former Fins coaches are going to be so damning. I don't think it'll even get to the absurd severity of the penalties themselves.
Even if you disagree with my conclusion, you cannot deny that Vilma's suit was based on the fact Goodell singled him out, and that it was eventually thrown out.
Even if you disagree with my conclusion, you cannot deny that Vilma's suit was based on the fact Goodell singled him out, and that it was eventually thrown out.
True. His was tossed based on the bias.
I believe they're going to be able to prove that same bias with Ted Wells which, again, violates the labor agreement for an "impartial third party."
In my opinion, when this goes to appeals the court will find that Goddell violated his the agreement with the NFLPA in hiring Wells, who has proven himself twice now to be of questionably impartiality, something required by the agreement. Its why the statements from the former Fins coaches are going to be so damning. I don't think it'll even get to the absurd severity of the penalties themselves.
I don't believe that's sufficient to nullify the suspension and the the lost draft picks, nor do I believe that it should be. Those are internal league matters and nullifying that sort of thing by legal action sets a dangerous precedent. The fine against the Patriots themselves is different.
Alpharius wrote: I'm just wondering why you're so worked up and full of anger about it - it is...odd.
And really, abandoning logic, and 'answering' a question with a question?
Really?
Actually, while I disagree with Peregrine tone on these forums most of the time, it's Ghazkuul and Xenomancers that seem to be working themselves into a frenzy in this case.
Alpharius wrote: I'm just wondering why you're so worked up and full of anger about it - it is...odd.
And really, abandoning logic, and 'answering' a question with a question?
Really?
Actually, while I disagree with Peregrine tone on these forums most of the time, it's Ghazkuul and Xenomancers that seem to be working themselves into a frenzy in this case.
Peregrine is the level headed one, here.
To be fair - I'm a patriots fan and my team is getting smeared by BS allegations...again...it puts a sour taste in my mouth. If there was conclusive evidence I wouldn't dispute it. Also I'm not in a frenzy - though I am passionate about Bradys legacy being tarnished for the NFL to get good ratings in the off season.
There isn't. And there also isn't evidence that any Colts employee ... participated in conversations that reference deflating footballs.
Statements like this aren't actually based on facts/logic though, are they?
Have the Colts turned over all their records, emails, cell phones, texts?
We don't know what Andrew Luck has said or arranged with his equipment managers, do we?
Anyway, in terms actual news concerning this investigation, it is odd that Roger Goodell has set HIMSELF up to be the 'arbitrator' in this case - I'm not sure that's going to be accepted by the NFLPA, or if it is now 'do not visit Roger, go directly to court'.
Anyway, in terms actual news concerning this investigation, it is odd that Roger Goodell has set HIMSELF up to be the 'arbitrator' in this case - I'm not sure that's going to be accepted by the NFLPA, or if it is now 'do not visit Roger, go directly to court'.
Goodell is protecting the NFL's 'shield' here and I think he has that plenary power.
Anyway, in terms actual news concerning this investigation, it is odd that Roger Goodell has set HIMSELF up to be the 'arbitrator' in this case - I'm not sure that's going to be accepted by the NFLPA, or if it is now 'do not visit Roger, go directly to court'.
Goodell is protecting the NFL's 'shield' here and I think he has that plenary power.
I didn't mean to imply that he COULDN'T do it, just that he SHOULDN'T do it!
It details the commissioner’s power to resolve disputes and to take action against a person connected with the league, when the person engages in conduct detrimental to the league.
Xenomancers wrote: HAHA, I just figure the seahawks have the most to gain from this and therefore most reason to support these penalties. This Rivalry is new to me.
How do the Seahawks gain anything from this? Suspending Brady and taking away draft picks doesn't go back in time and change the outcome of last year's super bowl, and they don't play again this season unless they both make it to the super bowl. The real winners are the Patriots' division rivals (you know, the teams that play the Patriots at least twice a year), who get a four-game head start and a better draft if the suspension is upheld. And everyone who cares about honest football, of course.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Alpharius wrote: Have the Colts turned over all their records, emails, cell phones, texts?
We don't know what Andrew Luck has said or arranged with his equipment managers, do we?
Is there any reason to believe that the Colts have cheated in the same way? No.
Xenomancers wrote: HAHA, I just figure the seahawks have the most to gain from this and therefore most reason to support these penalties. This Rivalry is new to me.
How do the Seahawks gain anything from this? Suspending Brady and taking away draft picks doesn't go back in time and change the outcome of last year's super bowl, and they don't play again this season unless they both make it to the super bowl. The real winners are the Patriots' division rivals (you know, the teams that play the Patriots at least twice a year), who get a four-game head start and a better draft if the suspension is upheld. And everyone who cares about honest football, of course.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Alpharius wrote: Have the Colts turned over all their records, emails, cell phones, texts?
We don't know what Andrew Luck has said or arranged with his equipment managers, do we?
Is there any reason to believe that the Colts have cheated in the same way? No.
Pretty good chance they meet in the super-bowl next season. Seahawks are still the best team in their conference so I expect they will make it and the pats historically win their division every year so there a pretty good chance of a repeat. They also gain more though - they can stop blaming their own poor coaching decisions costing them a superbowl and divert their embarasment saying they lost to "cheaters."
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Is there any reason to believe that the Colts have cheated in the same way? No.
I'd say yes because 3/4 of the colts balls were found to be under inflated as well at half time. Yet - luck was not asked to hand over cell phone. Do you dispute this? It's in the wells report.
You disappoint me - normally you are very logical when I see you post - you seem content to ignore logic here. You MUST be a sea-hawks fan.
Hey now!!! I'm a Hawks fan, and I resent that remark good sir! In truth he sounds more like a 49ers fan
HAHA, I just figure the seahawks have the most to gain from this and therefore most reason to support these penalties. This Rivalry is new to me.
Yep, "we" Seahawks hate the 49ers so damn much that we passed the ball on the 2 yard line, thus "giving" away the 49th Lombardi Trophy to the Patriots
Xenomancers wrote:How exactly could the NFL commissioner get fired? I think this is what needs to happen but I'm not sure how it would happen. Anyone know?
I think that the commissioner can get fired in this instance if the owners pull together and vote him out. In essence a "vote of no confidence" as if he were the PM of Great Britain. The reasoning wouldn't be JUST this one single case. They would be putting forth the mishandling of the Ray Rice incident, this one, and basically every other negative action, no matter how slight as their evidence of his being unfit for the job.
Kronk as a Side note im really not worked up over this at all :-P I treat football as a nice diversion until hockey season starts up. Once the first puck is dropped football doesn't matter to me until the Super Bowl....and only then if the patriots are in it.
What bothers me (not has me worked up about) is that peregrine continuously points out facts that are incorrect and then xeno or someone else disputes his facts, proves him wrong and then hands over real facts based on the Wells report that prove that this is utter nonsense.
Roger Goodell in my opinion just sealed his own coffin by putting himself as arbitrator. He is literally asking the patriots to take this to court. I personally feel that he handed off the investigation to a 2nd party and put the VP in charge so that he could act as the arbitrator and try to come out of it looking like the hero....unfortunately this backfired and I think Kraft is going to get him canned.
Ghazkuul wrote: unfortunately this backfired and I think Kraft is going to get him canned.
I don't believe that Kraft can single-handedly make that happen. As I said above, I think that the collective owners would have to come together to have a vote of no confidence to oust the commissioner.
Ghazkuul wrote: i think your underestimating Mr Kraft. He is a scary man when angered.
And there are 30 or so other similarly wealthy people who also are "scary" when they are angry. It doesn't change the point I'm making that it will take an NFL owner's constitution majority (whether they require a simple majority or 2/3rds or whatever) to get rid of a guy that much of the "general public" NFL fan likes about as much as they do Obama.
The only teams I can think of that consistently fill their parks in any sport are the teams with the history. Joe Louis is almost always full, even if the Red Wings "suck", Lambeau Field is always packed. Centurylink field is packed (and the Kingdome before that) Oakland Coliseum is always full when the Raiders are playing, a bit less so when the As are playing. Dodger stadium draws people out, the SF Baseball Giants regularly fill out, etc.
The Raiders? The Raiders have literally the lowest attendance% per game of all of the NFL teams.
And when it comes to baseball, the Cardinals and Red Sox are the first two that come to mind.
Ghazkuul wrote: i think your underestimating Mr Kraft. He is a scary man when angered.
And there are 30 or so other similarly wealthy people who also are "scary" when they are angry. It doesn't change the point I'm making that it will take an NFL owner's constitution majority (whether they require a simple majority or 2/3rds or whatever) to get rid of a guy that much of the "general public" NFL fan likes about as much as they do Obama.
True, but Mr Kraft might not go after him in that way, he could just file so many lawsuits and what not against him for every little infraction that in the end he either steps down or the owners tell him to pack up before they vote him out. Mr Kraft as well as every NFL owner have all sorts of nifty ways to bend the rules in regards to these matters. it helps having billions of dollars in your bank account
Well here's question then. I am a pats fan so I am particularly outraged. I wonder what other owners are thinking right now...
Maybe - if they can pull something like this on Brady and the most popular franchise in the sport - Goodey can do this to anyone.
As stated before hes messed up a lot of stuff lately and seems like hes afraid of public opinion too much. Public opinion should not matter to the NFL commissioner. He should care that everyone "thinks" the pats are cheaters...he should know it's 90% butthurtness anyways and the rest is the fact that the pats don't do anything any other team doesn't do themselves - the pats just have way more attention on them than anyone one else.
Xenomancers wrote: Well here's question then. I am a pats fan so I am particularly outraged. I wonder what other owners are thinking right now...
Maybe - if they can pull something like this on Brady and the most popular franchise in the sport - Goodey can do this to anyone.
As stated before hes messed up a lot of stuff lately and seems like hes afraid of public opinion too much. Public opinion should not matter to the NFL commissioner. He should care that everyone "thinks" the pats are cheaters...he should know it's 90% butthurtness anyways and the rest is the fact that the pats don't do anything any other team doesn't do themselves - the pats just have way more attention on them than anyone one else.
From here on out you are going to see a lot more harsh penalties to anyone.
Too many people poked the bear too many times. Now he is going to start swatting randomly at everything.
Not saying the bear should not have been poked but in part, this is Goodell giving people the finger.
I don't think he's going to choose to or be allowed to go too crazy.
He'll do enough to 'protect the Shield' and try and restore...his/its/their image - but he's not going to be given free rein.
Do you think the punishment the Pats recieved emulates that attitude of the other NFL owners?
Some? Sure.
But I think it is more about 'protecting the brand' than anything else, and trying to rehabilitate the NFL's 'image' after the beating it took last year with the Rice, Petersen and Hardy problems.
This is partially the NFL laughably trying to 'look tough' and 'talk tough' about integrity when it...dropped the ball badly on more important problems earlier, it is partially jealousy rearing its ugly head, and it is partially what the Pats deserve given how they've decided to conduct themselves with their 'Castle and Moat' type of behavior.
I'm looking forward to watch how it all unfolds, but I'm not looking forward to hearing about it over and over on the radio and sports channels - I'd rather they talk about the Sox. If, you know, they can turn things around!
I don't think he's going to choose to or be allowed to go too crazy.
He'll do enough to 'protect the Shield' and try and restore...his/its/their image - but he's not going to be given free rein.
Do you think the punishment the Pats recieved emulates that attitude of the other NFL owners?
Some? Sure.
But I think it is more about 'protecting the brand' than anything else, and trying to rehabilitate the NFL's 'image' after the beating it took last year with the Rice, Petersen and Hardy problems.
This is partially the NFL laughably trying to 'look tough' and 'talk tough' about integrity when it...dropped the ball badly on more important problems earlier, it is partially jealousy rearing its ugly head, and it is partially what the Pats deserve given how they've decided to conduct themselves with their 'Castle and Moat' type of behavior.
I'm looking forward to watch how it all unfolds, but I'm not looking forward to hearing about it over and over on the radio and sports channels - I'd rather they talk about the Sox. If, you know, they can turn things around!
I think this may have been the most succinct post on the matter so far. Exalted my friend :-)
I'm looking forward to watch how it all unfolds, but I'm not looking forward to hearing about it over and over on the radio and sports channels - I'd rather they talk about the Sox. If, you know, they can turn things around!
This is why I've avoided any sports channels/shows other than MLB stuff, or MLB Network.... and just as it's a problem in politics, I find it just as aggravating when they sensationalize and polarize issues so needlessly, and we have the endless train of BS until the resolution comes about finally, and quite often it seems that a lot of people say, "really? I waited all this time for THIS? why did I care so much about this gak?"
I don't think he's going to choose to or be allowed to go too crazy.
He'll do enough to 'protect the Shield' and try and restore...his/its/their image - but he's not going to be given free rein.
Do you think the punishment the Pats recieved emulates that attitude of the other NFL owners?
Some? Sure.
But I think it is more about 'protecting the brand' than anything else, and trying to rehabilitate the NFL's 'image' after the beating it took last year with the Rice, Petersen and Hardy problems.
This is partially the NFL laughably trying to 'look tough' and 'talk tough' about integrity when it...dropped the ball badly on more important problems earlier, it is partially jealousy rearing its ugly head, and it is partially what the Pats deserve given how they've decided to conduct themselves with their 'Castle and Moat' type of behavior.
I'm looking forward to watch how it all unfolds, but I'm not looking forward to hearing about it over and over on the radio and sports channels - I'd rather they talk about the Sox. If, you know, they can turn things around!
Sox don't have a chance - worst team weve put out in a looong time. Basically bottom of the barrel in every category and it's their own fault for being cheap - letting good players go - and overestimating their talents. It's sad but it's hardly a surprise 0 hitting and 0 pitching means you don't go .500. Just wondering - do you think this would be a suitable penalty if all of these charges turn out to be true? I think it's excessive. Plus, a lot of this stuff doesn't even add up - making it even more excessive.
The problem here is that it does seem very excessive - the highest penalty ever levied - for something that they basically don't have 100% concrete proof on.
So ultimately, if Goodell (or a truly neutral 3rd party arbitrator if Goodell recuses himself) doesn't significantly reduce the penalties, off to court we go!
And I'm starting to think that almost no matter what, unless there's no suspension, Brady and the NFLPA are going to court.
I'd hope cooler head will prevail though and we end up with:
1) $500K fine
2) Loss of 2017 4th round pick
3) Brady suspended for 1 (2 games max) for being 'uncooperative'
I am reminded of when everyone rallied around Lance Armstrong and said he never would cheat; he was just a nice, honest guy that would never lie; he did but no one wanted to believe it.
Xenomancers wrote: Steroids...vs possible ball deflation. A poor comparison. A good comparison would be - do you think tom brady would ever consider steroid?
Well no, it isn't the specific incident, it is about peoples reaction to it. I don't know if Brady did it or not, but if he did no one that wants to believe him will think he did. People swore Armstrong would never do anything either but that was not the case. If it helps instead think of when people said the NSA would never spy on Americans until it was shown they absolutely were. If he did cheat people that want to believe he didn't will swear he didn't and people who do think he cheated won't be persuaded to believe he didn't. Overall it is more of a problem of the Pats having a reputation and perception issue, it seems.
I still think steroids should be legal.
Because watching sports is boring. Now if sports was filled with over muscled men who could turn angry at the drop of a hat, it would be much more fun.
hotsauceman1 wrote: I still think steroids should be legal.
Because watching sports is boring. Now if sports was filled with over muscled men who could turn angry at the drop of a hat, it would be much more fun.
I disagree. As I keep telling my wife, what I think football really needs to be more exciting is ninjas.
Ahtman wrote: I am reminded of when everyone rallied around Lance Armstrong and said he never would cheat; he was just a nice, honest guy that would never lie; he did but no one wanted to believe it.
Ha!... you said Lance Armstrong was a nice guy.... Lol.
I know that I, for one, was an Armstrong supporter. Based on the simple fact that, even now, the cycling world NEVER had a positive test on him. He did finally cave after multiple years of witch hunts. Now... it just turns out that he was no better or worse than anyone else in that field (seriously, you vacate his 7 TDF victories, they wanted to award them to the next guy... well, the next 48 or 49 cyclists on that list have all been stripped for doping as well)
As to this news of Kraft just "taking" the punishment. I wonder if his legal team advised him against it in order to save this little incident for a "rainy day", such as building a case to get rid of Goodell altogether.
Ahtman wrote: I am reminded of when everyone rallied around Lance Armstrong and said he never would cheat; he was just a nice, honest guy that would never lie; he did but no one wanted to believe it.
Ha!... you said Lance Armstrong was a nice guy.... Lol.
I know that I, for one, was an Armstrong supporter. Based on the simple fact that, even now, the cycling world NEVER had a positive test on him. He did finally cave after multiple years of witch hunts. Now... it just turns out that he was no better or worse than anyone else in that field (seriously, you vacate his 7 TDF victories, they wanted to award them to the next guy... well, the next 48 or 49 cyclists on that list have all been stripped for doping as well)
As to this news of Kraft just "taking" the punishment. I wonder if his legal team advised him against it in order to save this little incident for a "rainy day", such as building a case to get rid of Goodell altogether.
The strange thing with cycling is that "doping" isn't steroids or anything like that...
It's taking medications to increase your red blood cells and your oxygen intake. Not exactly all that different than taking supplements for your workouts.
As to Kraft accepting the punishment... I think it's more that they want to bury it and that it becomes "old news" by start of next season.
As to Kraft accepting the punishment... I think it's more that they want to bury it and that it becomes "old news" by start of next season.
Which I guess it will be, until week 1 rolls around.
Which... how crazy would it be if Garrapolo (sp?) went 4-0, completely like, 80% of his passes, threw 16 TD passes (on and on), then in week 5, Brady loses, completes only 50-60% of his passes, gets picked, etc. Essentially having The backup pull a Brady, and Brady becoming the new Bledsloe of the Patriots team
As to Kraft accepting the punishment... I think it's more that they want to bury it and that it becomes "old news" by start of next season.
Which I guess it will be, until week 1 rolls around.
Which... how crazy would it be if Garrapolo (sp?) went 4-0, completely like, 80% of his passes, threw 16 TD passes (on and on), then in week 5, Brady loses, completes only 50-60% of his passes, gets picked, etc. Essentially having The backup pull a Brady, and Brady becoming the new Bledsloe of the Patriots team
That would be delicious! I've seen him play as the Illini QB... he has a chance to be really good.
Xenomancers wrote: Steroids...vs possible ball deflation. A poor comparison. A good comparison would be - do you think tom brady would ever consider steroid?
Well no, it isn't the specific incident, it is about peoples reaction to it. I don't know if Brady did it or not, but if he did no one that wants to believe him will think he did. People swore Armstrong would never do anything either but that was not the case. If it helps instead think of when people said the NSA would never spy on Americans until it was shown they absolutely were. If he did cheat people that want to believe he didn't will swear he didn't and people who do think he cheated won't be persuaded to believe he didn't. Overall it is more of a problem of the Pats having a reputation and perception issue, it seems.
I agree - pats have a reputation. I don't particularly agree with that reputation but they do have it. Brady however - has a good reputation - as a good sportsman. He never speaks i'll of others. Always shakes hands after the game - win or lose. The only negative attention he ever gets is for the "tuck rule" which some think was cheating but actually it's just the way the games rules work. He could have known about some deflated balls, he could have had nothing to do with it. It's bunk to punish a man for something you can't prove because he won a super-bowl because of the tuck rule - he won 2 more after that - with no tuck required. In fact I havn't seen him tuck since lol.
As to Kraft accepting the punishment... I think it's more that they want to bury it and that it becomes "old news" by start of next season.
Which I guess it will be, until week 1 rolls around.
Which... how crazy would it be if Garrapolo (sp?) went 4-0, completely like, 80% of his passes, threw 16 TD passes (on and on), then in week 5, Brady loses, completes only 50-60% of his passes, gets picked, etc. Essentially having The backup pull a Brady, and Brady becoming the new Bledsloe of the Patriots team
That would be delicious! I've seen him play as the Illini QB... he has a chance to be really good.
I'm going to be completely honest here. Brady is not that good. Hes a great short passer but outside of 15 yards theres plenty that are better than him. Any QB will flurish in a BB system. Proven by Matt Cassel in 2008. The real strength of brady is determination and his inspiring presence on young people at this point - his years of breaking records are over.
There is 0.0% chance the fine/draft picks get reduced from the pats and it's crazy talk to suggest otherwise IMO. It's already happened and they aren't appealing. The NFL isn't going to just go back and say "yah maybe that was excessive". Brady's appeal is a whole other matter. This whole situation really took the air out of my sails as a patriots fan. Not saying I won't watch or root for the team but it really put a damper on my pumpitude for football in a couple months.
JAG is awesome. All in due time though. Brady is not finished by any stretch. I hope we pull a GB and go from Brady to the next Aaron Rodgers ;p from what I've seen JAG has that kind of potential especially learning behind Brady.
Ahtman wrote: Well no, it isn't the specific incident, it is about peoples reaction to it. I don't know if Brady did it or not, but if he did no one that wants to believe him will think he did. People swore Armstrong would never do anything either but that was not the case.
Yeah, and when Armstrong was absolutely proved guilty, then people just invented the new argument 'well everyone was doing it so that makes it okay'. Which I think is basically people trying to shift their argument to avoid admitting they were wrong in the first place.
Anyhow, I think you're right that this Patriots thing feels a lot like Armstrong. Obviously its on a way smaller scale, but the reactions are kind of the same - lots of points of view that are just really weird, until you start to pick apart the motivations underpinning them. There's certainly a dislike for the commission has led a lot of people to oppose their actions here. And probably some Patriots fans just sticking up for their team.
I know that I, for one, was an Armstrong supporter. Based on the simple fact that, even now, the cycling world NEVER had a positive test on him. He did finally cave after multiple years of witch hunts. Now... it just turns out that he was no better or worse than anyone else in that field (seriously, you vacate his 7 TDF victories, they wanted to award them to the next guy... well, the next 48 or 49 cyclists on that list have all been stripped for doping as well)
Armstrong never having a positive test says nothing about Armstrong, but a whole lot about the utterly corrupt state of drug testing during that period in cycling.
And in general, I'd recommend you read in to what was actually going on throughout the Armstrong drugs period. Armstrong wasn't just another rider. Instead, through a close relationship with Michele Ferrari and other doctors, Armstrong organised drugs for other riders, and through control of the source manipulated gained considerable advantage for himself, not least of which was ensuring he had a tremendously strong team riding to support him.
Seriously, the only possible response is the one taken - draw a red line through those years, take Armstrong's titles and give them to no-one.
Armstrong never having a positive test says nothing about Armstrong, but a whole lot about the utterly corrupt state of drug testing during that period in cycling.
Most forms of blood doping wouldn't show up on a drug screen.
DutchWinsAll wrote: Rex Ryan has a foot fetish. He's also our new head coach, so I support anything that gives the Bills a chance of snapping our record playoff drought
Chancetragedy wrote: There is 0.0% chance the fine/draft picks get reduced from the pats and it's crazy talk to suggest otherwise IMO. It's already happened and they aren't appealing. The NFL isn't going to just go back and say "yah maybe that was excessive". Brady's appeal is a whole other matter. This whole situation really took the air out of my sails as a patriots fan. Not saying I won't watch or root for the team but it really put a damper on my pumpitude for football in a couple months.
Yeah the lost draft pick is likely going to stick - owner sold us out. This doesn't effect me as a patriots fan at all. I am used to/expect this kind of treatment from all non pats fans and ofc from the biggest idiot to be NFL commissar.
The NFL is only a place or two removed from pro wrestling with how this stuff is scripted.
But there does seem to be a correlation between the age of the team and the number of fans at the park.
