You don't think Troy Vincent and Tom Brady know each other? Okay guys, you win. Total slight.BigSoxFan said:Why would Vincent address Brady as "Tom" then? They presumably have had little interaction.
You don't think Troy Vincent and Tom Brady know each other? Okay guys, you win. Total slight.BigSoxFan said:Why would Vincent address Brady as "Tom" then? They presumably have had little interaction.
BigSoxFan said:Why would Vincent address Brady as "Tom" then? They presumably have had little interaction.
ivanvamp said:From the Bountygate story, this is regarding Tagliabue's ruling...
"to an extent, this case ties Goodell’s hands going forward. In several instances, Tagliabue argues that Goodell’s suspensions were unwarranted because, in prior cases, the NFL never punished players so severely. “The League has not previously suspended or fined players for some of the activities in which these players participated,” Tagliabue writes, “and has in the recent past imposed only minimal fines on NFL clubs — not players — of a mere $25,000 or less.
Tagliabue agrees with Goodell’s finding that former Saints defensive end Anthony Hargrove obstructed the NFL’s investigation by denying the bounty program’s existence — at the behest of his coaches. But, Tagliabue writes, “the context of previous NFL punishment for obstruction suggests that a seven-game suspension is unprecedented and unwarranted here.” The example that Tagliabue cites to back this up: the 2010 investigation into Brett Favre’s alleged sexual harassment of a New York Jets employee. “In December 2010, the NFL fined Brett Favre $50,000 — but did not suspend him — for obstruction of a League sexual harassment investigation,” he writes. “Although not entirely comparable to the present matter, this illustrates the NFL’s practice of fining, not suspending, players for serious violations of this type.”
From (http://keepingscore.blogs.time.com/2012/12/12/reading-between-the-lines-of-the-bountygate-ruling/)
So Tagliabue is saying that a penalty that is out of line with other penalties for the same infraction is totally unacceptable. I find it hard to believe that Goodell would go right back to doing the same thing he did that Tagliabue overruled him on and chastised him for, not that long ago.
But it is Goodell, so…...
I hope the next arbiter/judge smacks Goodell down just as hard.
jsinger121 said:
WayBackVazquez said:You don't think Troy Vincent and Tom Brady know each other? Okay guys, you win. Total slight.
We also note that one arbitrator has previously found that you, in particular, are unfamiliar with proper NFL discipline procedures and have no role in imposing discipline. Peterson Art. 46 Appeal at 7.
It is no biggie, please trust us.BigSoxFan said:Why would Vincent address Brady as "Tom" then? They presumably have had little interaction.
Rudy Pemberton said:They didn't even address him as Mr. Vincent!
ivanvamp said:From the Bountygate story, this is regarding Tagliabue's ruling...
"to an extent, this case ties Goodell’s hands going forward. In several instances, Tagliabue argues that Goodell’s suspensions were unwarranted because, in prior cases, the NFL never punished players so severely. “The League has not previously suspended or fined players for some of the activities in which these players participated,” Tagliabue writes, “and has in the recent past imposed only minimal fines on NFL clubs — not players — of a mere $25,000 or less.
Tagliabue agrees with Goodell’s finding that former Saints defensive end Anthony Hargrove obstructed the NFL’s investigation by denying the bounty program’s existence — at the behest of his coaches. But, Tagliabue writes, “the context of previous NFL punishment for obstruction suggests that a seven-game suspension is unprecedented and unwarranted here.” The example that Tagliabue cites to back this up: the 2010 investigation into Brett Favre’s alleged sexual harassment of a New York Jets employee. “In December 2010, the NFL fined Brett Favre $50,000 — but did not suspend him — for obstruction of a League sexual harassment investigation,” he writes. “Although not entirely comparable to the present matter, this illustrates the NFL’s practice of fining, not suspending, players for serious violations of this type.”
From (http://keepingscore.blogs.time.com/2012/12/12/reading-between-the-lines-of-the-bountygate-ruling/)
So Tagliabue is saying that a penalty that is out of line with other penalties for the same infraction is totally unacceptable. I find it hard to believe that Goodell would go right back to doing the same thing he did that Tagliabue overruled him on and chastised him for, not that long ago.
But it is Goodell, so…...
I hope the next arbiter/judge smacks Goodell down just as hard.
Morgan's Magic Snowplow said:
Tagliabue's ruling wasn't binding on Goodell in any way. And reportedly Goodell was royally pissed by Tagliabue's decision and it substantially poisoned their relationship (which was already somewhat rocky).
I think all that episode did was convince Goodell not to appoint independent arbitrators in the future.I
Morgan's Magic Snowplow said:
Tagliabue's ruling wasn't binding on Goodell in any way. And reportedly Goodell was royally pissed by Tagliabue's decision and it substantially poisoned their relationship (which was already somewhat rocky).
I think all that episode did was convince Goodell not to appoint independent arbitrators in the future.
garzooma said:The problem with this idea, which I'll bet Kraft himself has used with fellow owners, is that when the League brought up CameraPlacementGate, they basically obliterated the "moving on": "Just put this behind you Hester Prynne, but you still have to wear that scarlet letter." This is especially egregious considering the "more probable than not" standard -- it doesn't even have to be proven you did anything wrong. I wonder if one of the things Kraft will be after is a change in the bylaws to explicitly prohibit the NFL from considering past issues.
Mark Emmert.Ralphwiggum said:I'm trying to think of a high-profile, highly paid executive who is more incompetent than Roger Goodell, but I can't come up with any examples. He and his minions seem to have fucked this thing up in every conceivable way, and then keep fucking up.
You would think that at some point the group of billionaires that employ him would get sick and tired of his bullshit, but Kraft himself stood up in front of the world and gave him a vote of confidence less than a year ago. I don't get it.
I find it hard to believe that Goodell would go right back to doing the same thing he did that Tagliabue overruled him on and chastised him for, not that long ago.
drleather2001 said:Yes, it's deliberate, in a "Hey, champ, mind stepping aside so the people who know what the fuck they are talking about can get something done? Thanks!" way.
ivanvamp said:
Oh I agree on both points you make here. But Tags' logic was impeccable. I mean, it's just not right to hand out punishment X to players A, B, and C for the same infraction, and then when player D comes along, you hand out punishment 10X, just…because. That kind of capricious ruling has no place in any just world.
bsj said:OK....whats the one line of this letter that media will use to ignore the rest of it?
This is exactly right. Goodell knew this Brady suspension wasn't going to stick. He just did it to say "I tried" so the public couldn't blame him. That is the exact opposite of how someone running multi billion dollar business should go about it. Roger fucked this up from the get go and now it is way too far gone. Any other commish would have swept this under the rug within the first few days in Janaury.Kenny F'ing Powers said:
This is about right. The NFL fucked this thin gup so bad that there is no way Brady serves 1 minute of a suspension.
The draft picks, on the other hand, are such fucking garbage and because it's nearly impossible to get that punishment rectified, will stick (which is why RG did it to begin with).
joe dokes said:
The problem is the "10X". ..... it can't be that Goodell can *never* increase penalties as time goes by. The theory would be that "my older, weaker sanctions aren't having a deterrent effect."
Harry Hooper said:It's hard for us laymen to imagine a more formal document than something related to discipline, hence the reaction to the informality of the salutation. Apparently lawyers think the shivs in the document are more palatable if you start out with a friendly greeting.
Ed Hillel said:
Now we know that, beyond merely leaking an erroneous report, they sent an official NFL letter to the Patriots with deliberately false information that a football measured at 10.1 PSI, which was nowhere near any of the measurements. Shouldn't there be legal recourse to this issue, separate from Brady's appeal? IMO, knowing this information makes the whole idea of the Wells Report less credible, especially when you combine that with Wells apparently not investigating the NFL leaks/conduct at the NFL's behest, yet also adding into the report that he found no evidence of wrongdoing by the league (which he wasn't looking for!). Those are not the actions of an independent investigator, nor is banning Patriots' counsel from testimony of their accusers.
Todd Benzinger said:Judging by this thread, they won't get past "Dear Troy"
Is this for real?ElcaballitoMVP said:Plot Twist: I am Jim McNally, you Dorito Dinks! It just sucks I decided to take a piss at the worst moment possible. Looks like I'm useless now, which takes the air right out of myballssails.
lambeau said:So it sounds like Kessler et al instead of going to court to vacate Goodell's decision, will seek relief against him being the arbitrator?
Morgan's Magic Snowplow said:
I'm not sure this really washes. The NFL had already made it a big deal. They leaked the erroneous report that the balls were >2 psi under regulations and did nothing to correct that misapprehension, they let the narrative build that this was an egregious assault on the integrity of the game, they let a media discussion continue all week in which a fair number of voices were calling for Belichick and/or Brady to be suspended for the Super Bowl. By doing so, they (a) boxed the Patriots into a corner in that initial week in which the team was forced to respond very forcefully and (b) made it 100% obvious to the Patriots that this was going to be an antagonistic process in which they were unlikely to get a fair hearing and in which none of the Patriots complaints about league conduct would get any traction whatsoever.
Once we've arrived at that point, subsequent decisions by the Patriots to offer less than full cooperation weren't going to help matters but the league was likely going to hammer them no matter what given the evidence discussed by the Wells Report.
I don't see any scenario where Tom Brady hands over his cell phone (assume it contains nothing of interest) and McNally does a second interview focuses on his "deflator" text (assume he makes the weight-loss claim) and the league lets the Patriots off with a slap on the wrist because they fully cooperated. That just doesn't square with the rest of the evidence.
It's not either/or.nighthob said:
That would seem to be the way to go, to forestall the precedent that the Artless Roger gets to act as judge, jury, and executioner.
ivanvamp said:
Right. So let's compare….. (and we are pretending here that they have actually demonstrated the Pats did something wrong, which, of course, they haven't come close to doing, but work with me…)
[snip]
I mean, it's not hard to figure out that what Goodell/Vincent did to the Patriots is completely, utterly, incomprehensibly out of whack, no matter how you slice it.
I truly hope this becomes the general narrative going forward, and the owners recognize the damage that's this is causing to the league. The league doesn't need dozens of petty violation reporting clogging up every other franchise. Who will want to watch the 2020 NFL draft when only six teams have first rounders?Ralphwiggum said:I'm trying to think of a high-profile, highly paid executive who is more incompetent than Roger Goodell, but I can't come up with any examples. He and his minions seem to have fucked this thing up in every conceivable way, and then keep fucking up.
You would think that at some point the group of billionaires that employ him would get sick and tired of his bullshit, but Kraft himself stood up in front of the world and gave him a vote of confidence less than a year ago. I don't get it.
dcmissle said:It's not either/or.
This is a very creative angle of attack, and i hope this gets discussed by the NEP and TB's legal teams.Rook05 said:I truly hope this becomes the general narrative going forward, and the owners recognize the damage that's this is causing to the league. The league doesn't need dozens of petty violation reporting clogging up every other franchise. Who will want to watch the 2020 NFL draft when only six teams have first rounders?
As an aside, I wonder if the NFLPA could have a case that eliminating draft picks reduces the total guaranteed compensation due to incoming players by a) removing a high salary slot in the early rounds and b) bumping late picks out of the draft entirely.
Stanley O'Neal? Jimmy Cayne?I'm trying to think of a high-profile, highly paid executive who is more incompetent than Roger Goodell, but I can't come up with any examples. He and his minions seem to have fucked this thing up in every conceivable way, and then keep fucking up.
You would think that at some point the group of billionaires that employ him would get sick and tired of his bullshit, but Kraft himself stood up in front of the world and gave him a vote of confidence less than a year ago. I don't get it.
RIFan said:There is an element that if Goodell wants to lose the battle, but win the war he will agree that due process was not followed, vacate the suspension, and impose a $50k fine similar to Favre. He could reduce the team penalties as well. The catch would be that he could claim that the Patriots and Brady are only getting off on a technicality and that the league firmly believes that there is a culture of cheating and they are on notice that any future instances will be dealt with severely. That would firmly brand Brady and the Patriots as what many already believe they are without allowing them their "day in court"* If legacy matters to Brady and Kraft enough, the idea that they only got off on a technicality without the chance to get an independent ruling of innocence may hurt more.
*hardcore haters will always hate, it's the more passive fans that will have their opinions affected by this.
DrewDawg said:
Did no one learn this in high school: http://www.businesswritingblog.com/business_writing/2006/01/greetings_and_s.html
You can begin a "business letter" with a first name if you are familiar with that person.
loshjott said:
I usually take a pen and strike through the Mr./Ms. Last Name and write in the first name.
Rook05 said:I truly hope this becomes the general narrative going forward, and the owners recognize the damage that's this is causing to the league. The league doesn't need dozens of petty violation reporting clogging up every other franchise. Who will want to watch the 2020 NFL draft when only six teams have first rounders?
As an aside, I wonder if the NFLPA could have a case that eliminating draft picks reduces the total guaranteed compensation due to incoming players by a) removing a high salary slot in the early rounds and b) bumping late picks out of the draft entirely.