#DFG: Canceling the Noise

Is there any level of suspension that you would advise Tom to accept?


  • Total voters
    208

Average Reds

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 24, 2007
35,330
Southwestern CT
Harry Hooper said:
 
 
re defamation/libel, the Commish says I am punishing the Pats for employee (the equipment guys) misbehavior. They are not public figures, but they've now been labelled guilty of wrongdoing. What happens next?
 
Unless there is an airtight case to be made that the accusations are false, they would have a hard time proving any libel.  But from the Wells report, we can logically assume there is not an airtight case that the accusations are false. 
 
Frankly, the only way the NFL opens themselves up to any sort of legal action is if Goodell wanders off script and says something stupid.  And even then legal action is not going to succeed because the NFL has unlimited resources and would simply outlast an accuser by elongating the process.
 

TheoShmeo

Skrub's sympathy case
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jul 19, 2005
12,890
Boston, NY
Average Reds, Your post at 16265 about my bona fides is ridiculous.  For some reason, I cannot reply to posts from my work computer with them showing up, so I am just referencing the post number.
 
But accusing me of lying is beyond the pale.  I accept your apology in advance because knowing you, you will realize how foolish that accusation was and then apologize.
 
My prior passing along a comment from a friend with connections tells you NOTHING about my biases.  It tells you ONLY that I have a friend who was wrong.  Given the intense interest here, I passed on his comments HOPING THEY WOULD BE WRONG.  If I told you that the stock market was going to crash tomorrow and it did not come to pass, that would suggest to you that I was disappointed it did not crash and that going forward you would assume that my comments about the market were all tainted by that bias?
 
Let me be crystal clear.  I have a very good relationship with being wrong.  Happens all the time.  That I am wrong on a topic doesn't remotely drive my opinions going forward or make me skew every conversation to undo that, horrors, incidence of being incorrect.  Who does that? 
 
If you spent even 5 minutes with me -- and really, if you read my posts here over the years -- you would know that I am as big of a Tom Brady fan as anyone.  He is truly my favorite athlete of all time.  In addition to all of the Super Bowls and accomplshiments,  I know people who know him well, and have heard a lot about him off the field, and that only adds to my Brady Love.  PS: If you ever get a video of his acceptance speech when he won SI's sportsman of the year, you will see something I made my kids watch until it was no longer on You Tube.  Perfect example of gratitude, appreciation for parents, teachers and teammates.  And of humility.  I'm sorry it is no longer on line and would kill to get it.
 
All that said, I draw a conclusion from the flurry of calls between him and the ball dude. At best, it looks bad.  I could believe that they were covering their tracks.
 
At the same time, as I have written repeatedly in this thread, nowhere in the Wells Report is there support for Tom asking for the balls to be deflated below 12.5.  I could believe that Tom lied about knowing McNally, had made it known that he wanted the balls at 12.5 and was making sure that everyone's stories were straight in repeated phone calls after the story broke.
 
Separately, one of the people I referenced above knows both Tom and his Dad extremely well.  He has spoken with Brady Senior about DeflateGate.  Tom was crystal clear with Brady Senior that he never asked for balls to be below 12.5.  My friend said that there's no way in hell Tom would lie to his Dad, whom he reveres, and I continue to believe that Tom never instructed deflation below 12.5, but that the calls in the following days do look bad and that there was some coordinating regarding the story going on.   
 

moondog80

heart is two sizes two small
SoSH Member
Sep 20, 2005
8,093
nattysez said:
Pro tip: when the lawyer releases a lengthy statement attacking the accuser and never says "my client did nothing wrong," his client did something wrong.
 
 
What does a lawyer whose client did nothing wrong do?
 

LuckyBen

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 5, 2012
3,396
nattysez said:
Pro tip: when the lawyer releases a lengthy statement attacking the accuser and never says "my client did nothing wrong," his client did something wrong.
 
Considering there is written proof that the footballs were at 16 psi, I have little doubt that Brady wanted them to be lowered within the legal limits. I know when I fill up my tires, I don't check the psi anymore. I do an eye test.  Most likely the refs are inept at this all of a sudden very important job of checking the psi of 24 footballs before each game.
 

Reverend

for king and country
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jan 20, 2007
64,026
TheoShmeo said:
Average Reds, Your post at 16267 about my bona fides is ridiculous.  For some reason, I cannot reply to posts from my work computer with them showing up, so I am just referencing the post number.
 
But accusing me of lying is beyond the pale.  I accept your apology in advance because knowing you, you will realize how foolish that accusation was and then apologize.
 
My prior passing along a comment from a friend with connections tells you NOTHING about my biases.  It tells you ONLY that I have a friend who was wrong.  Given the intense interest here, I passed on his comments HOPING THEY WOULD BE WRONG.  If I told you that the stock market was going to crash tomorrow and it did not come to pass, that would suggest to you that I was disappointed it did not crash and that going forward you would assume that my comments about the market were all tainted by that bias?
 
Let me be crystal clear.  I have a very good relationship with being wrong.  Happens all the time.  That I am wrong on a topic doesn't remotely drive my opinions going forward or make me skew every conversation to undo that, horrors, incidence of being incorrect.  Who does that? 
 
If you spent even 5 minutes with me -- and really, if you read my posts here over the years -- you would know that I am as big of a Tom Brady fan as anyone.  He is truly my favorite athlete of all time.  In addition to all of the Super Bowls and accomplshiments,  I know people who know him well, and have heard a lot about him off the field, and that only adds to my Brady Love.  PS: If you ever get a video of his acceptance speech when he won SI's sportsman of the year, you will see something I made my kids watch until it was no longer on You Tube.  Perfect example of gratitude, appreciation for parents, teachers and teammates.  And of humility.  I'm sorry it is no longer on line and would kill to get it.
 
All that said, I draw a conclusion from the flurry of calls between him and the ball dude. At best, it looks bad.  I could believe that they were covering their tracks.
 
At the same time, as I have written repeatedly in this thread, nowhere in the Wells Report is there support for Tom asking for the balls to be deflated below 12.5.  I could believe that Tom lied about knowing McNally, had made it known that he wanted the balls at 12.5 and was making sure that everyone's stories were straight in repeated phone calls after the story broke.
 
Separately, one of the people I referenced above knows both Tom and his Dad extremely well.  He has spoken with Brady Senior about DeflateGate.  Tom was crystal clear with Brady Senior that he never asked for balls to be below 12.5.  My friend said that there's no way in hell Tom would lie to his Dad, whom he reveres, and I continue to believe that Tom never instructed deflation below 12.5, but that the calls in the following days do look bad and that there was some coordinating regarding the story going on.   
 
Post 16267 is johnmd calling a column a turd.
 
I don't see how we can ever believe anything you ever say again... LAWYERED!! :p
 
In all seriousness, though, it was a bit confusing at first.
 

Leather

given himself a skunk spot
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
28,451
I have to assume that Wells didn't include a part about the general practices of referees prior to and during the games regarding ball prep and monitoring because Goodell was afraid of what would come of that.  Which, you know, allows me to assume that referees routinely break the rules by over-inflating balls.
 

TheoShmeo

Skrub's sympathy case
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jul 19, 2005
12,890
Boston, NY
Thanks, Rev, fixed the reference to 16265.  I fail at passing on information AND references.  And I agree, I would be suspect of everything I say about references going forward!
 

GregHarris

beware my sexy helmet/overall ensemble
SoSH Member
Jun 5, 2008
3,460

 
What does that mean Hal, what does it mean?!?  We did nothing wrong!
 

Reverend

for king and country
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jan 20, 2007
64,026
TheoShmeo said:
Thanks, Rev, fixed the reference to 16265.  I fail at passing on information AND references.  And I agree, I would be suspect of everything I say about references going forward!
 
16265?  :blink:
 

HomeBrew1901

Has Season 1 of "Manimal" on Blu Ray
SoSH Member
TheoShmeo said:
Thanks, Rev, fixed the reference to 16265.  I fail at passing on information AND references.  And I agree, I would be suspect of everything I say about references going forward!
Considering all of your "insider information" from your "sources" has never once proved correct I'm pretty sure everyone is suspect about everything you say with regards to the NFL.
 

PaulinMyrBch

Don't touch his dog food
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 10, 2003
8,316
MYRTLE BEACH!!!!
drleather2001 said:
I have to assume that Wells didn't include a part about the general practices of referees prior to and during the games regarding ball prep and monitoring because Goodell was afraid of what would come of that.  Which, you know, allows me to assume that referees routinely break the rules by over-inflating balls.
 
In a way I'm hoping for a suspension for Brady so the players union will get involved and focus on the sham procedure the NFL has in place for balls on gameday. There is not enough focus on the possibility that the refs have routinely over-inflated balls in the past after they were submitted for inspection. I'm not saying taking matters into your own hand was the solution, but if you submit them at 12.5 and get them back at 16 and the first time know is minutes before the game, I'd be pissed and I'd want some answers if I was TB12. And if ripping McNally a new asshole was the chosen outlet, I can totally get on board with that.
 

PayrodsFirstClutchHit

Bob Kraft's Season Ticket Robin Hoodie
SoSH Member
Jun 29, 2006
8,319
Winterport, ME
From what I can tell from the occasional reading of this thread (total media blackout otherwise), the reaction from non-Pats fans/mediots is what many of us expected.
 
I would be fine with Kraft switching to scorched earth with Brady and company hiring a high-profile independent investigation team to conduct a agenda-free investigation.
 
Let's get to some truth versus whatever you call the findings of this report.
 

BroodsSexton

Member
SoSH Member
Feb 4, 2006
12,630
guam
RedOctober3829 said:
I'll post this again: where in the report that Brady directed anybody to deflate the footballs BELOW THE 12.5 PSI??  That's because it's not there. 
 
The more important question is where did he direct anyone to deflate the footballs after they were certified by the referees, or develop an awareness of that practice?
 

Average Reds

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 24, 2007
35,330
Southwestern CT
TheoShmeo said:
Average Reds, Your post at 16265 about my bona fides is ridiculous.  For some reason, I cannot reply to posts from my work computer with them showing up, so I am just referencing the post number.
 
But accusing me of lying is beyond the pale.  I accept your apology in advance because knowing you, you will realize how foolish that accusation was and then apologize.
 
My prior passing along a comment from a friend with connections tells you NOTHING about my biases.  It tells you ONLY that I have a friend who was wrong.  Given the intense interest here, I passed on his comments HOPING THEY WOULD BE WRONG.  If I told you that the stock market was going to crash tomorrow and it did not come to pass, that would suggest to you that I was disappointed it did not crash and that going forward you would assume that my comments about the market were all tainted by that bias?
 
Let me be crystal clear.  I have a very good relationship with being wrong.  Happens all the time.  That I am wrong on a topic doesn't remotely drive my opinions going forward or make me skew every conversation to undo that, horrors, incidence of being incorrect.  Who does that? 
 
If you spent even 5 minutes with me -- and really, if you read my posts here over the years -- you would know that I am as big of a Tom Brady fan as anyone.  He is truly my favorite athlete of all time.  In addition to all of the Super Bowls and accomplshiments,  I know people who know him well, and have heard a lot about him off the field, and that only adds to my Brady Love.  PS: If you ever get a video of his acceptance speech when he won SI's sportsman of the year, you will see something I made my kids watch until it was no longer on You Tube.  Perfect example of gratitude, appreciation for parents, teachers and teammates.  And of humility.  I'm sorry it is no longer on line and would kill to get it.
 
All that said, I draw a conclusion from the flurry of calls between him and the ball dude. At best, it looks bad.  I could believe that they were covering their tracks.
 
At the same time, as I have written repeatedly in this thread, nowhere in the Wells Report is there support for Tom asking for the balls to be deflated below 12.5.  I could believe that Tom lied about knowing McNally, had made it known that he wanted the balls at 12.5 and was making sure that everyone's stories were straight in repeated phone calls after the story broke.
 
Separately, one of the people I referenced above knows both Tom and his Dad extremely well.  He has spoken with Brady Senior about DeflateGate.  Tom was crystal clear with Brady Senior that he never asked for balls to be below 12.5.  My friend said that there's no way in hell Tom would lie to his Dad, whom he reveres, and I continue to believe that Tom never instructed deflation below 12.5, but that the calls in the following days do look bad and that there was some coordinating regarding the story going on.   
 
 
I'm going to paraphrase the PM I just sent you.

My comments were not intended to call you a liar and I do not believe that's a reasonable way to interpret them. But if that's how it looked, I apologize for being careless.

We all have biases. I'm a U of M grad who is fond of Brady, so that's my bias. (But I'm not a Pats fan, for the record.)  I believed that you revealed a bias in this matter because you previously made a prediction that Brady would be suspended for the Super Bowl. That created an inference (to me) that you had pre-judged the situation.  If I am wrong about that, I apologize.

Last thought is that I did not mean any of this to be taken personally and I thought we were on the same wavelength on that. I clearly misread that, so that's on me.
 
 

Ferm Sheller

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 5, 2007
20,404
BroodsSexton said:
 
The more important question is where did he direct anyone to deflate the footballs after they were certified by the referees, or develop an awareness of that practice?
 
Just a nitpick maybe, but this isn't the "more important" question, it's merely one of the two equally important questions:
 
(1) Did Brady ever direct anyone to deflate balls to less than 12.5 psi (regardless of timing of the deflation); OR
 
(2) Did Brady ever direct anyone to adjust psi after the refs completed their inspection/sign off (or did he have knowledge of this practice on or prior to Jan. 18th)?
 
There's no evidence that he did either one of these things.  (Arguably, there is evidence that he knew that (2) did occur shortly after the fact.  That is, after January 18th.  But, so what?)
 

MuppetAsteriskTalk

Member
SoSH Member
Feb 19, 2015
5,399
If Brady ends up suspended for opening night I hope the Pats players refuse to take the field. (Of course against all protestations from BB and Kraft who would never forfeit a game.)
 
I realize that this is a fantasy.
 

Devizier

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 3, 2000
19,466
Somewhere
drleather2001 said:
Once again, I'm relieved to live in Minnesota for all of this, because the feeling here is that Brady is getting raked over the coals while St. Rogers is left alone purely because he plays for the (fucking) Packers.
general feeling in Steelers country is that the Steelers are terrible and they're sad about that.
 

Bongorific

Thinks he’s clever
SoSH Member
Jul 16, 2005
8,433
Balboa Towers
BroodsSexton said:
 
The more important question is where did he direct anyone to deflate the footballs after they were certified by the referees, or develop an awareness of that practice?
Nowhere.

And Wells et al. are smart enough to know that by concluding Brady was generally aware of likely wrongdoing opens him up to punishment by the league and, worse, a knock on his public image. I've said 3 times already that such conclusion is reckless because I can't find a better word for it. Irresponsible?
 

Myt1

educated, civility-loving ass
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Mar 13, 2006
41,574
South Boston
Average Reds said:
 
I'm going to paraphrase the PM I just sent you.

My comments were not intended to call you a liar and I do not believe that's a reasonable way to interpret them. But if that's how it looked, I apologize for being careless.

We all have biases. I'm a U of M grad who is fond of Brady, so that's my bias. (But I'm not a Pats fan, for the record.)  I believed that you revealed a bias in this matter because you previously made a prediction that Brady would be suspended for the Super Bowl. That created an inference (to me) that you had pre-judged the situation.  If I am wrong about that, I apologize.

Last thought is that I did not mean any of this to be taken personally and I thought we were on the same wavelength on that. I clearly misread that, so that's on me.
 
[demonizing]Could have been worse. [/demonizing] ;)
 

HomeBrew1901

Has Season 1 of "Manimal" on Blu Ray
SoSH Member
RedOctober3829 said:
I'll post this again: where in the report that Brady directed anybody to deflate the footballs BELOW THE 12.5 PSI??  That's because it's not there. 
This is not the court of law, it doesn't fucking matter whether or not he directed them to deflate the balls BELOW THE 12.5 PSI. 
 
What matters is if he was directing or even knew that these two morons were deflating footballs AFTER the refs checked them.
 

RedOctober3829

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 19, 2005
55,298
deep inside Guido territory
HomeBrew1901 said:
This is not the court of law, it doesn't fucking matter whether or not he directed them to deflate the balls BELOW THE 12.5 PSI. 
 
What matters is if he was directing or even knew that these two morons were deflating footballs AFTER the refs checked them.
Did it say in the report that he did what you said?  Nope.  It fucking matters that there is or isn't a smoking gun if they are going to levy a suspension against Brady.  
 

Reverend

for king and country
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jan 20, 2007
64,026
twibnotes said:
The thing I keep going back to is that the Colts four balls is not a valid control group for two reasons:

1) the numbnut refs only measured 4 of their 11 balls (if this was an issue that became escalated, how do you let that happen? And if a balls attendant can perfectly deflate balls in a bathroom, how is it that a ref can't find the time to measure 7 more balls...bc this is supposed to be important!)

2) we have no idea where the colts balls started off. Luck might want his balls to end up in the 13s whereas Brady wants to be at 12.5. Couldn't both sets of balls decline in similar ways (having started at different places)?


Am I missing something here (seriously asking, not rhetorical)?
 
Everything about the situation, right down to the balls being the charge of an unmonitored part-time employee and the stated penalty for tampering with them being a $25k fine, indicates that nobody ever felt that the pressure of the balls was that big a deal before all this went down.
 
What I'm taking away from all of this is that people sometimes like to lose their minds about shit. This is bigger than football--it's more like one of those stories about society needing outlets for their animal urges or some shit. Like a really lame version of Lord of the Flies or The Purge or some shit.
 
If somebody released this as fiction years ago it would have been mocked.
 

Leather

given himself a skunk spot
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
28,451
Bongorific said:
Nowhere.

And Wells et al. are smart enough to know that by concluding Brady was generally aware of likely wrongdoing opens him up to punishment by the league and, worse, a knock on his public image. I've said 3 times already that such conclusion is reckless because I can't find a better word for it. Irresponsible?
 
Part of the problem is that the NFL knows that this has already turned into a completely out-sized shitshow.  We're talking about an issue (an alleged 0.5 PSI) that every rational person agrees has no impact on on-the-field performance.  It's a complete non-issue.
 
So the negative media attention and impact on legacies and all that crap, is really not fitting the "crime" unless they find some sort of nefarious plot by the team and Brady to deliberately circumvent the rules.   That's the only outcome where the media attention and Hot Takes and general anti-Pats spin this has taken since Day 1 can be remotely justified.   The hope was that the NFL would use this report to either A) exonerate the Pats; or at the very least B) put this whole thing in perspective and make it go away with a little reasoning on the context of the alleged rule breaking (again: 0.5 PSI that nobody has ever cared about before). 
 
The  report didn't come close to finding conclusive guilt. The NFL could have used this report to contain the issue and put it in perspective, even though they found some vaguely damaging info on the Patriots.  They didn't.  Instead they took a page out of the fucking "Crucible" and embraced the public's zeal for finding a Bad Guy.  
 
So the Patriots are being treated as if they have been caught in a point-shaving scandal when, in reality, there was probably something going on that Tom Brady might have possibly known about involving an issue that doesn't really matter at all.  
 

dcmissle

Deflatigator
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Aug 4, 2005
28,269
PayrodsFirstClutchHit said:
From what I can tell from the occasional reading of this thread (total media blackout otherwise), the reaction from non-Pats fans/mediots is what many of us expected.
 
I would be fine with Kraft switching to scorched earth with Brady and company hiring a high-profile independent investigation team to conduct a agenda-free investigation.
 
Let's get to some truth versus whatever you call the findings of this report.
I don't know that we'll be hearing from the Pats much at all. They'll let TB carry the water in fighting a likely suspension. They can endure whatever team sanctions are likely to issue now that a BB suspension appears off the table. That would include the loss of a first-round pick, as we've been down that road before. The bottom line is they are fairly accountable for whatever the two guys did or didn't do. Not a lot of room to fight here, except on the PR front, which TB will take care of. All bets are off, though, if Rog leaves the reservation and suspends BB or something like that.
 

HomeBrew1901

Has Season 1 of "Manimal" on Blu Ray
SoSH Member
RedOctober3829 said:
Did it say in the report that he did what you said?  Nope.  It fucking matters that there is or isn't a smoking gun if they are going to levy a suspension against Brady.  
You may think that and you can continue to believe that but no, it really doesn't fucking matter whether or not you believe there needs to be a smoking gun for Goodell to suspend Brady for conduct detrimental to the league. 
 
I don't want it to happen and it probably won't hold up with the NFLPA but
 
Spoiler alerty
 
The Tooth Fairy isn't real either.
 

RedOctober3829

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 19, 2005
55,298
deep inside Guido territory
HomeBrew1901 said:
You may think that and you can continue to believe that but no, it really doesn't fucking matter whether or not you believe there needs to be a smoking gun for Goodell to suspend Brady for conduct detrimental to the league. 
 
I don't want it to happen and it probably won't hold up with the NFLPA but
 
Spoiler alerty
 
The Tooth Fairy isn't real either.
It isn't?? You just crushed my dreams.
 

TheoShmeo

Skrub's sympathy case
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jul 19, 2005
12,890
Boston, NY
HomeBrew, hugs and kisses.
 
Passing on information is done here with the following spirit:
 
"Hey, I just heard this, and since we're all huge  fans and interested in whatever we hear, you might be interested in it. It might be right and it might be wrong.  I find the person who told me to be credible but he's a just that, a person, and he might be wrong.  And even if what he heard at that time was a good reflection of where the NFL or whomever was leaning, things have a way of changing.  But with all the obvious caveats -- many unstated -- I think you might want to hear this so read it and apply whatever discount you wish to it."
 
If the fact that a few of my sources have been wrong makes you discount everything I say going forward, or think that I'm making stuff up (for what reason, I really can't conceive), then knock yourself out.  I think that makes you a dope, but there are a lot of dopes out there.
 
Average Reds, my prior prediction was that Belichick would be suspended for the SB, not Brady.  But either way, passing on information that proves to be incorrect tells you nothing about my biases.  When I passed on that Bill would be suspended, I was horrified at the notion and could not be more pleased that it proved wrong.  Nothing I say going forward about Tom or Bill is colored even in the smallest way by that prior bit of information. 
 
Indeed, a source told me that the NFL is leaning to 3 games and I hope that's wrong and it's 0 or 1.  If my source is wrong, you will know nothing about my biases from having told you what he said. 
 

RedOctober3829

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 19, 2005
55,298
deep inside Guido territory
HomeBrew1901 said:
You may think that and you can continue to believe that but no, it really doesn't fucking matter whether or not you believe there needs to be a smoking gun for Goodell to suspend Brady for conduct detrimental to the league. 
 
I don't want it to happen and it probably won't hold up with the NFLPA but
 
Spoiler alerty
 
The Tooth Fairy isn't real either.
So you don't want it to happen and it won't hold up?  You are proving my point.  Yes, he can be suspended by RG for what you call "conduct detrimental to the league" because RG can do whatever he wants.  But, is it right to suspend a player with the evidence they have? No.  There are a lot of holes in the report and it is one man's opinion on the data available. There is no definitive evidence that Brady or anybody else told JJ or JM to deflate them below 12.5 or deflate them after the referee's inspection.  
 

Remagellan

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
I'm sorry if this was posted earlier, but as usually Pos is the sanest voice in this cacophony of self-righteousness:
 
http://sportsworld.nbcsports.com/tom-brady-deflategate-justin-bieber-britney-spears-coffee-pizza-top-google-search-terms/
 
WHO CARES!  WHO CARES, NFL!  WHO THE F*CK CARES! 
 
This is the Starr Report of football.  A married guy got blown by someone other than his wife and lied about it?  WHO CARES!  
 
A QB, part of a group of players who are allowed to tinker with the balls to their preference, likes his a littler softer?  WHO CARES!  
 

DJnVa

Dorito Dawg
SoSH Member
Dec 16, 2010
53,840
TheoShmeo said:
Indeed, a source told me that the NFL is leaning to 3 games and I hope that's wrong and it's 0 or 1.  If my source is wrong, you will know nothing about my biases from having told you what he said. 
 
Three games, appealed just before season starts, he plays first 2, suspension knocked down to 1, and he misses Jacksonville game, comes back after bye and throws for 650 yards against Dallas.
 

Reverend

for king and country
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jan 20, 2007
64,026
JoePos has weighed in.
 

OK, do you remember how George Brett responded when he was called out after umpires determined that he had hit a home run with a bat that had too much pine tar? Of course you do. It was beautiful. He came tearing out of the dugout like a man who had been done wrong, like he was going to strangle somebody. He has told me that just before the umpires had called him out (the call was later reversed) he said to a teammate: “If they call me out here, I’m going to lose my (bleeping) mind.” He did that. He lost his bleeping mind.
 
The reason was simple: Before that game nobody gave a damn how much pine tar was on the bat. It had nothing to do with anything. Nobody was even sure why the too-much-pine-tar rule was on the books; it seemed to be there just because pine tar high would soil the baseballs and make them unusable. Billy Martin, the Yankees manager, was always looking for an edge, and he noticed Brett’s bat had all that pine tar on it. He knew it didn’t matter. But he determined that, when the time was right, he would make a show and get Brett called out. When Brett bashed a home run off Goose Gossage, the time was right. It really was a fun show.
 
This ridiculous Tom Brady deflated football thing should have been just as fun.
 
Instead, the NFL – like only the NFL can do – has turned it into a boring, overwrought, legalistic, front-page scandal, where it resides in New York Times prime real estate once maintained by My Lai or the fall of the Berlin Wall.
 
 

I'm standing on my desk shouting, "Oh Captain, My captain!!"
 

HomeBrew1901

Has Season 1 of "Manimal" on Blu Ray
SoSH Member
RedOctober3829 said:
So you don't want it to happen and it won't hold up?  You are proving my point.  Yes, he can be suspended by RG for what you call "conduct detrimental to the league" because RG can do whatever he wants.  But, is it right to suspend a player with the evidence they have? No.  There are a lot of holes in the report and it is one man's opinion on the data available. There is no definitive evidence that Brady or anybody else told JJ or JM to deflate them below 12.5 or deflate them after the referee's inspection.  
The whole report is silly, however you are clinging to your 12.5 PSI stance like it's your binky and means anything more than your opinion.  The idea that this is worse than Ray Rice, Adrian Petersen, Ben Roethlisberger, etc... is ridiculous.
 
The worst part is, Goodell could have avoided this whole mess by reading the report, deciding on what, if any, punishment there would be and announcing it at the same time the report was being released.  If he only fined Brady and the team 100K, no one is looking at the Wells Report like it's a big deal.  If he suspended Brady for a few games, then it's pretty serious.
 
Instead, like he did when all this came out he's making it worse for the NFL, the Patriots, and Brady but allowing this to hang out there while he decides punishment after seeing which way the wind is blowing.
 

Smiling Joe Hesketh

Throw Momma From the Train
Moderator
SoSH Member
May 20, 2003
35,726
Deep inside Muppet Labs
HomeBrew1901 said:
The whole report is silly, however you are clinging to your 12.5 PSI stance like it's your binky and means anything more than your opinion.  The idea that this is worse than Ray Rice, Adrian Petersen, Ben Roethlisberger, etc... is ridiculous.
 
The worst part is, Goodell could have avoided this whole mess by reading the report, deciding on what, if any, punishment there would be and announcing it at the same time the report was being released.  If he only fined Brady and the team 100K, no one is looking at the Wells Report like it's a big deal.  If he suspended Brady for a few games, then it's pretty serious.
 
Instead, like he did when all this came out he's making it worse for the NFL, the Patriots, and Brady but allowing this to hang out there while he decides punishment after seeing which way the wind is blowing.
 
That's the very essence of Goodell. Put out punishments not based on the crimes, but the reactions of the public.
 
Tags weeps.
 

RedOctober3829

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 19, 2005
55,298
deep inside Guido territory
HomeBrew1901 said:
The whole report is silly, however you are clinging to your 12.5 PSI stance like it's your binky and means anything more than your opinion.  The idea that this is worse than Ray Rice, Adrian Petersen, Ben Roethlisberger, etc... is ridiculous.
 
The worst part is, Goodell could have avoided this whole mess by reading the report, deciding on what, if any, punishment there would be and announcing it at the same time the report was being released.  If he only fined Brady and the team 100K, no one is looking at the Wells Report like it's a big deal.  If he suspended Brady for a few games, then it's pretty serious.
 
Instead, like he did when all this came out he's making it worse for the NFL, the Patriots, and Brady but allowing this to hang out there while he decides punishment after seeing which way the wind is blowing.
Thank you for a detailed response instead of a stupid personal attack. 
 

Devizier

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 3, 2000
19,466
Somewhere
Smiling Joe Hesketh said:
 
That's the very essence of Goodell. Put out punishments not based on the crimes, but the reactions of the public.
 
Tags weeps.
 
Tags, as in Paul Tagliabue? Isn't he the guy that put a quack in charge of the NFL concussions policy, ultimately contributing to the league's largest ongoing problem?
 

LuckyBen

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 5, 2012
3,396
Smiling Joe Hesketh said:
 
That's the very essence of Goodell. Put out punishments not based on the crimes, but the reactions of the public.
 
Tags weeps.
 
Which is fine when you consider that there is nothing in the rulebook about beating your girlfriend, whipping your 2 yo with a branch, or raping a girl in the bathroom. There is punishment for tampering with a ball. I see no way that anything else can stand up against appeal. Unless they try to go the lying route, which he wasn't under oath and it wasn't even proven that he did anything wrong or lied. Fools like Woody Paige and Sharpe show their stupidity when coming out with some of these comments.
 

dcmissle

Deflatigator
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Aug 4, 2005
28,269
I think no one has discredited Theo's account in late January that BB was on the cusp of a suspension.

The report addresses only a portion of the League misconduct issues, and the portion it addresses it does not do so effectively.

Nothing has been said about the leaking. The denial that this was a sting -- in a footnote -- was shredded by Florio last night. We have no way of knowing for sure what the League was up to in late January. Oh, but we do have on record then Troy Vincent's assertion that the whole thing would be resolved "in a few days."

When you are the Commissioner, you get to define the scope of the lawyer's assignment.

If they push on Brady, we may see. Even the NFL could not Congress to pass a law locking away the records until 2037 (later reduced to 2017).
 

Ed Hillel

Wants to be startin somethin
SoSH Member
Dec 12, 2007
43,559
Here
Smiling Joe Hesketh said:
 
That's the very essence of Goodell. Put out punishments not based on the crimes, but the reactions of the public.
 
Tags weeps.
 
It's funny, he goes out of his way to pander to the public on these things, yet his public image is completely garbage. What ironic is that I'm not sure I could imagine a much worse "protector of the shield" than Roger Goodell. He does create a ton of controversey, though, which in a way is good. Good for business, bad for "The Shield."
 

MarcSullivaFan

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 21, 2005
3,412
Hoo-hoo-hoo hoosier land.
HomeBrew1901 said:
The worst part is, Goodell could have avoided this whole mess by reading the report, deciding on what, if any, punishment there would be and announcing it at the same time the report was being released.  If he only fined Brady and the team 100K, no one is looking at the Wells Report like it's a big deal.  If he suspended Brady for a few games, then it's pretty serious.
 
Instead, like he did when all this came out he's making it worse for the NFL, the Patriots, and Brady but allowing this to hang out there while he decides punishment after seeing which way the wind is blowing.
Yup. This is exactly what I thought he'd do. Float the report and hold his finger to the wind. That said, he's got a LOT of competing priorities:

-He's the Sheriff, blah, blah
-Kraft
-The rest of owners
-Fucking NBC and spaying the league's opening ceremony with a mist of shit water
-Public perception that he's cozy with Kraft
-Assessing a stiff penalty that feeds the perception that the Pats' championship season is illegitimate

It's a lot to think on, and thinking on things ain't exactly his forte.

One reason for pessimism--Would Yee flame the Wells report now if he didn't think a substantial penalty was coming? Would seem like a bad idea if you expected a slap on the wrist.
 

dcmissle

Deflatigator
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Aug 4, 2005
28,269
I think the whole world believes a TB suspension is in the works. Hence the Yee statement.
 

Leather

given himself a skunk spot
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
28,451
Yee's job is to protect his client, including endorsement deals both now and in the future.  
 
I'd bet Yee is less concerned with what the NFL levies against Brady (because he knows they can appeal it and he has no control over it right now, anyway), and more concerned with PR damage control to maintain Brady's maximum marketability in a general sense.
 

LuckyBen

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 5, 2012
3,396
http://espn.go.com/blog/boston/new-england-patriots/post/_/id/4781236/turning-a-critical-eye-on-wells-report
 
Article from Reiss on the report.
 
Manipulating public perception. At the March owners meeting, commissioner Roger Goodell said, "If there was anything that we as a league did incorrectly, we'll know about it in that report.” I didn't see much of that in the report, if anything at all. Specifically, I was curious whether there would be any mention of reputation-damaging leaks from the league office that helped manipulate public opinion, ultimately setting the stage for the release of the Wells report. Thus, I came away from parts of the report questioning whether this was more about serving a pro-NFL agenda than getting to the truth.
 

Ed Hillel

Wants to be startin somethin
SoSH Member
Dec 12, 2007
43,559
Here
I think we've all done too much reading more into statements than are there. Brady's probably just pissed and told Yee to say what he said because that's what he believes, and that's as far as it goes.
 

Smiling Joe Hesketh

Throw Momma From the Train
Moderator
SoSH Member
May 20, 2003
35,726
Deep inside Muppet Labs
Devizier said:
 
Tags, as in Paul Tagliabue? Isn't he the guy that put a quack in charge of the NFL concussions policy, ultimately contributing to the league's largest ongoing problem?
 
Meh. The league was better run under Tags. We didn't have these absurd Kabuki theaters every 6 months.