#DFG: Canceling the Noise
- Thread starter nattysez
- Start date
Another interpretation of Dorito dink, from a comment at Barstool Sports:
"in a circle jerk, the “dorito dink” is the last person to bust a nut on the dorito, which means he has to eat it."
This just gets better and better.
"in a circle jerk, the “dorito dink” is the last person to bust a nut on the dorito, which means he has to eat it."
This just gets better and better.
Only if you care what ESPN thinks. I'm not sure that was the Pats goal, however.drleather2001 said:
When did lawyers decide to start making long winded extraneous statements to the press?dcmissle said:
Given what we've seen from Wells and Goldman, this hasn't been the profession's finest hour. Let's hope Kessler does better.MarcSullivaFan said:
I would have expected this under Kiam or the Sullivans but never Bob Kraft.
All the reasons why Wells' presser was stupid apply here, but more so because of the Pats' baggage.
This isn't going to move the needle in our favor one iota; in fact, it probably makes it worse. The brand takes a beating.
It certainly will not help with Goodell or the owners; in fact, it probably hurts.
And the irony is, in an appeal, the team could have made these points confidentially (not a public proceeding) and without giving the adversary prior notice.
I know Bob signed off, but he is getting old. If this is Jonathan's coming out party, that's not good news for us.
All the reasons why Wells' presser was stupid apply here, but more so because of the Pats' baggage.
This isn't going to move the needle in our favor one iota; in fact, it probably makes it worse. The brand takes a beating.
It certainly will not help with Goodell or the owners; in fact, it probably hurts.
And the irony is, in an appeal, the team could have made these points confidentially (not a public proceeding) and without giving the adversary prior notice.
I know Bob signed off, but he is getting old. If this is Jonathan's coming out party, that's not good news for us.
There's no chance Wells would have held that press conference without Goodell's approval.kartvelo said:
Your job is to keep the client from walking off a cliff.Ed Hillel said:
In any event, I read the rebuttal as an over the top piece of advocacy, not something the client dictated word for word. Discretion is the better part of valor, and there was a lack of discretion, even though many aspects were very effective.
Wells may have been ordered to do the pressure, but nobody ordered him to be angry and defensive. He did not stay on message.
For me, the bottom line was the simple fact that their was absolutely no physical evidence that the balls' half time PSI values were outside of their expected range. In fact they supposedly bullied the head referee into suggesting his recollection of the pre-game guage might be incorrect. This was the key point .. If you accept the ref's memory (the high guage) and the high guage's half time readings there was no abnormal deflation. But the league decided to announce in their letter to the Patriots that a Preliminary Finding of Guilt was found to exist and a investigation would be forthcoming. Why would they do that? Despite the only evidence to suggest the balls were tampered with was made up? Draw your own conclusions.
When I had first read those text messages I found them to mildly incriminating and basically accepted the fact they did screw with the balls. Now .. I think they were completely innocent.
When I had first read those text messages I found them to mildly incriminating and basically accepted the fact they did screw with the balls. Now .. I think they were completely innocent.
MarcSullivaFan said:
It's your job to try, yes, but ultimately you do what the rich client wants. There aren't many people Wells would ever consider doing that for, given his reputation, but he can make an exception for an 8 billion dollar corporation.
Or a check from the offices of the National Football League. We’re talking apples and oranges as far as the connections go.GregHarris said:
dcmissle said:
MarcSullivanFan made a very interesting point that to him the report didn't seem so much biased as intent on finding a strong conclusion either way. This angle actually brings to the fore one of the problems with using attorneys, even very good attorneys, for investigations such as this.
Basically, attorneys bring to the problem or issue those skills and experiences which have been developed in their profession, which obviously reflects (hopefully) the "virtues" of that profession. Specifically, they are skilled in things like process.
However, the central element of the legal system is not, as some would wish, justice, but rather closure. This observation forms the basis of some of the more interesting assessments and critiques of the legal system. First and foremost, a legal system must close cases. Justice is an important element of the process, but in a functional sense, largely because if the closure of cases and issues is not just, then the legitimacy of the system will be questioned and it will ultimately fail.
Ultimately, the system can afford to fall short at times in justice, but not in closure. And this fact is reflected in the processes developed, which is in turn instantiated in the skills and approach attorneys trained in the system.
Oftentimes, people tend to believe in whatever outcome the system yielded because that's needed to accept the closure, which is important. When a bright light is shown upon some cases, though, well, cracks show.
On the other hand, much like so many families of crime victims who protest when a convicted person is released based on DNA evidence, many people prefer to hold on to the sense of closure because it's cleaner, easier.
This obviously happens with lots of stuff in real life. And real life is messy. People--here, the league--brings in attorneys to make everything appear settled and that's what they're good at. But sometimes, when considered in terms of reality, it looks kinda... weak.
Again I think the Pats response to Wells (not Goodell yet) was meant largely for the other owners who will likely prefer a brokered peace than open warfare.
Maybe this is wishful thinking, but IMO Kraft knows he can not get full satisfaction, but perhaps a middle-ground can be found, in a negotiated truce.
Maybe this is wishful thinking, but IMO Kraft knows he can not get full satisfaction, but perhaps a middle-ground can be found, in a negotiated truce.
LuckyBen said:
Please stop telling people what to be interested in. Or how to post in general--I keep seeing you do stuff like this and it's generally not constructive or adding value to the thread, and it's especially notable when addressing someone with a professional interest in this stuff in addition to a sports fandom orientation.
Thanks in advance.
You've never heard an exaggeration? These guys are ribbing each other. The exaggeration makes it obvious to his buddy that he won't actually follow through.RSFnFL said:
Edit: Autocorrect
The brand has already been taking a beating. So I don’t think publishing the refutation is as damaging as you seem to think.dcmissle said:
That being said, I agree with you that the documents should have remained out of the public sphere and first presented during an appeal.
Edit: Inserted ‘first,’ as I would reserve the right to publish said documents at a later date.
dcmissle said:
So what? The goal isn't to win a legal hearing. The goal is to win the PR campaign and embarrass the NFL into backing off on their own. If Kraft wins an arbitration hearing, or something, without convincing the public (and fellow owners) that the whole thing was a crock from the get-go, then it's a hollow victory -- the NFL will just come back and find some other random rule violation and revoke a 1st round pick for that, instead.
bankshot1 said:
I take is as "fuck you" mode from Kraft which is the response most fans wanted. It probably won't move the needle but it is good to get out there and trash the report as much as possible because it deserves trashing.
If I were Kraft, I would insist on Goodell personally attending the ring ceremony in September, and make a huge public stink if he declines. Make him risk his life walking into Gillette after this, please.
Question on timing -- anyone know when the appeal will be held and when we'd hear something?
Basically, how many more days until Brady's cleared to start opening night?
Basically, how many more days until Brady's cleared to start opening night?
It is a "fuck you" but its largely aimed at the Wells report. IMO its possible that calmer heads (other BSD owners) talk Kraft from going nuclear on Goodell and the league in return for a lighter penalty on the Pats. And that penalty is largely based on less than perfect cooperation. and not on tampering.SuperManny said:
Wells takes one for the team. NFL gets peace. Pats get slapped. Goodell gets a check.
The appeal is to the guy that issued the punishment (OK, The Artless Roger used a sockpuppet to issue the punishment, but still...). So the Patriots punishment is set in stone. On the other hand, if you're more interested in pressuring the NFL into appointing an independent arbitrator for the Brady hearing (which is infinitely more important than the two picks) then it probably helps to open a second front for the NFL to have to defend.nolasoxfan said:
I honestly don't know what Kraft had to lose from the media perception perspective. We've had folks calling for a yearlong or even a lifetime ban on Brady and Belichick. Other folks are calling the Super Bowl victory against Seattle tainted; others are saying that Brady is another "cheater" much like Belichick. And this is nearly universal, including the local Boston mediots such as Shank and Volin and Gasper and Buckley. Shank himself essentially called this a bigger scandal than the 1919 Black Sox.
The mediots were going to take down the rebuttal no matter what was in it. They were going to troll $100 bills through the trailer parks of ex-players to come up with additional allegations of Pats "cheating" regardless of any rebuttal. That storm had already been unleashed, and the NFL doubled down on it when it ordered or allowed Wells to hold that press conference, which was nothing more than an orchestrated attack on the Patriots brand.
I get the appeal angle; certainly Kraft didn't do himself any favors with the league office. But if he truly felt cornered with nothing left to lose, it's not surprising when something like this comes out.
The mediots were going to take down the rebuttal no matter what was in it. They were going to troll $100 bills through the trailer parks of ex-players to come up with additional allegations of Pats "cheating" regardless of any rebuttal. That storm had already been unleashed, and the NFL doubled down on it when it ordered or allowed Wells to hold that press conference, which was nothing more than an orchestrated attack on the Patriots brand.
I get the appeal angle; certainly Kraft didn't do himself any favors with the league office. But if he truly felt cornered with nothing left to lose, it's not surprising when something like this comes out.
lexrageorge said:
Maybe they didn't have public opinion on their side, but there has been plenty of "Ted Well's blew this, what was he thinking" talk over the last two days. Instead of letting that stew while the Wells report is picked apart more and more, they give what sounds like a totally ridiculous explanation to the one portion of the Wells report people found credible. I don't think this blows anything and probably matters little in the ultimate outcome, but the mishandling is still disappointing.
This ..AB in DC said:
Given that there is no real appeal process available to Kraft it should be obvious that the Wells Rebuttal is completely an exercise in PR. given the rebuttals length and level of detail it's certainly not directed at casual fans (the Pats are cheaters .. Don't confuse me with the facts) but rather at die hard Pats fans and at The NFL community in general.
Brady can certainly use this material in his appeal .. And it should result in an overturning of the suspension given an impartial environment. But that's far from given.
That is my understanding as well, which puts pressure on Goodell to decide quickly who is hearing it -- himself, one of his "independent" arbitrators, or a genuinely independent arbitrator.epraz said:
Brady has no interest in agreeing to a delay before the hearing examiner is identified. He'll want to know quickly who he has to persuade. I would argue he has no interest in a delay after that, but it depends on whether his lawyers are ready to go.
If this appeal goes south, he'll want to get his court papers ready after that.
Captaincoop said:
This. Call it the Duracell Patriot Power Night, with a free package of D Cell batteries for each fan in attendance.
nighthob said:
Do you really feel that way? I would gladly agree to have Brady serve this whole suspension in exchange for the picks back.
Yeah, I'm not too worried about it. The Patriots are setting this up so its them and Brady against Wells and the NFL, only the NFL and Wells were supposed to be neutral. The takedown of the report will eventually do more good than harm in the court of public opinion judging whether this was a screw job, and when one of your sons gets pilloried and railroaded, that's just what you do.
Wells's problems yesterday and in the report were systemic. I'm less worried about a lack of perfection in the decisions going into the takedown. When your adversary has been controlling the narrative since January with selective false leaks and then you get hit with the piece of shit they got, it's scorched earth time.
The Pats' response ensures this isn't going to fade from the headlines while the process plays out, which is what we were worried about yesterday.
Wells's problems yesterday and in the report were systemic. I'm less worried about a lack of perfection in the decisions going into the takedown. When your adversary has been controlling the narrative since January with selective false leaks and then you get hit with the piece of shit they got, it's scorched earth time.
The Pats' response ensures this isn't going to fade from the headlines while the process plays out, which is what we were worried about yesterday.
That one "ridiculous explanation" was but a tiny piece of the rebuttal.TheMoralBully said:
There were also rebuttals to the purported lack of cooperation by the Patriots, which was a key piece used to justify the punishment.