#DFG: Canceling the Noise
- Thread starter nattysez
- Start date
Chicken**it coward. Granted, he has a lot to lose, potentially, but this is sick seeing him like this, especially after the bravado in the beginning. I'm quite surprised he's valuing future ownership of this team (which can't be more than 3-4 years w/Brady with a potential for Championships) ahead of his legacy.
Whether it is true or not, in the court of public opinion, not fighting it is the same as confessing.
The 1st rounder is more valuable than Brady for 1, 2, or even 4 pre-Halloweengames, Bob.
Whether it is true or not, in the court of public opinion, not fighting it is the same as confessing.
The 1st rounder is more valuable than Brady for 1, 2, or even 4 pre-Halloweengames, Bob.
ragnarok725 said:
They really don't. Start with the premise that there was never, not for a moment, a recourse for the team punishments that Kraft was willing to pursue. Some very good lawyer folks have been talking in this thread for a while now about how bleak that part is for the Pats. On that level, it's not about right or fair or moral or anything AT ALL besides 1) contracts within billionaire associations, and B) a legal system that has clearly said they're not in the business of regulating those kinds of agreements absent pressing public need. Maybe he does win in court. But even testing those waters takes him from being in the top tier of owners to a pariah. That's real cost.
Add to all that his apparent, conflicting conviction that the Pats are blameless, and the two actions seem to make quite a lot of sense together. The website was just about the most he could do without taking a wrecking ball to the whole thing. It, quite simply, ain't even close to being worth taking a wrecking ball to the whole thing.
BigJimEd said:
I think it's possible that as RG's team (meaning the regular outside counsel and others in the league) have gotten deeper into the Wells report the depth of its problems has become a lot more clear than they thought on day 1. And if that is the case, those advisors would be telling him to avoid having to litigate the powers of the commissioner on THESE facts, which would mean RG would be looking for the escape hatch.
Do not know that Brady will accept anything more than zero, however, especially with the union telling him this is the time to get discipline process under control. And not sure RG will go all the way to zero.
E5 Yaz said:
You guys don't want to give your tickets to E5, he's been pretty much anti-Pats* for all intents and purposes throughout the whole thing. On the other hand, I'm a pretty good guy and my supportive credentials are well-established.
*amirite?? just trust me.
PedroKsBambino said:
This is playing out in the best possible way for those who want to protect the Shield.
Kraft agrees not to appeal. League stays strong and they avoid Al Davis ugliness.
Goodell drops the Brady suspension. NFLPA has to stand down, and Goodell's mishandling of the case is quickly forgotten. In a few weeks, Goodell will say "I told my team to base the suspension on the Wells report. They did so. However, I've read the report and respectfully disagree that the conclusions Mr. Wells drew merited the penalties Mr. Brady received. I'm therefore vacating Mr. Brady's suspension."
Goodell would be crazy to take any other approach, but we've all said that before...
I think NE is in a lose-lose here now. If Goodell reduces or eliminates the suspension it will look like Kraft made a back room deal to get his QB back on the field. If the suspension is upheld then people will assume Kraft backed down while gaining nothing because he knew they were guilty. I'm sure that NE executives have thought through all of the possible scenarios but I'm still trying to understand what he gained by making this statement.
Stitch01 said:
I fucked up. Sorry. Wasn't trying to be a welch.
Brady suspension gets dropped to zero games by Goodell = I am permabanned.
Brady's suspension does not get dropped to zero games by Goodell = Stitch01 has to pay $500 to Jimmy Fund.
M
MentalDisabldLst
Guest
I've typed up a paraphrased version of the Matt Light extended interview from Beetle & Zo earlier this morning, which gave his frank thoughts on the matter. It was good stuff, thanks for the referral. You can see the write-up here.
BigJimEd said:
He didn't--he assigned Vincent to do so, did not participate, and appointed himself for the appeal.
JimBoSox9 said:
The website may also be interpreted as a violation of said agreement, should push come to shove.
pappymojo said:
This is a little like asking McBain how he sleeps at night.
Tyrone Biggums said:
If I'm an NFL owner there's no way I waste my millions on longshot litigations against the NFL: I'd rather spend the money on a combination of malaria nets for kids in Africa, horizontals and verticals of premier cru bourdeauxs, and making Allison Stokke my love slave. Because I think I could make those things happen with the millions of dollars fighting this would cost and have about the same chance of changing anyone's mind or getting that first round pick back.
SeanBerry said:
Why would Goodell drop it to zero? If it gets dropped it'll be to the court system, not Goodell.
I live in Central PA which is Steelers and Penn State country, everyone here knows that I am an unabashed Patriots Fan, you know how many people have given me shit here? ZEROStitch01 said:
1. They acknowledge this whole thing is ridiculously stupid. 2. I have Roethlisburger and Sandusky to bring up.
Move along, nothing to see here, just like Sox Fans do with Yankee Fans, if someone is going to be a hater, no matter what Goodell and the NFL did would make this go away.
Yep. They're going to cut the legs out from the NFLPA and Kraft is helping them do it. I'd be pissed if I was Brady.nattysez said:
He's (Seanberry) gonna loophole out of it because Goodell will never eliminate the entire suspension. Brady will likely win via the Tags out.
Trautwein's Degree said:
You can argue causation v. correlation here but Bob Kraft and the NFL owners know they are wealthier today than they were when Goodell took over. Every sports commissioner gets called an idiot by fans. Yet, so long as revenues increase they are bulletproof.
I don't like Goodell but this plot is bullshit. Purposely expands the scale for NFL revenue to make it seem like a small increase. Another way to look at it would be to say that revenues went up about 3.5 billion during his tenure, and he got about 10% of that.
Zedia said:
If Goodell is smart enough to drop the suspension, then I'm going to have to reassess my position on the league, and consider the possibility that I just love the drama.
Of course, there's a bit of a Charlie Brown effect, and I probably won't care as much about the next trumped up scandal.
GregHarris said:
It's not a loophole. That's what was offered to me! I just took the bet.
I'd never bet something like that on the court system. Who knows? Crazy shit happens there.
IMO, here's the compromise:
1. Pats agree to accept team punishment (loss of picks and fine) for agreeing that evidence tends to suggest that JM/JJ acted wrongfully (negligent supervision on team's part), but it's forever left unstated explicitly that JM/JJ acted wrongfully such as not to further drag him through the mud; and
2. NFL agrees to drop Brady's punishment and absolve him of guilt and agree that despite Wells' evidence, the Pats's web site rebuttal (in addition to what comes out in some appeal meeting between Goodell and Brady) tends to suggest more probably than not that he wasn't in fact involved.
Brady saves face (as much as he possibly can at this point; there always will be haters) and the organization takes the hit for him, which it was going to have to do anyway. Organization has been through this before and its not an individual, so it will be OK. Brady's an individual and is one of the top players in the history of the game and it's not fair to crucify him based on such weak evidence. League looks like it came down hard and it gets to avoid going to court with Brady.
It's a win/lose for everyone, including Wells and JM/JJ (not that the League or Pats care so much about those parties).
1. Pats agree to accept team punishment (loss of picks and fine) for agreeing that evidence tends to suggest that JM/JJ acted wrongfully (negligent supervision on team's part), but it's forever left unstated explicitly that JM/JJ acted wrongfully such as not to further drag him through the mud; and
2. NFL agrees to drop Brady's punishment and absolve him of guilt and agree that despite Wells' evidence, the Pats's web site rebuttal (in addition to what comes out in some appeal meeting between Goodell and Brady) tends to suggest more probably than not that he wasn't in fact involved.
Brady saves face (as much as he possibly can at this point; there always will be haters) and the organization takes the hit for him, which it was going to have to do anyway. Organization has been through this before and its not an individual, so it will be OK. Brady's an individual and is one of the top players in the history of the game and it's not fair to crucify him based on such weak evidence. League looks like it came down hard and it gets to avoid going to court with Brady.
It's a win/lose for everyone, including Wells and JM/JJ (not that the League or Pats care so much about those parties).
Well...here's hoping that Brady and the NFLPA get this into the courts and skewer the league. That was always the more likely avenue for something like real justice to occur here.
moondog80 said:
1%.
Its also inaccurate to say his salary is that high. His salary is much lower. He has bonuses belt into his compensation package based on revenue targets that the league has hit.
Zedia said:
If by "cutting the legs out from the NFLPA" you mean "dropping the suspension to nothing" then I cannot agree.
As we discussed upthread, that's not a complete win for Brady, but it's pretty good. And the NFLPA just holds their powder until the next player is suspended.
wibi said:
If Goodell concludes that he is likely to lose in court and have his authority undermined, the smart play would be to cut his losses by eliminating the suspension. (Thus eliminating the court case.)
Edit: I don't think Goodell is this smart. I think he does not vacate the suspension.
Does anyone think he didn't participate? Did Goodell himself even say he didn't participate?
I just don't see anyway Goodell eliminates the suspension. Reduce, wrote possibly but not eliminate.
I understand why people are saying that. I didn't think Brady would get suspended to begin with because I didn't think the NFL would want to fight this battle. But at this point I don't see them backing down. There is nothing new and nothing has changed so why would they?
cheekydave said:
On field events typically force him to refrain from coming around these parts during the regular season and post-season anyway.
