I feel like this thread is starting to suffer from scope creep. [edit: this post took a while to write, so the preceding sentence doesn't necessarily apply to the past half-dozen or so posts!] It's one thing to put one's feelings about Kraft's handling of Deflategate into a broader context ('yes I'm pissed at him like hell for this, but taking everything into consideration I still am glad he's the Pats' owner'); it's another to turn our attention away entirely from the matter at hand to an involved discussion on Kraft's tenure. I know, I know, this is what happens on message boards, I get it, but still: it dilutes the analysis.
Two things stand out for me about Kraft's statement yesterday, and make it especially shocking considering his previous public responses to this issue:
1. The first thing that strikes me is the extent to which the statement is, above all, about affiliation and identification.
Kraft declares where his ultimate allegiances lie in two steps:
(a) He begins by (subtly but unmistakably) distancing himself from Patriots fans, describing us as one of two "polarizing audiences" (the other being fans of other teams). The very structure of his argument sets us up as one of two irreconcilable blocs that is exerting pressure (through "rhetoric") upon him, and paints Kraft as the Peacemaker who will bring about a cessation of rhetorical hostilities.
(b) What he does in the next few paragraphs constitutes an ever deeper, more candid declaration of affiliation and allegiance. He talks about the goosebumps he felt when first welcomed to the confederation. He tells us that the epiphany he lives by is the realization that "the heart and soul" of the league is the partnership between the 32 teams. He is a team player, great; but notice what this is not saying: "the heart and soul" of the NFL is not its fans (who bring the passion and the revenue), much less the players: it's "the partnership".
Now, viewed outside of context there is nothing inherently wrong about such a candid acknowledgement of allegiance. The problem is precisely the context: since this whole shit-storm broke out, Kraft has been talking like the Great Chief of Patriots Nation, defending the honor of his team, coach, QB, and fans, asking for apologies, releasing extensive exposés of the Wells Report, etc.
2. The second thing that strikes me about the statement is this: some people are saying well, just wait, we don't know yet what concessions he obtained from Goodell; Kraft is a shrewd businessman... In other words, the idea is that Kraft didn't concede without getting something in return. I have a fundamental problem with this argument. Even if Brady's suspension ends up getting reduced, Kraft will have failed to obtain something more important (in my view at least): saving face. Kraft is walking away from this looking like someone who not only is accepting the discipline, but is no longer disagreeing with either its factual basis or its proportionality. To the extent he alludes to disagreement, it's in the past tense "I think I made it clear when the report came out that I didn't think it was fair". He doesn't go so far as to disown his past views on the report, but he does not make it clear that he still holds them. And I think this is a huge concession on his part: in essence, he's walking away from this negotiation with nothing, not even the dignity of being able to say "I still disagree, but I will accept it".
If he has in fact managed to get Brady's suspension reduced, that will be nice, I guess, but I don't think that makes up for what I see as a complete capitulation on the merits of the case. Some people say "oh but if the suspension is reduced then we'll see how prudent Kraft was, and that he didn't do this for nothing", as if that would be how Kraft saves face here. I disagree. Saving face is about more than obtaining a few concessions from the victor (who after all can always be credited for being magnanimous and merciful). It's about what you say as you step down. It's about dignity. Kraft has been shouting St. Crispin's Day speeches to us since Ballghazi broke out, and overnight he's like, "you know what, never mind, King Charles and the Dauphin are good guys, and for the peace of Europe let's retreat".
Regardless of what I think of Kraft's tenure as a whole (I happen to think he's been a great owner), I find this combination of turnabout, capitulation, and distancing from the fanbase nauseating, unseemly, and above all unnecessary.
So am I upset with the organization? About this matter in particular?: hell yeah.
