#DFG: Canceling the Noise
- Thread starter nattysez
- Start date
I HOPE Goodell makes it a full year. First off, you'd finally have some good intel. Second, the NFLPA and Patriots would rain hell upon the NFL and their highest office. You think Kraft would still stand by about the 2 picks if RG decides to increase the penalty fourfold?
Mike Garafolo @MikeGarafolo 21s21 seconds ago
Post-hearing briefs in Tom Brady appeal due late next week, sources say. Decision from Roger Goodell to follow at some point thereafter.
Post-hearing briefs in Tom Brady appeal due late next week, sources say. Decision from Roger Goodell to follow at some point thereafter.
It's not really any intel. It's just a re-telling of a discussion with an NFL executive/minority owner who used to be in the hedge fund business full time.
I just got a reply from my friend who spoke with him.
My friend said was that this guy:truly is a man possessed on the topic He thinks Brady is lying and that he's as bad as Rice (!!!), and was more wishcasting than truly making a true prediction about what will happen.
My friend thought the relevance was that it's an indication that other NFL teams are hearing a less rosy reflection of Brady's performance than we are hearing from some. And that might mean that we need to way dial down our hopes, if we have them, that Goodell will reduce the suspension by more than a game, if at all.
Again, your mileage may vary.
I just got a reply from my friend who spoke with him.
My friend said was that this guy:truly is a man possessed on the topic He thinks Brady is lying and that he's as bad as Rice (!!!), and was more wishcasting than truly making a true prediction about what will happen.
My friend thought the relevance was that it's an indication that other NFL teams are hearing a less rosy reflection of Brady's performance than we are hearing from some. And that might mean that we need to way dial down our hopes, if we have them, that Goodell will reduce the suspension by more than a game, if at all.
Again, your mileage may vary.
TheoShmeo said:
I can't see the league office sharing the proceedings with other teams to gather reactions, this seems pretty far fetched. Technically isn't the appeal confidential?
@garymyersNYDN: Tom Brady was first to testify at yesterday's hearing. Answered questioned for 2 hours. Then he stayed at hearing until done 9 hours later.
There wasn't a peep from the other owners when no one had seen the video of Rice cold-cocking his future wife. The blowback started when the video went public and the story became a league-wide embarrassment. In this case there is a league-wide embarrassment. Unfortunately for Goodell he's its author. The other owners just want the story to go away without further damage.Average Reds said:
Tim, the part about sharing information to gather reactions is not what I intended to convey.
All I heard was that an NFL executive heard a report on the hearing from someone. Whether that someone was an NFL official, another owner who heard from an NFL official or some other source, I don't know. I'm guessing it was someone from the NFL but I did not get precise information. And I don't know if the information was shared just to pass it on and keep him in the know or, as you suggested, to get a reaction.
Geoffm33, absolutely. Hell, it's possible that the executive/owner was being fed from someone who knew what he wanted to hear and the negative report was as made to order as the Wells Report.
All I heard was that an NFL executive heard a report on the hearing from someone. Whether that someone was an NFL official, another owner who heard from an NFL official or some other source, I don't know. I'm guessing it was someone from the NFL but I did not get precise information. And I don't know if the information was shared just to pass it on and keep him in the know or, as you suggested, to get a reaction.
Geoffm33, absolutely. Hell, it's possible that the executive/owner was being fed from someone who knew what he wanted to hear and the negative report was as made to order as the Wells Report.
nighthob said:
I tend to agree that they want it to go away, but I feel pretty strongly that the way they want it to go away is for Brady to be punished.
As an aside, I understand why people are giving Theo the business about his "source" but the reality is that my observation is that this is how the rest of the league looks at the Pats. I think they will go apeshit if Goodell were to announce that it's all just a misunderstanding and there reallyi isn't evidence that any balls were deflated.
We'll know soon enough. (Not soon enough, but you know what I mean.)
TheoShmeo said:
Sounds like this guy's opinions were already fixed and had zero to do with how yesterday's hearing played out.
Maybe he's one of Wells' best buds and is incensed that anyone dared to criticize Ted.
I don't think the owners care about anything except the embarrassment (excepting Irsay, of course). The front office personnel are likely insane over their inability to beat the Patriots, and I agree that they'd like to see Brady banned for life. But the owners are fuming, and if Goodell butchers this and the NFLPA gets its way, they'll probably pass the hat to hire a hitman.Average Reds said:
simplyeric said:
Gotcha.
While I didn't agree with your hypothetical, I could definitely see him making this case. Something like, "Look, we have all of this data and info and none of it proves Brady knew what was going on. I'm keeping the team penalty in place because it's clear to me that the employees were up to something, but I'm eliminating the Brady suspension and instead hitting him with a $50k fine for not initially cooperating, as he did in his appeal hearing. If we take this to court, it could spiral out of control for us and I think the best way to make this go away is by doing what I've outlined above."
Brady can pay the fine in $12.50 increments in pennies, be able to say he wasn't found guilty of anything other than not handing over his phone, and Rog gets to say he cracked down on the Pats for some "shady" dealings to keep the rest of the NFL and their fans happy. The Pats won't have a 1st round pick next year and everyone will get to talk about how the Cheatriots are cheating cheaters who cheat during the 2016 draft. We'll get all pissed off on here because, like Spygate, everyone will get the facts wrong because their minds are already made up.
But I'm probably making the same mistake I accused you of making, and that's giving credence to the idea that Goodell can dig himself out of this mess without making himself and his office look worse.
TheoShmeo said:
Your friend equates a football's internal pressure to that of a woman's face?
ElcaballitoMVP said:
Oh, yeah, I'm not saying that Roger is smart enough to do anything worthwhile here, although that's not to say he can't stumble on something that works for him.
But all the other owners supposedly want their pound of flesh, but:
- Roger was able to convince Kraft to accept a tangible and real penalty for the better sake of the league, and because he had no recourse
- Roger might be able to convince other owners to accept an intangible "defeat" for the sake of the league, because of the potential downside of Brady's continued pursuit of the case.
IF... it's all "IF" and "supposedly". But it's a rational outcome.
Roger doesn't give a shit about what the fans think, as long at the owners think they will continue making money. Nothing about this case will make the general fans of any team watch less. Hell, dropping the penalty would enrage other fan bases, so they'd be even more likely to watch when their team played the Patriots.
Roger gives shits about whether the other owners think the outcome is financially beneficial to them, and frankly, "make it go away" (in a legal sense) might be the best outcome.
Drop the suspension: "I found TB to be credible and believable"
levy a fine: "if only TB would have been this cooperative earlier"
wait until next off-season, next scandal, whatever. If the Patriots have a very low draft pick, make the penalty only the 1st rounder. If the Patriots have a higher draft pick (i.e. don't make the playoffs) change the penalty to one 2nd rounder.
The pro NFL leaks aren't really surprising. Hard to say what happened in the meeting, but given the cast of characters that managed to turn this into a megadeal through anti-Patriot media leaks suffered zero consequences it would be more surprising if they stopped leaking now than if they kept leaking..
ROG can't up the suspension though. No one with any real knowledge of the situation is going to give that as a prediction.
ROG can't up the suspension though. No one with any real knowledge of the situation is going to give that as a prediction.
Dumb questions born(e) out of massive frustration....
1. Why can't Roger, his minions and Wells be charged under the RICO Act?
2. Why can't Pats fans start a class action suit to get the Pat's picks back?
I know, these questions establish that I am dumber than a box of rocks, but I can't stand it anymore.
1. Why can't Roger, his minions and Wells be charged under the RICO Act?
2. Why can't Pats fans start a class action suit to get the Pat's picks back?
I know, these questions establish that I am dumber than a box of rocks, but I can't stand it anymore.
As I said, my friend used to work for this guy and talked to him today for first time in a while. My friend is a big Pats fan and decided to call the one person he knows who has a connection to the NFL.
Coincidentally, I had some dealings with this guy over 10 (and maybe 15) years ago, but the odds of him remembering my name are non-existent. His institution was on a committee of lenders I represented but he was above the pay grade of the guys I was dealing with at his shop for the most part.
I don't think he really believes Goodell will increase the sentence. I think he said that to make his point to his former employee (who he knows is a Pats fan) and to the extent he's even talking about it, he's wishcasting or exaggerating for show.
But my friend doubly confirmed the point about his comment on Tom versus Rice. Apparently, this guy is so convinced that Tom is lying that Tom has become public enemy number one in his eyes.
Coincidentally, I had some dealings with this guy over 10 (and maybe 15) years ago, but the odds of him remembering my name are non-existent. His institution was on a committee of lenders I represented but he was above the pay grade of the guys I was dealing with at his shop for the most part.
I don't think he really believes Goodell will increase the sentence. I think he said that to make his point to his former employee (who he knows is a Pats fan) and to the extent he's even talking about it, he's wishcasting or exaggerating for show.
But my friend doubly confirmed the point about his comment on Tom versus Rice. Apparently, this guy is so convinced that Tom is lying that Tom has become public enemy number one in his eyes.
TheoShmeo said:
Aren't you like 0 for 37 on your sources over the course of this? Or am I confusing you with someone else? Not that I'm doubting this story was relayed to your (or saying your friend is lying to you), just that it is accurate or meaningful in any way.
Papelbon's Poutine said:
I think his point was just that there are some NFL employees (and people in general) who still completely and totally believe that Brady is guilty. I don't think it was meant to be a huge revelation.
I don't think Goodell gives a remote fuck whether Brady is guilty or not, and I think Brady and his team are well aware of that. Goodell's next step will be driven 100% by what he feels is best for the owners and for his own reputation, and 0% by whether he thinks Brady did anything or not. Any leaks claiming that Brady made a good case or was forthcoming yesterday are simply to provide the illusion that the commissioner is a thoughtful man who will carefully ponder the evidence when all he and his lackeys are likely doing is determining what actions are the likely to result in the most favorable outcome for himself and the owners.
Brady may have done well yesterday by illustrating how strong his case would be if it were to go to federal court, but I can't imagine anyone in that room actually believed that Goodell was actually using the hearing to try to determine Brady's innocence or guilt.
The actual degree of Brady's guilt and Goodell's motivations here are completely uncoupled, and using the former to predict the outcome of the latter is like using Papi's OPS in night games this year to predict how many second period goals Jonathan Toews will score in 2017.
Brady may have done well yesterday by illustrating how strong his case would be if it were to go to federal court, but I can't imagine anyone in that room actually believed that Goodell was actually using the hearing to try to determine Brady's innocence or guilt.
The actual degree of Brady's guilt and Goodell's motivations here are completely uncoupled, and using the former to predict the outcome of the latter is like using Papi's OPS in night games this year to predict how many second period goals Jonathan Toews will score in 2017.
Sending some love to this post. I used to play the shit out of tonka trucks when I was a little fella.( . ) ( . ) and (_!_) said:
MalzoneExpress said:
I've stared at this for 20 minutes and don't even know where to begin. It's like asking why we can't have Goodell dragged to The Hague and tried as a war criminal.
My eternal optimism is fading. Starting to think the scholarship in my aunts memory will not be getting that $50 from mental. This whole thing is stupid and it sucks. Roger is stupid and he sucks. Wah. Pity party time!!
Saddle up and get Tommy that 5th fuck you ring boys.
Saddle up and get Tommy that 5th fuck you ring boys.
PP, I think the story is meaningful for one thing and one thing only: it suggests that there is a view among NFL executives and possibly NFL officials about Tom's performance that is less positive than some of the reports we have heard, and that view might be shared by or affecting Goodell.
That possibility should come as no surprise.
Nothing about my posts should be taken as a prediction. The full season thing was apparently hyperbole from the start.
The NFL executive involved is not a dumb man. Not even close. And that he is apparently convinced of Brady's guilt and has strong anti-Tom views wouldn't tell me that he's a dope if I did not know something about him prior to today. A lot of very smart people have perceptions about Brady that I think are way off the mark.
That possibility should come as no surprise.
Nothing about my posts should be taken as a prediction. The full season thing was apparently hyperbole from the start.
The NFL executive involved is not a dumb man. Not even close. And that he is apparently convinced of Brady's guilt and has strong anti-Tom views wouldn't tell me that he's a dope if I did not know something about him prior to today. A lot of very smart people have perceptions about Brady that I think are way off the mark.
Schefter told Holley it's headed for federal court in Massachusetts--the League was essentially unmoved by Brady or attacks on the science.
This appears to be about 18 hours old, so if it has been posted, I apologize.
But Florio is killing it now: http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2015/06/23/exploring-nfls-inconsistent-reactions-to-erroneous-espn-reports/related/
Good for him.
But Florio is killing it now: http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2015/06/23/exploring-nfls-inconsistent-reactions-to-erroneous-espn-reports/related/
Good for him.
Dale Arnold: "Why, why doesn't the League find out who leaked to Mortenson?"
Schefter (quietly): "I think they know."
Schefter (quietly): "I think they know."
This makes me sick that the NFL knowingly allowed this to happen in lead up to its biggest event. It was obviously meant to hurt the Pats chances in the Super Bowl with strategically timed leaks. Thankfully, it seemed to rally the team and lead to a SB win. What a major FU to whatever dickhead began this shitstorm.lambeau said:
DrewDawg said:
Come on, that was a great post. A class action suit. . . .that would be something, don't you think?
This makes my head explode.lambeau said:
If it were anyone other than Schefter, I'd be taking it with a grain of salt.
Double down on Wells, all countervailing evidence - including the AEI report - be damned. And then there are those deflator texts...
Unfortunately, it also makes me think my "stays at 4 games" prediction will prove correct.
Court will be interesting.
