#DFG: Canceling the Noise
- Thread starter nattysez
- Start date
On this we agree in spades.Average Reds said:
Kessler did a helluva job. Good planning, judgment, oral advocacy and brief writing. The whole package.
The negative fall out was inevitable.
I was listening between noon and 12:40.
I think that what's going on is that Jonathan Kraft, when asked about the picks before last night's game, said "Robert is a man of his word. As of today, we have no plans to go after the picks." This seemed to leave the door open to the organization changing its mind. From there, the talk show hosts have been engaging in a flight of fancy.
I think that what's going on is that Jonathan Kraft, when asked about the picks before last night's game, said "Robert is a man of his word. As of today, we have no plans to go after the picks." This seemed to leave the door open to the organization changing its mind. From there, the talk show hosts have been engaging in a flight of fancy.
You should be having fun. What a bunch of clowns. Even if someone believes Goodell was right about everything then they agree this is an infraction on par with PEDs so I guess Seattle's Super Bowl win was tainted because Browner. You can play this game with every team but only the Pats live in everyone's head.Ralphwiggum said:
Yeah I did enjoy the judge making it clear what he really thought. Also Michael Hurley (who has been great throughout this) had my favorite point. Paraphrased, he said we have a federal judge vacating the suspension with a scathinf decision in black and white showing what a sham Goodell ran. And people still want to point to Tom Brady, accused by this same man, maybe having awareness of people lowering PSI levels, that nobody ever cared about before this, by incomprehensible margins which may not even provide a competitive advantage. KenTremendous, I still feel like a crazy person talking about thisAverage Reds said:
https://twitter.com/AdamSchefter/status/639846415531835392JohnnyK said:
link to tweet
Wonder what makes him say that.
The only way they could get those back would be in a defamation suit.
dcmissle said:
It's bad form to bound down the stairs on Christmas morning, open the gift wrapped package and get exactly what you hoped would be under the tree and then grumble that you didn't get a bunch of other, unlikely gifts too.
E5 Yaz said:
Couldn't agree more. It's good to check in here on legal developments/analysis etc, but the obsession with haters -- on this issue, spygate, or just the Pats being kick ass repeat SB winners (!) in general -- is boring as all hell. A separate thread for those that want to tear down each and every negative internet comment would be cool. God knows they'll never stop.
Or, as is well said here:
mandro ramtinez said:
I'd like to see a post-mortem...as if genuine journalists were investigating this story instead of sports writers.
It's pretty clear that the knives were out before that playoff game.
I. Why did the League (owners) go after the Patriots?
a. Feeling that the Patriots (Belichick) get away with bending/breaking rules (e.g. - Harbaugh)
b. Fed up with lack of parity in the league? (e.g. - Grigson)
c. Concern that Kraft was too close to Goodell?
d. Needing a non-minority villain?
II. Who leaked the incorrect inflation data, and why?
a. Why was the correct data never put out?
b. What was Kensil's role in all of this?
III. Who established the ground-rules for the investigation (i.e. - this is the conclusion we seek)?
a. Was Wells given marching orders from the very beginning? If so, by whom?
IV. What was Pash's role?
a. Was the report edited to reach a level of "more probable than not" under the direction of Pash (or did Wells conclude that on his own)?
b. Who directed Exponent to reach a specific conclusion by masking un-scientific conclusions (while the consultant(s) covered their culpability by using escape words indicating the conclusions were not sacrosanct)?
V. Who chose that Princeton Professor and why?
a. Was the Professor simply incompetent (ignoring incorrect science, incorrect statistical manipulations, etc.) or was he paid to rubber stamp the conclusions?
VI. What did the interview notes of Jastremski and McNally reveal?
VII. Did the officials actually gauge non-kicking footballs prior to the game?
VIII. What was going on with the "missing football"? Was there an illegal money making scheme going on and did that relate in any way to the investigation of alleged deflation?
IX. Why did the investigators choose not to pursue all the texts listed in Brady's phone log?
etc. There must be more.
I think Mr. Wells probably has the answers to most or all of these questions. I have no reason to believe he's a crook - but was responding to the directions given him by his client, without breaking any rules.
I also think that the text messages and bathroom break were what led some to conclude guilt (c'mon, they really did look bad), and that the rest of the evidence was cooked to back that up.
It's pretty clear that the knives were out before that playoff game.
I. Why did the League (owners) go after the Patriots?
a. Feeling that the Patriots (Belichick) get away with bending/breaking rules (e.g. - Harbaugh)
b. Fed up with lack of parity in the league? (e.g. - Grigson)
c. Concern that Kraft was too close to Goodell?
d. Needing a non-minority villain?
II. Who leaked the incorrect inflation data, and why?
a. Why was the correct data never put out?
b. What was Kensil's role in all of this?
III. Who established the ground-rules for the investigation (i.e. - this is the conclusion we seek)?
a. Was Wells given marching orders from the very beginning? If so, by whom?
IV. What was Pash's role?
a. Was the report edited to reach a level of "more probable than not" under the direction of Pash (or did Wells conclude that on his own)?
b. Who directed Exponent to reach a specific conclusion by masking un-scientific conclusions (while the consultant(s) covered their culpability by using escape words indicating the conclusions were not sacrosanct)?
V. Who chose that Princeton Professor and why?
a. Was the Professor simply incompetent (ignoring incorrect science, incorrect statistical manipulations, etc.) or was he paid to rubber stamp the conclusions?
VI. What did the interview notes of Jastremski and McNally reveal?
VII. Did the officials actually gauge non-kicking footballs prior to the game?
VIII. What was going on with the "missing football"? Was there an illegal money making scheme going on and did that relate in any way to the investigation of alleged deflation?
IX. Why did the investigators choose not to pursue all the texts listed in Brady's phone log?
etc. There must be more.
I think Mr. Wells probably has the answers to most or all of these questions. I have no reason to believe he's a crook - but was responding to the directions given him by his client, without breaking any rules.
I also think that the text messages and bathroom break were what led some to conclude guilt (c'mon, they really did look bad), and that the rest of the evidence was cooked to back that up.
Hey, the Denver guys have a legitimate beef here. God clearly has a pro-Patriots bias.
1. Brady likes his balls on the softer side.
2. He plays in Foxboro, which is cold.
3. PV = nRT
I mean, if God were a Cowboys fan, is there any doubt that it would instead be PT = nRV? I mean, that could have avoided this whole mess!
1. Brady likes his balls on the softer side.
2. He plays in Foxboro, which is cold.
3. PV = nRT
I mean, if God were a Cowboys fan, is there any doubt that it would instead be PT = nRV? I mean, that could have avoided this whole mess!
I expressed my disappointment at Brady never having his day in court regarding the evidence months ago when it finally got through my thick head what the good SoSH LLC lawyers were trying to tell me. That said, I don't agree with the masses that this provided no exoneration to Brady.
Berman has provided substantial meat for the Patriots/Brady are innocent crowd. Sure, Berman only ruled on the process facts of the case but he...
1) Spent an awfully lot of time in the oral arguments discussing the facts of the case -- frequently ridiculing the NFL -- and then made all the transcripts public
2) Included many suspect facts regarding the evidence in his summary of the case and the transcript of him questioning those facts even though it generally had nothing to do with his ruling and (IANAL) presumably many could have been left out (e.g., JB: "do you have any direct evidence" Nash: "If you're asking do we have electronic, email, etc. evidence of Brady directing this, no, we don't."
3) Gave the impression of a man who wanted to make sure that if he was going to overturn a case that 95% of the time he should confirm, that he was doing so in favor of the party who deserved it. (e.g., yucking it up with Kessler while he explains his speeding analogy)
4) Openly mocked the NFL throughout his findings (e.g., "independent", and "harvard trained")
5) Actually over-turned the case
This was a massive win for Brady's credibility. It's true the facts of the case will only say notice and fairness -- but to everyone paying attention -- and a LOT of the media paid attention -- it became clear that the NFL's case was a load of garbage. Everyone who argues otherwise either has an agenda, didn't pay close attention, or isn't very bright.
Thank you, Judge Berman, for shining a bright light on this dumpster fire of an NFL league office and their shoddy frame job.
Berman has provided substantial meat for the Patriots/Brady are innocent crowd. Sure, Berman only ruled on the process facts of the case but he...
1) Spent an awfully lot of time in the oral arguments discussing the facts of the case -- frequently ridiculing the NFL -- and then made all the transcripts public
2) Included many suspect facts regarding the evidence in his summary of the case and the transcript of him questioning those facts even though it generally had nothing to do with his ruling and (IANAL) presumably many could have been left out (e.g., JB: "do you have any direct evidence" Nash: "If you're asking do we have electronic, email, etc. evidence of Brady directing this, no, we don't."
3) Gave the impression of a man who wanted to make sure that if he was going to overturn a case that 95% of the time he should confirm, that he was doing so in favor of the party who deserved it. (e.g., yucking it up with Kessler while he explains his speeding analogy)
4) Openly mocked the NFL throughout his findings (e.g., "independent", and "harvard trained")
5) Actually over-turned the case
This was a massive win for Brady's credibility. It's true the facts of the case will only say notice and fairness -- but to everyone paying attention -- and a LOT of the media paid attention -- it became clear that the NFL's case was a load of garbage. Everyone who argues otherwise either has an agenda, didn't pay close attention, or isn't very bright.
Thank you, Judge Berman, for shining a bright light on this dumpster fire of an NFL league office and their shoddy frame job.
I usually add that 'they're a little salty, maybe you should hydrate more.'HomeBrew1901 said:
True,mandro ramtinez said:
But I could understand someone bounding down the stairs getting exactly the pair of Air Jordans you hoped for, after telling mom and dad...dont worry about anything else, then having dad tell you that as a member of the basketball team you deserved and should have gotten them anyway when the season started but your mom was and is being an obstinate bitch and made you wait on Santa. At that point I could see some grumbling about not getting the adjustable hoop and basketball.
Yes. Its called "growing up and using critical thinking."*soxhop411 said:
*Before anyone comes at me: Yes - I know these quotes are from a sportswriter, and not Soxhop
Recouping the picks will likely have to be through back channel negotiations with the league. Not sure what kind of leverage Kraft has, but if he has any, using it quietly behind the scenes is likely the only play he has.
Different sport, but for some reason I've always had the Devils/Kovalchuk debacle in the back of my head. The league took away a 1, 3 and $3 million following the Kovalchuk illegal contract. The Devils somehow managed to get the 1st rounder back. The Kraft's should have a chat with Lou Lamoreillo.
Different sport, but for some reason I've always had the Devils/Kovalchuk debacle in the back of my head. The league took away a 1, 3 and $3 million following the Kovalchuk illegal contract. The Devils somehow managed to get the 1st rounder back. The Kraft's should have a chat with Lou Lamoreillo.
And it truly was in a few hours. They won on the argument they crafted in response to the NFL, who filed immediately after Goodell the arbitrator ruled on Goodell the Commissioner. That's when he picked the four key issues, and two of them were winners.DennyDoyle'sBoil said:
If that's really true, couldn't Brady sue for defamation?Myt1 said:
Geoduck, you have an outline for a terrific book. But unless one of the few white hats has the time, you'll have to do it.
The most disappointing aspect of this is the performance of the media -- the most heartbreaking, the performance of local media. Volin is a tool and easily dismissed. My anger at Jackie Mac and Bob Ryan is not going to dissipate for a long time.
The most disappointing aspect of this is the performance of the media -- the most heartbreaking, the performance of local media. Volin is a tool and easily dismissed. My anger at Jackie Mac and Bob Ryan is not going to dissipate for a long time.
Eddie Jurak said:
When all you have is a ginger hammer, every problem looks like you have to nail it.
My response to people on the question of innocence is that the judge found the NFL's process completely deficient, and thus we cannot conclude anything about what happened. That means we can't conclude anything about whether the balls were deflated or not, about what caused it if they were, or who caused it if something unnatural did.
There is nothing in the opinion inconsistent with the above, I don't believe. The judge went out of his way to say 'alleged' before all the key facts, which was not at all necessary to reach his conclusion; thus, I think he made a comment about how the process impacted our ability to assess the underlying facts.
There is nothing in the opinion inconsistent with the above, I don't believe. The judge went out of his way to say 'alleged' before all the key facts, which was not at all necessary to reach his conclusion; thus, I think he made a comment about how the process impacted our ability to assess the underlying facts.
Agreed with above. The takeaway after reading all the burn-book columns from the usual media wags is if you were a Pats hater last week, no matter how sternly that decision was worded, you are still a Pats hater today. Yesterday didn't change too many minds. It may have made RG look worse but it didn't make the Pats look any better.
I'm of the belief that nothing that has happened thus far comes close to putting RG's job in jeopardy. Follow the money. These guys are making too much money and have seen the value of their respective franchises jump too much during Goodell's tenure for these legal screw ups to endanger him, as preposterous as they are.cshea said:
The one way he could change that, I think, is to return the picks to Kraft. The picture of him caving to Kraft immediately after the NFLPA destroyed him in Court might just be too much for these owners to bear. But it's likely wholly academic in that I can't see Roger wanting to deal in the aftermath of Berman's opinion. It takes effort to get out of the fetal position.
Indeed. In the eyes of many fans, the story is now "The Patriots/Brady beat the rap on a technicality." Not "The Patriots proved the investigation was biased."ifmanis5 said:
JimD said:
Conversely, this means that it would be a very bad year for Tom to become mortal due to age.
This x1000.
"But what about the report?"
"Oh, you mean the one that the Judge said Brady wasn't really allowed to challenge? That report?"
And I think there were at least a dozen people here who said that that's exactly what would happen, short of Goodell doing a complete mea culpa and on-air suicide (and even then, it would be blamed on his fealty to Kraft). And since I was one of those people, I do not give a shit.
Maybe The Bobfather makes Roger an offer he can't refuse, Tommy cops to a $5,000 non-cooperation fine, Roger drops the appeal, the Pats get back their #1, and Frank gets the part in From Here to Eternity.
“@PostSports: BREAKING NEWS: NFL owners to discuss changing Roger Goodell’s role in disciplinary process http://t.co/kl2mLteSwg http://t.co/c9DKfzmcMD
There's not a lot there except for one additional unnamed owner being open to discussing altering RG's role in discipline.
So now you have
Kraft
Blank
Benson (not on record but one would presume)
one additional owner from WP article
That's only four and could be just three if Benson is the owner behind the WP article.
It's more of a trickle than an avalanche certainly but it is progress.
So now you have
Kraft
Blank
Benson (not on record but one would presume)
one additional owner from WP article
That's only four and could be just three if Benson is the owner behind the WP article.
It's more of a trickle than an avalanche certainly but it is progress.
So the owners are going to strip Goodell of his arb powers, aren't they? The question is if they accept a truly independent arbitrator, or if they'll remain stubborn and try to get their own hand-picked guy to take his place. Regardless, if Roger is removed, I think we'll see the Brady appeal dropped as part of the process.
RedOctober3829 said:
You are correct. So there are four on record and we can be fairly certain that Benson would make five. There are probably an additional few already that feel similarly but haven't and may never speak to the media about it.
Would any of the lawyers here care to speculate on what form the ground-rules would have taken? I understand that there's something called a Letter of Engagement that's supposed to lay out this sort of thing. How much wiggle room is there?geoduck no quahog said:
TheoShmeo said:
I mentioned to someone the other day that there really isn't any reason to believe that the post-ruling legal analysis will be any better than the pre-ruling legal analysis.
Myt1 said:
OK, I'm ready to ride with you. Lemme find my sword...
Seriously, though, I just don't get it sometimes.
We live in a nation full of people obsessed with Star Wars who don't want to be Jedi.
TheoShmeo said:
Disagree.
Folks in the stratosphere of NFL owners like their upside, but are absolutely terrified of their downside. When you're at the top of the heap, the only way you can really go is down.
It's not hard to see that the NFL may be topped out. TV contracts have kept getting bigger, but with the erosion of television audiences generally and the growth of the cut-the-cable-cord movement, that can plateau, and probably will in the next ten years. Virtually every big market except LA has had their tit squeezed for a revenue-maximizing stadium, and LA will eventually happen (ironically, this will hurt the owners collectively, in that it takes away the "I'll move to LA" threat that has been so useful for the twenty years). So there won't be another wave of cash-cow stadiums. Is expansion to London really going to add that much to revenue? If not, it's hard to see where the next big boom in revenue comes from.
Meanwhile, in addition to the potentially disastrous attrition in TV revenue, there is the ever-present brain trauma issue, which threatens the growth of both the fan base and the player pool. And there is the steady stream of crimes being committed by players, Irsays, etc. Lots of things to color negative perceptions.
I predict an existential crisis for the NFL in the next ten years.
If I'm an NFL owner, I'm scared shitless of the downside. I'm looking for a guy who can keep a steady hand on the tiller and not fuck things up. I'm convinced after this fiasco that Rog ain't him.
Bergs said:
I've given up on these, unfortunately. Kraft ended that with the manner in which he made his statement. The only way he'd get them back is behind closed doors, and I don't think he'll have the support for that. There are probably enough owners who think they "got away" with this now, as absurd as it seems.
Kraft's legacy will undoubtedly go down in Boston history as one of the city's best owners, if not the best. However, like Brady nationally, he'll always have this black mark on him. The difference between the two being that Kraft kind of earned his.
Note that I'm not saying Kraft should have sued the league, but the manner in which he went about things was really brutal. He should have waited to get home and think about things rather than reacting on his emotions at the Owners' meetings.
Edit - Actually, there is one other possible out. We already know the NFL will be measuring footballs throughout the season. If Kraft can convince enough people to play along and compare numbers at the end of the season, he may be able to turn opinion enough to get some draft equity back. More accurately than compare, just release numbers that demonstrate how much footballs deflate when exposed to cold conditions; for example, release a few numbers from games on the frozen tundra and they drop 2-3 PSI. I know that wouldn't actually prove anything about the footballs against the Colts, but we're dealing with PR here, and a good portion doesn't seem to understand how the IGL works. Some evidence it happens to other teams (we all know it happens, but we're not dealing with honor students) may get some balls rolling.
I am aware of that. I am just surprised that Schefter tweets this without attributing it to someone or making clear it is his opinion.Myt1 said:
This is delusional. I live in Denver and work with many die hard, life long Broncos fans that have absolutely no clue what I'm talking about when I bring up their salary cap violations. In addition, sports talk radio out here has been insufferable since the ruling (and really since January). This morning was all about how T.J Ward, caught on video throwing a glass at a woman, is the victim and Brady is getting away with cheating. The quote this morning was something along the lines of "So TJ Ward get's 1 game for 'allegedly' committing a misdemeanor off the field and Tom Brady gets nothing for corrupting the integrity of the game by cheating in the AFC Championship Game". Denver fans are some of the worst. I'd rather talk to Jets and Yankee fans.Adrian's Dome said:
And I'd like to believe I could put Scarlet Johansen on the table, but that's not gonna happen either.Bergs said:
