#DFG: Canceling the Noise
- Thread starter nattysez
- Start date
So let me get this straight- in the NFL it's a no-no to throw a tantrum in your own home, but Tom Brady gets a get-out-of-jail free card to play in a nationally televised game?soxhop411 said:
ESPN doing an OTL report now on ESPN about Goodell / Spygate. Probably just more rehashing of Spygate.
Patriots taped up to 40 games from 2000-2007, not 2006-2007 only.
All garbage. No surprise.
Patriots taped up to 40 games from 2000-2007, not 2006-2007 only.
All garbage. No surprise.
That OTL piece was nothing but garbage and they are now bringing up things that they can't prove about Spygate to continue to smear the Pats.
Forget about the ESPN smear job. Bigger takeaway is that this was a "makeup call" by the league. Of course it was.
Robert Kraft needs to file an antitrust lawsuit because this will never end. His partners are out to smear his franchise and they will never stop until they are publicly exposed.
Something like this was inevitable and there's likely more to come. Goodell may be unqualified for his position, but he works tirelessly to distract people from that. I just hope Kraft learned from this never, ever to trust that man.
Roger on with Mike & Mike now. Says he's not going to the Pats game to let the game speak for itself. Talking about Doirto Dink now. Says the league did NOT ask Pats to fire the ballboys.
ifmanis5 said:
This is still the same NFL that told reporters not to quote one of its Hall of Famers condoning illegal activity before posting a video of it on its own fucking website, right?
Paraphrasing.. the last part of RG's interview on Mike& Mike:
Ginger just said he asked for the Dorito twins to appear and the NFLPA said they were not needed and the NFL said they thought they had enough evidence without questioning them, but RG should take into consideration that the NFLPA did not want them questioned.
He also said the NFL did not ask for the two to be fired.
Ginger just said he asked for the Dorito twins to appear and the NFLPA said they were not needed and the NFL said they thought they had enough evidence without questioning them, but RG should take into consideration that the NFLPA did not want them questioned.
He also said the NFL did not ask for the two to be fired.
Roger asked why Jastremski/McNally not asked to testify at appeals hearing. States he asked both parties, union and management council, if they should testify and both sides said it wasn't necessary. Also stated the management council said because the union pushed for that idea harder, Roger should consider the union's reluctance to produce them when making his decision.
He caught himself twice during the exchange and didn't mean to make that admission. If the NFL themselves didn't want J and M to testify under oath, the NFL knew itself that nothing improper occurred at the AFCCG and their only chance to win in court was to make the water as murkey as possible.
He caught himself twice during the exchange and didn't mean to make that admission. If the NFL themselves didn't want J and M to testify under oath, the NFL knew itself that nothing improper occurred at the AFCCG and their only chance to win in court was to make the water as murkey as possible.
That's because they weren't. They have been indefinitely suspended at the NFL's request. Goodell knows exactly what he is saying there and the full intent is once again to smear Kraft and the Patriots.norm from cheers said:
Why the fuck would the Union be responsible for "producing" them. They are non-Union club employees.
He's being too clever and its going to bite him in the ass.RIFan said:
Virtually everything he said in that interview was hogwash. When the actual truth comes out (and I have to believe it will at this point) he'll have nowhere to hide.
Did he say the word fire or suspend? It's been Shefter's claim that the league asked them to suspend, not fire the pair. Which they did. That's a pretty weak political game to use fire to have a public denial on record. ESPN won't follow up on that, so he gets to deny.
That's another example of what I mean. He thinks he's being clever, when in truth he's being disingenuous to the point of being fraudulent.MarcSullivaFan said:
I wonder if Goodell remembers what it's like to be truthful?
We need a Jon Stewart style expose of Goodell, showing clips that show him saying one thing followed by clips that show him saying the opposite. That's what needs to be created and posted online, not legalese or science, both of which make the general public go cross-eyed.
Never thought I would say this, but the ESPN report about Deflategate being a "makeup call" for Spygate has turned me into an advocate of the notion that Kraft should sue the NFL on anti-trust grounds.
He won't, because he's smarter than me. But I really wish he would so we could expose the NFL.
He won't, because he's smarter than me. But I really wish he would so we could expose the NFL.
If it was a makeup, were we going to get our 2008 first round pick back?
Hoping the fact that Kraft realizes he needs to be on his toes and constantly vigilant for the rest of Goodell's time as commissioner leads him to finally start agitating for change. Boys club and what-not but if it starts to dawn on Kraft that he's simply not going to be able to relax and enjoy his football team as long as Goodell is around, that may be more damning for Goodell than anything he's done so far. There's no endgame here. This shit will continue until a change is made.
Hoping the fact that Kraft realizes he needs to be on his toes and constantly vigilant for the rest of Goodell's time as commissioner leads him to finally start agitating for change. Boys club and what-not but if it starts to dawn on Kraft that he's simply not going to be able to relax and enjoy his football team as long as Goodell is around, that may be more damning for Goodell than anything he's done so far. There's no endgame here. This shit will continue until a change is made.
Average Reds said:
It's never going to end without exposing the NFL's inner workings and/or somehow clearing out the front office and replacing them with people who understand that when the whining loser children tattle tales come complaining that you send them packing with a smack on their ass.
I need to eat some crow for suggesting this thread should be locked the other night. I really thought the story was largely over, and it was just redundant complaing at this point. Totally fucking wrong on my part. This ESPN smear job makes it clear these jackals are engaged in a sustained effort to destroy the reputation and Brand of the Patriots. I feel dirtier and dirtier every day for continuing to follow this league/sport.
Goodell has previously denied that the NFL asked the Patriots to suspend them. Back in May at the owners meeting when Schefter first reported it.
The fact that the NFL is on record that they cannot be reinstated without the league's permission seems to suggest that they did feel they should have been.
The fact that the NFL is on record that they cannot be reinstated without the league's permission seems to suggest that they did feel they should have been.
Or he could use the full nuclear option, and ask some of the New England senators to open an investigation into the NFL filing false documentation during Senator Magic Bullet's hearings on the Cheatriots. That has to be a felony of some sort.Average Reds said:
Anyone to whom this comes as a surprise is as naive as Kraft -- or , hopefully, as naive as Kraft was.
Nothing about this is accidental. It was intended as Gronk style spike after what they assumed would be a favorable ruling from Berman. Reality intervened, and now it is sour grapes.
Yes, as I've consistently maintained, the NEPs remain extremely vulnerable.
Nothing about this is accidental. It was intended as Gronk style spike after what they assumed would be a favorable ruling from Berman. Reality intervened, and now it is sour grapes.
Yes, as I've consistently maintained, the NEPs remain extremely vulnerable.
nighthob said:
It's the great, undying, myth held dear around these parts, that Bob Kraft has some final trump card that he can play at his discretion. And, watch out, he just might...next time!
Let it go. He's got nothing. Not the Commish, not the support of other owners, nothing.
If anything,his impotently naive reaction to the initial reports back in January and the half-assed response back in in the spring with that "Deflator" nugget has just rendered him weaker.
Agreed. I wonder though what he thinks about his fellow owners' complete abandonment of him (if he thought he was well liked). My guess is he realized he didn't have many friends or allies among ownership, what with his "arrogant" coach, and the unparalleled success of his team the last 15 years, but if he did, he must be really scratching his head over this.drleather2001 said:
drleather2001 said:
You may have me mistaken with someone else. Way back when this first happened I fully expected New England to lose their first round pick last April (and I'm glad that delayed for a year) and have said from the start that the best case scenario was that Brady escaped without suspension. I also wasn't one of the ones blaming Kraft for giving in on the draft picks because the paperwork you sign to join the billionaire boy's club pretty much removes those options. However, the NFL providing false information to a senatorial committee? That's the sort of story the non-sports media would be interested in, and anything the Patriots do to hasten that story finding feet is a good thing.
Goodell still wants final say on player discipline: http://weei.stats.com/fb/story.asp?i=20150908111251193031508&ref=hea&tm=&src=
DrewDawg said:
So essentially, the NFL needs to be better about obfuscating whether or not the initial discipline comes from Goodell.
Here's David Stern with an interesting take on Berman
Well... unless we need them to rule in our favor. Then they definitely belong. Just not to overturn us or our bungling.
edmunddantes said:
I don't understand that David Stern quote. He's saying federal courts have no business meddling in professional sports leagues. Why not? They are too intricate? Too intricate for what, for federal judges to understand?
Disappointed to see that from Stern. Especially as Berman would seem to only present a threat for commissioners present and future if they make a practice of bungling things as badly as Goodell, which in and of itself would be a bigger threat to the general health of any league than an activist judge.
I'm all for a commissioner having fairly broad powers as there are going to be unanticipated situations that require a response that has not been specifically bargained for. But Stern's comment would seem to discount the premise that not all commissioners will be rational actors, as well as the ability of a federal judge to rightfully interpret the fucking law.
EDIT: I would not be surprised to see Stern walk back or clarify those comments in the coming days, though some of it seems tough to qualify.
I'm all for a commissioner having fairly broad powers as there are going to be unanticipated situations that require a response that has not been specifically bargained for. But Stern's comment would seem to discount the premise that not all commissioners will be rational actors, as well as the ability of a federal judge to rightfully interpret the fucking law.
EDIT: I would not be surprised to see Stern walk back or clarify those comments in the coming days, though some of it seems tough to qualify.
Yeah, Stern's quote makes no sense. He's either saying sports leagues are too complex for federal judges who can wade through securities law, the bankruptcy code and other far more complex and nuanced matters, or he's saying federal judges shouldn't decide issues related to corporations? And, the "blinded by the lights" comment is just a cheap shot. I'm pretty sure Berman has had bigger cases with bigger companies/countries and equally notable parties before him. He's a senior judge, not a groupie in the 5th row at a VMA performance.
What a load of garbage. I'm sure every CEO of every company that negotiates with a union would love if federal judges ignored labor law violations because they don't understand the business.
Nice summary from a political science professor.
http://sites.middlebury.edu/presidentialpower/2015/09/07/bush-lied-obama-is-a-muslim-and-brady-cheated-why-myths-endure/
http://sites.middlebury.edu/presidentialpower/2015/09/07/bush-lied-obama-is-a-muslim-and-brady-cheated-why-myths-endure/
That's basically the current zeitgeist as a whole; not just the Brady case and not just in sports.AB in DC said:
Not shocked at all by Sterns statement. Have we all forgotten so soon what kind of commissioner he was?