Yup. The owners looked at the league's dealings with the Pats as being identical (in terms of process and authority) to the league's handling of the bounty faux-scandal.
Gorton Fisherman said:
I think if Kraft (or anyone) thought that only a tiny minority of fans would have been satisfied with anything less than a full scorched-earth approach, then he was really, really off base. And I think that is borne out by the responses that I've observed from fans both here and elsewhere. I think a large proportion of Patriots fans, probably a majority in fact, remain rightfully pissed about the whole situation, but are pissed at Kraft not because he accepted the punishment, but rather the docile, namby-pamby tone of his acceptance speech. A lot of fans recognize that he did not have a lot of recourse available. But that being said, it was just so completely unnecessary for him to be so conciliatory, and to adopt a tone that was such a radical departure from his earlier statements. I think if Kraft had merely eliminated the obsequious namby-pambyness of his response, he wouldn't be getting nearly the amount of shit that he is getting now. Sure, there would still be a vocal group calling for full thermonuclear war, but I really think those people are in the minority.
Mara agreed with the Patriots and other critics of Wells that the nearly three-month probe and 243-page report “wasn’t perfect,” but said Goodell and the league have no reason to apologize.
“I’m sure everybody believes there were certain things that maybe could have been done better, but overall, the league did what it was supposed to do,” Mara told The Post. “There was a situation brought to its attention, it has an obligation to investigate it and come up with findings, and the commissioner has the obligation to impose discipline if he thinks it’s necessary. That’s the way it unfolded, and so now we’re moving on.”
...
Mara said Goodell has “the overwhelming support of most of the owners” and scoffed at anyone who thinks Goodell’s job is in jeopardy — especially as a result of Deflategate.
“[Goodell is] expected to make very tough decisions,” Mara said. “Unfortunately, we’ve had a lot of cases in recent years where he’s been put on the spot, but that’s the job he was hired to do. And I think most of believe that he’s doing a good job.”
Mara also strongly defended Goodell’s right as commissioner to serve as judge, jury and executioner in disciplinary cases. The NFLPA ceded that power to Goodell in the 2011 labor battle, and Mara made it clear the owners won’t give it back without a fight.
“Having the final say-so is why you have a commissioner,” Mara said. “That’s what we bargained for, and there you have it.”
http://m.nydailynews.com/sports/football/transcript-tom-brady-press-confrence-deflategate-article-1.2088914tims4wins said:
Agree and agree. My larger point was that clearly Brady has had previous communication with JJ regarding air pressure in the balls, but he didn't even admit that post AFCCG. And again, that may have been the correct strategy.
Van Everyman said:
I found Mara's comments to the NY Post to be quite revealing:
http://nypost.com/2015/05/20/giants-owner-patriots-had-no-case-brady-has-no-side-deal/
Looking past the standard pap about Goodell being a good commissioner and just doing his job, my read on this is that while there wasn’t enough support to do anything about it, there was, indeed, some dissent in the ranks of owners—“overwhelming support of most of the owners” suggests that the allies Kraft did have may well have been small in number but there were some and they vocal in their opposition. In addition, however deserved the rest of the owners felt the Patriots' ultimate punishment may have been, Mara’s comments that the report “wasn’t perfect” and that certain things "maybe could have been done better” indicate ownership was less than pleased with the process to get there and aspects of the report itself.
Stepping back, my guess is that this has a lot less to do with the Patriots being wronged and a lot more to do with owners worrying that Goodell’s lack of leadership in this instance has potentially undermined powers they fought hard to establish in the CBA by blurring the lines between player discipline and team sanctions and highlighting the challenges inherent in consolidating so much power in the hands of the commissioner. If so, you can see why everyone on the league side is pushing to get this behind them, from short-circuiting the appeals process to floating the idea that Kraft may be telling Brady to stand down — because the longer this goes on, the stronger the NFLPA’s case will be to argue the commissioner’s powers are too broad.
Edit: formatting, typos
tims4wins said:Forgive me if this has been brought up before, but I can't recall a discussion on this (and please let me know if it has been discussed):
Per the NFL rules, the balls are supposed to be under the supervision of the ref, correct? And per the Wells report and context report, the balls not only went "missing" before the game, but again before the second half, right?
So would that not make Walt Anderson at least somewhat responsible here? If it is his job to supervise the balls, and he fails to do so, he is at fault, to a degree. But obviously no mention of this anywhere.
Just another sub-topic that burns.
This is why the rest of the country hates Patriots fans.Dirty Sanchez Forever said:After a day of reflection, I have more disdain for the doddering old cuckold.
1. Most of the owners probably believe the Pats cheated. It's a big ask for them to roll up their sleeves and get into the details of this.Yup. The owners looked at the league's dealings with the Pats as being identical (in terms of process and authority) to the league's handling of the bounty faux-scandal.
What did they do?DrewDawg said:After seeing the NFL troll the Patriots on twitter today, I've had an emotional change of heart. I wish he would have burned it down.
I'll be more rational after some coffee.
Did Exponent do any sensitivity analysis? (ie. testing the impact that their various assumptions would have on the final results). I haven't seen it mentioned but I would think it should be standard procedure for any legitimate research where major assumptions come into play.troparra said:Exponent's experiments on standard deviation of gauges, and therefore the conclusion that the Pats' ball pressure variability is an indicator of guilt, is based on the assumption that the balls were all at the exact same pressure pregame. In their experiments, they used balls inflated to specific psi in order to determine variability.
grsharky7 said:What did they do?
Ed Hillel said:This is a combination of hilarious and terrifying. The NFL continues to troll the Patriots via official Twitter accounts. Integrity, baby!
https://mobile.twitter.com/nfl/status/601252348812468224
Wow just saw the tweet on my phone, sorry to say it took me a second to see the PSI on there. What a clown show the NFL is. The NFL is like a drug dealer though, they can do this stuff and they know almost everyone will keep coming back. They know even though we all scream and holler now, we'll still tune in come September.BigSoxFan said:Thank you, NFL. No SB hangover for the Pats.
F You Mode....activated.
norm from cheers said:WOW, that tweet is over the top rubbing it in. After Kraft went hat in hand at the podium, you would think the NFL would show some decorum and back off the "rhetoric". Now I wonder if JJ didn't have a picture or two of Kraft on his phone at a bachelor party or something.
I continue to be amazed at the Media and NFL as a whole, blindly accepting the Wells report as gospel despite all the science which proves otherwise. I am reminded of Galileo, who faced an inquisition by a religious leadership who believed his theory that the sun was the center of the universe, not the earth, was heresy.. He was found guilty by a weak Pope who was facing pressure from all sides:
"prior to Galileo's 1633 trial and judgement for heresy, Pope Urban VIII had become preoccupied with court intrigue and problems of state, and began to fear persecution or threats to his own life. In this context, Sobel argues that the problem of Galileo was presented to the pope by court insiders and enemies of Galileo. Having been accused of weakness in defending the church, Urban reacted against Galileo out of anger and fear."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galileo_Galilei
Galileo was sentenced to house arrest for the rest of his days, yet still continued on with his studies, and went on to write one of his most important journals "Two New Sciences." This gives me hope that TB and the Patriots will continue to their study and mastery of the game, despite very biased and discerning eyes overseeing every move on and off the field.
Honest question: is this jab because the Pats' Twitter avatar is still Brady?Ed Hillel said:This is a combination of hilarious and terrifying. The NFL continues to troll the Patriots via official Twitter accounts. Integrity, baby!
https://mobile.twitter.com/nfl/status/601252348812468224
Van Everyman said:Honest question: is this jab because the Pats' Twitter avatar is still Brady?
Read the acronym of the three characteristics.loshjott said:
That tweet was not a jab at Brady or the Pats. The linked video of "franchise QBs" featured Brady prominently. Just because Luck was pictured doesn't make it a jab.
I think they're referencing the initials of the qualities of a "franchise QB" spelling out PSI as opposed to Luck being pictured...loshjott said:
That tweet was not a jab at Brady or the Pats. The linked video of "franchise QBs" featured Brady prominently. Just because Luck was pictured doesn't make it a jab.
loshjott said:
That tweet was not a jab at Brady or the Pats. The linked video of "franchise QBs" featured Brady prominently. Just because Luck was pictured doesn't make it a jab.
loshjott said:
That tweet was not a jab at Brady or the Pats. The linked video of "franchise QBs" featured Brady prominently. Just because Luck was pictured doesn't make it a jab.
Van Everyman said:Honest question: is this jab because the Pats' Twitter avatar is still Brady?
I was wondering about this. I had a question whether general principles of journalism or reporter's sheild laws apply when the source lies. In this case, though, didn't the NFL letter say 10.1? I think most serious journalists -- whether or not ESPN counts -- would probably view sources as worth protecting if there is a chance they are simply mistaken. But I would think if a journo decides it's likely the source used the journo to spread false info, then the source can be burned. It would have to be a pretty high degree of certainty though, I would think.Hoya81 said:Goodell evades questions regarding NFL leaks during #DeflateGate http://t.co/ZDWkjhTyee— ProFootballTalk (@ProFootballTalk) May 21, 2015
"On one hand, it’s important for a reporter to protect his sources. On the other hand, the rules should change when the reporter has been flat-out lied to. And if the NFL isn’t going to shed light on what actually happened back in January regarding the false PSI data, ESPN shouldn’t simply point out the NFL’s silence; ESPN should end its own."
bougrj1 said:I think they're referencing the initials of the qualities of a "franchise QB" spelling out PSI as opposed to Luck being pictured...
drbretto said:I'm not understanding the jab. Is it because there's a picture of a colts player? That seems like it would be ok for the NFL to put up a picture of an NFL player. I think people might be reading into this one. Unless I'm missing something.
Wrote about this on the "Home of the Resistance" thread but I disagree. If you read the NY Post article you get a much more complex dynamic and quotes that suggest more dissension in the ranks than they've acknowledged thus far:dcmissle said:NYG's owner Mara --
http://www.bostonherald.com/sports/patriots_nfl/the_blitz/2015/05/giants_john_mara_robert_kraft_gave_up_because_he_knew_he_didn
Kraft accepted the penalties cause he had no choice; RG had the overwhelming support of the owners.
No, "We're grateful to Bob for doing the right thing ... Bob's a great guy" or anything close to it.
So that would be Jerry Jones, Arthur Blank, Bob McNair and now a member of the owner aristocracy, Mara. Their statements were not compelled -- they were thrown out their by these owners with a purpose.
Kraft had no or almost no owner support. It could not be more clear.
RedOctober3829 said:This is why the rest of the country hates Patriots fans.
DrewDawg said:
Jesus.
Look at the first letters of the 3 traits.
It's been pointed out a dozen times.
drbretto said:I'm not understanding the jab. Is it because there's a picture of a colts player? That seems like it would be ok for the NFL to put up a picture of an NFL player. I think people might be reading into this one. Unless I'm missing something.
Edit: explained while posting. Now I get it. I actually can't help but laugh to be honest.
Ed Hillel said:
It absolutely is funny, but it's also highly inappropriate coming from an entity that's supposed to be unbiased and professional.
Yes.. Galileo=Patriots Inquistion=Wells/NFL investigation team Pope Urban=Goodell. Galileo had to renounce his own theories publicly, even though he knew them to be correct. Like Kraft, he fell on the sword to live another day, albeit on the terms of a corrupt/biased hierarchy.loshjott said:
Brady/Kraft as Galileo?
Is my sarcasm meter on the fritz?
drbretto said:
Oh definitely, but I'm sure it's just some guy getting away with a joke. I don't think it was a directive by Goodell or anything. I'm sure 99% of the NFL has no idea what's on their twitter site.
You get comfort from this? To each his own, I guess.Wrote about this on the "Home of the Resistance" thread but I disagree. If you read the NY Post article you get a much more complex dynamic and quotes that suggest more dissension in the ranks than they've acknowledged thus far:
http://sonsofsamhorn.net/index.php?/topic/89451-Home-of-the-Resistance%3A-The-North-Remembers/page__view__findpost__p__6053251
Not comfort – as I said, it's really got nothing to do with the Patriots.dcmissle said:You get comfort from this? To each his own, I guess.
drbretto said:
Jesus.
I'm at work and started typing before the solution was presented, got interrupted by work, then hit submit.
relax.
Also, it's kind of funny.
Marciano490 said:Sorry if I've missed this somewhere, but I'm trying to establish a probable timeline.
Let's say Harbaugh set all this in motion after Brady's know the rules comment. That would mean one of three things: 1) somehow it was known league-wide or at least to the Ravens that the Pats deflated; 2) it's common knowledge that balls deflate below the limit over the course of a game; 3) there was some shenanigans to frame the Pats.
Now, option 1 seems the most likely given how obscure the rule otherwise is. But, wouldn't that indicate that some cheating was likely?
"Belichick never believed his story, from what I was told," said Borges. "Because they all know. Why do you think all those retired quarterbacks, the Troy Aikmans of the world -- Troy Aikman is about as nice a guy as I've ever met in football -- nobody's backed [Brady]. Nobody, not a single guy. Why do you think that is? Because they hate Brady? No. Because they're not stupid. They know nothing's done with those balls that the quarterback doesn't want done."
HAH! Stolen and Tweeted.Devizier said:
Discipline
Respect
Urgency
Grit
Stamina
DrewDawg said:
It is funny. It is also trolling.