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.
#DFG: Canceling the Noise
- Thread starter nattysez
- Start date
Gorton Fisherman said:
This has been addressed about a million times. The earlier statements were all in a different context. EVERYONE who either settles a case or pleads guilty at one time said loudly "I DIDNT DO IT."
He was beaten. And over the previous 24 hours he found out he had no support. His statement reflected that of a beaten man. And perhaps also reflected the fact that he knows he bears some responsibility for enabling the beater.
"Docile? Namby pamby? I dont think Kraft really worries about fans who throw around words like that in situations like this. It just sounds like "Hey Bob; Roger's swinging his dick. Dont you have one?"
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
http://m.nydailynews.com/sports/football/transcript-tom-brady-press-confrence-deflategate-article-1.2088914tims4wins said:
I think people forget how much Brady went into the detail about the process in that press conference.
"Q: A few years ago you said you liked the ball deflated. You were quoted saying you like throwing a deflated ball. Explain that comment in the context of what you’re dealing with this week.
TB: I obviously read that I said that. I like them at the way that I like them, which is at 12.5. To me, that’s a perfect grip for the football. I think that particular term, deflated or inflated, whatever norm you’re using, you could probably use. I would never do anything outside of the rules of play. I would never have someone do something that I thought was outside the rules."
Van Everyman said:
No chance the NFLPA would ever stand down. They are going to use Brady to change the commissioners powers forever.
tims4wins said:
Walt also forgot to put his mark on the #1 K ball, which led to a whole other brouhaha that day.
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.
2. Many of the owners probably have been told by their executives and coaches that the Pats are serial cheaters. It's an ass-saving response when their owners ask, "why can't we do what the Pats do?'
3. RG has no greater champion than Bob Kraft. So from the owners' standpoint, "You created this monster ... don't come crying to me."
It's all very understandable and much of it defensible. Those who abide injustice invite it on themselves.
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.
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.
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:
It doesn't surprise me that the owners like a strong commissioner. The general public, unless it is the fans of the team being arguably unfairly punished, love a good scandal and enjoy punishment even more. After this episode with the Patriots I spent an inordinate amount of time rereading Bounty Gate and the Jonathan Martin saga. Before I revisited them I noted that I had bought the NFL's narrative and felt the punishment was harsh for SP but not really for anyone else in particular. While those crimes are arguably greater and have more malice behind them much of the evidence was procured the same way. It reminds me of some lesson I barely remember from law school about summary judgment. If you take all the evidence in the best light against the side asking for summary judgment would they still win (on the merits I think - correct me if I'm wrong). Here though this isn't even asking for summary judgment as it is supposed to be fair. But yet all the evidence is presented in a one-sided manner. Three. Times. In. A. Row. We have a pattern here.
What's the point? Unless you dig deep and crucially follow everything the rhetoric of bad guys bad, punishment good is sexier. I'm not the brightest bulb in the chandelier but I'm not an idiot and I fell for the ruse the first two times. We live in a world of sound bytes where black and white sells and the truth (life has many shades of Gray and I'm not talking about that trash novel) is far less alluring. People eat his public theater of the absurd up.
Goodell's biggest public problem hasn't been from too much punishment but not enough. He wasn't tough enough on domestic violence. It reminds me of the scene in Naked Gun when Leslie Nielsen is calling balls and strikes. The more over the top and zealous he gets the louder the roar of the crowd.
Until Goodell steps on too many toes or makes some critical error like exposing the Death Star to proton torpedoes from enemy stunt fighters he's going to stay in power.
This is about how we deal with information and which narratives can be boiled down easier. Goodell's travesty of an investigation already goes with public confirmation bias against the Patriots. His argument is simpler and easier. Kraft had no chance of winning the battle of public opinion. The owners aren't going to come to his defense publicly either. Why the hell would they? Would you say something out of line against Goodell if you owned a team? We should assume we don't know what many of them are thinking aside from Kraft who is probably thinking he needs to hire one Leon the Professional for a nice cleaning service at NFL HQ.
Kraft wasn't going to win in court. Kraft wasn't going to win by the battle of public perception/opinion. Kraft faced losing power and influence as an NFL owner (and since he is a good owner we want him to have that). He swallowed his pride and made the right decision. He's human. He knows how unfair this is but he's willing to make the politically savvy choice. If our ultimate goal is to suffer this fool as little as possible then we should be satisfied with this decision as Kraft is going to be able to try and influence the owners not to renew his contract.
What's the point? Unless you dig deep and crucially follow everything the rhetoric of bad guys bad, punishment good is sexier. I'm not the brightest bulb in the chandelier but I'm not an idiot and I fell for the ruse the first two times. We live in a world of sound bytes where black and white sells and the truth (life has many shades of Gray and I'm not talking about that trash novel) is far less alluring. People eat his public theater of the absurd up.
Goodell's biggest public problem hasn't been from too much punishment but not enough. He wasn't tough enough on domestic violence. It reminds me of the scene in Naked Gun when Leslie Nielsen is calling balls and strikes. The more over the top and zealous he gets the louder the roar of the crowd.
Until Goodell steps on too many toes or makes some critical error like exposing the Death Star to proton torpedoes from enemy stunt fighters he's going to stay in power.
This is about how we deal with information and which narratives can be boiled down easier. Goodell's travesty of an investigation already goes with public confirmation bias against the Patriots. His argument is simpler and easier. Kraft had no chance of winning the battle of public opinion. The owners aren't going to come to his defense publicly either. Why the hell would they? Would you say something out of line against Goodell if you owned a team? We should assume we don't know what many of them are thinking aside from Kraft who is probably thinking he needs to hire one Leon the Professional for a nice cleaning service at NFL HQ.
Kraft wasn't going to win in court. Kraft wasn't going to win by the battle of public perception/opinion. Kraft faced losing power and influence as an NFL owner (and since he is a good owner we want him to have that). He swallowed his pride and made the right decision. He's human. He knows how unfair this is but he's willing to make the politically savvy choice. If our ultimate goal is to suffer this fool as little as possible then we should be satisfied with this decision as Kraft is going to be able to try and influence the owners not to renew his contract.
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:
Honest question: is this jab because the Pats' Twitter avatar is still Brady?Ed Hillel said:
Van Everyman 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 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:
bougrj1 said:
OK, mea culpa, I missed that. Using "The Needle and the Damage Done" as background music would have been more obvious.
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.
Edit: explained while posting. Now I get it. I actually can't help but laugh to be honest.
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:
http://sonsofsamhorn.net/index.php?/topic/89451-Home-of-the-Resistance%3A-The-North-Remembers/page__view__findpost__p__6053251
RedOctober3829 said:
The rest of the country hates Pats fans because the Pats have won so much. That's it.
If your team is a loser, everybody just laughs at you for doing/saying the same kinds of things.
DrewDawg 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.
Ed Hillel 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.
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:
So, you're saying that Brady won't be recognized as the greatest QB of all time until people are learning about ancient sports in middle school in the year 2350?
drbretto said:
Quite possibly, but then again Troy Vincent has made some similar tweets in the past few weeks. I'm sure people have been made aware of it at this point (posted last night), and the Tweet's still up. Not a good look imo.
Galileo is a bit much. Plus the last time I heard that reference was Rick Perry trying to explain away global warming.
Not comfort – as I said, it's really got nothing to do with the Patriots.dcmissle said:
But reading between the lines it does suggest that some owners were not happy with the Wells Report and the leaks and that there was some concern that this episode has further cast a cloud over the commissioner, his judgment and, perhaps more importantly, the powers his office wields versus the union.
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?
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?
Marciano490 said:
Why? It seems that no one in the NFL ever considered that natural causes could drive a football's PSI under the 12.5 mark. So it is quite possibly the case that other teams did notice some soft footballs in Pats games, but this was immediately attributed to some active misbehavior.
DrewDawg said:
Oh, it's definitely trolling. It just made me giggle about this whole mess for a second, so it didn't bother me any.