#DFG: Canceling the Noise

Is there any level of suspension that you would advise Tom to accept?


  • Total voters
    208

Super Nomario

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 5, 2000
14,012
Mansfield MA
MarcSullivaFan said:
All that said, Belichick brought Goodell's wrath upon the team by being obstinate and, frankly, rather disrespectful in the face of a clear direction from the league. Yes, he may have been correct that the league's interpretation of the rule was incorrect, but when you have a clear directive from the head of the league, you follow it if and until you convince the league to see it your way. He was warned and he ignored the warning. After the Jets blew it up on national television, Goodell had to do something. I think the 1st rounder was too much, but I don't think a 3rd or 4th would have been out of line.
Do you have any basis for calling it "obstinate and frankly, rather disrespectful" as opposed to a mistake or misinterpretation? I'm aware there was a memo that prohibited it, but I don't imagine Belichick spends an awful lot of time reading memos. I don't know about your job, but if I sat down and read and digested every email from corporate I'd barely get anything done.
 

E5 Yaz

Transcends message boarding
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Apr 25, 2002
90,032
Oregon
I didn't read the CHB column, but is the New York owner he's discussing clearly the Maras. Or does he mean Woody Johnson?
 

jimbobim

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 14, 2012
1,558
Tom Curran is the man. And this article was a refreshing read after inadvertently reading/clicking on CHB's fence setting nonsense calling those media members who are defending the Patriots part of a Kraft lead "cartel".
 
http://www.csnne.com/new-england-patriots/tom-e-curran-says-please-stop-with-this-significantly-underinflated-stuff
 
 So giving every benefit of their assumptions, it’s (11.09). Then look at what they say many pages later in their report and I’m quoting their report again, they say they do all of their assumptions for time, for temperature, for wetness and they say these are the assumptions we’re adopting and they go with these equations … and predict the Patriots balls should have measured between 11.52 and 11.32 at the end of the first half. So let’s start with that. Not at 12.5. Their assumptions are it was going to go down from 12.5 to 11.52 and 11.32.
“Then it occurred to me as I’m preparing this argument, how much of a difference is that,” Kessler asked. “And what it turns out, it’s one of two-tenths of a difference of PSI. What does that mean? It means how much do you think we have to alter the assumption to overcome one or two-tenths of PSI? It means their conclusion is, Mr. McNally – the attendant – went into the bathroom to lower the PSI one or two-tenths of a PSI. I would say, your Honor, even the NFL would not contend that a quarterback could even feel the difference of one or two-tenths of PSI, let along in making a difference in play.”
 

dcmissle

Deflatigator
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Aug 4, 2005
28,269
It's Mara. Woody is Tattaglia -- a clown show. He is lucky he is in the club, let alone influence.

The dangerous ones -- Mara, Rooneys, etc -- have been around a long time, lay low despite their stature, and are dangerous because they are very clever. They are eminently reasonable, and unassailable because they also wrap themselves in the flag and eat apple pie.
 

nighthob

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
12,680
PedroKsBambino said:
Part of the problem with Spygate was the destruction of the tapes by the league, which made it impossible to disprove the rumors of 'what else was in there'
 
Once again, RG's attempts to manage the short-term ended up causing far more long-term pain for him, the league, and the team involved...
 
Wasn't the destruction of their video library part of the punishment?
 

Harry Hooper

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jan 4, 2002
34,402
nighthob said:
 
Wasn't the destruction of their video library part of the punishment?
 
The likes of Herman Edwards and other NFL coaches making funny faces at the Pats cameraman was going to ruin the Commish's spin that this was a horrible affront to fair competition in the NFL that merited unprecedented discipline. The zoom-ins on various cheerleaders also spoiled the narrative.
 

MarcSullivaFan

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 21, 2005
3,412
Hoo-hoo-hoo hoosier land.
Super Nomario said:
Do you have any basis for calling it "obstinate and frankly, rather disrespectful" as opposed to a mistake or misinterpretation? I'm aware there was a memo that prohibited it, but I don't imagine Belichick spends an awful lot of time reading memos. I don't know about your job, but if I sat down and read and digested every email from corporate I'd barely get anything done.
He openly acknowledged reading the memo, and eventually conceded that he should have asked for clarification from the league. His purported interpretation of the memo (that taping from the sideline was acceptable so long as the tape wasn't used during the game) does not pass the straight face test. He thought the league's interpretation of the rule was wrong (and he may have been correct), so he chose to disregard it.

http://www.boston.com/sports/football/patriots/articles/2007/09/21/patriots_wont_be_hit_harder/
 

mwonow

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 4, 2005
7,095
jimbobim said:
Tom Curran is the man. And this article was a refreshing read after inadvertently reading/clicking on CHB's fence setting nonsense calling those media members who are defending the Patriots part of a Kraft lead "cartel".
 
http://www.csnne.com/new-england-patriots/tom-e-curran-says-please-stop-with-this-significantly-underinflated-stuff
 
 So giving every benefit of their assumptions, it’s (11.09). Then look at what they say many pages later in their report and I’m quoting their report again, they say they do all of their assumptions for time, for temperature, for wetness and they say these are the assumptions we’re adopting and they go with these equations … and predict the Patriots balls should have measured between 11.52 and 11.32 at the end of the first half. So let’s start with that. Not at 12.5. Their assumptions are it was going to go down from 12.5 to 11.52 and 11.32.
“Then it occurred to me as I’m preparing this argument, how much of a difference is that,” Kessler asked. “And what it turns out, it’s one of two-tenths of a difference of PSI. What does that mean? It means how much do you think we have to alter the assumption to overcome one or two-tenths of PSI? It means their conclusion is, Mr. McNally – the attendant – went into the bathroom to lower the PSI one or two-tenths of a PSI. I would say, your Honor, even the NFL would not contend that a quarterback could even feel the difference of one or two-tenths of PSI, let along in making a difference in play.”
 
Really good piece, thanks for sharing!
 

djbayko

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
25,897
Los Angeles, CA
nighthob said:
 
Wasn't the destruction of their video library part of the punishment?
Can't tell if this is sarcasm or not (because the destruction did end up hurting the Pats in allowing other teams to cry conspiracy). But it was not part of the punishment. I'm not sure how that would be construed as punishment since they tapes were no longer in the team's possession.

Goodell cited the reasons as: (a) so the tapes would not fall into competitors' hands, and (b) Belichick admitted to wrongdoing so the evidence was no longer needed.

It's funny...the fact that the NFL league office leaks like a sieve actually lends credence to Goodelll's fear of the tapes falling into the wrong hands :)
 

Super Nomario

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 5, 2000
14,012
Mansfield MA
MarcSullivaFan said:
He openly acknowledged reading the memo, and eventually conceded that he should have asked for clarification from the league. His purported interpretation of the memo (that taping from the sideline was acceptable so long as the tape wasn't used during the game) does not pass the straight face test. He thought the league's interpretation of the rule was wrong (and he may have been correct), so he chose to disregard it.

http://www.boston.com/sports/football/patriots/articles/2007/09/21/patriots_wont_be_hit_harder/
Do you have a source that he "openly acknowledged reading the memo?"
 

Seagull

New Member
Jul 16, 2005
383
nighthob said:
 
Wasn't the destruction of their video library part of the punishment?
The answer is no, the tapes were destroyed by the league office.  That led to the absurd narrative that the league is protecting the Patriots.  We saw strains of that narrative as recently as today's Sunday notes column by Ben Volin, who pondered why there has been no discipline to Belichick for deflategate.  Ironically, the "independent" Wells report took pains to say that Belichick had no role.  So for the "protecting the Patriots" crowd, either the league had no choice, or maybe that finding was nefariously introduced during league review, i.e., Pash, to enssure protection.    I wonder which explanation the BB haters would prefer?
 

Leather

given himself a skunk spot
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
28,451
The league played the tapes at a press conference and invited the press to watch them before the tapes were destroyed.

That entire narrative is pure bullshit. If the league had offered a free DVD copy of the tapes to everyone who asked, certain conspiracy theorists, upon seeing how mundane the tapes really were, would still have trumpeted that the league must have withheld some tapes because they would be too damaging to release, because otherwise the heavy punishment wouldn't make sense.
 

pappymojo

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 28, 2010
6,668
The Jets game where the Pats were busted for videotaping the Jets coaches was the first game of the season, Goodells first season as commissioner, and the first Patriots game after Goodell sent out his memo.

In other words, any existing videotapes were from prior years, recorded prior to Goodells memo. They were destroyed because they were well not illegal.
 

mwonow

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 4, 2005
7,095
Seagull said:
The answer is no, the tapes were destroyed by the league office.  That led to the absurd narrative that the league is protecting the Patriots.  We saw strains of that narrative as recently as today's Sunday notes column by Ben Volin, who pondered why there has been no discipline to Belichick for deflategate.  Ironically, the "independent" Wells report took pains to say that Belichick had no role.  So for the "protecting the Patriots" crowd, either the league had no choice, or maybe that finding was nefariously introduced during league review, i.e., Pash, to enssure protection.    I wonder which explanation the BB haters would prefer?
 
I'm not sure which is more SMH-worthy - talking about Spygate or caring what BV thinks
 

Harry Hooper

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jan 4, 2002
34,402
pappymojo said:
The Jets game where the Pats were busted for videotaping the Jets coaches was the first game of the season, Goodells first season as commissioner, and the first Patriots game after Goodell sent out his memo.

In other words, any existing videotapes were from prior years, recorded prior to Goodells memo. They were destroyed because they were well not illegal.
 
 
You clearly don't understand how Goodell's principles of retroactive punishment work in cases like Spygate and Adrian Peterson:
 
As for the eight tapes from 2000 to 2002 that Walsh provided to the NFL, the footage shown was mundane - a shot of coaches on the sidelines, the play from an end-zone angle, and a shot of the scoreboard to indicate the down and distance of the next play.
 
Goddell said Walsh told him he never handed the tapes over during a game, thus eliminating the possibility there was an in-game benefit.
 
In addition to signals, one of the tapes - from a Sept. 29, 2002, game against the Chargers - included up-close footage of a San Diego cheerleader. Walsh was not the camera operator for that tape. Goodell added that Walsh said he knew the taping was probably in violation of league rules.
 
Said Goodell, "I think I'm pretty well on the record here. I didn't accept Bill Belichick's explanation for what happened and I still don't to this day."
 
 
 
Globe
 
 
 
 
For clarity, I am pretty sure the Walsh tapes were what Goodell played in his press conference in 2008. The original Spygate tapes were never shown, except for the few snippets that Jay Glazer managed to get his hands on.
 

Harry Hooper

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jan 4, 2002
34,402
nighthob said:
I thought that tapes from even before the memo were destroyed?
 
 
Yes, IIRC Pats turned over all tapes, notes, and other associated materials.  Walsh had his own copies of some stuff that the team didn't know about.
 

mwonow

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 4, 2005
7,095
Is there a way to move the retro-Spygate stuff to a separate thread? This one is supposed to focus on a different "scandal"...
 

Seagull

New Member
Jul 16, 2005
383
mwonow said:
 
I'm not sure which is more SMH-worthy - talking about Spygate or caring what BV thinks
I'm talking about the reasons why owners, the league office, and the media are pushing for such harsh discipline in deflategate. It's linked to feelings that the Patriots got off easy previously, completely skated for other unspecified skirting of the rules, and need to be slapped down hard now.  I don't care what Volin thinks per se, but he happens to have a prominent platform, and was articulating a pernicious narrative in this morning's Sunday Globe.  
 

mwonow

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 4, 2005
7,095
Seagull said:
I'm talking about the reasons why owners, the league office, and the media are pushing for such harsh discipline in deflategate. It's linked to feelings that the Patriots got off easy previously, completely skated for other unspecified skirting of the rules, and need to be slapped down hard now.  I don't care what Volin thinks per se, but he happens to have a prominent platform, and was articulating a pernicious narrative in this morning's Sunday Globe.  
Dude - we got it, literally thousands of posts ago. And a bunch of people here have asked for BV to be relegated to CHB status.
 

hunter05

Member
SoSH Member
May 29, 2006
7,659
Hokkaido
drleather2001 said:
The league played the tapes at a press conference and invited the press to watch them before the tapes were destroyed.

That entire narrative is pure bullshit. If the league had offered a free DVD copy of the tapes to everyone who asked, certain conspiracy theorists, upon seeing how mundane the tapes really were, would still have trumpeted that the league must have withheld some tapes because they would be too damaging to release, because otherwise the heavy punishment wouldn't make sense.
 
Which is silly, because Jay Glazer played a clip from the Jets tape on the Fox pregame show some time the story broke, 1 to 2 weeks maybe? That's when Jimmy Johnson admitted that he used to tape as well and said he used to go through the opposing teams hotel garbage in hopes of finding game plans.
 

dcmissle

Deflatigator
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Aug 4, 2005
28,269
mwonow said:
Is there a way to move the retro-Spygate stuff to a separate thread? This one is supposed to focus on a different "scandal"...
Please. I can handle only one scandal at a time. There is nothing to say about Spygate that has not been said a dozen times already.
 

mwonow

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 4, 2005
7,095
dcmissle said:
Please. I can handle only one scandal at a time. There is nothing to say about Spygate that has not been said a dozen times already.
Agreed. I just wanted to be able to give the new rehash a pass
 

Harry Hooper

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jan 4, 2002
34,402
dcmissle said:
Please. I can handle only one scandal at a time. There is nothing to say about Spygate that has not been said a dozen times already.
 
While I am sympathetic to this view, I think it's noteworthy for the current scandal that thanks to the NFL fog machine even motivated observers (such as Pats fans) can get certain parts of Spygate wrong years later.
 

MarcSullivaFan

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 21, 2005
3,412
Hoo-hoo-hoo hoosier land.
pappymojo said:
The Jets game where the Pats were busted for videotaping the Jets coaches was the first game of the season, Goodells first season as commissioner, and the first Patriots game after Goodell sent out his memo.

In other words, any existing videotapes were from prior years, recorded prior to Goodells memo. They were destroyed because they were well not illegal.
The memo was circulated in September 2006.
 

Super Nomario

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 5, 2000
14,012
Mansfield MA
MarcSullivaFan said:
Yes. Bill Belichick.
 
https://youtu.be/Hyg9BhqESxU
 
Edit:  Sorry, not getting it to emded.  Starts around the 3:00 minute mark.
OK, thanks. your interpretation - that Belichick brazenly and arrogantly ignored league rules - still doesn't make a lot of sense to me, but I see where you're coming from a little better. In general, I find the idea that Belichick is especially arrogant to be largely without merit.
 

dcmissle

Deflatigator
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Aug 4, 2005
28,269
Marc is right. BB had the memo, pushed the envelope, and then compounded the error by offering a very lawyerly interpretation.

Arrogance in my view was not the problem. Naïveté was. That's right, you cannot find much smarter or wiser people than BB and Kraft in what they do, but neither could fathom the extent to which other people in the League were out to fuck them. Simply because they won too much. Bill got screwed by the Jets, Kraft got his from Goodell -- after throwing him a lifeline. It was a failure of imagination on their part.

As long as Goodell, Kensil and the others remain where they are, and as long as some of the other owners have sharp knives, the Pats will be vulnerable. That's what ties the two scandals together and what needs to be internalized going forward.
 

Devizier

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 3, 2000
19,474
Somewhere
dcmissle said:
Marc is right. BB had the memo, pushed the envelope, and then compounded the error by offering a very lawyerly interpretation.

Arrogance in my view was not the problem. Naïveté was. That's right, you cannot find much smarter or wiser people than BB and Kraft in what they do, but neither could fathom the extent to which other people in the League were out to fuck them. Simply because they won too much. Bill got screwed by the Jets
 
I agree with your post, but re: the bolded, you could argue that the Jets saw it the other way around.
 

soxhop411

news aggravator
SoSH Member
Dec 4, 2009
46,278
 
In a case that is now less about the inflation levels of the footballs and more about the lasting reputation of two of football's most prominent figures, it is now Goodell with little to gain and Brady with little to lose.
Make no mistake: legally the NFL still holds a strong position. Based on the 2001 United States Supreme Court decision MLBPA v Garvey, judges can't step in and revoke arbitrators' decisions even if it determines "improvident, even silly, fact-finding."
"It is only when the arbitrator strays from interpretation and application of the agreement and effectively 'dispenses his own brand of industrial justice' that his decision may be unenforceable," the Garvey ruling reads.
While NFLPA attorney Jeffrey Kessler has presented four separate arguments to Berman suggesting Goodell strayed from the process spelled out in the CBA, the NFL still has the Garvey decision behind it. Even if Berman initially sides with Brady, the NFL would be favored if the case goes to the Second Circuit Court of Appeals, which is just around the corner here.
So the NFL is still the most likely party to win, eventually.
http://sports.yahoo.com/news/roger-goodell--nfl-could-get-favorable-deflate-gate-ruling-yet-still-lose-010959640.html
 
more at the link
 

natpastime162

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
2,944
Pennsylvania
MarcSullivaFan said:
It's true that Spygate involved a relatively minor infraction. And it was certainly blown out of proportion, in large part by the media's branding it as "spying," which implies some sort of clandestine activity. Quite to the contrary, it was completely out in the open. Opposing teams and the league knew exactly what the Pats were up to. How could they not?

All that said, Belichick brought Goodell's wrath upon the team by being obstinate and, frankly, rather disrespectful in the face of a clear direction from the league. Yes, he may have been correct that the league's interpretation of the rule was incorrect, but when you have a clear directive from the head of the league, you follow it if and until you convince the league to see it your way. He was warned and he ignored the warning. After the Jets blew it up on national television, Goodell had to do something. I think the 1st rounder was too much, but I don't think a 3rd or 4th would have been out of line.
 
Short version: Spygate was about insubordination. 
 

mwonow

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 4, 2005
7,095
natpastime162 said:
 
Short version: Spygate was about insubordination. 
Shorter: Spygate was in 2007.
 
PLEASE GET OVER IT NOW. There are enemies enough at today's gate without rehashing past injustices.
 
Yes, Spygate started the Cheatriots meme, yada yada. Enough. Rehashing why the Pats are seen as cheaters doesn't add any new context to the discussion. Lamenting the fact that "even motivated observers (such as Pats fans) can get certain parts of Spygate wrong years later" restates the obvious without moving anything forward.
 
Please, turn the page now, or start another thread about how unfair it is that past injustices aren't seen in the cold light of logic. It's 2015. This thread is about a different injustice. Tomorrow, we get (hopefully) more evidence that Goodell is a lying sack of sh*t. Let's please focus the rant here on the problems with #Framegate and the board-wide desire to see Berman feed RG a very-well-deserved public spanking.
 

Stitch01

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
18,155
Boston
dcmissle said:
Marc is right. BB had the memo, pushed the envelope, and then compounded the error by offering a very lawyerly interpretation.

Arrogance in my view was not the problem. Naïveté was. That's right, you cannot find much smarter or wiser people than BB and Kraft in what they do, but neither could fathom the extent to which other people in the League were out to fuck them. Simply because they won too much. Bill got screwed by the Jets, Kraft got his from Goodell -- after throwing him a lifeline. It was a failure of imagination on their part.

As long as Goodell, Kensil and the others remain where they are, and as long as some of the other owners have sharp knives, the Pats will be vulnerable. That's what ties the two scandals together and what needs to be internalized going forward.
Seems from BBs pressers Super Bowl week it's been pretty internalized.
 

NortheasternPJ

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 16, 2004
19,272
Nothing would make me happier than a ruling from the bench today getting this over with. Please Berman! Make it stop!!!
 

Ed Hillel

Wants to be startin somethin
SoSH Member
Dec 12, 2007
43,592
Here
I hope he tells the NFL "settle now you're going to lose" and the NFL refuses to settle without admission of guilt. Then loses.
 

Ed Hillel

Wants to be startin somethin
SoSH Member
Dec 12, 2007
43,592
Here
I hope he tells the NFL "settle now you're going to lose" and the NFL refuses to settle without admission of guilt. Then loses.
 

lambeau

Member
SoSH Member
Feb 7, 2010
1,175
Connecticut
I wonder why Wetzel assumes Berman can't write a decision that will stand; I guess he's not following along here. (He would be better at his job.)
 

MarcSullivaFan

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 21, 2005
3,412
Hoo-hoo-hoo hoosier land.
Wetzel doesn't understand Garvey. Garvey is a somewhat unusual case in that the 9th Circuit blatantly second-guessed the arbitrator's factual findings, which didn't seem particularly unreasonable in the first place. I doubt very highly that Berman would rule for Brady on such shaky grounds.

I'll say this for Wetzel--he presents a more accurate account of Garvey than Munson did.
 

joe dokes

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
30,247
The league is "quite confident" about the strength of its case and the likelihood that it will prevail on the law if the judge does rule, sources tell ESPN. But there is some degree of concern about angering the judge by refusing to settle, and that concern keeps alive the possibility that the case could get settled before a ruling is issued.
 
 
I have a hard time believing that good lawyers -- and the NFL has some of those -- think that the Judge's "anger" would affect the Judge's decision-making.  Sounds more like snowplowing the road to Excuseville.
 

dstunbound

New Member
Nov 21, 2005
24
Stephen Brown ‏@PPVSRB  20h20 hours ago
Brady and Goodell will be back at Manhattan Federal tomorrow for an 11 a.m. #deflategate conference. I'll tweet quotes again once it's over.