MattM

I've had the same problem a few times there, under the same circumstances. I've really lost all respect for Florio over this matter. He repeatedly gets down in the weeds to argue every stupid pro-Patriots* point he can find and even his word choices belie an antagonism to the League here. My personal favorite is his pinning the whole thing on Mortensen's 2 pounds under Tweets, totally ignoring, for example, the amazingly incriminating texts between the ballboys (which, to me personally is all a rational person needs to see here) or the gifts Brady lavished on McNally. BTW, I have yet to see a story on how Brady did that for all the low level staff--I'm sure if he had we'd have heard all about that by now, so you draw your own conclusions. Goodell's report lays this all out nicely along Occam's razor-the simplest explanation is probably correct. Here, as Kelly has noted repeatedly, a whole bunch of preposterous coincidenced must all occur at once for Brady's story to hold any water.

Pats* fans will tell you the NFL ordered them fired, but the League immediately denied that.

I'm far from a QB expert, but I was at camp today and thought the QB play was, to put it politely, "dispiriting". Manuel in particular looked pretty rough today, from fumbling a shotgun snap to overthrowing or throwing behind his receivers. Taylor and Cassell were a little better (at least today). Then again, I was not paying 100% attention, as I'm in the area on a visit after having grown up in the next town over, so was chatting with friends while watching.

Great stuff, as always!

Heading over to camp today--logistical question. Are they now doing bussing from Sutherland HS as well as Mendon?

That's an interesting point, but I think it was a different, smaller leak they were referring to in those emails. I also think Patriot* mouthpiece Florio and others are putting way too much emphasis on the Mort report (which I also believe the Pats* did rebut at the time via their own leaks). Instead, to me the smoking gun was and always has been the texts between the two ball boys, which no one has to this point sufficiently explained away for obvious reasons.

You beat me to it. I've thought so ever since his QB moves blew up and he couldn't get Mariota like he obviously planned and is now stuck with Bradford, who doesn't strike me at all as a QB to run his fast paced system (or, actually, whoever's behind Sam when he eventually goes out for the season again). I never got the love that Peter King (he literally has a Chip Kelly item of the week in his column) and others shower in him.

Oh, please--the judge is not stupid. He knows who's on whose side here and I suspect after his "tone it down"/scorched earth admonition he won't be pleased at all with the Pats* releasing those e-mails.

One of my favorite '70's Bills. Got to meet him once when he and one of the DBs (Mario Clark maybe?) visited my school. He seemed to be having a great time as a pro football player--very much a shame how that ended up hurting him in the longer run. RIP Mr. Brown

I noticed that, too, in reading the decision. It's really quite a tight defense of his ruling, which is why the attack has now turned to the process and not the substance so much. What happened to the days when people owned up to their mistakes?

Do yourself a favor and Google "Sally Jenkins" and "Lance Armstrong". Sally was one of Lance's staunchest defenders until the bitter end. Here's one of many, many articles castigating her for her defense of that cheater. Do you see a pattern here (in addition to the pattern of Patriot* cheating, spinning, lying, covering up)? http://dcist.com/2012/12/sally_jenkins_finally_writes_about.php

I remain stunned that there are so many Pats* defenders on this board--a team that's been caught cheating repeatedly and accused of much, much more--in the face of mounting evidence of their cheating. I mean, the guy destroyed his phone in order to avoid giving over evidence. Three days ago, when that came up as a Steven A. Smith-hinted possibility these same folks were saying that the messenger was so often wrong that such a supposition was ludicrous, but seemed to admit that if it was true it would be a big deal. Now that we know that's true, some of those same folks have found new ways to gloss over that same major development. Amazing willful blindness in defense of....?...a well-known and documented cheating opponent? Really? (On Yee's and Brady's explanations of why that specific phone was destroyed, they are laughable at best--first it was that Brady cycles his phones regularly and destroys all of the old ones (oops, except the last couple before the phone in question), then it was that Brady wanted the "new" Iphone 6 (oops, that phone came out 6 months earlier--in fact, well before he'd even bought the second to last phone he used), then it was well, we cooperated and gave you the names of about 30 folks who might have relevant testimony--go sue all of them for the messages. Sorry, you don't get to smash the evidence into a gazillion pieces and then bring all the pieces and say "Here, it's all there, you fix it." Our discovery system doesn't work that way.) If I didn't know better I'd be wondering if we've been invaded by sockpuppets! Amazing.....

I recall seeing something stating that the system initially involved a backup QB relaying the D signals in and that this started when Bledsoe was QB. If true (I have a vague recollection that it may have been the HBO special on Matt Walsh or the Spygate book), then it would have either been Tommy Boy or Rohan Davy perhaps, but my memory is hazy on this. Anyone else recall this?

The "no notice" argument here is just asinine. To take it to its logical conclusion, if the Pats* come up with some new way to cheat, they'll always be able to claim they were not aware of what the specific discipline would be for their new shenanigans, so therefore can't be punished for them. Do you understand how ridiculous that sounds?

Funny, then, that Goodell wanted to meet them both at the appeal, but it was Brady who said no (you really need to read the decision), but maintained they were his friends who would back him up if they were there. You really can't make this stuff up..,,,

For all those wondering how we'd react in similar circumstances I offer one, Orenthal James Simpson. At the risk of showing my age here, he was a god in my house growing up, but neither I nor anyone else on this board have any illusions about what he did. It's just a special kind of stupid in Boston.....

I read the decision on the way home tonight and a few interesting observations-- 1. In defending the 4 games,Goodell compared Brady to a PED user seeking an unfair advantage. Even more interestingly, he compared him to a PED user using a masking agent to cover up his crime, which is supposed to get you 6 games. Here, Brady covered up the cover up until June 18, well after the initial punishment came out. Personally, I think that's why the League is taking no prisoners here--they feel they, too, were cheated and lied to; 2. The Commish really wanted to hear from Tweedledum and Dumber, but it was Brady who said no, while at the same time claiming those two were his buddies who'd back him up (but we were supposed to take his word for it); and 3. Lots of inconsistencies in Brady's arguments exposed--like the "I always destroy my old phone, oh, except for the one I used until November, 2014--that one I'll give you." It's a riot full of very tight legal arguments that I suspect the Pats* lawyers will break their fangs on.....

Noted in my original post, but "if" he's right, to quote "Aliens" "Game over, man!"

Wow--if true (and I agree with most here that, considering the source, it's a very big "if"), the destroying the phone thing is a game changer, especially in the court of public opinion. While I agree that in reality it gets you little, I've seen insider trading cases where well-educated Wall Street professionals have tried to cover their tracks by destroying their phones, so that move isn't just for total dumbarses. Here's hoping it works for Brady as well as it worked for those schmucks!

If so, it looks like the Pats* paid as much attention to it as the explicit letter they got the summer before Spygate warning teams not to film signals. Again, I think that's the reason a number of owners want Goodell to stand firm here--they're fed up with the cheating. Personally, I think the real test may come from how their games are officiated this year--let's see if they still get calls like the Jerry Hughes headslap 15 yarder on a key third down or Nate Clements' "inadvertent whistle" on a pick 6 or the no call on a clear holding penalty on the game-winning TD against the Saints. That to me will be when we know something has changed at League HQ.

For all those saying that the League should have simply warned the Pats* when they got reports of underinflating balls, two points. First, life doesn't work that way--try that sometime if you ever get arrested or pulled over. "Sorry, officer, but you should have warned me first." The cheater blaming the League for not letting them off with a warning is absolutely ridiculous to the point I'm starting to think some of you are paid by the Pats* to spread doubt (much like Mike Florio seems to be ever since that switch flipped sometime in May). Secondly, remember this particular team*'s history--that warning before Spygate really did a lot of good, didn't it? After hearing that several owners want to see the full punishment, combined with prior stories about the Pats* being the unabashed kings of tomfoolery of all kinds (witness the NFL Competition Committee members right after Spygate saying it was them over and over and over again being brought before them on charges of cheating), I really suspect that we only know less than half the story on this team. I think these guys are finally just fed up with all of it and want to not see them skate for a change.

Sorry, Ryan--the link still didn't work for me. PS. Please say hi to my buddy at Scout, Dan Bova, for me.

If you have time and are not from the area, try the Abbott's custard on Fairport Road--great stuff. They've got a new one about 40 minutes away from me in Westchester, but I must admit that I've made that trip for it at least once.

It's kind of funny that there are so many here admitting that the Pats* intentionally deflated footballs (presumably for some kind of advantage, at least in their mind (and, the fumble data would show, in reality), otherwise why do it?), and yet are still defending them, spinning and twisting to find any reason to argue that what happened to them (being punished for cheating after being caught in two of the biggest cheating scandals in recent years, if not NFL history, and being suspected of much more) is not fair. Amazing stuff....

Riiigghhtt--the League just loves having a major scandal envelope their SB champs during the entire offseason. That's just how Goodell and boys drew it up in Marketing 101.....