Kelly the Dog Posted May 11, 2015 Posted May 11, 2015 Taking an over inlfated ball into the game is a violation of the rule. Pretty simple. No it's not. At all. The officials are 100% responsible for PSI of footballs. teams and players 0.0%
The Wiz Posted May 11, 2015 Posted May 11, 2015 (edited) hahaha You can't deny that it has that type of feel to it though. right? I know you of all people are waiting for that tweet to come out. No it's not. At all. The officials are 100% responsible for PSI of footballs. teams and players 0.0% They are responsible for making sure they are ready prior to the game. Not responsible for someone going into the officials locker room and deflating or taking the balls when their backs are turned. Edited May 11, 2015 by The Wiz
Doc Posted May 11, 2015 Posted May 11, 2015 (edited) You mean the ...."protect himself from self incrimination" part? LOL... WEO made his position clear in the past that if you don't talk to the police, it's because you're guilty. Yet all along in this case, he hasn't held Tommy Boy to the same standard. I knew that if I tossed-out the "not cooperating shows he's guilty" line, it would draw him out and make him look like a hypocrite. And sure enough... As for me, I still say you're a fool to talk to the police, who have every reason to want to make you seem as guilty as possible. Not talking to an investigator hired by your employer, who have every reason not to make you seem guilty...not so smart, unless you have something to hide. This isn't a criminal case and Sir Roger isn't bound by conventional law, as we've seen. And ultimately, Lynch was guilty of something. Edited May 11, 2015 by Doc
RuntheDamnBall Posted May 11, 2015 Posted May 11, 2015 I think people get way too caught up in the effect or results of this. Basically, there is a rule. The Pats were caught violating it in a playoff game. Their star quarterback is unquestionably involved and he refused to cooperate with the investigation. How much it impacted the games, road vs. home records, etc. None of that is at issue here, and it all confuses the issue. Goodell needs to be weighing three things -- 1) the fact that they were cheating and violating this rule (in the playoffs, no less) 2) the fact that Brady wasn't complying with the investigation. And it's impossible to do, but he needs to look at this as he would with any other player. 3) He also needs to look at the fact that this is textbook recalcitrance from a team that has violated the rules on this stage before. Everything else is noise.
Rocky Landing Posted May 11, 2015 Posted May 11, 2015 (edited) You guys are missing my point. I think that the balls were doctored and I think Brady should be suspended. But to conclude that Wells' word would be the final say about what a preponderance of evidence is in a courtroom is simply wrong. That report would be torn to shreds by a good defense attorney. There is nothing in it that directly incriminates Brady, and he would likely win his case. Now if his phone has incriminating evidence, that's a different story. But we don't know if it does, and the fact that there are no incriminating texts from Brady to the the flunkies suggest that there may not be. This isn't about whether the balls were doctored. It's about whether Brady can be linked to it. That's the issue here. Were this a civil case, a good defense attorney would settle out of court. Edited May 11, 2015 by Rocky Landing
Go Kiko go Posted May 11, 2015 Posted May 11, 2015 If Rodgers overinflates every ball and a few make it past what sounds like a cursory inspection by ref crews and such a ball makes it into his hands at gametime, he's breaking the rules by playing with that ball. Taking an over inlfated ball into the game is a violation of the rule. Pretty simple. The rules provide that "[t]he Referee shall be the sole judge as to whether all balls offered for play comply with these specifications." Could you cite which rule Rodgers would be violating by playing with a ball that the referee, who is "the sole judge" of the matter, has approved for play?
The Real Buffalo Joe Posted May 11, 2015 Posted May 11, 2015 ESPN BREAKING NEWS: Brady Punishment In, Not What Expected
NoSaint Posted May 11, 2015 Posted May 11, 2015 I think people get way too caught up in the effect or results of this. Basically, there is a rule. The Pats were caught violating it in a playoff game. Their star quarterback is unquestionably involved and he refused to cooperate with the investigation. How much it impacted the games, road vs. home records, etc. None of that is at issue here, and it all confuses the issue. Goodell needs to be weighing three things -- 1) the fact that they were cheating and violating this rule (in the playoffs, no less) 2) the fact that Brady wasn't complying with the investigation. And it's impossible to do, but he needs to look at this as he would with any other player. 3) He also needs to look at the fact that this is textbook recalcitrance from a team that has violated the rules on this stage before. Everything else is noise. normally im a big fan of your posts but i think you miss the mark here. clearly the magnitude of the rule has to effect the severity of the consequences. and though it muddies up the water some, i think its reasonable to discuss the impact as a way to help steer our discussions. we have seen suggestions today alone that this accounts for most a a 43% reduction all the way through to a post saying that it may even have the opposite effect. yea, a rule has been broken and that comes with consequence but not all rules are created equal. at this point the cooperation seems bigger than the deflation for many.
RuntheDamnBall Posted May 11, 2015 Posted May 11, 2015 normally im a big fan of your posts but i think you miss the mark here. clearly the magnitude of the rule has to effect the severity of the consequences. and though it muddies up the water some, i think its reasonable to discuss the impact as a way to help steer our discussions. we have seen suggestions today alone that this accounts for most a a 43% reduction all the way through to a post saying that it may even have the opposite effect. yea, a rule has been broken and that comes with consequence but not all rules are created equal. at this point the cooperation seems bigger than the deflation for many. Well, first, right back atcha. But I think the magnitude of the effect is nebulous and up for debate, right? And that serves the Patriots - in fact it's probably the only thing serving them right now. But it might mean that a guy doesn't fumble a ball. It might mean that a ball is easier to catch. It might mean that it's easier to throw. We can't really know what would have happened and we can hardly base it on coarse stats. We do know the rule was violated by a wildly successful team, during the playoffs, and that they went to lengths to disguise what they were doing. This isn't like a uniform violation. To me, that's the issue here.
The Real Buffalo Joe Posted May 11, 2015 Posted May 11, 2015 During the punishment phase, are they taking into account the fact that this isn't the first offense?
PromoTheRobot Posted May 11, 2015 Posted May 11, 2015 ESPN BREAKING NEWS: Brady Punishment In, Not What Expected You mean they finally saw what he's hiding on his phone?
MattM Posted May 11, 2015 Posted May 11, 2015 normally im a big fan of your posts but i think you miss the mark here. clearly the magnitude of the rule has to effect the severity of the consequences. and though it muddies up the water some, i think its reasonable to discuss the impact as a way to help steer our discussions. we have seen suggestions today alone that this accounts for most a a 43% reduction all the way through to a post saying that it may even have the opposite effect. yea, a rule has been broken and that comes with consequence but not all rules are created equal. at this point the cooperation seems bigger than the deflation for many. On the water muddying point, please explain to me how the Pats**' balls deflated at over twice the rate of the Colts' balls. All those giving truck to the "bad gauge" argument seem to gloss right over that, including Florio, as best I can tell.
Fan in San Diego Posted May 11, 2015 Posted May 11, 2015 During the punishment phase, are they taking into account the fact that this isn't the first offense? We can only hope. Ban Brady, Bellicheat for life, strip all draft picks next year and $10,000,000 fine.
PromoTheRobot Posted May 11, 2015 Posted May 11, 2015 We can only hope. Ban Brady, Bellicheat for life, strip all draft picks next year and $10,000,000 fine. Vacate all affected wins including Super Bowl.
BigPappy Posted May 11, 2015 Posted May 11, 2015 Yeah I'm starting to see it this way too. Plus the guy is 38 going on 39. Pretty soon Garrapolo will be their starter anyway, so that will be the Pats at full strength. And Brady cheated and lied. He deserves to be suspended. If he hurts his team it's only his fault. How about the Garrapolo era against the Bills is the opposite of Brady against the Bills. 2-24 or whatever. I'm changing my prediction to 8 and upheld on appeal. He really has no grounds for appeal. I also think it will be 8 games. But, and its a big but, if he is suspended for the entire season and it is upheld, I think he retires. He would be 40 when he came back. I don't care how good he is and how good a shape you are in, 40 is way to old to come back and play after a year off. BigPappy ESPN BREAKING NEWS: Brady Punishment In, Not What Expected Damn it!!! I fell for it again!!! BigPappy
ko12010 Posted May 11, 2015 Posted May 11, 2015 Vacate all affected wins including Super Bowl. Get rid of the franchise and give it to L.A.
RuntheDamnBall Posted May 11, 2015 Posted May 11, 2015 Get rid of the franchise and give it to L.A. Burn Gillette Stadium to the ground, gift the land to the original American Indian owners.
NoSaint Posted May 11, 2015 Posted May 11, 2015 (edited) Well, first, right back atcha. But I think the magnitude of the effect is nebulous and up for debate, right? And that serves the Patriots - in fact it's probably the only thing serving them right now. But it might mean that a guy doesn't fumble a ball. It might mean that a ball is easier to catch. It might mean that it's easier to throw. We can't really know what would have happened and we can hardly base it on coarse stats. We do know the rule was violated by a wildly successful team, during the playoffs, and that they went to lengths to disguise what they were doing. This isn't like a uniform violation. To me, that's the issue here. its definitely hazy - but you can still punish hazy. to a degree i feel like each side is scared to give an inch, because they are worried about the opinion of the masses. The NFL shouldnt worry about what trending on twitter, and instead focus on the core issues within the offense. they dont need to know whether its a 7% reduction or 9% reduction, just like the "crowd noise" in atlanta isnt easily quantifiable, but i think you have to have some sort of grasp on scale or what type of offense it is still. if this is a rule that accounts in a 43% reduction in fumbles, its treated differently than something that is a 3% change. and from there start building out the framework for punishing the offense based on the facts they do have available and history, and similarly handle bradys punishment for noncooperation based on past incidents -- not pft comments. Edited May 11, 2015 by NoSaint
BillsFan-4-Ever Posted May 11, 2015 Posted May 11, 2015 (edited) Why would a guy call himself the deflater? why would he and the other ball handler dislike Tom* so much? F#$% Tom this and that? Did Tom* rag on them for rubbing his balls the wrong way? Edited May 11, 2015 by BillsFan-4-Ever
Recommended Posts