Tired of Deflategate

[Kelly the Dog]

Roger Goodell has demonstrated an inability to be fair and reasonable in the manner he carries out his authority in handling discipline cases. He has been erratic and injudicious in not only making his determinations but in the manner in which he investigated these cases. His handling of the Ray Rice case was more based on how he looked rather than on the facts of the case. When this case went to an arbitrator his more severe second ruling was quickly overturned. It was very apparent that Goodell lied when he made the claim that he had new information that he didn't have when making his first ruling.

 

The deflategate fiasco is not really about Brady as many make it out to be. It is about how a deciding authority with a lot at stake for the league and the parties involved ineptly handled a disciplinary responsibility that he ferociously controlled.

 

Jonathan Vilma defeated Goodell over the manufactured Saints' episode by taking the matter to court and having a neutral party review the case. It very quickly and decisvely overturn Roger's ruling against him. That is what Brady should do. He should get an injunction against Goodell's ruling and then have his day in court. He will easily win with his very talented and tough legal representation.

 

The following attachment is a Washington Post column by Sally Jenkins that demonstrates how absurd it was for such a trivial matter to become a ridiculous fiasco because the commisioner mishandled the situation right from the start.

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/redskins/in-trying-to-restore-his-authority-goodell-undermined-his-credibility/2015/05/21/142c8d2c-ffd4-11e4-805c-c3f407e5a9e9_story.html

You should apologize for that.

 

Every decision that Goodell makes is pretty much based on PR. It's hard to argue otherwise. Brady, however, cannot go to court because he cheated, and he got caught, and he lied about it. And that would all come out when Jastremski and McNally took the stand. That has zero to do with the NFL's or Goodell's incompetence.

[JohnC]

You should apologize for that.

 

Every decision that Goodell makes is pretty much based on PR. It's hard to argue otherwise. Brady, however, cannot go to court because he cheated, and he got caught, and he lied about it. And that would all come out when Jastremski and McNally took the stand. That has zero to do with the NFL's or Goodell's incompetence.

You agree that Goodell uses his disciplinary office to make decisions based on his PR interests and then treat it as if it is appropriate and to be expected. That is ridiculous; it makes no sense.

 

I don't know if you read the Washington Post link but if you did it reveals a level of incompetence and sloppiness that is unacceptable when judging the behavior of others.

 

Your claim that Brady can not go to court is inaccuarate. If that was the case then how did Vilma win his case? He took it to court and the ruling was made in his favor.

Edited July 2, 2015 by JohnC

[NoSaint]

And that would all come out when Jastremski and McNally took the stand. That has zero to do with the NFL's or Goodell's incompetence.

 

you are of course assuming that they are both being 1) accurately represented in the report (something that has been questionable before), and 2) would cooperate with the NFL and not go in and say "yea man i was working on shedding some weight"

[Kelly the Dog]

you are of course assuming that they are both being 1) accurately represented in the report (something that has been questionable before), and 2) would cooperate with the NFL and not go in and say "yea man i was working on shedding some weight"

Hard to imagine they would after not only being fired by the Patriots who continue to say Brady did absolutely nothing wrong, as well as until the threat of perjury charges. Right now they don't speak because of an obvious NDA they would have had to sign.

You agree that Goodell uses his disciplinary office to make decisions based on his PR interests and then treat it as if it is appropriate and to be expected. That is ridiculous; it makes no sense.

 

I don't know if you read the Washington Post link but if you did it reveals a level of incompetence and sloppiness that is unacceptable when judging the behavior of others.

 

Your claim that Brady can not go to court is inaccuarate. If that was the case then how did Vilma win his case? He took it to court and the ruling was made in his favor.

 

I don't agree with what Goodell does, it just seems obvious from everything he does. To some degree that is his job, and he does it well. The owners love him because he takes the pressure off of them, and the league, and the NFL has never been more popular.

 

The Bounty case has no bearing on Brady, who cannot go to court because of what other people know, namely Jastremski and McNally. He can't go to court. Bringing up the bounty case is foolish.

[NoSaint]

Hard to imagine they would after not only being fired by the Patriots who continue to say Brady did absolutely nothing wrong, as well as until the threat of perjury charges. Right now they don't speak because of an obvious NDA they would have had to sign.

truly, i dont think that they would be incredibly worried about perjury charges here short of them being incredibly insulting to the court in their behavior. i just dont see any of the judges that have worked nfl cases going there, personally. and we have no idea how they feel about the patriots or their hopes of future employment - they may feel more comfortable playing along, or falling on a sword for all we know.

 

this strand im really just being a little bit of a devils advocate against the "its open and shut and anyone questioning it is not smart" tone that permeates a few posters. it could easily turn into a "i cant believe the nfl did X, Y, and Z to mess this situation up so badly" in a few months.

Edited July 2, 2015 by NoSaint

[ThurmasThoman]

Roger Goodell has demonstrated an inability to be fair and reasonable in the manner he carries out his authority in handling discipline cases. He has been erratic and injudicious in not only making his determinations but in the manner in which he investigated these cases. His handling of the Ray Rice case was more based on how he looked rather than on the facts of the case. When this case went to an arbitrator his more severe second ruling was quickly overturned. It was very apparent that Goodell lied when he made the claim that he had new information that he didn't have when making his first ruling.

 

The deflategate fiasco is not really about Brady as many make it out to be. It is about how a deciding authority with a lot at stake for the league and the parties involved ineptly handled a disciplinary responsibility that he ferociously controlled.

 

Jonathan Vilma defeated Goodell over the manufactured Saints' episode by taking the matter to court and having a neutral party review the case. It very quickly and decisvely overturn Roger's ruling against him. That is what Brady should do. He should get an injunction against Goodell's ruling and then have his day in court. He will easily win with his very talented and tough legal representation.

 

The following attachment is a Washington Post column by Sally Jenkins that demonstrates how absurd it was for such a trivial matter to become a ridiculous fiasco because the commisioner mishandled the situation right from the start.

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/redskins/in-trying-to-restore-his-authority-goodell-undermined-his-credibility/2015/05/21/142c8d2c-ffd4-11e4-805c-c3f407e5a9e9_story.html

 

everything you just typed is great, but neglects to take into account that the nfl is an entertainment product that relies on fans consuming their product. the nfl has complete control over the american sporting landscape--there is nowhere for them to go but down.

 

is this situation, in your opinion, good or bad for the nfl?

 

and don't give me the tired cliche: "any pub is good pub", because it's not.

 

the patriots are cheaters, they have been busted before, and they were busted again. they have compromised the integrity of the game. that might not mean much, but it has the same effect as catching your spouse texting an ex lover. the same ex lover they got busted having an affair with 8 years ago. sure, sure, sure--it's all circumstantial, and nothing can be proven.

 

but that relationship then falls apart. and that's whats going to happen with the nfl.

 

mark my f*cking words. this is the jumping the shark moment. if goodell comes out and lessens this suspension, he is saying "even though the patriots have been busted for cheating before. and even though a team accused them of deflating balls, and we set up a sting operation and busted them for deflating balls. and even though the employees of the patriots text each other about deflating footballs. and even though theres video of an employee bringing balls into the bathroom for 1:30 seconds. and even though that guy is called "mr. deflator." AND EVEN THOUGH I ALREADY SUSPENDED BRADY FOR A QUARTER OF THE SEASON FOR ALL THIS. ive decided that's too harsh, and cheating is ok."

 

brady should kicked out of the league. not because what he did was egregious enough to warrant it, but because this is the beginning of the downfall for the nfl if they don't do that.

 

the nba is coming off a GREAT playoffs, and posted its highest tv ratings for a final since MJ. steph curry looks like the next mj, in all the ways the league wanted lebron to be the next mj. he is raking in endorsements from pottery barn at this point, its insane. he is a superstar that is DAMN good at what he does--he might be the best pure shooter ever. the warriors are a dream team, and will be winning championships for awhile. lebrons cavs are good, and the league is about to sign a massive tv contract.

 

im telling you--this is the beginning of the end for the nfl. call it hyperbole, call it offseason drama, call it a jealous bills fans over reaction--but honestly, how bad are the bills, really? we finished 3 games back from the patriots: 9-7 to 12-4. lets say the pats won 2 extra games by cheating--what if we had beaten them? that gets us to 10-6 and puts them at 11-5, with us having the tie breaker. sh*t, what if they had to play by the rules ALL season... maybe they would have lost to the jets in that rainy november game? thats the point, no one knows. theyre just allowed to cheat, and win, and no one can question it.

 

why? thats sh*tty. thats not fun. thats the point of all this. you can make all the logical arguments you want about why bradys suspension should be reduced, or overturned, or it doesnt matter... but in the end, it absolutely does matter.

 

the patriots cheat. the game is rigged. i have too much to do with my life to watch this product (that goes to EXTREME levels to hype itself as a matter of life and death) when what im seeing isnt even real. remember when watching sports was fun? not an argument? like, you could legitimately ask "whos better, marino or kelly?" the nfl is supposed to be fun. they have allowed a "dynasty" to be created, and simultaneously punished them for cheating in EVERY SINGLE ONE of their championships. this isnt fun. im not having fun consuming this "entertainment" product. this is like playing a badly designed video game, eating undercooked chicken, or watching a boring movie--all products designed to be enjoyable, but all products that can be ruined by a bad experience.

[Kelly the Dog]

truly, i dont think that they would be incredibly worried about perjury charges here short of them being incredibly insulting to the court in their behavior. i just dont see any of the judges that have worked nfl cases going there, personally. and we have no idea how they feel about the patriots or their hopes of future employment - they may feel more comfortable playing along, or falling on a sword for all we know.

this strand im really just being a little bit of a devils advocate against the "its open and shut and anyone questioning it is not smart" tone that permeates a few posters. it could easily turn into a "i cant believe the nfl did X, Y, and Z to mess this situation up so badly" in a few months.

The point I'm trying to make is that it doesn't matter how much the NFL screwed it up. There is not a rational thinking person on earth that thinks this was all total coincidence. Brady cannot take this to court outside of trying to say Goodell shouldn't be able to rule, and that has already all been debunked. It's clear as day that he has that power given to him. Brady cannot take his I have no idea what happened case to court. Zero. None. Nada. There is more circumstantial evidence that convicted Aaron Hernandez, and it's the only thing that has the ability to truly ruin his legacy. There is no chance.

[JohnC]

Hard to imagine they would after not only being fired by the Patriots who continue to say Brady did absolutely nothing wrong, as well as until the threat of perjury charges. Right now they don't speak because of an obvious NDA they would have had to sign.

I don't agree with what Goodell does, it just seems obvious from everything he does. To some degree that is his job, and he does it well. The owners love him because he takes the pressure off of them, and the league, and the NFL has never been more popular.

 

The Bounty case has no bearing on Brady, who cannot go to court because of what other people know, namely Jastremski and McNally. He can't go to court. Bringing up the bounty case is foolish.

Brady hired an attorney who has a history of taking the league to court and winning. You believe that Brady would not allow his case to be taken to court out of fear of what will come out. I disagree with that view. If this case gets into a courtroom or arbitration setting it will result in a ruling in his favor, as it turned out for Rice, Vilma and other cases.

 

http://www.boston.com/sports/football/patriots/2015/05/13/reports-tom-brady-lawyers-hiring-nfl-nemesis-jeffrey-kessler-for-deflategate-appeal/R8VxFScOekxF86MCvkjU3H/story.html

Edited July 2, 2015 by JohnC

[dave mcbride]

Hard to imagine they would after not only being fired by the Patriots who continue to say Brady did absolutely nothing wrong, as well as until the threat of perjury charges. Right now they don't speak because of an obvious NDA they would have had to sign.

I don't agree with what Goodell does, it just seems obvious from everything he does. To some degree that is his job, and he does it well. The owners love him because he takes the pressure off of them, and the league, and the NFL has never been more popular.

 

The Bounty case has no bearing on Brady, who cannot go to court because of what other people know, namely Jastremski and McNally. He can't go to court. Bringing up the bounty case is foolish.

You sound so self-assured. I wouldn't be. You don't know enough. If the NFL can't convince a judge/jury in court that there was deflation beyond the threshold separating fair play from cheating - and they will not be able to do this EVEN if it happened given the shoddiness of the report and the confusion around the gauges - then there is no case against Brady. Everything else is noise.

Edited July 2, 2015 by dave mcbride

[Kelly the Dog]

Brady hired an attorney who has a history of taking the league to court and winning. You believe that Brady would not allow his case to be taken to court out of fear of what will come out. I disagree with that view. If this case gets into a courtroom or arbitration setting it will result in a ruling in his favor, as it turned out for Rice, Vilma and other cases.

 

http://www.boston.com/sports/football/patriots/2015/05/13/reports-tom-brady-lawyers-hiring-nfl-nemesis-jeffrey-kessler-for-deflategate-appeal/R8VxFScOekxF86MCvkjU3H/story.html

You linked month old news to support your case? Good move.

 

Please explain what Brady would be taking to court first. This ought to be good. This isn't a criminal case or trial. Defamation of character? That would be good.

[dave mcbride]

You linked month old news to support your case? Good move.

 

Please explain what Brady would be taking to court first. This ought to be good. This isn't a criminal case or trial. Defamation of character? That would be good.

Maybe I'm naive, but if he can establish that the RESULT that the penalty is based on may well be based on flawed data analysis (I'm still waiting for that critique of the AEI report, btw - it hasn't come yet), then why would anything else even matter?? Results come first and foremost. The Saints guys had their decisions overturned in large part because of flawed data analysis.

Edited July 2, 2015 by dave mcbride

[Kelly the Dog]

You sound so self-assured. I wouldn't be. You don't know enough. If the NFL can't convince a judge/jury in court that there was deflation beyond the threshold separating fair play from cheating - and they will not be able to do this EVEN if it happened given the shoddiness of the report and the confusion around the gauges - then there is no case against Brady. Everything else is noise.

This isn't a criminal case. As I asked JC above, what do you think that Brady would take the NFL to court over? I don't think very many people here realize what is actually going on. Nor are some of you taking a step back and realizing what happened. Yes, I'm being so self-assured. But it's really basic common sense. Sure the NFL is run by buffoons. Sure they are incompetent. Sure you can poke reasonable doubt into a ton of the Wells report and earlier trials. That is glaringly obvious. Though not as glaringly obvious as 20 things in a row that point to the balls being deflated, and Jastremski and McNally playing a part in it, REGARDLESS of all else. This is not a murder case. They don't have to have a murder weapon. There is 0.000000% chance this is all total coincidence. And since that is inarguable, someone did something to the balls.

 

The only chance whatsoever that Brady wasn't involved would be if McNally and Jastremski did it all on their own.

 

Which is impossible, and would be impossible without the texts, which prove it.

Maybe I'm naive, but if he can establish that the RESULT that the penalty is based on may well be based on flawed data analysis (I'm still waiting for that critique of the AEI report, btw - it hasn't come yet), then why would anything else even matter?? Results come first and foremost. The Saints guys had their decisions overturned in large part because of flawed data analysis.

Half of the result came from science which no one anywhere has proven faulty, including the AEI report. The other half came from Brady and the Patriots refusing to cooperate. What do you think is going to happen if McNally takes the stand and the lawyer says "Why were you called the Deflator?"

 

He's going to evoke the Jenny Craig defense?

[NoSaint]

What do you think is going to happen if McNally takes the stand and the lawyer says "Why were you called the Deflator?"

 

He's going to evoke the Jenny Craig defense?

just to be a pain.... what if he does?

[dave mcbride]

This isn't a criminal case. As I asked JC above, what do you think that Brady would take the NFL to court over? I don't think very many people here realize what is actually going on. Nor are some of you taking a step back and realizing what happened. Yes, I'm being so self-assured. But it's really basic common sense. Sure the NFL is run by buffoons. Sure they are incompetent. Sure you can poke reasonable doubt into a ton of the Wells report and earlier trials. That is glaringly obvious. Though not as glaringly obvious as 20 things in a row that point to the balls being deflated, and Jastremski and McNally playing a part in it, REGARDLESS of all else. This is not a murder case. They don't have to have a murder weapon. There is 0.000000% chance this is all total coincidence. And since that is inarguable, someone did something to the balls.

 

The only chance whatsoever that Brady wasn't involved would be if McNally and Jastremski did it all on their own.

 

Which is impossible, and would be impossible without the texts, which prove it.

Half of the result came from science which no one anywhere has proven faulty, including the AEI report. The other half came from Brady and the Patriots refusing to cooperate. What do you think is going to happen if McNally takes the stand and the lawyer says "Why were you called the Deflator?"

 

He's going to evoke the Jenny Craig defense?

Criminal case or civil case, the only thing that matters is results -- i.e., a determination that the guilty party is responsible for a harm that actually occurred. Let me reiterate: that is ALL that matters regardless of the setting. If they can't even determine if Brady actually did violate a rule to the point where they're even moderately convinced he did it, where is the case? I'm telling you - that Wells report is bad for the league. I read the same things you do, and we've both probably read that the league knows the report is flawed.

Edited July 2, 2015 by dave mcbride

[Kelly the Dog]

just to be a pain.... what if he does?

The judge or jury would laugh and ask if it is possible, like in The Verdict, to put much more of a penalty than was originally asked.

Criminal case or civil case, the only thing that matters is results -- i.e., a determination that the guilty party is responsible for a harm that actually occurred. Let me reiterate: that is ALL that matters regardless of the setting. If they can't even determine if Brady actually did this to the point where they're even moderately convinced, where is the case? I'm telling you - that Wells report is bad for the league. I read the same things you do, and we've both probably read that the league knows the report is flawed.

 

There is nothing that has shown it to be flawed. Nothing. People can say that the report doesn't 100% prove that the balls were intentionally deflated, and guess what, that's what the Wells report says, too. What it does show is that there were about 100 reasons to believe that the Patriots did something to the balls by what they did and said all season long to each other. That's what it proves. And no one has come close to disproving that.

[dave mcbride]

Criminal case or civil case, the only thing that matters is results -- i.e., a determination that the guilty party is responsible for a harm that actually occurred. Let me reiterate: that is ALL that matters regardless of the setting. If they can't even determine if Brady actually did violate a rule to the point where they're even moderately convinced he did it, where is the case? I'm telling you - that Wells report is bad for the league. I read the same things you do, and we've both probably read that the league knows the report is flawed.

Also, you keep bringing up the two guys. If they didn't know the pressure numbers they were working with (and of course they didn't), and the court can't establish that there was a violation to begin with, then there is no case. None - regardless of what they did or didn't do. Again, you have to have evidence of a violation/harm. Otherwise there is nothing to go on.

Edited July 2, 2015 by dave mcbride

[Kelly the Dog]

Also, you keep bringing up the two guys. If they didn't know the pressure numbers they were working with (and of course they didn't), and the court can't establish that there was a violation to begin with, then there is no case. None - regardless of what they did or didn't do. Again, you have to have evidence of a violation/harm. Otherwise there is nothing to go on.

They do know the pressure numbers. They have always known the pressure numbers. And they will have two guys take the stand and say we measured these balls and here were the numbers.

[dave mcbride]

The judge or jury would laugh and ask if it is possible, like in The Verdict, to put much more of a penalty than was originally asked.

There is nothing that has shown it to be flawed. Nothing. People can say that the report doesn't 100% prove that the balls were intentionally deflated, and guess what, that's what the Wells report says, too. What it does show is that there were about 100 reasons to believe that the Patriots did something to the balls by what they did and said all season long to each other. That's what it proves. And no one has come close to disproving that.

We'll have to disagree on the quality of the Wells report. I thought the AEI report was convincing, although I'm not an expert on the data analysis (although I trust the economist more than I trust the firm the NFL hired). More importantly, while there have been tons of critiques of the Wells report, there have been none of the AEI report - and Brady is more disliked than the league. You'd have thought the attackers would be crawling out of the woodwork.

[Kelly the Dog]

We'll have to disagree on the quality of the Wells report. I thought the AEI report was convincing, although I'm not an expert on the data analysis (although I trust the economist more than I trust the firm the NFL hired). More importantly, while there have been tons of critiques of the Wells report, there have been none of the AEI report - and Brady is more disliked than the league. You'd have thought the attackers would be crawling out of the woodwork.

 

There was a guy last week who came out and debunked the AEI report although he also debunked the Wells report. But it's all theoretical.

And the AEI report doesn't disprove anything whatsoever. It says you guys may have not considered the possibility of this and that, which is impossible considering all of the other circumstances.

[dave mcbride]

They do know the pressure numbers. They have always known the pressure numbers. And they will have two guys take the stand and say we measured these balls and here were the numbers.

McNally mentioned "16" in one text--pretty much the highest number you can go to (kinda like Nigel Tufnel saying his goes to 11). If you think he was measuring the balls beforehand and afterward on even a semi-regular basis, there's a bridge in Brooklyn I'd be happy to sell you. Regardless, the league will not arrive with convincing evidence, and without evidence the two guys just don't matter. A good legal team will shred the Wells report.