dave mcbride Posted July 27, 2015 Posted July 27, 2015 I agree to an extent. If you and everyone else agrees that Kraft lobbying him is 1000x more the case and more problematic. I absolutely agree that it would be problematic if Kraft lobbied on Brady's behalf. My sense, though, is that Thurston J. is smart enough to stay out of this particular process. I also think we would have heard about it if he had lobbied.
Kelly the Dog Posted July 27, 2015 Posted July 27, 2015 I absolutely agree that it would be problematic if Kraft lobbied on Brady's behalf. My sense, though, is that Thurston J. is smart enough to stay out of this particular process. I also think we would have heard about it if he had lobbied. We did. It was a massive story two-three weeks ago in Aspen or wherever Kraft and Goodell met up at a conference and were seen chummy together and Florio had his stories of them hammering out a compromise. Which was of course speculation like all of this is.
BillsFan-4-Ever Posted July 27, 2015 Posted July 27, 2015 How did the guy get the nickname "the deflator"? didn't he call himself that in his texts?
Dorkington Posted July 27, 2015 Posted July 27, 2015 (edited) well, the team got a major penalty. im not sure its fair to hit brady, despite our distaste for him, as a repeat offender while he doesnt have a previous offense. if the nfl gives him a major fine (say the previous fines for equipment issues, plus some esclation) and thats it (or a minor suspension) -- its if anything, more in line with the past penalties. which for someone wanting to preserve the rule book, youd think consistency would be a goal. 4 games would definitely be the upper upper edge of any comparable situation, if not above. i dont get how suddenly its become thought of as the plainly obvious penalty. I may or may not be in the minority on this, but the fact players can get suspended for much longer for relatively stupid things that have no impact on the actual games cements that Brady should be given a severe penalty, imo. BUT the NFL doesn't work like that, so you're right in that 4 games is on the high side of things, and 1 or 2 games at most would be in line. Edited July 27, 2015 by Dorkington
K-9 Posted July 27, 2015 Posted July 27, 2015 Why do suppose those particular photographs of Goodell were chosen to accompany the Florio article? Also need to clarify something I read upthread: the "bathroom" that McNally used didn't have a urinal or commode; just a sink. Why did he feel compelled to lie about needing to take a leak? Or is he OK with everyone knowing he pees in sinks? GO BILLS!!!
NoSaint Posted July 27, 2015 Posted July 27, 2015 There is no reason in the investigation to think that the NFL didn't have a pretty simple, pretty serious protocol and were not serious in the process. Name one. A standardized gauge? It's VERY simple. They measure the balls. End of story. There is nothing to believe they don't. That other qbs try to get ones by that are illegal (Rodgers comment) implies they either don't believe they are at least 1 of 2 - accurately measured, or measured every week That the 2 gauges aren't consistent That in interviewing the refs they aren't handling it the same way across the board That the NFL lets teams control the balls post inspection That despite prior complaints and the balls disappearing it took an interception to re-check the balls There's 5 decent examples of the NFL not indicating that 12.5 is some sacred holy number guarded by serious protocol
BillsFan-4-Ever Posted July 27, 2015 Posted July 27, 2015 I'm sorry still I don't buy this personal stuff. What is on his phone that could be embarrassing ? Was he sexting with his wife? exchanging sexting textx with his teammates? calling Belicheat nasty names? For me - my personal phone is for my personal use. If my work wants to use a mobile phone for work related stuff let the company provide me a phone. After 2002 (post 9-11-2001) ANYONE who isn't aware your messages are stored and or viewed is dumb and deserve any kickbacks.
LeGOATski Posted July 27, 2015 Posted July 27, 2015 That's all fine. But if venturing back into an argument that the NFL is highly standardized and takes the measurements seriously ill bring it up just the same. Someone pointed out it's such a big deal that they had 2 gauges! If the league doesn't have a standard process, standard gauges, or any real attention to detail... it's tough to come back claiming it's a SERIOUS infraction. A bit like nailing someone with jail time for going 60 in a 55 when your radar gun is +/- 5mph anyway and you don't really tend to enforce the rule strictly. Even if I know they did 60, there's an element of "seriously??" that would be my reaction to a significant punishment there. The fact that we're talking about their level of attention to ball pressure is proof that the defense's strategy to avert attention away from the rule-breaking is working. Their attacking the NFL's weak points, which is the right course of action. The focus should remain on Brady's involvement with the tampering that we already know occurred, not what the result was or how strict the NFL is with their procedure. If Brady is found to be completely uninvolved, then so be it. If that's the case, then it should've been easy for him to cooperate in the first place. Weird.
Matt in KC Posted July 27, 2015 Posted July 27, 2015 I think the pregame measurements have been like all of the other official procedures and rulings: attempts by the league to standardize them, but differences based on each Ref/crew. The ref crew is responsible for confirming balls are fit for use. I don't doubt that sometimes the balls haven't been measured, or haven't all been measured. Sometimes the sticks aren't used before the ref calls a close spotting of the ball a first down. But none of the above matters. In this case when they were caught, the balls were each measured pre-game, and were indeed altered after that. The Pats were basically caught red-handed, and releases their two employees who were undeniably involved, and accepted the league punishment. Brady's involvement is less clear, but his mention in the texts, his lack of believability, lack of cooperation, undisputed preference for softer balls, and apparent pay-offs to "the Deflator," taken as a whole, are pretty damning. This is above the preponderance threshold the league sets for being found guilty. As far as I can tell the agreed process for doling out and reviewing punishment was followed by the League.
NoSaint Posted July 27, 2015 Posted July 27, 2015 (edited) The fact that we're talking about their level of attention to ball pressure is proof that the defense's strategy to avert attention away from the rule-breaking is working. Their attacking the NFL's weak points, which is the right course of action. The focus should remain on Brady's involvement with the tampering that we already know occurred, not what the result was or how strict the NFL is with their procedure. If Brady is found to be completely uninvolved, then so be it. If that's the case, then it should've been easy for him to cooperate in the first place. Weird. and if he is involved to some degree, as most of us agree on, then we get into looking at what type of offense it is, what his involvement was and what the punishment should be. you can continue to side step that discussion and stick your fingers in your ears and yell "he did it, he did it, he did it" though, if youd like. i cant stop you. Edited July 27, 2015 by NoSaint
dave mcbride Posted July 27, 2015 Posted July 27, 2015 We did. It was a massive story two-three weeks ago in Aspen or wherever Kraft and Goodell met up at a conference and were seen chummy together and Florio had his stories of them hammering out a compromise. Which was of course speculation like all of this is. What a screwed up process. How can an arbitrator be independent when a whole bunch of his bosses are advising him on penalties? It's ridiculous, and regardless of what the CBA allows Goodell to do, he should have known that his self-appointment as arbitrator would inevitably result in conflict-of-interest problems.
LeGOATski Posted July 27, 2015 Posted July 27, 2015 I am sure the Brady team could easily find justifiable means for them wanting to withhold sensitive personal info from an outfit that has proven itself to be incapable of keeping things secret. if the NFL was so concerned about non co-operation, why didn't they penalize, say, Gostowski, for not co-operating with Wells? OK, you're back to your original statement about giving up sensitive personal info...do you think he was talking about his personal life to the ball boys? based on the circumstantial evidence, Wells/the NFL obviously didn't care if Gostkowski gave no further info. If the ball boys were talking about Gostkowski like they were about Brady, I'm sure that Gostkowski would be under fire as well. What a screwed up process. How can an arbitrator be independent when a whole bunch of his bosses are advising him on penalties? It's ridiculous, and regardless of what the CBA allows Goodell to do, he should have known that his self-appointment as arbitrator would inevitably result in conflict-of-interest problems. The NFLPA knew this would happen and they set him up....the plot thickens... and if he is involved to some degree, as most of us agree on, then we get into looking at what type of offense it is, what his involvement was and what the punishment should be. you can continue to side step that discussion and stick your fingers in your ears and yell "he did it, he did it, he did it" though, if youd like. i cant stop you. If he's involved, I think the 2 game suspension is fine. You?
NoSaint Posted July 27, 2015 Posted July 27, 2015 What a screwed up process. How can an arbitrator be independent when a whole bunch of his bosses are advising him on penalties? It's ridiculous, and regardless of what the CBA allows Goodell to do, he should have known that his self-appointment as arbitrator would inevitably result in conflict-of-interest problems. which i dont think got many replies when i said it an hour ago, but is exactly why he shouldnt have put himself in charge of the appeal here.
K-9 Posted July 27, 2015 Posted July 27, 2015 What a screwed up process. How can an arbitrator be independent when a whole bunch of his bosses are advising him on penalties? It's ridiculous, and regardless of what the CBA allows Goodell to do, he should have known that his self-appointment as arbitrator would inevitably result in conflict-of-interest problems. So reports of Irsay and Bisciotti being in Goodells's ear is now "a whole bunch of his bosses?" It's a given that he serves at the behest of 32 owners, but I don't buy Florio's disinformation campaign on behalf of the NFLPA, either. GO BILLS!!!
dave mcbride Posted July 27, 2015 Posted July 27, 2015 (edited) We did. It was a massive story two-three weeks ago in Aspen or wherever Kraft and Goodell met up at a conference and were seen chummy together and Florio had his stories of them hammering out a compromise. Which was of course speculation like all of this is. As for speculation, Sal Paolantonio -- a good reporter -- pretty much said that it was a certainty that Irsay and Bisciotti had lobbied Goodell. So reports of Irsay and Bisciotti being in Goodells's ear is now "a whole bunch of his bosses?" It's a given that he serves at the behest of 32 owners, but I don't buy Florio's disinformation campaign on behalf of the NFLPA, either. GO BILLS!!! It doesn't matter whether it's 2 or 16. You realize that, right? The process has been corrupted. Edited July 27, 2015 by dave mcbride
Pneumonic Posted July 27, 2015 Posted July 27, 2015 OK, you're back to your original statement about giving up sensitive personal info...do you think he was talking about his personal life to the ball boys? based on the circumstantial evidence, Wells/the NFL obviously didn't care if Gostkowski gave no further info. If the ball boys were talking about Gostkowski like they were about Brady, I'm sure that Gostkowski would be under fire as well. Any "talk" between Brady and the ball boys was already disclosed and noted during Brady's initial cooperation stage. Absent a subpoena, Brady had no legal reason to continue on with the witch hunt by supplying them with any further personal phone info. Given the NFL/Wells' blatant disregard for non disclosure, neither would most sensible people.
LeGOATski Posted July 27, 2015 Posted July 27, 2015 Any "talk" between Brady and the ball boys was already disclosed and noted during Brady's initial cooperation stage. Absent a subpoena, Brady had no legal reason to continue on with the witch hunt by supplying them with any further personal phone info. Given the NFL/Wells' blatant disregard for non disclosure, neither would most sensible people. Brady's initial cooperation stage? When did that occur? Wells got anything he could from everyone else. Brady offered nothing. In the investigation, it doesn't matter if some things are repetitive because you're looking for the inconsistencies. Just because they had some of the ball boys' texts, doesn't mean they didn't need Brady's. Brady didn't know what texts the ball boys gave up, and even if he gave up non-incriminating texts, they still could've presented an inconsistency. His best move to cover his own ass was to not cooperate/give up absolutely nothing, therefore not presenting any further inconsistencies.
Mr. WEO Posted July 27, 2015 Posted July 27, 2015 That other qbs try to get ones by that are illegal (Rodgers comment) implies they either don't believe they are at least 1 of 2 - accurately measured, or measured every week That the 2 gauges aren't consistent That in interviewing the refs they aren't handling it the same way across the board That the NFL lets teams control the balls post inspection That despite prior complaints and the balls disappearing it took an interception to re-check the balls There's 5 decent examples of the NFL not indicating that 12.5 is some sacred holy number guarded by serious protocol I've brought these up, including the Rodgers comments and preferences months ago. There are certain things that cannot even be discussed, NoSaint, without cocnluding you are a NE "apologist/defender".. Brady's initial cooperation stage? When did that occur? Wells got anything he could from everyone else. Brady offered nothing. In the investigation, it doesn't matter if some things are repetitive because you're looking for the inconsistencies. Just because they had some of the ball boys' texts, doesn't mean they didn't need Brady's. Brady didn't know what texts the ball boys gave up, and even if he gave up non-incriminating texts, they still could've presented an inconsistency. His best move to cover his own ass was to not cooperate/give up absolutely nothing, therefore not presenting any further inconsistencies. Wrong. "Mr. Brady, the report set forth, he came to the interview, he answered every question I put to him. He did not refuse to answer any questions in terms of the back and forth between Mr. Brady and my team. He was totally cooperative."
LeGOATski Posted July 27, 2015 Posted July 27, 2015 I've brought these up, including the Rodgers comments and preferences months ago. There are certain things that cannot even be discussed, NoSaint, without cocnluding you are a NE "apologist/defender".. Wrong. "Mr. Brady, the report set forth, he came to the interview, he answered every question I put to him. He did not refuse to answer any questions in terms of the back and forth between Mr. Brady and my team. He was totally cooperative." We're talking about phone info. Wells/the NFL penalized him for not cooperating with the records request. If Pneumonic was just talking about the interview, then fine, but that doesn't support his argument about Brady's reasons to withhold relevant phone records. Obviously, it's easier to manipulate your interview answers than it is to manipulate your phone records. Even then, Brady only had to give up what he thought were non-incriminating ones, but he didn't even risk that.
Pneumonic Posted July 27, 2015 Posted July 27, 2015 Brady's initial cooperation stage? When did that occur? Wells got anything he could from everyone else. Brady offered nothing. In the investigation, it doesn't matter if some things are repetitive because you're looking for the inconsistencies. Just because they had some of the ball boys' texts, doesn't mean they didn't need Brady's. Brady didn't know what texts the ball boys gave up, and even if he gave up non-incriminating texts, they still could've presented an inconsistency. His best move to cover his own ass was to not cooperate/give up absolutely nothing, therefore not presenting any further inconsistencies. Brady spent the better part of a day answering every ? asked of him. The issue presented itself when they asked for his private phone contents which, absent a subpoena, he was advised, understandably so, not to provide them with.
Recommended Posts