Jump to content

Deflategate '16


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 107
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

 

Well, the problem is that Good Ole Rog stated it that way--that it was clearly a scheme to deflate footballs; he made no mention of failure to cooperate, destroying evidence, and lying during questioning being part of the equation. Had he done so, it would've been a lot easier to get the punishment to stick through the appeal process.

I haven't read it since last summer, but IIRC, Roger did a good job of pointing all this out in his summary report submitted to the court. But you're right, he should have trumpeted the same message to the media.

 

The Pats*** early decision to fire TweedleDee and TweedleDum(b) and thus making them off limits to further investigation, while brilliant on their part, was also a huge slap to the face of the league and I'm glad it wasn't tolerated.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I haven't read it since last summer, but IIRC, Roger did a good job of pointing all this out in his summary report submitted to the court. But you're right, he should have trumpeted the same message to the media.

 

The Pats*** early decision to fire TweedleDee and TweedleDum(b) and thus making them off limits to further investigation, while brilliant on their part, was also a huge slap to the face of the league and I'm glad it wasn't tolerated.

Wasn't the 'slap' of them rehiring them worse, though?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wasn't the 'slap' of them rehiring them worse, though?

Yeah, kind of, but the issue was moot at that point. The rehiring did underscore why they were fired in the first place; for the sole purpose of skirting the league's investigation which, especially in the light of their repeat offender status, was why they deserved and received the punishment for not cooperating.

GO BILLS!!!

Edited by K-9
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, kind of, but the issue was moot at that point. The rehiring did underscore why they were fired in the first place; for the sole purpose of skirting the league's investigation which, especially in the light of their repeat offender status, was why they deserved and received the punishment for not cooperating.

GO BILLS!!!

Yeah, that's s better way of saying what I was getting at.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is not indicative of what will happen in the Deflategate appeal, but yesterday the appellate court that will decide that case slighted the trial judge. That kind of thing is rare, and it means that the judge is on the appellate court's radar. Again, it doesn't suggest a result in the case we care about, but it's interesting nonetheless.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...