#DFG: Canceling the Noise
- Thread starter nattysez
- Start date
So Tommy Brady skates. "Always welcome Tom to come forward"
So, he offers up his emails, and Roger clears him from obstruction, finds no evidence of involvement, and therefore clears the Franchise's reputation.
Kraft deal
So, he offers up his emails, and Roger clears him from obstruction, finds no evidence of involvement, and therefore clears the Franchise's reputation.
Kraft deal
NavaHo said:
Then why does their re-instatement need to be approved by NFL Executive Vice President Troy Vincent?
CHB just asked something about Brady that was basically scoffed off, something along the lines of everyone has to follow the rules or whatever.
LIAR LIAR PANTS ON FIRENavaHo said:
What a despicable person. Clear insinuation is that the Pats suspended them because they were cheating. Fucking prick.
So Kraft "honorably" lays down his swords yesterday for Goodell. In response, the shithead calls Kraft a liar.
Well, he's OK enough with it to not pursue the matter further, but Kraft's OK-with-it-ness wasn't the part of SJH's argument I was supporting, nor was it the part of your post I took issue with. It was (what appeared to me to be) your airy dismissal of the loss of draft picks, saying that a lot of time they don't pan out anyway - and, well, that's just like Papi's at-bats.TheoShmeo said:
The Wells report - and Wells himself - maintains that the conduct of the league office was out of scope. If I recall correctly he stated that 'the report does not address these issues.'
And this is why Kraft's actions yesterdat were unacceptable. He only encouraged Goodell.cshea said:
"No, we never asked them to suspend the ballboys."
We did suggest to them that it would benefit them to suspend the ballboys, and our subsequent actions clearly showed that we at least encouraged them to do so, but no, we never asked them.
Goodell needs his own Straight Talk Translator, like Obama's Anger Translator.
We did suggest to them that it would benefit them to suspend the ballboys, and our subsequent actions clearly showed that we at least encouraged them to do so, but no, we never asked them.
Goodell needs his own Straight Talk Translator, like Obama's Anger Translator.
Mooch said:
Are you serious? Where do you guys come up with this stuff?
It's creative I guess but so outside of how the world works. Do you guys have these same insane thought about everyday life things or just New England Patriots-related issues?
When you take it out of context, well, you take it out of context...
We agree that losing the picks is BS and potentially harmful. I just don't see the loss in the context of this team, with Belichick and Caserio doing there thing overall, as something that will ruin anything. The degree of difficulty indeed has been dialed up. But does anyone really think these guys can't overcome it? Or that they wont?
We agree that losing the picks is BS and potentially harmful. I just don't see the loss in the context of this team, with Belichick and Caserio doing there thing overall, as something that will ruin anything. The degree of difficulty indeed has been dialed up. But does anyone really think these guys can't overcome it? Or that they wont?
I'd come to accept that laying down was the only choice Robert had, but has pissed me off. Kraft says for the betterment of the league and the other 31 teams, we'll stop with the dialogue and rhetoric. Then Goodell does this? Fuck that.Smiling Joe Hesketh said:
NavaHo said:
He's right. They asked them to suspend the equipment assistant and officials locker room attendant, not the ball boys. That'd be silly.
Just a platform for him to issue self praising talking points for him and the process. I am sure he was speaking for the courts to in describing the process
It doesn't ruin the 2016 or future seasons, but it sure is a handicap.
Im not convinced fighting further would have taken Goodell down a peg or three. My guess from public comments and Kraft's actions are that his view was that the owners were going to rally around Goodell, much like Kraft did during the Ray Rice fiasco.
Im not convinced fighting further would have taken Goodell down a peg or three. My guess from public comments and Kraft's actions are that his view was that the owners were going to rally around Goodell, much like Kraft did during the Ray Rice fiasco.
Yeah, I guess if that's factored into the average, then I suppose it makes sense. But if you find me someone who wants to pay $387 to buy by the ounce, I'll quit my job today.
What it comes down to is that whatever way I read Kraft's statement it reads like a de facto admission of guilt. His disagreements with the league over Deflategate are not only buried, but disavowed. They live on in his narrative in the form of Patriots fans' "polarizing rhetoric", with no greater claim to truth-value than the rhetoric of Patriots haters.
I agree with everyone here who thinks that Kraft's decision to not press further with challenges was the pragmatic, prudent thing to do, and certainly Kraft is in a position to know with more accuracy what the prudent thing to do is when dealing with "the partnership".
What I disagree with, and am dismayed by, is the extent of the bend-over manifest in his statement. It goes well beyond the conciliatory language that is expected and appropriate for such occasions of surrender. This excessively sycophantic tone leads one to suspect that Goodell really has the goods (in terms of evidence) on Deflategate and Beyond: i.e., that he's got Kraft by the balls.
I agree with everyone here who thinks that Kraft's decision to not press further with challenges was the pragmatic, prudent thing to do, and certainly Kraft is in a position to know with more accuracy what the prudent thing to do is when dealing with "the partnership".
What I disagree with, and am dismayed by, is the extent of the bend-over manifest in his statement. It goes well beyond the conciliatory language that is expected and appropriate for such occasions of surrender. This excessively sycophantic tone leads one to suspect that Goodell really has the goods (in terms of evidence) on Deflategate and Beyond: i.e., that he's got Kraft by the balls.
Hoya81 said:
Sure Roger, we'll hand over Brady's and you can hand over yours in terms of Deflategate. Then we can all be on a level playing field, while we're at it, where's that Kensil guy's phone?
Here's a verbate from Roger today:
ROGER GOODELL, NFL COMMISSIONER
2:25:16 PM
We had a good couple days of meetings here-some of which you heard about I’ll tell you about the most significant for us. One is the PAT rule, this is a rule that we have been focused on for quite some time, it’s a play that we don’t think is exciting, a play that could be improved. We have competition committee made a recommendation on that to move it back to the 15 to kick the extra point and allow the defense to score. We think those changes are terrific, and we thought of other ideas in the context that have. But the bottom line on that, the ownership would like us to do this in stages so we can see the impact of the changes and evaluate that as we go through the season. We had an update on super bowl 53 and super bowl 54 process, and I'm sure that you're aware of where we are on that. But we have Miami and L.A. and Tampa Bay who are our four final cities. And if there's a team in Los Angeles, that that could be included in the process.
2:26:39 PM
So that is again the possibility. And we talked about L.A. for an extensive time this morning. And we had an international update, again, the tremendous growth that we're seeing of the game on a global base, not just the UK. A great deal discussion on Mexico and Germany and South America this morning, so we're very positive on that. And a lot of updates on public safety. As you all know, we made significant changes in March, and we went through that in great detail so clubs understood how we were approaching that, and how we were using the ATT spotter in the connection of that, and as well as the visiting team physician, who is another resource to provide better care for our visiting staff when they come in from a visiting city.
2:27:39 pm
so if they need hospitalization or drugs along those lines, we'll have a physician that will expedite that and try to assist us on that basis we heard a report from the conduct committee. The conduct committee is met on a regular base, and it's being formed earlier this year. Mike has done a great job on the continuing education, and the reporting with our teams, and of course, our continuing effort on character and how that's going to be implemented in everything that we do this coming season and for the future. I think those are the key issues, and one final thing, I guess, a very important issue for us, which 1 stadium security. Making sure that we're doing everything that we can to make sure that our stadiums are secure from outside threat. But also secure in the sense of
2:28:48 PM
when we're in our stadiums, and our fans are having the best experience possible. We want to make sure that they're safe, and they have a positive experience. So that's an important initiative that we continue to work on. So I'll be happy to take your questions.
>> Rog, I'm sure that you're aware of what Robert Kraft told us yesterday. And did you have any concerns on how he would handle that, and they asked that you recuse yourself from the Brady appeal and will you do that?
>> The two things, the decision that Robert made was his decision. I admire and respect Robert as you all know. We have had plenty of discussions over the past weeks, and this was his initiative, and something in a he wanted to do. And I certainly admire the step that he took.
2:29:49 PM
We may disagree on things, but that's not unusual. That happens. And your second question, yeah, I've been focusing on the meetings, and I'm not up to date, other than the fact that I'm aware of that. We obviously, when we get back tomorrow, we will focus that and give full consideration, and make sure that we do the appropriate thing.
>> Roger, will Robert Kraft's decision for the patriots to accept the penalties will in any way affect Tom Brady's appeal?
>> No.
>> Wow allow Tom Brady a second chance to show cooperation by say turning over emails, and could that help appeal to you?
>> I'm not going to get into hypothetical. We have a process here that has
2:30:50 PM
been long established. And I look forward to hearing directly from Tom if there's new information that could be helpful to us to get this right. I want to hear directly from Tom that.
>> How do you address the question of how can you be fair hearing the appeal when you've already made judgment?
>> First off, it was an independent investigation by Ted wells, and he drew a conclusion of whether there was violation or not, and he drew the facts in the investigation, and I got the chance to read the report shortly before you did. And so we have been very transparent that. The second part, once we have the wells report, our staff, led by troy Vincent, who handles matters like this, began participating in the meetings, so I understood the discussion that they were having.
2:31:51 PM
Troy made a recommendation, and I authorized him to issue that as I do in every case.
>> Did the league and the patriots to suspend those staffers?
>> No.
>> When he comes back with the information in his report, with some of his conclusions, how did you scrutinize the report or sitenize his findings?
>> We can read the report and scrutinize it, and that's how we have the process. So issues are raised, either in the context of the appeal or outside of that. And you look at that. And what you want to do 1 get it right. I thought his report was very clear. It was comprehensive. But we're always open. If there's new information to get us to a better place.
2:32:53 PM
>> Rogers, Ted's report didn't look inward in terms of how it conducted the investigation early, and both with some of the media leaks, and the demeanor of folks early on. Do you feel as if the league has an obligation to be more transparent because the patriots received a level of bias from the outset?
>> Well, Tom, I think that Ted wells did address that in his report. And I think that he addressed it specifically when I engaged him to evaluate the league's conduct. To determine what we could have done differently. And I think that he made his -- he was very clear in the report. So he would disagree on that point. That's something, whenever we have an incident, we look to see how we could have done it differently and how to improve. And we'll continue to do that.
2:34:02 PM
>> Reporter: [ Unintelligible ].
>> As I say, we have given all of that to tedle and he has had the opportunity to evaluate that.
>> Roger, can you elaborate on the position -- can you elaborate on how the football provision for 54 -- how far up do you see it moving up?
>> If think move to Los Angeles, at that time, they could submit for super bowl 54, and that would be included in the billed process, so in fact, there would be four teams bidding on 54. And if that doesn't happen, there would be three teams bidding on that.
>> The window is something that is under my authority as
2:35:03 PM
commission, and something that I can adapt. We have had a great deal of discussion already about the pluses and minuses and the alternatives, and what's going on in the local markets. So in some ways, we're significantly farther than we have been in any location in the past. So we have the ability to move that date up and I have the ability to discuss it with the committee and the membership. And we also have the ability to shrink it, as far as the timeframe when somebody applies and when the league would vote and make a decision. So those are both things that I'm considering. I don't expect there to be any decision that. One the things that went to balance is what's happening in the local markets, to make sure that there's significant time for them to at least put into our context to try to make whatever advances, whatever proposals, and whatever determinations they can make.
2:36:09 PM
>> With the progress in L.A., do you think that it's inevitable that they will have at least one team in the future?
>> I think that there's significant progress, but I don't think it's inevitable. There's certainly momentum and opportunities, and Jim, I can't remember the last time we had two facilities that are actually titled and are being developed. That's a very positive development. And in fact, there are actually two more sites that have been entitled. But the two we're affection focusing on are the -- and I think that those are positive developments, but a lot more work has to be done.
>> Just a follow-up on St. Louis. What's your follow up on that as you know it at this point?
>> Yeah, we heard from St. Louis a couple of weeks ago, Jim. It's one of the things that we're working on, but there's
2:37:10 PM
tremendous progress going on there. And we're going to make sure that we give full evaluation and consideration. And we'll get back to them if we feel there are issues that need to be addressed.
>> Roger, how does it impact you personally and professional to have Tom Brady, one of the faces of the Schnell, suspended for four games?
>> Any time anyone is suspended from a game they love, it's difficult. And that decision comes after a great deal of thought and consideration, and recognizing that that's a difficult decision, and we're very careful with it and thoughtful with it, and I have great admiration and respect for Tom Brady. But the rules have to be enforced on an uniform basis, and they apply to everybody. Every club and every individual coach and every individual player, and that is something
2:38:10 PM
that we put the game ahead of everything.
>> Roger, you said that you're making progress, significant progress in L.A. And tremendous progress in St. Louis. How would you canning rise San Diego and Oakland some.
>> Well, I haven't had a chance. I know that the task force came out with on a proposal, I believe it was yesterday or in the last 24-48 hours, and I don't think that the staff has had a real opportunity to be able to evaluate that fairly. So I'm not going to characterize that, or give you any impact that, other than they have obviously done a great deal of work. We're going to consider that, and make sure that we get to them. Oakland, I have not heard directly from. And I don't know, and I do not have an update that. It's something that we have not seen anything to my knowledge of
2:39:12 PM
a specific proposal. I don't know if it's a point of frustration, but certainly a point of information.
>> Reporter: Roger, was there any discussion with respect to the pregame handling of footballs in the chain of command, and perhaps any changes to the rules?
>> You mean on our protocol?
>> Yes.
>> There were in the meetings in the last several days, because our office has had to establish what changes we want to make, getting the wells report, we want to look at that and evaluate that. And what are the appropriate changes to make to our protocol. I do anticipate that the changes will take place before the 2015 season, but we did not discuss that.
2:40:19 PM
>> Roger, after well's investigation, and 253 pages of his report, as appeals officer, what would you have to hear from Tom Brady to vacate his suspension?
>> This is a long process, and it goes back to commissioner rows el, and several labor agreements, and there's a process and place that went to follow. The key of course is to be able to allow any information that Tom Brady and his representatives have. I look forward to hearing directly from Tom on that. And is there any new information that he can bring more clarity to, or something that wasn't considered in the wells report? I'm not going to get into hype themselves, but that's the reason for the process, and we are going to understand the facts.
>> Having gun throw through the Mueller report and having a
2:41:19 PM
microscope that in the investigation, giving up the emails and texts and being open and transparent in that way, did that have an impact on the patriots and how they handled their emails with the private communication?
>> I'm not sure that I understand your question.
>> When there's an investigation in the league, there's an open book, and when Brady was asked to provide his stuff, he resisted in giving some of his private communication, and did that have anything to do with the penalties imposed and the sanctions that were done?
>> I think we're very clear in Tory's letter that the non-cooperation was a factor in the discipline. Absolutely. You point out that in director Muller's investigation, there was full cooperation, and he had access to every bit of email and what everyone in the office had.
And there were no restrictions that whatsoever. So we do expect to have that in the investigation. It's an important part of it.
2:42:21 PM
And when there's full cooperation, that is certainly part of the discipline.
>> I got it.
>> Now that you have the Mueller report and the wells report. Do you expect that the league will continue to have independent investigator? Is that something that we can expect in the future?
>> We're going to do it when we feel it's necessary to do it. We had several other investigation that's went on in the spring, as you know, that had competitive of violations of our rules, and our game rules with other clubs. They were done internally and not done independently. Tom raised issues of Independence, and we felt it was important to do in the case of the patriots.
2:43:21 PM
We didn't want anyone to feel there was bias and we let someone independently to do that. The same with Muller. There's no way that I do an investigation myself that would be appropriate. So when it's appropriate to do that and have that Independence, we're going to do that, but we'll continue to handle these cases internally as we feel it can be done appropriately and fairly and justly.
>> Has there been a day that has been determined to have the Brady appeal? And initially, when you were asked about the NFL's request to have yourself recused from the proceedings, you didn't answer directly, but you answered twice that you want to hear directly from Tom if there's any new evidence, and it sounds like that's how you're going to handle it.
>> The specific question asked,
2:44:22 PM
I haven't had the chance it understand, and I believe that it came in yesterday, and I've been focused on the league meeting. Said when we get back tomorrow, I'll give due consideration and we'll handle it appropriately. So those are things that I need to get back with the staff. And I don't know if there's even a date set for the hearing. I've just been focused on matters at hand here.
>> Reporter: Philosophically, why is it important for you to be the appeals officer for the Brady case, as opposed to what you've done in other situations, designate someone else to hear it?
>> Well, one of the primary responsibilities of the commissioner is to protect the integrity of the game of football. And that's my job. I made this clear to the super bowl. It's our job to determine if there are of violations of our
2:45:23 PM
rules, of our policies, of our procedures, and to enforce those. And it's my job here to make sure that we're doing everything to protect the integrity of the game. Protecting our policies and procedures. And we have a process that has been negotiated with the union, in place for decades. And so it's my responsibility. And it’s something that we have in place for a long time. And we're going to do it that way. Unless there's some other factor that I'm not aware of, which we'll deal with. Again, I haven't been able to see any of the issues that the union may have sent in the last 4 hours.
>> Roger, you mentioned international S Mexico, germy, would that be for preseason games?
>> Particularly in Germany, we know there's an interest in
2:46:24 PM
playing a game over there, and I think that there's a renewed interest in playing a game in Mexico, a preseason game. And I think that we'll evaluate that. There has been some interest in playing a pro bowl in Rio. So we're going to evaluate all of those there's a growing passion to our game globally, and we want to respond in the right way, so we can continue to grow this great game. We're excited about where we are, and excited about the passion for our game. And taking it to the world.
>> Rog, I have two questions regarding Oakland and the raiders. One, regarding the city of Oakland and hearing from them? A certain timeline where you really need to have a proposal or see something? And secondly, mark Davis said yesterday, he had no interest in sharing the stadium, which can
2:47:25 PM
accommodate two teams. And do you see a future scenario where it might make sense to have the raiders --
>> It's going to have to be made. Mark wants a long-term stadium solution, I think that's what he has always been focused on. He would like to have it here in the bay area in Oakland and that's what he has been working toward. So I think his priorities are clear. The first part of your question, the deadline on the time?
We don't have a deadline, but this is not a new issue that we're dealing with here. This is something that the raiders have been working on the stadium for years. This is something that has been publicly debate. We need to have a promotional on how they're going to be able to keep the raiders here in Oakland, and do it on a basis that's not only good for the communities but good for team
2:48:27 PM
long-term. So that proposal is necessary to have.
>> Thank you.
ROGER GOODELL, NFL COMMISSIONER
2:25:16 PM
We had a good couple days of meetings here-some of which you heard about I’ll tell you about the most significant for us. One is the PAT rule, this is a rule that we have been focused on for quite some time, it’s a play that we don’t think is exciting, a play that could be improved. We have competition committee made a recommendation on that to move it back to the 15 to kick the extra point and allow the defense to score. We think those changes are terrific, and we thought of other ideas in the context that have. But the bottom line on that, the ownership would like us to do this in stages so we can see the impact of the changes and evaluate that as we go through the season. We had an update on super bowl 53 and super bowl 54 process, and I'm sure that you're aware of where we are on that. But we have Miami and L.A. and Tampa Bay who are our four final cities. And if there's a team in Los Angeles, that that could be included in the process.
2:26:39 PM
So that is again the possibility. And we talked about L.A. for an extensive time this morning. And we had an international update, again, the tremendous growth that we're seeing of the game on a global base, not just the UK. A great deal discussion on Mexico and Germany and South America this morning, so we're very positive on that. And a lot of updates on public safety. As you all know, we made significant changes in March, and we went through that in great detail so clubs understood how we were approaching that, and how we were using the ATT spotter in the connection of that, and as well as the visiting team physician, who is another resource to provide better care for our visiting staff when they come in from a visiting city.
2:27:39 pm
so if they need hospitalization or drugs along those lines, we'll have a physician that will expedite that and try to assist us on that basis we heard a report from the conduct committee. The conduct committee is met on a regular base, and it's being formed earlier this year. Mike has done a great job on the continuing education, and the reporting with our teams, and of course, our continuing effort on character and how that's going to be implemented in everything that we do this coming season and for the future. I think those are the key issues, and one final thing, I guess, a very important issue for us, which 1 stadium security. Making sure that we're doing everything that we can to make sure that our stadiums are secure from outside threat. But also secure in the sense of
2:28:48 PM
when we're in our stadiums, and our fans are having the best experience possible. We want to make sure that they're safe, and they have a positive experience. So that's an important initiative that we continue to work on. So I'll be happy to take your questions.
>> Rog, I'm sure that you're aware of what Robert Kraft told us yesterday. And did you have any concerns on how he would handle that, and they asked that you recuse yourself from the Brady appeal and will you do that?
>> The two things, the decision that Robert made was his decision. I admire and respect Robert as you all know. We have had plenty of discussions over the past weeks, and this was his initiative, and something in a he wanted to do. And I certainly admire the step that he took.
2:29:49 PM
We may disagree on things, but that's not unusual. That happens. And your second question, yeah, I've been focusing on the meetings, and I'm not up to date, other than the fact that I'm aware of that. We obviously, when we get back tomorrow, we will focus that and give full consideration, and make sure that we do the appropriate thing.
>> Roger, will Robert Kraft's decision for the patriots to accept the penalties will in any way affect Tom Brady's appeal?
>> No.
>> Wow allow Tom Brady a second chance to show cooperation by say turning over emails, and could that help appeal to you?
>> I'm not going to get into hypothetical. We have a process here that has
2:30:50 PM
been long established. And I look forward to hearing directly from Tom if there's new information that could be helpful to us to get this right. I want to hear directly from Tom that.
>> How do you address the question of how can you be fair hearing the appeal when you've already made judgment?
>> First off, it was an independent investigation by Ted wells, and he drew a conclusion of whether there was violation or not, and he drew the facts in the investigation, and I got the chance to read the report shortly before you did. And so we have been very transparent that. The second part, once we have the wells report, our staff, led by troy Vincent, who handles matters like this, began participating in the meetings, so I understood the discussion that they were having.
2:31:51 PM
Troy made a recommendation, and I authorized him to issue that as I do in every case.
>> Did the league and the patriots to suspend those staffers?
>> No.
>> When he comes back with the information in his report, with some of his conclusions, how did you scrutinize the report or sitenize his findings?
>> We can read the report and scrutinize it, and that's how we have the process. So issues are raised, either in the context of the appeal or outside of that. And you look at that. And what you want to do 1 get it right. I thought his report was very clear. It was comprehensive. But we're always open. If there's new information to get us to a better place.
2:32:53 PM
>> Rogers, Ted's report didn't look inward in terms of how it conducted the investigation early, and both with some of the media leaks, and the demeanor of folks early on. Do you feel as if the league has an obligation to be more transparent because the patriots received a level of bias from the outset?
>> Well, Tom, I think that Ted wells did address that in his report. And I think that he addressed it specifically when I engaged him to evaluate the league's conduct. To determine what we could have done differently. And I think that he made his -- he was very clear in the report. So he would disagree on that point. That's something, whenever we have an incident, we look to see how we could have done it differently and how to improve. And we'll continue to do that.
2:34:02 PM
>> Reporter: [ Unintelligible ].
>> As I say, we have given all of that to tedle and he has had the opportunity to evaluate that.
>> Roger, can you elaborate on the position -- can you elaborate on how the football provision for 54 -- how far up do you see it moving up?
>> If think move to Los Angeles, at that time, they could submit for super bowl 54, and that would be included in the billed process, so in fact, there would be four teams bidding on 54. And if that doesn't happen, there would be three teams bidding on that.
>> The window is something that is under my authority as
2:35:03 PM
commission, and something that I can adapt. We have had a great deal of discussion already about the pluses and minuses and the alternatives, and what's going on in the local markets. So in some ways, we're significantly farther than we have been in any location in the past. So we have the ability to move that date up and I have the ability to discuss it with the committee and the membership. And we also have the ability to shrink it, as far as the timeframe when somebody applies and when the league would vote and make a decision. So those are both things that I'm considering. I don't expect there to be any decision that. One the things that went to balance is what's happening in the local markets, to make sure that there's significant time for them to at least put into our context to try to make whatever advances, whatever proposals, and whatever determinations they can make.
2:36:09 PM
>> With the progress in L.A., do you think that it's inevitable that they will have at least one team in the future?
>> I think that there's significant progress, but I don't think it's inevitable. There's certainly momentum and opportunities, and Jim, I can't remember the last time we had two facilities that are actually titled and are being developed. That's a very positive development. And in fact, there are actually two more sites that have been entitled. But the two we're affection focusing on are the -- and I think that those are positive developments, but a lot more work has to be done.
>> Just a follow-up on St. Louis. What's your follow up on that as you know it at this point?
>> Yeah, we heard from St. Louis a couple of weeks ago, Jim. It's one of the things that we're working on, but there's
2:37:10 PM
tremendous progress going on there. And we're going to make sure that we give full evaluation and consideration. And we'll get back to them if we feel there are issues that need to be addressed.
>> Roger, how does it impact you personally and professional to have Tom Brady, one of the faces of the Schnell, suspended for four games?
>> Any time anyone is suspended from a game they love, it's difficult. And that decision comes after a great deal of thought and consideration, and recognizing that that's a difficult decision, and we're very careful with it and thoughtful with it, and I have great admiration and respect for Tom Brady. But the rules have to be enforced on an uniform basis, and they apply to everybody. Every club and every individual coach and every individual player, and that is something
2:38:10 PM
that we put the game ahead of everything.
>> Roger, you said that you're making progress, significant progress in L.A. And tremendous progress in St. Louis. How would you canning rise San Diego and Oakland some.
>> Well, I haven't had a chance. I know that the task force came out with on a proposal, I believe it was yesterday or in the last 24-48 hours, and I don't think that the staff has had a real opportunity to be able to evaluate that fairly. So I'm not going to characterize that, or give you any impact that, other than they have obviously done a great deal of work. We're going to consider that, and make sure that we get to them. Oakland, I have not heard directly from. And I don't know, and I do not have an update that. It's something that we have not seen anything to my knowledge of
2:39:12 PM
a specific proposal. I don't know if it's a point of frustration, but certainly a point of information.
>> Reporter: Roger, was there any discussion with respect to the pregame handling of footballs in the chain of command, and perhaps any changes to the rules?
>> You mean on our protocol?
>> Yes.
>> There were in the meetings in the last several days, because our office has had to establish what changes we want to make, getting the wells report, we want to look at that and evaluate that. And what are the appropriate changes to make to our protocol. I do anticipate that the changes will take place before the 2015 season, but we did not discuss that.
2:40:19 PM
>> Roger, after well's investigation, and 253 pages of his report, as appeals officer, what would you have to hear from Tom Brady to vacate his suspension?
>> This is a long process, and it goes back to commissioner rows el, and several labor agreements, and there's a process and place that went to follow. The key of course is to be able to allow any information that Tom Brady and his representatives have. I look forward to hearing directly from Tom on that. And is there any new information that he can bring more clarity to, or something that wasn't considered in the wells report? I'm not going to get into hype themselves, but that's the reason for the process, and we are going to understand the facts.
>> Having gun throw through the Mueller report and having a
2:41:19 PM
microscope that in the investigation, giving up the emails and texts and being open and transparent in that way, did that have an impact on the patriots and how they handled their emails with the private communication?
>> I'm not sure that I understand your question.
>> When there's an investigation in the league, there's an open book, and when Brady was asked to provide his stuff, he resisted in giving some of his private communication, and did that have anything to do with the penalties imposed and the sanctions that were done?
>> I think we're very clear in Tory's letter that the non-cooperation was a factor in the discipline. Absolutely. You point out that in director Muller's investigation, there was full cooperation, and he had access to every bit of email and what everyone in the office had.
And there were no restrictions that whatsoever. So we do expect to have that in the investigation. It's an important part of it.
2:42:21 PM
And when there's full cooperation, that is certainly part of the discipline.
>> I got it.
>> Now that you have the Mueller report and the wells report. Do you expect that the league will continue to have independent investigator? Is that something that we can expect in the future?
>> We're going to do it when we feel it's necessary to do it. We had several other investigation that's went on in the spring, as you know, that had competitive of violations of our rules, and our game rules with other clubs. They were done internally and not done independently. Tom raised issues of Independence, and we felt it was important to do in the case of the patriots.
2:43:21 PM
We didn't want anyone to feel there was bias and we let someone independently to do that. The same with Muller. There's no way that I do an investigation myself that would be appropriate. So when it's appropriate to do that and have that Independence, we're going to do that, but we'll continue to handle these cases internally as we feel it can be done appropriately and fairly and justly.
>> Has there been a day that has been determined to have the Brady appeal? And initially, when you were asked about the NFL's request to have yourself recused from the proceedings, you didn't answer directly, but you answered twice that you want to hear directly from Tom if there's any new evidence, and it sounds like that's how you're going to handle it.
>> The specific question asked,
2:44:22 PM
I haven't had the chance it understand, and I believe that it came in yesterday, and I've been focused on the league meeting. Said when we get back tomorrow, I'll give due consideration and we'll handle it appropriately. So those are things that I need to get back with the staff. And I don't know if there's even a date set for the hearing. I've just been focused on matters at hand here.
>> Reporter: Philosophically, why is it important for you to be the appeals officer for the Brady case, as opposed to what you've done in other situations, designate someone else to hear it?
>> Well, one of the primary responsibilities of the commissioner is to protect the integrity of the game of football. And that's my job. I made this clear to the super bowl. It's our job to determine if there are of violations of our
2:45:23 PM
rules, of our policies, of our procedures, and to enforce those. And it's my job here to make sure that we're doing everything to protect the integrity of the game. Protecting our policies and procedures. And we have a process that has been negotiated with the union, in place for decades. And so it's my responsibility. And it’s something that we have in place for a long time. And we're going to do it that way. Unless there's some other factor that I'm not aware of, which we'll deal with. Again, I haven't been able to see any of the issues that the union may have sent in the last 4 hours.
>> Roger, you mentioned international S Mexico, germy, would that be for preseason games?
>> Particularly in Germany, we know there's an interest in
2:46:24 PM
playing a game over there, and I think that there's a renewed interest in playing a game in Mexico, a preseason game. And I think that we'll evaluate that. There has been some interest in playing a pro bowl in Rio. So we're going to evaluate all of those there's a growing passion to our game globally, and we want to respond in the right way, so we can continue to grow this great game. We're excited about where we are, and excited about the passion for our game. And taking it to the world.
>> Rog, I have two questions regarding Oakland and the raiders. One, regarding the city of Oakland and hearing from them? A certain timeline where you really need to have a proposal or see something? And secondly, mark Davis said yesterday, he had no interest in sharing the stadium, which can
2:47:25 PM
accommodate two teams. And do you see a future scenario where it might make sense to have the raiders --
>> It's going to have to be made. Mark wants a long-term stadium solution, I think that's what he has always been focused on. He would like to have it here in the bay area in Oakland and that's what he has been working toward. So I think his priorities are clear. The first part of your question, the deadline on the time?
We don't have a deadline, but this is not a new issue that we're dealing with here. This is something that the raiders have been working on the stadium for years. This is something that has been publicly debate. We need to have a promotional on how they're going to be able to keep the raiders here in Oakland, and do it on a basis that's not only good for the communities but good for team
2:48:27 PM
long-term. So that proposal is necessary to have.
>> Thank you.
After simmering on this for a full day and thinking thoughtfully (in other words, not carelessly), I'm actually ok with Kraft's move. I'm still fucking pissed about the draft picks and it really sucks to have the organization that I root for dragged through the mud and made an example of (for a 2nd time), but there really was no avenue for Kraft to pursue that wouldn't have pissed off the rest of the league and that most likely would have gotten us any closer to getting those picks back.
His news conference has really thrown water on the fire and has done exactly what he intended it to do. I haven't seen nearly the attention paid to this today than the last few weeks. The waters are calming and it's probably best for all involved. It's no longer front page news and it will all go away soon. Mission accomplished.
His news conference has really thrown water on the fire and has done exactly what he intended it to do. I haven't seen nearly the attention paid to this today than the last few weeks. The waters are calming and it's probably best for all involved. It's no longer front page news and it will all go away soon. Mission accomplished.
Here's the original context, so maybe we each can see where the other is coming from:TheoShmeo said:
I think I'm in agreement with the middle position taken by Stitch01 and others. It won't "ruin" 2016 or subsequent seasons, as you say, but it's nonetheless a significant handicap which can't be dismissed with, "Hey we blow picks all the time anyway," - because we now have two fewer opportunities to blow picks (or get them right) over the next two seasons. Maybe the issue lies in the definitions of "ruin" and "fatal," and we've actually been in complete alignment all along otherwise.
A guy caught on video beating his fiancée.allstonite said:
A guy indicted for assault and battery.
A guy who beat his child.
And a guy who "more probably than not" had a "general awareness" that maybe two schleps may have been tampering with a half pound of air pressure in footballs.
Uh.... One of these things is not like the others.
^We don't lose the cap space, right?
I know nothing about the NFL cap and I'd imagine that picks tend to be more efficient uses of $$$, but I'd think it's not going to impact the roster in a huge way.
Yes. I'm very pissed at Kraft. RG is a slime. He'll shake your hand and then stab you in the back... which it looks like he's doing again, today. I wanted the entire NFL dragged through the mud - daily stories about this, whatever. I would like to see Gillette security completely ignore any sign/banner restrictions for the entire season and just let the Pats' fans go crazy with Deflategate stuff.
I know nothing about the NFL cap and I'd imagine that picks tend to be more efficient uses of $$$, but I'd think it's not going to impact the roster in a huge way.
Yes. I'm very pissed at Kraft. RG is a slime. He'll shake your hand and then stab you in the back... which it looks like he's doing again, today. I wanted the entire NFL dragged through the mud - daily stories about this, whatever. I would like to see Gillette security completely ignore any sign/banner restrictions for the entire season and just let the Pats' fans go crazy with Deflategate stuff.
Roger states that everyone must play be the rules. So when does the Aaron Rodgers investigation into over-inflating balls begin? They don't even need Ted Wells--Aaron confessed to the albino monk Phil Sims.
Does he get 4 games as well, or only 2?
Does he get 4 games as well, or only 2?
It amazes me how easily and comfortably the media just slide into stupid mode when it comes to the Pats and this story. You'd think the Pats bombed Pearl Harbor, kidnapped Nigerian girls and neglected to spoiler tag the end of Mad Men. Is there anything else they'd like to tack on to Foxboro's House of Horrors this week? The league and the fans and the commissioner are all fully on board with bashing the signature NFL franchise of this era over any slight no matter what the cost. It's beyond absurd.
Yeah, I don't think we're really arguing much. I agree that losing the picks is very important. (And total BS). I just don't view it as ruinous or fatal or anything along those scary lines. And I don't think you do, either.
One string the league mighy not want pulled is ticket scalping that includes team employees..They certainly werent interested in talking or inteviewing JJs friend who was moving McNallys tickets.There also could be concern about a thriving black market in memoribilia that likewise involves team personnel.
Red(s)HawksFan said:
Pats: You guys are suspended.
NFL: Good call, Pats. Also - don't try to reinstate them without our approval.
This isn't hard people.
If losing his appeal was all that was at stake, I'm convinced Kraft would not have given in. It seems pretty clear to me that Kraft showed up at the meetings and saw what he was afraid he'd see: no real allies in this fight. And without real allies, you aren't knocking Goodell down one peg, much less three. You just aren't. If anything, you're probably emboldening Goodell in the eyes of other owners and doing additional harm to your own brand (both the team's and the family's).Smiling Joe Hesketh said:
I know he's a gleeful troll, but I keep coming back to the anonymous quote in the Shaughnessy piece by the owner of the "vaunted NFL franchise":
No sane reading of the report suggests that the league really has anything on them, much less enough. Which leads me to conclude one of two things: either these other owners are, in their heart of hearts, simply bitter and resentful of the Patriots' success, or, as some have posted, that the league was prepared to go even harder after the Patriots somehow -- either with additional punishment on the the PSI infraction or perhaps on another fishing expedition altogether.
Regardless, you don't have to be a tinfoil hat wearer or a Kraft apologist to realize that there was the potential to do greater damage to the team if they pursued this than if they didn't.
The correct time for Kraft to make the decision about whether to go scorched-earth, or whether to take a circumspect and respectful approach, was before holding an outraged press conference swearing to get to the bottom of this, promising full transparency, denying everything, and demanding an apology.tims4wins said:
Why are the Kraft apologists the only ones who don't see that?
So here's the real problem with the system. Roger can dole out any penalty he wants. Obviously. And then he can tell them if you don't accept it quietly, I'll simply tack on more.
And there's no redress because he is both the prosecutor and judge in each case if he wants to be?
In what world is such a system even remotely ok? In what world is such a system NOT set up to be incredibly corrupt?
And there's no redress because he is both the prosecutor and judge in each case if he wants to be?
In what world is such a system even remotely ok? In what world is such a system NOT set up to be incredibly corrupt?
Yea, that's my exact problem with it as well. There's absolutely no point in having guidelines on penalties cause Goodell is going to do whatever he wants to do anyway, and it can't be challenged when he does that.ivanvamp said:
I wonder if there has ever been a more hated person in Boston sports history.
That's easy to say now, but the strong stances by Belichick and Kraft - along with the commission of the Wells investigation - essentially put the issue to bed in the run up to the Super Bowl. The issue quieted down significantly until the Wells Report came out. I think Kraft basically did what he had to do at both ends of this, and with the same intention: to put the issue behind him so the franchise could move forward.yep said: