#DFG: Canceling the Noise
- Thread starter nattysez
- Start date
One of the ESPN NFL guys (Schefter or Mort, don't remember which one) was on Mike & Mike a little while ago. Said it went really, really well for Brady, and that the Wells report is pretty much universally considered now to be flawed. No proof at all that TB 'ordered the Code Red'. Said that the commissioner does not want to go to court about this. He speculated that the best course might be for Goodell to vacate the suspension and issue a statement validating Brady's innocence, but ding him one game for failing to cooperate with investigators.
JimD said:
Which may sound good, but why hit him with one game for THAT? Brady's record is impeccable. It is not even clear that he "failed to cooperate with investigators". That's Wells' take on it, but I'm sure it's not Brady's take. Moreover, in recent years we have two prime examples of teams or players "failing to cooperate" with an investigation:
- 2010, Brett Favre. Here is language the NFL used to describe Favre (see: http://www.foxsports.com/nfl/story/brett-favre-faces-fine-in-jenn-sterger-scandal-122910):
"was not candid in several respects during the investigation."
"his failure to cooperate with the investigation in a forthcoming manner."
Those words sound familiar? They should. Here's what the NFL said about Brady (http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap3000000492190/article/nfl-releases-statement-on-patriots-violations):
"not fully candid during the investigation."
"failed to cooperate fully with the investigation.”
What did Favre get for a penalty? $50,000 fine. Docking Brady one game would not only cost him and the team a game, obviously, but also close to $500,000 in lost salary. Why should Brady get TEN TIMES the penalty Favre got for doing (allegedly) the exact same thing?
- 2012 Chargers, during their ball-tampering investigation. They didn't turn over the sticky towels (yuck) to the NFL. Tried to hide the evidence. Got caught. Their penalty? A $20,000 fine.
Again, how can these other players/teams, DURING GOODELL'S TENURE (we're not talking about something that happened in 1987) be doing the same thing as Brady and only be fined $50k and $20k, while Brady, a man with impeccable credentials, is hit with a one-game suspension and the loss of nearly $500,000?
Moreover, if Goodell "validates Brady's innocence", as Schefter or Mort suggests, then that means that this entire thing really did not happen, right? And if it really did not happen, how can Goodell in good conscience (hahaha, I know) actually leave the TEAM penalties in place? For something that DID NOT HAPPEN?
Or, as pappymojo succinctly and more eloquently put it:
pappymojo said:
Which hopefully Brady would take to court because I would think that's an easier case than the science.
"I sat through 5 hours of interview with Wells. 11 hours worth of appeal. They have the relevant texts from the team employees. I'm not turning over my phone because I'm a union guy and precedence. How have I not cooperated?"
"I sat through 5 hours of interview with Wells. 11 hours worth of appeal. They have the relevant texts from the team employees. I'm not turning over my phone because I'm a union guy and precedence. How have I not cooperated?"
I have no clue what's going to happen, since Goodell is like the downed electrical wire just flopping randomly all over the place. But......once again....IMO, "generally aware" isn't a much greater quantum of guilt than "not aware" (and it's signiciantly less than "he ordered it.").
I think Goodell could say he: 1)was convinced by Brady that he wasn't "generally aware" of the methods by which the McN and Jas tried to comply with his perfectly legal wishes that the balls be right at 12.5. Because that's the issue here. Not the alleged deflation itself, but the post-inspection timing of it. This was Brady's hearing. Not the ballboys'; and it remains somewhat consistent with penalizing the team. 2)regarding the science, given Brady's unawareness, he doesn't really have to go into whether Wells's science was bad. That at least keeps him from acknowledging a $5M waste.
As for the 'cheatriots' stuff.....get used to it and get over it. A co-worker who mutters that stuff might as well be walking around saying "my cock is biggger than yours." If those types of people bother you, move to Mars. Short of video of Goodell waiting in the bathroom for McNally, chaining him to a radiator and deflating balls himself*, nothing will change the narrative of "they cheated," or its mirror image, "Goodell caved to his buddy Kraft." Any result keeps thus half the ESPN-bots happy, which is all thats needed to keep the eyballs clicking, which is all that ESPN cares about.
*And even then, Spygate would be used as proof of the Patriots using superior video skills to have invented the Goodell video.
I think Goodell could say he: 1)was convinced by Brady that he wasn't "generally aware" of the methods by which the McN and Jas tried to comply with his perfectly legal wishes that the balls be right at 12.5. Because that's the issue here. Not the alleged deflation itself, but the post-inspection timing of it. This was Brady's hearing. Not the ballboys'; and it remains somewhat consistent with penalizing the team. 2)regarding the science, given Brady's unawareness, he doesn't really have to go into whether Wells's science was bad. That at least keeps him from acknowledging a $5M waste.
As for the 'cheatriots' stuff.....get used to it and get over it. A co-worker who mutters that stuff might as well be walking around saying "my cock is biggger than yours." If those types of people bother you, move to Mars. Short of video of Goodell waiting in the bathroom for McNally, chaining him to a radiator and deflating balls himself*, nothing will change the narrative of "they cheated," or its mirror image, "Goodell caved to his buddy Kraft." Any result keeps thus half the ESPN-bots happy, which is all thats needed to keep the eyballs clicking, which is all that ESPN cares about.
*And even then, Spygate would be used as proof of the Patriots using superior video skills to have invented the Goodell video.
Another question for the lawyers- what happens if Goodell does this? Basically washes his hands of anything in the Wells report aside from the fact that Brady didn't turn over his phone, knocks back the suspension to one game, and Brady still goes to court? Does the scope of that trial change? Would the entirety of the Wells report, and the apparent nefarious nature of its very existence still be called into question? Or would the discussion really be limited to just the fact that Brady didn't turn over his phone, with Goodell once again avoiding any in-depth look into his buffoonery?
Florio sounds a little butthurt about ESPN getting inside info that Florio didn't, but nevertheless, he nailed that column. The Mort tweet is Ground Zero for public opinion on this whole sad affair and the NFL's silence during those 2 crucial weeks was a catastrophe for the Pats and Brady.
Does anyone think that Goodell will reach out to Tom, perhaps through an intermediary, and offer to knock the suspension down to a game or two, but only if Tom agrees not to go to Court?
If I was in Goodell's shoes, I would be leery of going down to a game only to have Tom fight me in Court.
Apologies if this has been discussed already. I don't recall having seen it but I have not read all 24 books of the Brady Chronicles here.
If I was in Goodell's shoes, I would be leery of going down to a game only to have Tom fight me in Court.
Apologies if this has been discussed already. I don't recall having seen it but I have not read all 24 books of the Brady Chronicles here.
Doubt that will happen since TB's camp has made it known they are going for full exoneration here.TheoShmeo said:
TheoShmeo said:
The only intermediary would be Brady's lawyers. I do think that the chance of the NFL making such an offer is more probable than not. My hunch is that Brady's starting & ending point is "no games or I go to court."
Also, I think the Chronicles are in scroll form, rather than books.
It was Sal Pal on Mike & Mike this morning. He said he wasn't basing his opinion on any inside info, just what he thinks should happen at this point.
Sal Pal also indicated that he expects a decision from Goodell pretty soon because this is Tom Brady & the New England Patriots. (I have no idea what that means). In any event, this was the most ESPN related programming I've watched since DeflateGate became A Thing. In fairness, I was mainly watching because Chad Ford was on and who doesn't enjoy NBA draft talk...
- Goodell exonerates Brady of cheating in a letter.
- Brady is suspended for 1 game for lack of cooperation.
- Win for the NFL because they still punish Brady for something.
- Win for Brady because he has a written exoneration to protect his legacy.
- He said neither side wants this to go to court.
Sal Pal also indicated that he expects a decision from Goodell pretty soon because this is Tom Brady & the New England Patriots. (I have no idea what that means). In any event, this was the most ESPN related programming I've watched since DeflateGate became A Thing. In fairness, I was mainly watching because Chad Ford was on and who doesn't enjoy NBA draft talk...
He'd have to go through the union or he'd be committing an unfair labor practice under the NLRA. Employers (which would include a representative of a multi-employer bargaining group) cannot deal directly with employees to resolve grievances.TheoShmeo said:
EL Jeffe said:
Doesn't work for me. That means he gets a game suspension for non cooperation which, evidently, is not turning over his cell phone which the CBA doesn't force him to do. He sets a bad precedent for other players. He cooperated, he met with Wells for hours. Dropping the penalty to something way too big just because the starting point was WAY, WAY too big isn't a satisfactory conclusion.
See you in court, Rog.
I feel cautiously optimistic from all the noise out there from Sal Pal, other ESPNers, Florio, etc... Things seem to have gone Brady's way. However, every single time I have felt the tiniest bit of optimism about anything in this entire saga the exact opposite has happened. Every time I feel good about this, something so stupid and illogical happens that I want to build myself a rocket ship and blast off of this rock full of idiots and try to find a new sane place to live. So basically my positive feelings are now making me terrified. The NFL is a fucked up place.
EL Jeffe said:
This is hysterical. It has always been "Tom Brady and the New England Patriots" yet here we are in late June still talking about something that may or may not have happened in January.
I have to think that Brady might be Ok with a 1 game suspension but that NHLPA would not be.
Just out of curiosity, could Brady opt to serve a 1 game suspension AND continue his appeal, or must be do one or the other? If suspension was overruled he could presumably recover his lost salary.
Just out of curiosity, could Brady opt to serve a 1 game suspension AND continue his appeal, or must be do one or the other? If suspension was overruled he could presumably recover his lost salary.
Let's assume that TB12 was a compelling and credible witness yesterday. If you are his legal/PR team, do you build on this and have him sit for a long interview (not with Jim Gray, for God's sake) in which he addresses the claims and hope to move the needle of public opinion while this thing continues to pend before Goodell? Or do you leave well enough alone for now, understanding full well that this might all end up in court and that there are risks associated with any public statement while this is unresolved?
I have to think that Brady might be Ok with a 1 game suspension but that NHLPA would not be.
Just out of curiosity, could Brady opt to serve a 1 game suspension AND continue his appeal, or must be do one or the other? If suspension was overruled he could presumably recover his lost salary.
Just out of curiosity, could Brady opt to serve a 1 game suspension AND continue his appeal, or must be do one or the other? If suspension was overruled he could presumably recover his lost salary.
In terms of his appeal and a possible federal court petition, talking more has zero upside and significant downside. If you think you made a compelling case, why run the risk of antagonizing Goodell?jmcc5400 said:
Eddie Jurak said:
The suspension doesn't take effect until September. So if Brady goes to court the day after Goodell annolunces the decision with teh new suspension, there is no formal "acceptance." Either Brady timely files in Fed Court or he doesn't. *if* Brady doesn;t try to stay/enjoin the suspension pending the Fed Ct action, and then serves it, the NFL might argue that the case is moot, but Brady would argueas you say, that he should get his $$$ back. Also, there are ancillary considerations, like if Brady *wins* in Fed Ct. his next offense would be his first.
jmcc5400 said:
I'm not changing my view that the "public needle" will never be moved. I dont see any advantage to such an interview. There will always be some mildly influential talking head who says, "that out-of-place nostril hair suggests he's lying." And it's always been my view that the best lawyers do their best talking in court. Kessler would strongly advise against it.
EL Jeffe said:
If it gets knocked down to one game why would TB be worried about missing gameS in the middle of the season?
Me too. If he got 1 game, I think he should take it and have this thing over. Public opinion on this will never change, it's too late and who cares anyways. Goodell reducing his own penalty would be victory enough if you ask me. If the grounds are failure to cooperate and the union is unhappy with that they can make that case later. That all said I am expecting no reduction and then courts, still.MuppetAsteriskTalk said:
It's particularly amusing to me that because of the Patriots success, I think Tom Brady is less likely to take 1 game. Honestly, if the Patriots were hosting the Jaguars at home on Sunday to open the season, it'd be one thing. But with Game 1 being the Thursday Night game to kick off the season, against the Steelers, someone they expect to be competing for the #1 seed with, setting the narrative for the entire season with all the segments about why Brady isn't playing? There are too many aggravating factors here for me to believe Tom will suck up a 1 game suspension and move on, and unless Goodell is a world class dumbass, he probably has to know this and be cursing that he can't delay the suspension until a few weeks into the season.
Prediction- suspension vacated, cleared of wrong doing publicly. But he gets hit with a $250,000 fine for lack of cooperation re the cell phone. Massive $$$ hit in comparison to Favre for same offense is enough for Goodell to feel like he's made a statement.
I really hope I am right.
I really hope I am right.
Now that the hearing is over, I hope the nation's sports press turns an inward look upon itself. This entire narrative is a sad commentary on the independence and critical thinking capabilities of the American sports "press." Far too many reporters and columnists immediately and unthinkingly cast their lot in with the official NFL word, for fear of upsetting the gravy train that gets them access to all the hot events and inside sources or upsetting self-hating fans who prefer to believe lies about a good team rather than ask hard questions about the mediocre football teams in their own markets.
Exceptions like Florio and Riess and Jenkins have been refreshing simply by applying normal journalistic practices to the inflow of half-truths, lies and prevarications oozing out of 345 Park Avenue.
And where is the accountability? The next time ESPN apologizes to its web site readers for the lies that have gone out under its reporters' names will be the first time. It's almost as if ESPN has gotten so bloated, so incestuously embedded as a P.R. arm of the NFL that it has entirely forgotten its duty to the truth. It is well past time for ESPN to review its policies for printing anonymous statements. If an ombudsman were still on the staff, he or she would be waist deep in items to tackle on this story.
I don't expect knuckle-dragging, mouth-breathing partisan fans from other markets to ever look at this story objectively, but I do expect that from sports journalists. Even now, it's not too late.
Exceptions like Florio and Riess and Jenkins have been refreshing simply by applying normal journalistic practices to the inflow of half-truths, lies and prevarications oozing out of 345 Park Avenue.
And where is the accountability? The next time ESPN apologizes to its web site readers for the lies that have gone out under its reporters' names will be the first time. It's almost as if ESPN has gotten so bloated, so incestuously embedded as a P.R. arm of the NFL that it has entirely forgotten its duty to the truth. It is well past time for ESPN to review its policies for printing anonymous statements. If an ombudsman were still on the staff, he or she would be waist deep in items to tackle on this story.
I don't expect knuckle-dragging, mouth-breathing partisan fans from other markets to ever look at this story objectively, but I do expect that from sports journalists. Even now, it's not too late.
Taking a 1 game suspension would be selfish. It materially reduces the chances of he Patriots winning that game, which could materially affect playoff chances or (more likely) playoff seeding.
So take a game suspension 'just to have it behind you' is actually the worse option for the tame. And for TB.
if RG says that he'll resuce it to the financial equivalent of one game, then I think MAYBE TB takes it (assuming it's only for non-cooperation and otherwise exoneration), except for the fact that he cooperated extensively and is not required by the CBA to turn over his phone. So then I think the union pushes the issue into court (yes with TB's cooperation, but more as a union issue than a TB personal issue)
So take a game suspension 'just to have it behind you' is actually the worse option for the tame. And for TB.
if RG says that he'll resuce it to the financial equivalent of one game, then I think MAYBE TB takes it (assuming it's only for non-cooperation and otherwise exoneration), except for the fact that he cooperated extensively and is not required by the CBA to turn over his phone. So then I think the union pushes the issue into court (yes with TB's cooperation, but more as a union issue than a TB personal issue)
jtn46 said:
Which would mean the whole thing becomes even more ridiculous because "failure to cooperate" will have cost the Pats a major fine plus a 1st and a 4th. This is why I believe Goodell will uphold the penalty. Either way he looks like a jackass, but if he reverses Brady's penalty, but not the Pats, he looks like a bigger fool to the owners.
txexile said:
Don't get your hopes up. The Commish's started off his "State of the League" speech at the Super Bowl with a line about how the NFL has the best media partners in the world!
The SalPal prognostication is rosier than I expected, or expect. But if it is informed, that underscores a point made upthread -- the leverage shifted massively to TB once Troy Vincent's signature was dry on the disciplinary letter.
As noted more than a few pages ago, RG cannot attempt to negotiate a resolution without great risk. That would be entirely inconsistent with his role as reviewing "judge" -- and it would fuel all the points Kessler & Co. have made about this process being procedurally illegitimate. There is no realistic hope that a settlement overture would remain quiet; it would more likely make its way into the union's arsenal.
So there is a very great risk that if RG went down the SalPal road, TB would say, "thanks, I'll take 3/4s of the loaf" -- it's actually more -- and continue to fight. Might he come off looking like a dick, especially with the exonerating letter? Maybe, in many quarters. I don't think he cares.
This "distraction" stuff is complete nonsense -- catnip for Felger and Mazz. The case is in the can. Kessler and the others are shouldering the load. All Brady needs to do is show up in court when required, and acquit himself well. I'm quite confident he can do that. Whether he chooses to or not is another question. I would support his choice regardless.
The real carrot here, beyond getting 3 games back, would be the exonerating letter. No judge can compel that. But again, there is no practical way for RG to hold that hostage in any deal. That territory is way too dangerous for him.
As noted more than a few pages ago, RG cannot attempt to negotiate a resolution without great risk. That would be entirely inconsistent with his role as reviewing "judge" -- and it would fuel all the points Kessler & Co. have made about this process being procedurally illegitimate. There is no realistic hope that a settlement overture would remain quiet; it would more likely make its way into the union's arsenal.
So there is a very great risk that if RG went down the SalPal road, TB would say, "thanks, I'll take 3/4s of the loaf" -- it's actually more -- and continue to fight. Might he come off looking like a dick, especially with the exonerating letter? Maybe, in many quarters. I don't think he cares.
This "distraction" stuff is complete nonsense -- catnip for Felger and Mazz. The case is in the can. Kessler and the others are shouldering the load. All Brady needs to do is show up in court when required, and acquit himself well. I'm quite confident he can do that. Whether he chooses to or not is another question. I would support his choice regardless.
The real carrot here, beyond getting 3 games back, would be the exonerating letter. No judge can compel that. But again, there is no practical way for RG to hold that hostage in any deal. That territory is way too dangerous for him.
I wont lie this sucks for TB.
But I will also say that TB is getting one of the best crash courses in "turning around negative public opinion".
RG and this whole thing has helped make TB a Senator.
I think he wins this. And (assuming he does) can you imagine a heartfelt TB saying "I KNOW what its like to be attacked.....to have people try to tear down what you have worked your whole life for......for nothing more then jealousy. I promise you.....a Vote for me is a Vote for your future!"
But I will also say that TB is getting one of the best crash courses in "turning around negative public opinion".
RG and this whole thing has helped make TB a Senator.
I think he wins this. And (assuming he does) can you imagine a heartfelt TB saying "I KNOW what its like to be attacked.....to have people try to tear down what you have worked your whole life for......for nothing more then jealousy. I promise you.....a Vote for me is a Vote for your future!"
bsj said:
Here's the thing that keeps getting repeated: Brady (and the NFLPA) will take the NFL to court unless the suspension is vacated and any fine is aligned with established precedent. (The minor fine that Favre got for non-cooperation.)
We can throw out alternative scenarios all day long, but if the stories about how the NFLPA views this as an ideal test case have any merit to them, this is the only way for Goodell to avoid having this land in court.
With few exceptions, sports "journalists" are interested in making money, in increasing clicks and views and raising their national profile. Those that do not do this rarely advance.txexile said:
I think what we all need to do is stop associating news media with objective truth. That's not their interest. Their interest is telling compelling stories.
That's how they are evaluated, that's how they are promoted, and that's how their organizations make money.
Objective truth might have been the most important thing to Walter Cronkite, but that ship sailed a long time ago. All Mort cares about is clicks.
txexile said:
Dude, this is a sports story involving deflated footballs. The media in general shits all over itself in far more offensive ways covering stories that actually matter and nothing ever changes. This isn't going to lead to any difference in the way the media covers the NFL or anything else.
I think you guys are defeatists about having to just deal with "cheatriots" forever. It's true to a degree, there will always be people who are both dumb and hate the pats that will always find a way to say something negative, but if Brady gets exonerated here, the general public will let it go.
That said, if he pulls this off, forget Brady for senate. Put those baby blues to work in the White House. I'd vote for him at this point.
That said, if he pulls this off, forget Brady for senate. Put those baby blues to work in the White House. I'd vote for him at this point.
bsj said:
Me too, but I'm skeptical.
What keeps coming back to me is the almost hour long telephone call and the personal meeting with a guy who previously had no contact with TB. Tie that to the banter between the two idiots and it becomes hard to explain rationally.
I think he gets a 2 game reduction for cooperating.
bakahump said:
Public opinion is not being turned around.
I was at a dinner last night and this subject came up. To a man, the four others I was with said that any reduction in Brady's punishment was due to Goodell showing favoritism to the Pats. When I brought up the fact that the AEI story effectively debunks the idea that any deflation occurred, I was hit with a round of comments/questions like "so why wasn't there any deflation in the balls used by the Colts?" The conversation was unproductive from there.
The point is that the vast majority of casual fans aren't paying attention and in their minds Brady has already been branded a proven cheater. The only opinions that are beginning to turn is the handful of reporters who are paying attention.
This is so sad but true. There are those of us, myself included, that in general find the truth to be the more compelling story. However I fear we are far outnumbered.crystalline said:
dcmissle said:
Agree with the distraction stuff being complete nonsense. I mentioned this possibility earlier but I'm already entirely sick of that narrative. It seems like the NFL is greasing the skids for this and using their media people to try to spread this line of thinking. Sal Pal saying it for ESPN and Breer was on T&R saying that he should take the 1 game and not risk court. I see no benefit for Brady to just stop there (rather than the 4 games vs. 1) instead of fighting till the end. I don't even care about public opinion at this point because that isn't changing. I want 16 games of Brady and the slightest possibility Roger is ripped to shreds by a judge on this.
bakahump said:
This has been in the back of my mind. I recall seeing speculation concerning that path in the past, can't find it ATM. I don't know for sure what his politics are, but if he keeps his roots in MA after retirement, he'll be the most sought-after candidate in a long time.
If that's in his mind, he'll fight this all the way, unless he gets a letter of exoneration from RG. Which is unlikely in the extreme.
This has become a test case of the NFL's willingness to crack down on everyone, regardless of star power. Exoneration cuts the ground from under RG. There are any number of other owners who already are convinced that RG is a sock puppet for Kraft.
There is no great risk going to court. Just as the court will not likely have a trial on whether balls are deflated or not, it will not compel TB to produce his cell phone records. The court is going to be bound mostly by the record that has been compiled. It is serving a review function.
All the bs to the contrary coming from people like Borges should be ignored. Again, we have reached the stretch of the road where it's a one-way street in TB's favor. It cannot get worse insofar as penalties are concerned.
All the bs to the contrary coming from people like Borges should be ignored. Again, we have reached the stretch of the road where it's a one-way street in TB's favor. It cannot get worse insofar as penalties are concerned.
Otis Foster said:
Brady calling JJ is the most rational thing there is. Out of the blue Brady is accused of something, he hears the lies about how deflated the balls are, so he calls his equipment guys to find out WTF is going on. If Brady DIDN'T call or text to look into it, now that would surprise me.