#DFG: Canceling the Noise

[( . ) ( . ) and (_!_)]

Zero chance the union is comfortable changing the precedence for not turning over a phone from $50k to sitting for two games.

That outcome gives the NFL more power. The NFLPA certainly has their flaws but they seem hell bent on limiting Goodells super powers not making him stronger.

 

[Seonachan]

Sal Paolantonio on WEEI, suggesting the following "compromise" to satisfy Brady and the hard-line owners:

- League reduces suspension to two games for non-cooperation.
- League issues an official statement exonerating Brady of any wrongdoing related to deflating the footballs.

Brady happy because he's cleared of wrongdoing.

Hardliners happy because he is still punished.

And the Patriots still fined and docked the 1 and 4.

Butch and Bradford seemed to think it was viable and a "common sense" solution, but wondered whether the union would go along.

Personally, I think it's insane. I don't think Brady would take it. And don't think the union would either.

If that's what the NFL office comes up with, we're where we've been for awhile now: see you in court.

 
So Brady should negotiate a deal, that everyone knows is a negotiated deal, that "exonerates" him, as part of the deal. WTF does "exonerate" even mean in that scenario?

 

[Section15Box113]

 
So Brady should negotiate a deal, that everyone knows is a negotiated deal, that "exonerates" him, as part of the deal. WTF does "exonerate" even mean in that scenario?

It just means that the two games are for not cooperating rather than for deflating.

I think it's a distinction that would be lost over time - all many would remember is he was suspended because of that deflation thing. So much for exoneration.

Add in the change in precedent and it seems clear that a deal along these lines won't fly.

 

[Ed Hillel]

Two games too many. If that deal is offered to Tom with the suspension reduced to 1 -- with the exoneration -- Brady has to give this serious consideration.

No deal is possible without the exoneration.

I disagree. Why would he accept a suspension for something Favre got a 50k fine for and Ghost got nothing for in the same investigation? What court would uphold that? None, so tell Roger to eff off. Roger's already done the PR damage to Brady and I don't think an NFL "official exoneration" changes that. I don't think there's any way for the NFL to exonerate him at this point anyway. What of the Wells Report?

 

[RedOctober3829]

@jamisonhensley: Bisciotti: "The story circulating that I've put pressure on Roger [Goodell] is 100 percent wrong. The reports are unfair to Robert Kraft, who is honorable person and to his franchise. Let's talk about football and the start of training camp. Fans and people like me want the issue resolved now."

 

[ivanvamp]

How the NFL thinks that even a two game suspension (and the loss of almost a million dollars) for not fully cooperating when the past three precedents - Favre (2010), San Diego (2012), and Gostkowski (2015) - netted a $50k fine, a $20k fine, and no penalty at all, is beyond me.

 

[ivanvamp]

How the NFL thinks that even a two game suspension (and the loss of almost a million dollars) for not fully cooperating when the past three precedents - Favre (2010), San Diego (2012), and Gostkowski (2015) - netted a $50k fine, a $20k fine, and no penalty at all, is beyond me.

And why Brady and/or the union would accept that, I have no idea.

 

[NWsoxophile]

Fuck. That. Shit.

If Brady really didn't do anything, that's a horrible compromise for him.

Yeah. Exonerating him and nonetheless suspending him doesn't strike me as a compromise.

 

[MarcSullivaFan]

And why Brady and/or the union would accept that, I have no idea.

Not saying they would or wouldn't, but they could deal with the precedent issue by settling on a no-precedent basis. Almost every grievance settlement I've been involved in includes this language.

 

[amarshal2]

@jamisonhensley: Bisciotti: "The story circulating that I've put pressure on Roger [Goodell] is 100 percent wrong. The reports are unfair to Robert Kraft, who is honorable person and to his franchise. Let's talk about football and the start of training camp. Fans and people like me want the issue resolved now."

I believe him.

Odds of a similar quote from Irsay and/or Woody have to be close to 0%.

The idea that a public exoneration of Brady and an upholding of draft pick forfeitures could happen at the same time seems idiotic to me.

 

[pappymojo]

@jamisonhensley: Bisciotti: "The story circulating that I've put pressure on Roger [Goodell] is 100 percent wrong. The reports are unfair to Robert Kraft, who is honorable person and to his franchise. Let's talk about football and the start of training camp. Fans and people like me want the issue resolved now."

How are reports of Bisciotti putting pressure on Goodell unfair to Kraft?

 

[riboflav]

Is the worm starting to turn?  With the start of football season coming up, more and more of the mainstream media are starting to write about the situation.  Up until now, outside of Boston and Indy, it's been basically all NFL "broadcast partners" (with a few exceptions like Florio), none of whom are going to be especially critical of the league's handling of the situation.  But regular media folks aren't in the NFL's pocket, and some of them have actual, you know, journalists, who care about what the facts are.  
 
Maybe I'm being too optimistic, but if there's one thing that would get Goodell to cave, it's a belief that public opinion is no longer as anti-Patriots as he thought.

 
I'm curious to see your evidence that more of the mainstream media is writing about this and is critical of the NFL.

 

[grsharky7]

John Clayton on the radio this morning saying he thinks the decision has already been made, and he feels that it's going to stay at 4 games. He said Goodell is just trying to figure out the best time to release the statement.

 

[MarcSullivaFan]

How are reports of Bisciotti putting pressure on Goodell unfair to Kraft?

Probably the "getting away with murder" part.

 

[Section15Box113]

John Clayton on the radio this morning saying he thinks the decision has already been made, and he feels that it's going to stay at 4 games. He said Goodell is just trying to figure out the best time to release the statement.

Now this, I believe. Unless it goes to zero, might as well appear consistent - especially if Brady simply reiterated what he said to Wells and "failed to provide new information." See you in court.

 

[bankshot1]

Sal Paolantonio on WEEI, suggesting the following "compromise" to satisfy Brady and the hard-line owners:

- League reduces suspension to two games for non-cooperation.
- League issues an official statement exonerating Brady of any wrongdoing related to deflating the footballs.

Brady happy because he's cleared of wrongdoing.

Hardliners happy because he is still punished.

And the Patriots still fined and docked the 1 and 4.

Butch and Bradford seemed to think it was viable and a "common sense" solution, but wondered whether the union would go along.

Personally, I think it's insane. I don't think Brady would take it. And don't think the union would either.

If that's what the NFL office comes up with, we're where we've been for awhile now: see you in court.

Is Sal Pal floating the NFL's trial balloon?
Pop that sucker quickly.
Fuck that. That's not much of a back-down from the NFL who reportedly seems to think they will lose in court. I will be pissed if Brady does not fight a 1-game suspension..

 

[steveluck7]

John Clayton on the radio this morning saying he thinks the decision has already been made, and he feels that it's going to stay at 4 games. He said Goodell is just trying to figure out the best time to release the statement.

Rog wants to take the piss out of Boston fans as much as possible. If what's happening today in Cooperstown was a weekday, the announcement would be today. As such, I'm expecting Tuesday just to try to cut into the good feelings that will be surrounding Pedro's # 45 being retired.

 

[DJnVa]

Rog wants to take the piss out of Boston fans as much as possible. If what's happening today in Cooperstown was a weekday, the announcement would be today. As such, I'm expecting Tuesday just to try to cut into the good feelings that will be surrounding Pedro's # 45 being retired

 
 
Okay, so now Goodell is out to get the fans of Boston...why don't you just relax and go watch Pedro's speech.

 

[MarcSullivaFan]

Rog wants to take the piss out of Boston fans as much as possible. If what's happening today in Cooperstown was a weekday, the announcement would be today. As such, I'm expecting Tuesday just to try to cut into the good feelings that will be surrounding Pedro's # 45 being retired.

Oh come on. Roger wants Boston fans to keep spending oodles of cash on NFL games, apparel, TV packages, etc.

 

[ifmanis5]

John Clayton on the radio this morning saying he thinks the decision has already been made, and he feels that it's going to stay at 4 games. He said Goodell is just trying to figure out the best time to release the statement.

I believe this also. He was waiting for the Hardy dust to settle fist. We're going to court and I think we knew that all along. Can't wait for Kessler to destroy him.

 

[Rico Guapo]

John Clayton on the radio this morning saying he thinks the decision has already been made, and he feels that it's going to stay at 4 games. He said Goodell is just trying to figure out the best time to release the statement.

 
I hope they get skewered in court, fucking assholes.

 

[dcmissle]

I guessed tomorrow. If not, then Tuesday.

Unless they really want to be a-holes about it, in which case Wednesday, the eve of training camp.

This is what being a team player nets Bob Kraft.

Bob, I love you. You saved this team and owned the team in exactly the right way. On this cluster of issues, you are a complete rube.

 

[Ed Hillel]

Why leak all this BS if they are keeping the suspension at 4? Very strange...

 

[amarshal2]

Why leak all this BS if they are keeping the suspension at 4? Very strange...

Who said they leaked anything vs. sports media just making things up.

 

[Ed Hillel]

Who said they leaked anything vs. sports media just making things up.

Sal Pal I could agree with you on, but Florio I trust in terms of sourcing. Someone is leaking something.

 

[djbayko]

Why leak all this BS if they are keeping the suspension at 4? Very strange...

You are assuming they're leaks. Biscotti has already refuted the story about him. You can choose to believe him or not, but I don't put much faith in reports without named sources from sports journalists. So many of them turn out to be false that I think they are perfectly fine with publishing rumors and idle speculation and passing it off as an exclusive scoop, especially when they feel safe that no one is going to call them out on it.

Edit: Either that, or they are just constantly duped and/or used over and over again. The above is obviously worse, from an integrity standpoint, but not by much.

 

[dcmissle]

Bisciotti's statement can fairly be viewed as a non-denial denial. He says he did not "pressure" RG. He did not deny having conversations with RG about DFG. Pressure is in the eye of the beholder.

In my view, there is no legitimate reason for Bisciotti or any other owner or team to be conversing with RG about TB's case.

RG is supposed to be an impartial arbitrator. The appeal to RG observed formal process. There was a hearing. There were post-hearing submissions. There is a record, which likely is soon to be before a federal judge. Impartial arbitrators do NOT have ex parte communications, or they are not supposed to anyway. Ex parte in this context means a communication about the case outside the formal process, including communications with non-parties such as Steve Bisciiotti

Go ahead boys, keep digging your hole deeper.

 

[dcmissle]

I would have advised the NFL that it was very likely to lose both the RR and AP cases. Hardy was a tougher call because it went to Harold Henderson, who had a reputation as RG's go-to guy. Now that makes the defeat sting more.

Judges' bullshit meters are pretty sensitive. And judges are entirely unimpressed that the NFL is one of the parties. Litigants are litigants.

Copies of the RR and AP decisions were posted in one of these threads long ago. I suggest reading the former by retired judge Barbara Jones. Her contempt for several of the arguments is only thinly veiled, which is a natural comeuppance when you make bogus arguments that insult the intelligence of the judge.

This case, if it is filed, will be treated on its own merits. The procedural history you refer to will be laid bare. The court will be made to understand who is responsible for the delay. And the point will be made at some point that for such a devastating problem that allegedly imperils the integrity of competition, not a goddamn thing has been done by the NFL on a going forward basis about football inflation or deflation.

I don't know whether TB's case would be filed in MA or Minnesota and, if the latter, whether it would be assigned to Judge Doty. If so, get your popcorn. He has a long history with the NFL. He also was a Korean War combat veteran as a captain in the United States Marine Corps. Guess where his bullshit meter is set.

So the last point in the next-to-last paragraph above ... The NFL addressed it today. Tying bows and clearing the deck for a decision. Expect it anytime. There could be leaks tonight.

 

[MarcSullivaFan]

So the last point in the next-to-last paragraph above ... The NFL addressed it today. Tying bows and clearing the deck for a decision. Expect it anytime. There could be leaks tonight.

Except they've virtually assured that some balls will fall below 12.5 in cold weather games. The entire policy seems to ignore the ideal gas law.

 

[dcdrew10]

@jamisonhensley: Bisciotti: "The story circulating that I've put pressure on Roger [Goodell] is 100 percent wrong. The reports are unfair to Robert Kraft, who is honorable person and to his franchise. Let's talk about football and the start of training camp. Fans and people like me want the issue resolved now."

"I did not have sexual relations with that woman."

 

[TheoShmeo]

You have made this argument several times and I think that people understand it. The problem is that you are making a general statement rather than a specific judgment about this case.

I would expect a player at the beginning or middle of their career to want precisely what you have articulated - get this behind them and get on the field. But Brady is at the end of one of the greatest careers in the history of the NFL. I would expect that he cares a hell of lot more about fighting an unjust punishment than just getting back on the field.

I'll agree with you that I don't think he gives a damn what people think of his decisions here. You control what you can control and nothing more.

I don't think it's a matter of "just getting back on the field."
 
If he settles, I would suspect it's about ending the noise, being able to stop talking to lawyers and focus his non-personal time exclusively on football, removing the uncertainty regarding the outcome and, critically, eliminating the risk that the punishment ends up at 4 games, however you quantify that risk in the real world.
 
That is a very specific application to this case and not one that is a generic pro-settlement stance.  Joe can correct me if he likes but I have a feeling that  he was thinking along those lines.
 
It's true that some fans will view any deal by Tom as a huge letdown and any deal will be portrayed by many as an admission of guilt.
 
In end, though, if he settles, It might come down to a choice of the practical over the principle. 
 
In my view, whatever he chooses will be easily understandable, as I think there are very good arguments for both paths.
 
As dcmissile said earlier today, I think Tom will be faced with a tough choice if he gets offered one game.  But everything I noted favoring settlement would apply if the deal was at two game, as well.

 

[lambeau]

The League finally figured out what to when they check balls at halftime. Since pretty much all Nov-Dec games will be colder than the Colts game, the balls will be measuring around 10.5 PSI. Their solution?
There can be no solution that will not get the Brady case  thrown out, so all measured balls will automatically be removed and replaced by the 12 backup balls. The case has them paralyzed. Pretty funny.
They cannot even mention the word temperature in discussing what will be recorded. They certainly cannot come out and say "normal weather-induced variations are expectable", let alone issue guidelines.
What guidelines? "In Green Bay in December, average temperature 9-24 degrees, a PSI below 8.0 will be deemed evidence that the offending team needs a warning that they are in big fucking trouble!"

 

[joe dokes]

You have made this argument several times and I think that people understand it. The problem is that you are making a general statement rather than a specific judgment about this case.

I would expect a player at the beginning or middle of their career to want precisely what you have articulated - get this behind them and get on the field. But Brady is at the end of one of the greatest careers in the history of the NFL. I would expect that he cares a hell of lot more about fighting an unjust punishment than just getting back on the field.

I'll agree with you that I don't think he gives a damn what people think of his decisions here. You control what you can control and nothing more.

 
I have said it before. (I think its the nature of the thread.)  Anyway...I think you have hit on the disconect between our views.  Mine *is* general.  But as best as I can articulate, I think that at this particular time, Tom Brady -- TOM BRADY though he may be -- is a lot more like the "general" litigant than you think he is.  That's fine. Neither one of us is inside his head. All I can say is that I've been in civil suits where people swear they did nothing wrong (and I thought they had a pretty good case)  agreed to take a deal to end it NOW and it was probably the right thing under their particular circumstance. Part of my view is also based on my unwillingness to wade into "what he cares  [most] about." That's not a knock on your take, which is entirely reasonable. But your take is based on a presumption of what's driving Brady most, and I dont go that far. I don't know if he cares more about fighting as unjust punishment than he does about acting in a way that makes it most likely that the team wins another SB.  IOW -- I really dont know, if he's presented with a "deal" which isn't exoneration but does get him back on the field much sooner, what he does. (I guess that's the longhand version of "1 game gives him something to think about")
 
I dont think it would be that much of a stretch to think that Brady is thinking, "Roger Goodell is a laughingstock.  But right now he is a festering carbuncle on my ass. I could take one game, drop it all, cauterize Goodell, and smile like Charles Manson when he hands me the next Lombardi.  The whole fucking world thinks we're cheaters and will anyway no matter what a federal judge says. So I'll just get on the field in week 2 and kick everyone's ass."
 
This of course assumes that 1 game is out there.  I dont think it is. But whothefuckknows.

 

[GeorgeCostanza]

I'd love to one day see a Christopher Guest style mockumentary of this entire farce. Him and Levy wouldn't even need to take much artistic license with the story either. Larry Miller in a ginger wig playing Roger. Ed Beagley Jr as Jim Irsay. Eugene Levy as Ted Wells.

 

[Tony C]

Actually, Steve Bisciotti is an entirely self made billionaire. And in almost every respect, he is an ideal owner. Understated, under the radar, allows professionals to run the team.

This is disappointing.

 
 

Steve Bisciotti may well be a successful businessman, but as an NFL owner, he's the very definition of a JAG. Relative noob to the league, nothing particularly remarkable or interesting about either him as an owner, or the franchise he runs. Also Bisciotti absolutely disgraced himself by acting as a shameless apologist for the wife-beating slimebag Ray Rice. To say nothing of his franchise's beatification of Ray Lewis over the past several years.
 
There's really no good reason for Roger Goodell to have any heightened level of interest in what Steve Bisciotti has to say about anything.

 
 
Not only that, but his handling of the Ray Rice case was unethical in the extreme. The idea that he's an ideal owner is absurd. 
 

Now this, I believe. Unless it goes to zero, might as well appear consistent - especially if Brady simply reiterated what he said to Wells and "failed to provide new information." See you in court.

 
I agree. Either 0 games or 4 -- the NFL gains nothing politically or legally shortening the suspension. And, politically, they might well believe they're better off sticking to their guns even as they await the eventual overturn. 

 

[RedOctober3829]

@bkravitz: Asked Jim Irsay about ESPN report that Irsay and Balt. owner are pressuring Goodell to suspend Brady four games. Said he had no comment.

 

[tims4wins]

No comment = admission of guilt. At least according to all NE sports media.

 

[tedseye]

It would appear that the new rules governing football inflation announced over the weekend may well be the prelude to some formulation to be contained in Goodell's forthcoming ruling - perhaps deferring a finding on the "deflation" aspect of the ruling until after the 2015 season's data are collected and analyzed. The measurements contemplated would form the basis for a deferred conclusion in 2016 accepting either the Wells/Exponent version or the conclusions suggested by the laws of nature as to whether the Pats balls were deflated by the elements or by some human intervention.

That would leave only the "cooperation" issue to be ruled on before or during the 2015 season - which many posters think could be the subject of negotiated agreement now by the League, NFLPA and Brady.

Sound plausible?

 

[Van Everyman]

Sounds reasonable, so no.

My sense is that this is absolutely the League getting their ducks in a row (to the extent it's even possible) for them to show, as a poster pointed out upthread, that they are taking this issue seriously going forward. Otherwise, I would guess that it would have been difficult to prove in court that the League seriously believes ball inflation is an issue of integrity (and ergo, this was a serious investigation of a serious infraction).

The odds that the League would voluntarily defer punishment until the science is "proven" seems implausible to the extreme – why not just say that Wells was full of shit?

 

[Super Nomario]

It would appear that the new rules governing football inflation announced over the weekend may well be the prelude to some formulation to be contained in Goodell's forthcoming ruling - perhaps deferring a finding on the "deflation" aspect of the ruling until after the 2015 season's data are collected and analyzed. The measurements contemplated would form the basis for a deferred conclusion in 2016 accepting either the Wells/Exponent version or the conclusions suggested by the laws of nature as to whether the Pats balls were deflated by the elements or by some human intervention.

That would leave only the "cooperation" issue to be ruled on before or during the 2015 season - which many posters think could be the subject of negotiated agreement now by the League, NFLPA and Brady.

Sound plausible?

Highly unlikely. They can always say that, based on assumptions regarding the starting temperature, the gauge used, and when during halftime the balls were measured, the ongoing data suggests the Patriots' balls were tampered with. There's no way this sort of experiment can really exonerate them.

 

[Ed Hillel]

No comment = admission of guilt. At least according to all NE sports media.

This IS an admission. Why else would he say that?

 

[Super Nomario]

This IS an admission. Why else would he say that?

Maybe he was drunk and high on pills the last time he and Roger spoke and he honestly doesn't remember what they talked about?

 

[MarcSullivaFan]

Because that's what his PR people told him to say. You want Jim freestyling?

 

[MarcSullivaFan]

Because that's what his PR people told him to say. You want Jim freestyling?

 

[DJnVa]

 
 dont think it would be that much of a stretch to think that Brady is thinking, "Roger Goodell is a laughingstock.  But right now he is a festering carbuncle on my ass. I could take one game, drop it all, cauterize Goodell, and smile like Charles Manson when he hands me the next Lombardi.  The whole fucking world thinks we're cheaters and will anyway no matter what a federal judge says. So I'll just get on the field in week 2 and kick everyone's ass."
 
This of course assumes that 1 game is out there.  I dont think it is. But whothefuckknows.

 
 
I think if this was the case there would be some leak somewhere that Brady would possibly accept it.
 
Hell, they'd want that leaked as a smoke signal to the NFL But every leak we've heard has been that Brady is not willing to accept a single game. Something like "A source close to Brady's team has acknowledged that he would likely be willing to accept 2 games." But there's been nothing even close to that.
 
With the knowledge that we're all just guessing, I'll go with the side that at least has a tiny bit of smoke.

 

[tedseye]

Highly unlikely. They can always say that, based on assumptions regarding the starting temperature, the gauge used, and when during halftime the balls were measured, the ongoing data suggests the Patriots' balls were tampered with. There's no way this sort of experiment can really exonerate them.

Don't most observers agree that collecting this sort of data will demonstrate over the course of next season that balls will deflate in the colder weather along the lines suggested by various non-Exponent scientists and engineers? Why would the NFL collect this data if they expect (which I think in their inner councils they now do) that the results will ultimately exonerate the Pats and Brady?

On everything except "cooperation", that is.

The timing of this looks very suspiciously like the first of a two-step resolution. Possibly a negotiated one. Couldn't Roger say that enough questions have been presented about the scientific assumptions underpinning the Wells report's scientific finding that the time for speculation is past, and the questions should be resolved, as it were, by experience to be gained on the football field. He could come across as a statesman, practically Solomonic.

 

[amarshal2]

Don't most observers agree that collecting this sort of data will demonstrate over the course of next season that balls will deflate in the colder weather along the lines suggested by various non-Exponent scientists and engineers? Why would the NFL collect this data if they expect (which I think in their inner councils they now do) that the results will ultimately exonerate the Pats and Brady?

On everything except "cooperation", that is.

The timing of this looks very suspiciously like the first of a two-step resolution. Possibly a negotiated one. Couldn't Roger say that enough questions have been presented about the scientific assumptions underpinning the Wells report's scientific finding that the time for speculation is past, and the questions should be resolved, as it were, by experience to be gained on the football field. He could come across as a statesman, practically Solomonic.

If this was about science there would have been a different outcome from the Wells report. People who think they need this data to find out whether footballs are subject to the natural laws of our universe have an agenda or had a lobotomy.

 

[Super Nomario]

Don't most observers agree that collecting this sort of data will demonstrate over the course of next season that balls will deflate in the colder weather along the lines suggested by various non-Exponent scientists and engineers? Why would the NFL collect this data if they expect (which I think in their inner councils they now do) that the results will ultimately exonerate the Pats and Brady?

Of course the balls deflate in colder weather, and the Exponent / Wells Report indicates as much. The problem is that we don't have a starting temperature, a starting pressure, reliable pressure gauges, timing on when the balls were measured at halftime, or a valid control group. So they can run these experiments and easily claim that the data suggests the balls should have deflated by 1 PSI (or whatever) but the Patriots' balls deflated by 1.5 PSI (or whatever). There's no proving cheating or proving innocence - there was not enough data then, and there is no way to get it now.
 

On everything except "cooperation", that is.

The timing of this looks very suspiciously like the first of a two-step resolution. Possibly a negotiated one. Couldn't Roger say that enough questions have been presented about the scientific assumptions underpinning the Wells report's scientific finding that the time for speculation is past, and the questions should be resolved, as it were, by experience to be gained on the football field. He could come across as a statesman, practically Solomonic.

This seems like wishful thinking. Goodell hasn't given any indication that he cares even a tiny bit about being respected "as a stateman, practically Solomonic." If he did, none of this would have been handled the way it was.

 

[crystalline]

If this was about science there would have been a different outcome from the Wells report. People who think they need this data to find out whether footballs are subject to the natural laws of our universe have an agenda or had a lobotomy.

Right. Solomonic figures don't set up a season of data collection for this. The only possible outcome is to show a basic law of physics is in fact true, and that the prospective Solomon has no clue about how our world works.

Goodell would never collect this data and disclose it.

 

[djbayko]

Why would the NFL collect this data if they expect (which I think in their inner councils they now do) that the results will ultimately exonerate the Pats and Brady?

Because they're never going to let the halftime measurements see the light of day, especially on a cold day in Green Bay.

I believe you're overthinking this. Goodell has shown time and again that evidence is not important in this case. The appearance of strong leadership and knocking the Patriots down a notch are tantamount. He's not going to all of a sudden change course.