#DFG: Canceling the Noise

Is there any level of suspension that you would advise Tom to accept?


  • Total voters
    208

Leather

given himself a skunk spot
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
27,308
I may be cynical, but I just have trouble believing that the league will permit a report that casts it in as negative a light as some here are hoping/thinking.
 
Yes, Wells is from a reputable firm and I'm sure they will do good work, and what they tell Goodell behind closed doors might be brutally frank in its assessment regarding the league and Kensil and everyone just making a mess of things.   That being said, as a practical matter, there's no rules of procedure or rules of discovery that dictate that Goodell can't have some input on what areas of the investigation are emphasized or glossed over in the final report that gets released to the press.   It's not like Congress or some other government entity is performing an investigation, the entirety of which will be available through a FOIA request.   Wells and his associates are required to keep their conversations/dealings with Goodell confidential.
 
At the end of the day, the Wells report will say, at least in part, what Goodell wants it to say.
 
This is what Rachel Nichols was getting at, and which Goodell made a condescending remark towards.  Unfortunately, rather than (or at least, in addition to) people picking up the thread of what Nichols was saying, they focused on Goodell being an asshole.
 

theapportioner

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 9, 2006
4,982
73-0. Chicago vs Washington, 1940. Most points scored and largest margin of victory. Both records will be broken next year.
 

DJnVa

Dorito Dawg
SoSH Member
Dec 16, 2010
45,577
E5 Yaz said:
 
I'm not talking about the general public; I'm talking about the national media.
 
What Schefter says to a Boston radio station mean little toward the actual investigation, if he's only saying it to a local audience
 
 
Again though, I don't care what the "national media" thinks. I think (hope?) the Wells investigation is aboveboard. Hearing these things comes out gives me more hope that the NFL's game day procedure with the balls is so ludicrous that nothing can be pinned on NE.
 
 

DJnVa

Dorito Dawg
SoSH Member
Dec 16, 2010
45,577
PedroKsBambino said:
 
Kelly Naqi ends up looking like a total amateur here, which is probably unfair.   But if you're going to run with that report and you do not appear to have checked with enough sources to discover what else was reported, that is the impression that is left.
 
 

So, doesn't that make it completely fair? She ran with it before checking all her sources. Oh, and her COWORKER.
 
At the end of the EEI interview this morning they told Schefter to avoid Naqi at the next company holiday party.
 

joe dokes

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
21,745
loshjott said:
 
It's like blaming Aaron Barrett of the Nats for imploding against the Giants in the playoffs last year when Clippard and Storen were warm in the bullpen.  You need the manager (editor/ombudsman/etc) to step in and pull the drowning man (woman) out of the pool.
 
definitely an editor to ask questions---ombud is an after-the-fact analyzer.
 

E5 Yaz

Transcends message boarding
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Apr 25, 2002
72,068
Oregon
DrewDawg said:
 
 
Again though, I don't care what the "national media" thinks. I think (hope?) the Wells investigation is aboveboard. Hearing these things comes out gives me more hope that the NFL's game day procedure with the balls is some ludicrous that nothing can be pinned on NE.
 
 
We're talking past each other. I don't care what the national media "thinks," either.
 
But unless what Schefter says to Boston radio station becomes part of the overall story, it's meaningless ... and will have zero impact on the investigation and what, if any, punishment happens to the Pats. 
 

ifmanis5

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 29, 2007
50,047
Rotten Apple
E5 Yaz said:
 
You're assuming the "truth" about this story is known. It's not, and may never be.
 
The fact that Clouseau & Co. are running amok still doesn't mean the Patriots did nothing wrong.
Right, but once again, one of the key reasons why this thread is 13 thousand posts and 273 pages deep is due to the awful reportage on this story.
 

Mooch

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
2,357
So Grigson alerted the NFL but apparently didn't alert his head coach?

Doug Kyed ‏@DougKyedNESN · 7m7 minutes ago
Pagano said he didn't know about deflated football concerns until after the AFC Championship Game.
 
 

GeorgeCostanza

Member
SoSH Member
May 16, 2009
6,286
Found in central mass
Harry Hooper said:
Apparently that is what Rappaport said as clarification in the days after his published Super Bowl Sunday report.
Right, the "few ticks" part but I don't recall ever hearing it was only 6 balls that were under.

Anyway, looking forward to the Wells report and Rogers apology.
 

E5 Yaz

Transcends message boarding
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Apr 25, 2002
72,068
Oregon
ifmanis5 said:
Right, but once again, one of the key reasons why this thread is 13 thousand posts and 273 pages deep is due to the awful reportage on this story.
 
It would add to that awful reportage if Florio were to say that the Patriots were absolved of any wrongdoing by current revelations.
 
They're not absolved until they're absolved ... not just because their fans see what emerges and leap to conclusions
 

pappymojo

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 28, 2010
5,723
drleather2001 said:
I may be cynical, but I just have trouble believing that the league will permit a report that casts it in as negative a light as some here are hoping/thinking.
 
Yes, Wells is from a reputable firm and I'm sure they will do good work, and what they tell Goodell behind closed doors might be brutally frank in its assessment regarding the league and Kensil and everyone just making a mess of things.   That being said, as a practical matter, there's no rules of procedure or rules of discovery that dictate that Goodell can't have some input on what areas of the investigation are emphasized or glossed over in the final report that gets released to the press.   It's not like Congress or some other government entity is performing an investigation, the entirety of which will be available through a FOIA request.   Wells and his associates are required to keep their conversations/dealings with Goodell confidential.
 
At the end of the day, the Wells report will say, at least in part, what Goodell wants it to say.
 
This is what Rachel Nichols was getting at, and which Goodell made a condescending remark towards.  Unfortunately, rather than (or at least, in addition to) people picking up the thread of what Nichols was saying, they focused on Goodell being an asshole.
 

Is this true?  Does Wells have to keep his discussion with Goodell confidential from Kraft? 
 

E5 Yaz

Transcends message boarding
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Apr 25, 2002
72,068
Oregon
Mooch said:
So Grigson alerted the NFL but apparently didn't alert his head coach?

Doug Kyed ‏@DougKyedNESN · 7m7 minutes ago
Pagano said he didn't know about deflated football concerns until after the AFC Championship Game.
 
 
I believe that. I continue to believe that we're headed toward a Grigson-Kensil endgame that Jay Glazer hinted at weeks ago
 

Marciano490

Urological Expert
SoSH Member
Nov 4, 2007
49,649
drleather2001 said:
I may be cynical, but I just have trouble believing that the league will permit a report that casts it in as negative a light as some here are hoping/thinking.
 
Yes, Wells is from a reputable firm and I'm sure they will do good work, and what they tell Goodell behind closed doors might be brutally frank in its assessment regarding the league and Kensil and everyone just making a mess of things.   That being said, as a practical matter, there's no rules of procedure or rules of discovery that dictate that Goodell can't have some input on what areas of the investigation are emphasized or glossed over in the final report that gets released to the press.   It's not like Congress or some other government entity is performing an investigation, the entirety of which will be available through a FOIA request.   Wells and his associates are required to keep their conversations/dealings with Goodell confidential.
 
At the end of the day, the Wells report will say, at least in part, what Goodell wants it to say.
 
This is what Rachel Nichols was getting at, and which Goodell made a condescending remark towards.  Unfortunately, rather than (or at least, in addition to) people picking up the thread of what Nichols was saying, they focused on Goodell being an asshole.
 
Part of my hope comes from the fact that if these facts are out there, interviews aside, the Patriots should be able to track them down as well.  They may not devote the resources to the investigation the NFL is, and they obviously won't have the access, but the more favorable things come out the more I'm confident the Pats have a pretty thick file to plunk on Goodell's desk before he takes any action.
 

theapportioner

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 9, 2006
4,982
Mooch said:
So Grigson alerted the NFL but apparently didn't alert his head coach?

Doug Kyed ‏@DougKyedNESN · 7m7 minutes ago
Pagano said he didn't know about deflated football concerns until after the AFC Championship Game.
 
How the hell would Grigson know about the ball concerns, if not from the players or coaches? He's hiding something.
 

DJnVa

Dorito Dawg
SoSH Member
Dec 16, 2010
45,577
E5 Yaz said:
 
We're talking past each other. I don't care what the national media "thinks," either.
 
But unless what Schefter says to Boston radio station becomes part of the overall story, it's meaningless ... and will have zero impact on the investigation and what, if any, punishment happens to the Pats. 
 
Yes, we're talking past each other. He's not impacting the investigation, the investigation is impacting his reports.
 
 As he said this morning, this incident makes it very hard for the NFL to punish the Patriots for whatever the hell happened.
 
 
They're not absolved until they're absolved ... not just because their fans see what emerges and leap to conclusions
 
 
Unless what's emerging is from a source inside the investigation laying the groundwork for that investigation not finding anything on the Pats.
 
This thread is nearly 14000 posts of leaping to conclusions.
 

pappymojo

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 28, 2010
5,723
theapportioner said:
How the hell would Grigson know about the ball concerns, if not from the players or coaches? He's hiding something.
 
Maybe it wasn't his coach...
 

joe dokes

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
21,745
E5 Yaz said:
 
We're talking past each other. I don't care what the national media "thinks," either.
 
But unless what Schefter says to Boston radio station becomes part of the overall story, it's meaningless ... and will have zero impact on the investigation and what, if any, punishment happens to the Pats. 
 
Or if he nudges ESPN slightly in the direction of "the NFL is really fucking this up" narrative.  That might impact the extent to which Goodell later tries to whitewash the report into a series of "we dont knows," if the reporting in the months leading up to the report say exactly the opposite.  Mort, king, et al might *enjoy* being toadies, but they do *not* enjoy being made to look like idiot toadies.
 

PBDWake

Member
SoSH Member
May 1, 2008
3,682
Peabody, MA
drleather2001 said:
I may be cynical, but I just have trouble believing that the league will permit a report that casts it in as negative a light as some here are hoping/thinking.
 
Yes, Wells is from a reputable firm and I'm sure they will do good work, and what they tell Goodell behind closed doors might be brutally frank in its assessment regarding the league and Kensil and everyone just making a mess of things.   That being said, as a practical matter, there's no rules of procedure or rules of discovery that dictate that Goodell can't have some input on what areas of the investigation are emphasized or glossed over in the final report that gets released to the press.   It's not like Congress or some other government entity is performing an investigation, the entirety of which will be available through a FOIA request.   Wells and his associates are required to keep their conversations/dealings with Goodell confidential.
 
At the end of the day, the Wells report will say, at least in part, what Goodell wants it to say.
 
This is what Rachel Nichols was getting at, and which Goodell made a condescending remark towards.  Unfortunately, rather than (or at least, in addition to) people picking up the thread of what Nichols was saying, they focused on Goodell being an asshole.
 
I doubt it will cast the league itself in a negative light. If anything, the employment of Wells removes the league from the equation. As ridiculous as Roger is, he's kept his fingerprints off of this in a way that seems logical to him. The Wells report could comfortably conclude the Patriots explanation is plausible, but "without measurements from the officials, either pregame or at the half, there is simply no way to conclude that tampering occurred", and shift the blame towards the zebras for not logging any of the data/approving the balls. Then, Roger gets to announce the report, and apologize that the Patriots organization had to deal with an investigation of this scope, but he felt that the integrity of the game is beyond reproach, especially in the playoffs, and he needed to address the situation with the levity it deserved (which is actually none). He is pleased to announce that there is no evidence of tampering, but in order to ensure that such a situation never occurs again, the NFL is instituting new policies on the handling of balls and a new program for their officials to be implemented immediately. Now, all of this seems completely ridiculous, but I firmly believe Roger is a sociopath and would believe that this keeps Kraft happy and his hands clean.
 

E5 Yaz

Transcends message boarding
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Apr 25, 2002
72,068
Oregon
joe dokes said:
 
Or if he nudges ESPN slightly in the direction of "the NFL is really fucking this up" narrative.  That might impact the extent to which Goodell later tries to whitewash the report into a series of "we dont knows," if the reporting in the months leading up to the report say exactly the opposite.  Mort, king, et al might *enjoy* being toadies, but they do *not* enjoy being made to look like idiot toadies.
 
Agreed, but I made this mistake the last time. I thought when he disagreed with Mort's 11 balls report that that would change the ESPN narrative. It didn't
 

joe dokes

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
21,745
Then, Roger gets to announce the report, and apologize that the Patriots organization had to deal with an investigation of this scope, but he felt that the integrity of the game is beyond reproach, especially in the playoffs, and he needed to address the situation with the levity it deserved
 
 
well, he has succeeded in turning the whole thing into a joke.
 

PedroKsBambino

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
Gold Supporter
SoSH Member
Apr 17, 2003
25,906
RedOctober3829 said:
Or they just hate the Patriots so badly that they'd "alert" the league on something that everybody in the NFL does.  This is getting to be a bigger joke by the day. 
 
Belichick might hang 70 on the Colts next season.
 
I think we can count on there not being any kneel-downs at the end of that game.   A trick play or fake punt when they are up 50-10 seems like a real possibility.
 

ifmanis5

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 29, 2007
50,047
Rotten Apple
E5 Yaz said:
 
It would add to that awful reportage if Florio were to say that the Patriots were absolved of any wrongdoing by current revelations.
 
They're not absolved until they're absolved ... not just because their fans see what emerges and leap to conclusions
Once again you're missing my point. But I'm used to that by now. It's not about absolving anything. It's about getting the facts correct.
 

Harry Hooper

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jan 4, 2002
30,091
GeorgeCostanza said:
Right, the "few ticks" part but I don't recall ever hearing it was only 6 balls that were under.

Anyway, looking forward to the Wells report and Rogers apology.
 
 
Didn't see it, but I am guessing Rappaport appeared on the NFL Network on Feb. 1st. See Florio's Feb. 1 piece:
 
Here’s where it gets interesting.  Chris Mortensen of ESPN initially reported that 11 of the 12 balls were two pounds under the 12.5 PSI minimum.  PFT later reported that 10 of the balls were closer to one pound under the minimum than two.  Now, the media company owned by the NFL reports that “[m]any of [the footballs] were just a few ticks under the minimum.”
So how many are “many”?  And how much is “just a few ticks”?
 
Making the NFL media report even more confusing is the fact that, when Rapoport discussed the issue on the air, he specifically said that “a couple, three or four were about a pound under and three or four more were right at the line but a little bit under.”
 
As one league source with knowledge of the situation told PFT in response to the NFL Media report, “Ian’s wrong.”  Apart from the inherent conflict between the written assertion that “many” were “just a few ticks under” and only “three or four” were “right at the line but a little bit under,” it’s possible that both versions are incorrect.
 
Either way, the truth eventually will be known.  As a different source told PFT on Sunday morning, the NFL logged all PSI readings for the Patriots and Colts footballs at halftime of the AFC title game.  Assuming that this information makes its way into Ted Wells’ report (and surely it will), the hard numbers eventually will become public.
 
 

E5 Yaz

Transcends message boarding
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Apr 25, 2002
72,068
Oregon
ifmanis5 said:
Once again you're missing my point. But I'm used to that by now. It's not about absolving anything. It's about getting the facts correct.
 
And you keep thinking that the "facts" have been established.
 
They haven't
 

Ed Hillel

Wants to be startin somethin
SoSH Member
Dec 12, 2007
28,495
Here
I don't see any conceivable way that Kensil can survive this, given we have confirmation of a sting operation. If it's failed, even worse. If it does end up failed, Goodell has to at least get punished, right? Every owner would have to be upset with him in two different manners, one that he allowed the AFCCG to potentially be tainted rather than deal with it, and two that he could run the same type of sting on one of them one day. Once the "PUNISH THE PATS" shine wears off, owners will have to see this for what it is.
 

theapportioner

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 9, 2006
4,982
pappymojo said:
 
Maybe it wasn't his coach...
Harbaugh as Judas, Kensil as Herod, Goodell as Pilate, Brady as Jesus, and Belichick as God. The New England fanbase as Peter. McNally and the elderly ballboy with the enlarged prostate as the other two nailed to the cross. Gisele as Mary Magdalene. Do I have everyone's roles right?

Edit: The Wells report would be one of the Gospels, I guess. And the ESPN reports as apostasy, to be burned and forever lost to history.
 

E5 Yaz

Transcends message boarding
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Apr 25, 2002
72,068
Oregon
ifmanis5 said:
And in their place we've had what?
 
Good question.
 
But if you're looking for pristine reporting of only factual, open-sourced information, you're living in a media age that never existed
 

DJnVa

Dorito Dawg
SoSH Member
Dec 16, 2010
45,577
E5 Yaz said:
 
We do?
 
Well, not really.
 
We do have the Colts admitting they told the league early in the week and apparently no one told the Patriots of those concerns.
 

WayBackVazquez

white knight against high school nookie
SoSH Member
Aug 23, 2006
8,294
Los Angeles
drleather2001 said:
I may be cynical, but I just have trouble believing that the league will permit a report that casts it in as negative a light as some here are hoping/thinking.
 
Yes, Wells is from a reputable firm and I'm sure they will do good work, and what they tell Goodell behind closed doors might be brutally frank in its assessment regarding the league and Kensil and everyone just making a mess of things.   That being said, as a practical matter, there's no rules of procedure or rules of discovery that dictate that Goodell can't have some input on what areas of the investigation are emphasized or glossed over in the final report that gets released to the press.   It's not like Congress or some other government entity is performing an investigation, the entirety of which will be available through a FOIA request.   Wells and his associates are required to keep their conversations/dealings with Goodell confidential.
 
At the end of the day, the Wells report will say, at least in part, what Goodell wants it to say.
 
This is what Rachel Nichols was getting at, and which Goodell made a condescending remark towards.  Unfortunately, rather than (or at least, in addition to) people picking up the thread of what Nichols was saying, they focused on Goodell being an asshole.
 
I'm not so sure the bolded is true. Paul Weiss wasn't hired to give legal advice here. They were hired to conduct an internal investigation prompted not by any threat or anticipation of litigation. And, according to the word of Goodell and Wells, there will be a report made public, which would weigh further toward waiver of any attorney-client privilege or work product protection.
 
Now, things they want to stay confidential would still do so absent a properly made discovery request or subpoena; but if say Mr. Kraft or Mr. McNally were to file a lawsuit arising out of this debacle, their attorneys would push for full disclosure, and I think they'd have a pretty good argument.
 

ifmanis5

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 29, 2007
50,047
Rotten Apple
E5 Yaz said:
 
Good question.
 
But if you're looking for pristine reporting of only factual, open-sourced information, you're living in a media age that never existed
I'm looking for people to do their job. The facts are out there to be had. Go get them. And feel free to knock down stuff that has proven to be false.
 

E5 Yaz

Transcends message boarding
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Apr 25, 2002
72,068
Oregon
ifmanis5 said:
I'm looking for people to do their job. The facts are out there to be had. Go get them. And feel free to knock down stuff that has proven to be false.
 
While having no media discussion on this until the facts were ascertained would be a terrific development for all concerned, things simply don't work that way.
 

E5 Yaz

Transcends message boarding
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Apr 25, 2002
72,068
Oregon
scotian1 said:
It is very possible that Grigson and Kensil were behind this on their own and Goodell had no knowledge of what they had in mind, If that is the case Kensil is gone for sure.
 
That's where my money is; then again, that gut feeling comes from watching far too many TV procedurals
 

ifmanis5

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 29, 2007
50,047
Rotten Apple
E5 Yaz said:
 
While having no media discussion on this until the facts were ascertained would be a terrific development for all concerned, things simply don't work that way.
So, no reporting until Ted Wells speaks? That's great.
 

joe dokes

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
21,745
theapportioner said:
Harbaugh as Judas, Kensil as Herod, Goodell as Pilate, Brady as Jesus, and Belichick as God. The New England fanbase as Peter. McNally and the elderly ballboy with the enlarged prostate as the other two nailed to the cross. Gisele as Mary Magdalene. Do I have everyone's roles right?

Edit: The Wells report would be one of the Gospels, I guess. And the ESPN reports as apostasy, to be burned and forever lost to history.
 
"where are the dinosaurs?"
 
--Tony Dungy
 

Stitch01

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
18,155
Boston
There's been zero factual evidence presented that the Pats did anything wrong.  Some could come out, but given the sieve that is the league office Im making the educated guess we would have heard if there was a smoking gun.  So I'm continuing to operate under the premise that the Pats did zero wrong because we have zero evidence the Pats did anything wrong and because the organization, which has owned up to mistakes and accepted punishment in the past, vehemently denies any wrongdoing.  Im reasonably confident there is going to be no evidence of Patriot wrongdoing.  Im less confident there will be zero punishment, but that's because Goodell is an idiot, not because of anything the Pats did.
 

theapportioner

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 9, 2006
4,982
nattysez said:
 
I never saw Curran as a Pats shill, but he really has broken out a flamethrower in connection with this story.  I mean, he even sicced the Barstool Sports guy on Kensil at Media Day.   
Didn't Curran get his butt hurt by Belichick at one of the Ballghazi press conferences? I assumed he was trying to get back into the good graces of La Familia.
 

PBDWake

Member
SoSH Member
May 1, 2008
3,682
Peabody, MA
theapportioner said:
Didn't Curran get his butt hurt by Belichick at one of the Ballghazi press conferences? I assumed he was trying to get back into the good graces of La Familia.
 
BB was pretty blunt with him, but that's kind of the nature of their relationship. BB doesn't actually dislike Curran, by all accounts, he just calls him on dumb questions and they both move on. Curran's pretty professional about not holding sarcasm/dismissiveness against BB, and I guess BB likes that. I haven't heard anything about Curran being in his doghouse.