#DFG: Canceling the Noise

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


  • Total voters
    208

DavidTai

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 18, 2003
738
Herndon, VA
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.
 
Nah, he acknowledged the burn with some humor in an article about it, as well as tweets (commenting that his own son told him about the Belichick burn), so I think that's basically part of a give-and-take dynamic he has with Belichick.
 

amarshal2

Member
SoSH Member
Oct 25, 2005
4,876
re: Curran's sources piece.  It's gotta be pretty much unheard of for people in a central league office to try and take down one of its teams publicly.  Don't they realize how their salaries are paid?
 

DennyDoyle'sBoil

Found no thrill on Blueberry Hill
SoSH Member
Sep 9, 2008
31,834
AZ
WayBackVazquez said:
 
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.
 
Yeah, privilege for internal investigations is complicated.  It depends on what you're talking about -- notes of interviews, drafts of the report, conversations with the league, etc.  But I'm guessing Wells will be pretty careful about all that, and it's correct that unless there is litigation it is probably a moot point.  Making the final report public probably waives privilege as to prior drafts of the report.  Other stuff, like notes of interviews (if they exist or are retained) are more complicated.  
 
But it's clear that the league is trying to maintain its options with respect to privilege here.  Wells is the only name the press ever mentions, but the investigation was actually launched, purportedly, as a "joint" investigation by Wells and Jeff Pash, the NFL's general counsel.  I don't think making Pash a co-joint investigator was an accident, and probably would be helpful in maintaining privilege or at least giving the NFL an argument should it want one.
 

JimBoSox9

will you be my friend?
SoSH Member
Nov 1, 2005
16,619
Mid-surburbia
DrewDawg said:
 
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.
 
Do we know this last bit?  We know there's a weekly 'items of concern' list that each team submits to the league office about their opponent.  AFAIK, we do not know whether 'standard' policy is to distribute that list to said opponent.  We also do not know if Grigson 'alerting' the league was via this channel or something more 'special'.  We do know that the NFL sent a written warning about ball tampering for a comparable incident in Nov, but that was observed on video during the game and was not the result of any kind of pregame warning, making it a poor procedural comp.
 

dcmissle

Deflatigator
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Aug 4, 2005
28,269
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.
I agree. If there is punishment, I think there will be war. The team's appeal from that punishment will provide the lever to expose what -- again -- is unprecedented to my knowledge: League officials, over a period of 10 days, actively attempting to harm a championship game participant, through selectively leaking, in concert with individuals from other teams and in league with the media. I am not accusing Goodell of this, but Goodell underlings he was unwilling or unable to corral.

I am firmly persuaded that this took place, and for this reason part of me hopes for the $25,000 fine. Because I don't think Kraft will let that go.

If there is no discipline, there will not be a well defined forum in which to force this story out, and I suspect Kraft will let it go.
 

Corsi

isn't shy about blowing his wad early
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 3, 2010
12,955
Boston, 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.
 
Curran was anything but butthurt about that exchange.
 

DJnVa

Dorito Dawg
SoSH Member
Dec 16, 2010
45,577
JimBoSox9 said:
 
Do we know this last bit?  .
 
With the caveat that we actually know very little here, people like Albert Breer have tweeted something like "If the Colts reported this early in week and no one told the Patriots..."
 
I don't know. That Wells report will be fun to read.
 
 

Section30

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 2, 2010
1,176
Portland OR
DennyDoyle'sBoil said:
 
Yeah, privilege for internal investigations is complicated.  It depends on what you're talking about -- notes of interviews, drafts of the report, conversations with the league, etc.  But I'm guessing Wells will be pretty careful about all that, and it's correct that unless there is litigation it is probably a moot point.  Making the final report public probably waives privilege as to prior drafts of the report.  Other stuff, like notes of interviews (if they exist or are retained) are more complicated.  
 
But it's clear that the league is trying to maintain its options with respect to privilege here.  Wells is the only name the press ever mentions, but the investigation was actually launched, purportedly, as a "joint" investigation by Wells and Jeff Pash, the NFL's general counsel.  I don't think making Pash a co-joint investigator was an accident, and probably would be helpful in maintaining privilege or at least giving the NFL an argument should it want one.
Will we get the complete report from Wells?
 
If Goodell issues a watered down or altered report to the public I wonder if Wells would feel he has to preserve his professional integrity by releasing the the full report?
 
This has all of the earmarks of the FIFA investigation where the investigator (Michael Garcia) resigned after the report was altered to show no wrongdoing in the 2018-2022 World Cup bidding process.
 
http://www.bbc.com/sport/0/football/30522170
 

Marciano490

Urological Expert
SoSH Member
Nov 4, 2007
49,649
DennyDoyle'sBoil said:
 
Yeah, privilege for internal investigations is complicated.  It depends on what you're talking about -- notes of interviews, drafts of the report, conversations with the league, etc.  But I'm guessing Wells will be pretty careful about all that, and it's correct that unless there is litigation it is probably a moot point.  Making the final report public probably waives privilege as to prior drafts of the report.  Other stuff, like notes of interviews (if they exist or are retained) are more complicated.  
 
But it's clear that the league is trying to maintain its options with respect to privilege here.  Wells is the only name the press ever mentions, but the investigation was actually launched, purportedly, as a "joint" investigation by Wells and Jeff Pash, the NFL's general counsel.  I don't think making Pash a co-joint investigator was an accident, and probably would be helpful in maintaining privilege or at least giving the NFL an argument should it want one.
 
But, how's it work in the league dynamic?  If the Patriots, as a member of the league, want access to communications between the league itself and Paul Weiss, what's the basis for maintaining privilege?
 
I'm issue spotting.
 

joe dokes

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
21,745
Section30 said:
Will we get the complete report from Wells?
 
If Goodell issues a watered down or altered report to the public I wonder if Wells would feel he has to preserve his professional integrity by releasing the the full report?
 
This has all of the earmarks of the FIFA investigation where the investigator (Michael Garcia) resigned after the report was altered to show no wrongdoing in the 2018-2022 World Cup bidding process.
 
http://www.bbc.com/sport/0/football/30522170
 
I'm sure Wells and his firm have signed a confidentiality agreement with the NFL. (that's different than the privilege issue if someone sues the league).  Unless Goodell trashes wells or his firm, I doubt he would break his side of the agreement.
 

DennyDoyle'sBoil

Found no thrill on Blueberry Hill
SoSH Member
Sep 9, 2008
31,834
AZ
Marciano490 said:
 
But, how's it work in the league dynamic?  If the Patriots, as a member of the league, want access to communications between the league itself and Paul Weiss, what's the basis for maintaining privilege?
 
I'm issue spotting.
 
My guess (emphasis) is that Pash's and Wells' client is the NFL -- that is the 501(c)(6) (or whatever it is) that is the NFL.
 
I wouldn't think member clubs have the right inside the NFL's privilege, although they probably have contractual rights to control the NFL through the NFL's member club agreement pursuant to some process (such as a vote by a majority or Super Majority of the designated representative of each club).  
 
Interestingly, though, I don't really understand what the job of NFL Commissioner is or means.  I don't know if he's an employee of the NFL, or a person established by agreement, constitution or by-laws of the member clubs, or both.  I presume the latter, but I'm not sure he can take off one hat and put on another for purposes of retaining counsel.
 
There's probably a pretty significant overlay in the league's constitution or by-laws or member agreements that control this question, but I'm not sure those docs are available on line or to the public.
 

WayBackVazquez

white knight against high school nookie
SoSH Member
Aug 23, 2006
8,294
Los Angeles
DennyDoyle'sBoil said:
 
There's probably a pretty significant overlay in the league's constitution or by-laws or member agreements that control this question, but I'm not sure those docs are available on line or to the public.
 
Sure they are.
 
Basically, he's an all-powerful autonomous Oz, and the owners have given up basically any right to come after him for anything he does.
 

Ed Hillel

Wants to be startin somethin
SoSH Member
Dec 12, 2007
28,495
Here
NBC said Superbowl pregame that the league directly told them that they (the league) was made aware of the football issue during the game, not beforehand. Of course, "the league" could mean any number of things, or people. Still, it would seem odd that someone from the league at that point would not have known about the Colts' request.
 

Corsi

isn't shy about blowing his wad early
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 3, 2010
12,955
Boston, MA
RedOctober3829 said:
Felger said via Curran that Scott Miller is a full-time employee of the NFL and had an office on Park Avenue.
 
Yep, he works under "NFL Auctions"
 

joe dokes

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
21,745
Ed Hillel said:
NBC said Superbowl pregame that the league directly told them that they (the league) was made aware of the football issue during the game, not beforehand. Of course, "the league" could mean any number of things, or people. Still, it would seem odd that someone from the league at that point would not have known about the Colts' request.
 
This is the same "league" that received the Ray Rice tape, but didn't receive the Ray Rice tape.
 

NortheasternPJ

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 16, 2004
15,878
Ed Hillel said:
NBC said Superbowl pregame that the league directly told them that they (the league) was made aware of the football issue during the game, not beforehand. Of course, "the league" could mean any number of things, or people. Still, it would seem odd that someone from the league at that point would not have known about the Colts' request.
This is the same League Office that had the Ray Rice video for months and Ginger never heard about it, allegedly.

It's clearly shown the NFL League office doesn't talk to each other in person, have phones, email or instant messaging

the same Goodell that claims he's always available to the media and never speaks to them
 

Ed Hillel

Wants to be startin somethin
SoSH Member
Dec 12, 2007
28,495
Here
RedOctober3829 said:
Felger said via Curran that Scott Miller is a full-time employee of the NFL and had an office on Park Avenue.
 
I got through about a minute and now Felger is calling the Patriots liars as is whoever this clown is with him and they both think they did deflate the footballs because they are liars we shouldn't trust. Good God, why do people subject themselves to this garbage? I'm mad at myself for even giving them 90 seconds.
 

dcmissle

Deflatigator
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Aug 4, 2005
28,269
Felger said via Curran that Scott Miller is a full-time employee of the NFL and had an office on Park Avenue.
It would be hilarious if he received the Ray Rice video sent to the League office, as opposed to Jeffrey Miller, the director of security, who denied receiving it.

As a practical matter, Wells' report will be made public. It certainly will be if the Pats are disciplined. It also will be if they are not disciplines, because then certain people will be saying that Goodell is protecting Kraft.
 

8slim

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 6, 2001
17,370
Unreal America
Here's one thing we definitively learned in the past 36 hours...someone(s), most likely someone(s) at NFL HQ, has it in for the Pats.  I am VERY cautious to ever come to a conclusion like that, because it seems so ridiculous, but it also seems like an unavoidable conclusion at this point.  
 
Someone(s) familiar with the investigation fed a reporter the info that a Pats game day employee tried to get an unapproved ball introduced into play.  That said someone(s) apparently didn't mention to said reporter that it was a fired NFL employee that gave the unapproved ball to said Pats game day employee it's incredibly damning.  
 
The intent was obvious, to cast more suspicion upon the Pats.  
 

dcmissle

Deflatigator
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Aug 4, 2005
28,269
I got through about a minute and now Felger is calling the Patriots liars as is whoever this clown is with him and they both think they did deflate the footballs because they are liars we shouldn't trust. Good God, why do people subject themselves to this garbage? I'm mad at myself for even giving them 90 seconds.
Supposedly, because Felger is "clever" and "interesting" and "smart" -- and people want to be "entertained".

Whoever tunes into him is asking for what they get.
 

Smiling Joe Hesketh

All Hail King Boron
Dope
May 20, 2003
32,210
Deep inside Muppet Labs
8slim said:
Here's one thing we definitively learned in the past 36 hours...someone(s), most likely someone(s) at NFL HQ, has it in for the Pats.  I am VERY cautious to ever come to a conclusion like that, because it seems so ridiculous, but it also seems like an unavoidable conclusion at this point.  
 
Someone(s) familiar with the investigation fed a reporter the info that a Pats game day employee tried to get an unapproved ball introduced into play.  That said someone(s) apparently didn't mention to said reporter that it was a fired NFL employee that gave the unapproved ball to said Pats game day employee it's incredibly damning.  
 
The intent was obvious, to cast more suspicion upon the Pats.  
 
No need to beat around the bush. It's Kensil. It's got to be Kensil. The guy the Pats have long thought he's had it in for them. He went down to the field to personally measure the balls at half despite the fact that PER THE RULES only the on-field officials are supposed to do that.
 
Mike Kensil was a Jets front office guy when BB quit as HC of the NYJ.
Mike Kensil's father was the Jets president for 10 years.
 
So you've got a league actively trying to discredit on of its own members because of petty grudges held by long-time Jet douchebags.
 

DJnVa

Dorito Dawg
SoSH Member
Dec 16, 2010
45,577
RedOctober3829 said:
Felger said via Curran that Scott Miller is a full-time employee of the NFL and had an office on Park Avenue.
 
WAS a full-time employee.
 
 

dcmissle

Deflatigator
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Aug 4, 2005
28,269
No need to beat around the bush. It's Kensil. It's got to be Kensil. The guy the Pats have long thought he's had it in for them. He went down to the field to personally measure the balls at half despite the fact that PER THE RULES only the on-field officials are supposed to do that.
 
So you've got a league actively trying to discredit on of its own members because of petty grudges held by long-time Jet douchebags.
That's why the Pats likely won't be disciplined. Because if they are, that son-of-a-bitch will be put under oath by an arbitrator, who probably will be a retired federal judge.
 

8slim

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 6, 2001
17,370
Unreal America
Smiling Joe Hesketh said:
 
No need to beat around the bush. It's Kensil. It's got to be Kensil. The guy the Pats have long thought he's had it in for them. He went down to the field to personally measure the balls at half despite the fact that PER THE RULES only the on-field officials are supposed to do that.
 
So you've got a league actively trying to discredit on of its own members because of petty grudges held by long-time Jet douchebags.
 
And if the reporter in question really has been working on this story for 3 weeks as claimed, then she was given this info the week before the Super Bowl, right smack dab in the middle of the Leak Parade that was occurring before Wells took over the investigation.  
 
It all makes sense.  This news was supposed to come out 3 weeks ago along with the other stuff to cast more suspicion on the Pats.
 
Unreal.
 

Smiling Joe Hesketh

All Hail King Boron
Dope
May 20, 2003
32,210
Deep inside Muppet Labs
8slim said:
 
And if the reporter in question really has been working on this story for 3 weeks as claimed, then she was given this info the week before the Super Bowl, right smack dab in the middle of the Leak Parade that was occurring before Wells took over the investigation.  
 
It all makes sense.  This news was supposed to come out 3 weeks ago along with the other stuff to cast more suspicion on the Pats.
 
Unreal.
 
It all makes perfect sense if you conclude the whole point of this exercise was to take down the Patriots from within the league by any means possible.
 

dcmissle

Deflatigator
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Aug 4, 2005
28,269
And if the reporter in question really has been working on this story for 3 weeks as claimed, then she was given this info the week before the Super Bowl, right smack dab in the middle of the Leak Parade that was occurring before Wells took over the investigation.  
 
It all makes sense.  This news was supposed to come out 3 weeks ago along with the other stuff to cast more suspicion on the Pats.
 
Unreal.
and to establish a firmer foundation to suspend BB for the SB.

Now cycle back to all the Theo posts, in real time.
 

8slim

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 6, 2001
17,370
Unreal America
Smiling Joe Hesketh said:
 
It all makes perfect sense if you conclude the whole point of this exercise was to take down the Patriots from within the league by any means possible.
 
Well if you know that they're cheating but you just can't prove it, then the ends justify the means, right?
 
;)
 

Omar's Wacky Neighbor

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jul 14, 2005
12,950
Leaving in a bit to the studio :)
Mooch said:
Tom Curran playing connect-the-dots on Naqi and her potential sources. Some familiar names in there:

http://www.csnne.com/new-england-patriots/curran-strong-nfl-link-recent-deflategate-leak
My favorite part:
 
 
More recently, Hussain Naqi worked for the New Meadowlands Stadium Company in East Rutherford, N.J. There, he served as Vice President of Business Planning and General Counsel at MetLife Stadium, the home of the Jets and Giants. Naqi would have worked closely with the league office on all the logistics for Super Bowl 48. The man in charge of “running” the Super Bowl for the NFL is its Vice President of Game Operations. He would speak to Naqi a lot.
 
His name is Mike Kensil.
 

kartvelo

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Aug 12, 2003
8,820
At home
E5 Yaz said:
 
Depends. There are stories floating around that they noticed something in the game in November, then used the referee notification process prior to the playoff game to bring it up
You mean the game in Indianapolis, where the Colts' staff would have been responsible for the game balls?
 

nattysez

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 30, 2010
5,764
Smiling Joe Hesketh said:
 
It all makes perfect sense if you conclude the whole point of this exercise was to take down the Patriots from within the league by any means possible.
 
If this is the case, then Goodell's handling of this is partially vindicated.  If you have rogue employees causing trouble and are not sure who they are, the best way to address that is to have a full investigation, at the end of which you terminate all of the idiots for cause.  And then you happily apologize to Kraft and promise to hire better people in the future.
 
kartvelo said:
You mean the game in Indianapolis, where the Colts' staff would have been responsible for the game balls?
 
That's not how it works.  Each team is responsible for its own game balls.  Edit:  Just realized you likely meant transporting them from the officials' room to the field.  Never mind.
 

JimD

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 29, 2001
7,980
dcmissle said:
I agree. If there is punishment, I think there will be war. The team's appeal from that punishment will provide the lever to expose what -- again -- is unprecedented to my knowledge: League officials, over a period of 10 days, actively attempting to harm a championship game participant, through selectively leaking, in concert with individuals from other teams and in league with the media. I am not accusing Goodell of this, but Goodell underlings he was unwilling or unable to corral.

I am firmly persuaded that this took place, and for this reason part of me hopes for the $25,000 fine. Because I don't think Kraft will let that go.

If there is no discipline, there will not be a well defined forum in which to force this story out, and I suspect Kraft will let it go.
 
Kraft is not letting this go - there 's no need to wish for a fine that will give the haters ammunition to say that the league found the Patriots guilty.
 

joe dokes

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
21,745
8slim said:
 
And if the reporter in question really has been working on this story for 3 weeks as claimed, then she was given this info the week before the Super Bowl, right smack dab in the middle of the Leak Parade that was occurring before Wells took over the investigation.  
 
It all makes sense.  This news was supposed to come out 3 weeks ago along with the other stuff to cast more suspicion on the Pats.
 
Unreal.
The calls were coming from inside the house.
 

Section30

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 2, 2010
1,176
Portland OR
The NFL counsel is part of the Wells investigation and Wells has confidentiality agreements with the NFL so it is likely we will never see portions of the report and Goodell could make any determination he wants. Do the owners get to see the full report?
 
I'm just trying to figure out how this report will help "the integrity of the league" when all of the information may not be made available. A lack of transparency will surely hurt more than help.
 

DJnVa

Dorito Dawg
SoSH Member
Dec 16, 2010
45,577
Joe D Reid said:
 
 
That article says a non-k Ball was brought in for XP and that's when it was noticed. I had been assuming that it was a k ball, just not an approved one.
 
Or is a non approved k ball just a ball?
 
When McNally tried to bring this non-K-ball into play for the PAT, someone noticed it wasn't properly prepared and didn't have the right markings. PFT says it was the Patriots who realized something was up; ESPN says the officials. Either way, red flag.
 
 
Also, that article sums up what I was trying to say earlier, and why I think the Schefter stuff is (or, will become) important even if only "Boston" is noticing it right now:
 
 
 
Remember how, when Ballghazi first broke, the NFL emphasized the sacrosanct routine and rigorous, almost military-style preparation of its game balls? How each team has a specialist whose job it is to get those balls exactly to their quarterback's liking while staying within the rules? That the Patriots could have gained some immeasurable, championship edge from a few extra tenths of PSI?
 
Bullshit! All of it! No one knows anything about the balls. No one's keeping track of them. Random doofuses are roaming the sidelines, pocketing game balls and swapping in random ones they found in a closet somewhere. Non-approved balls are showing up on the field in a conference championship game, and no one knows why or how or where the real ones went. How often does this happen? We wouldn't even have known about this one if the NFL hadn't been investigating the other ball-related maybe-shenanigans.
 
This happens every time. Every NFL controversy—think Ray Rice, or the replacement refs, or the Saints' bounty scandal—starts off with a chest-thumping, self-important "We must protect the shield!" routine and a sworn oath to make things right. And then it quickly devolves into another shining display of the NFL's incompetence, with the answer invariably being that someone who was supposed to know what they were doing didn't.
 
And now this league, which portrays itself as a Park Avenue office building full of control freaks but can't even establish a chain of custody for its footballs, is going to presume to chastise New England when it has its own employees going rogue? This latest mess has nothing to do with Ballghazi. It's also completely exonerated the Patriots.
 

TheoShmeo

Skrub's sympathy case
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jul 19, 2005
12,890
Boston, NY
Kraft is probably never going to get his apology from the league.
 
Not that it matters given the buffoons who run the NFL.  Why would any of us really give a shit if Goodell apologized? I mean, it might feel good for a moment as he is the Commish of the Shield, but he has shown himself to be a bumbling fool and I don't give a rat's ass when such people apologize to me.  Move along, bumbling fool.
 
In a similar vein, I don't care about what crazy people like Charles Haley are going to say (which is probably nothing) in the wake of these recent developments.
 
What I do wonder about is what the more rational folks who jumped the shark will do.  Will Joe Montana issue a mea culpa?  Will Jackie MacMullan try to take it back?  Wait.  I can't think of many others that fall into this category.  But maybe they exist and if they do, I hope they say that they rushed to judgment and should not have convicted the Pats on the sniveling "well they don't get the benefit of the doubt" rationale.  Are there others who should apologize and whose apology we might actually care to hear?
 
That last paragraph in the Deadspin article was killer, by the way. 
 

Leather

given himself a skunk spot
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
27,308
Section30 said:
The NFL counsel is part of the Wells investigation and Wells has confidentiality agreements with the NFL so it is likely we will never see portions of the report and Goodell could make any determination he wants. Do the owners get to see the full report?
 
I'm just trying to figure out how this report will help "the integrity of the league" when all of the information may not be made available. A lack of transparency will surely hurt more than help.
 
Listen carefully:
 
The league does not give a shit about integrity.  It only cares about appearing to care deeply about integrity.  
 
The league's success is not based on fairness, or justice, or caring about its players, or breast cancer, or Play 60, or any of that stuff. All it cares about is making people think they care, because that's good Public Relations, and good P.R. is good for getting advertisers and negotiating TV contracts, and getting advertisers and favorable TV contracts helps them make money.
 
That's it.  Also, there is no fucking Easter Bunny.
 
If Goodell and the NFL determine it's better for business to bury parts of the Wells investigation, they will do so.   The end.   Granted, that calculation will involve lots of factors, but if the investigation turns up that some high ranking members of the NFL were literally trying to get a head coach suspended by making trumped up charges via unauthorized leak, well, I'd wager a lot of money that they would go to almost any length to prevent that from being made available to the public.   
 

ifmanis5

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 29, 2007
50,047
Rotten Apple
Yeah those last two graphs are worth quoting:
 


This happens every time. Every NFL controversy—think Ray Rice, or the replacement refs, or the Saints' bounty scandal—starts off with a chest-thumping, self-important "We must protect the shield!" routine and a sworn oath to make things right. And then it quickly devolves into another shining display of the NFL's incompetence, with the answer invariably being that someone who was supposed to know what they were doing didn't.
 
And now this league, which portrays itself as a Park Avenue office building full of control freaks but can't even establish a chain of custody for its footballs, is going to presume to chastise New England when it has its own employees going rogue? This latest mess has nothing to do with Ballghazi. It's also completely exonerated the Patriots.
 

joe dokes

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
21,745
drleather2001 said:
 
Listen carefully:
The league does not give a shit about integrity. It only cares about appearing to care deeply about integrity.
 
The league's success is not based on fairness, or justice, or caring about its players, or breast cancer, or Play 60, or any of that stuff. All it cares about is making people think they care, because that's good Public Relations, and good P.R. is good for getting advertisers and negotiating TV contracts, and getting advertisers and favorable TV contracts helps them make money.
 
That's it. Also, there is no fucking Easter Bunny.
 
 
 
If Goodell and the NFL determine it's better for business to bury parts of the Wells investigation, they will do so.   The end.   Granted, that calculation will involve lots of factors, but if the investigation turns up that some high ranking members of the NFL were literally trying to get a head coach suspended by making trumped up charges via unauthorized leak, well, I'd wager a lot of money that they would go to almost any length to prevent that from being made available to the public.   
 
 

Ed Hillel

Wants to be startin somethin
SoSH Member
Dec 12, 2007
28,495
Here
Section30 said:
The NFL counsel is part of the Wells investigation and Wells has confidentiality agreements with the NFL so it is likely we will never see portions of the report and Goodell could make any determination he wants. Do the owners get to see the full report?
 
I'm just trying to figure out how this report will help "the integrity of the league" when all of the information may not be made available. A lack of transparency will surely hurt more than help.
 
There is zero chance that Robert Kraft does not get the entire report on his desk at some point. That would be my counterpoint to people who fear Wells and Goodell will work this thing out behind closed doors somehow. Kraft would release the report and destroy everything in his path. Moreover, if something untoward ever happened that didn't hit the report, I'm confident Kraft would get the information. I'm sure he has an ally somewhere in the Paul Weiss buildings.
 

Leather

given himself a skunk spot
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
27,308
Joe D Reid said:
 
I know it's a fool's game, but there are some amazingly obtuse arguments being made in response to that article.  
 
 
Really, this was just a stretch rant to try and be outraged about something, ala Rush Limbaugh. I had read somewhere the official saw a ball was attempted to be put in play that wasn't approved. Since it wasn't approved, it was removed and treated as a mistake, since no one would really think someone who works for the NFL/Pats/whoever is trying to steal game balls.
To use this to rant about the NFL is not warranted.
 
 

joe dokes

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
21,745
Ed Hillel said:
 
There is zero chance that Robert Kraft does not get the entire report on his desk at some point. That would be my counterpoint to people who fear Wells and Goodell will work this thing out behind closed doors somehow. Kraft would release the report and destroy everything in his path. Moreover, if something untoward ever happened that didn't hit the report, I'm confident Kraft would get the information. I'm sure he has an ally somewhere in the Paul Weiss buildings.
 
I think you're right.  But it sounds like the seeds of a John Grisham novel.