#DFG: Canceling the Noise

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


  • Total voters
    208

Harry Hooper

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jan 4, 2002
32,023
notfar said:
Dear Staties,

I'm not really down with cops abusing their power, but just this once it is okay. Please arrest Goodell for traveling 2 MPH over the speed limit when he comes to the banner ceremony. A bogus resisting arrest charge would be nice too.
 
Heck, I want anyone from NFL HQ traveling through New England to learn the hard way that invariably their luggage will be lost, their hotel room will be too hot or too cold, their meal orders will be jumbled up, and their drinks will be watered down to a ridiculous degree.,  
 

Gagliano

Ask me about my mollusks
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Sep 19, 2001
5,812
Maine
Please save yourself and don't watch NFLN.
 
There is so much ignorance displayed there by "journalists" - they make Jerry Springer or Geraldo Rivera seem qualified in comparison.
 
It's one thing to have an opinion. It's another to either ignore or twist facts to suit your opinion. That goes both ways, except I really haven't heard anyone twist facts to defend the Patriots...only vice versa.
 
Jesus, the fucking (out of context) texting quotes are printed for everyone to read. Do they think no one reads them? Do they have to actually spout things that were never actually texted?
 
I'm not off football, but I'm certainly off sports networks that do anything but show games and shut up.
I can tell you one thing: I'm in Indy, and folks here are eatin' it right up.
 

Shelterdog

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Feb 19, 2002
14,525
New York City
Harry Hooper said:
 
Heck, I want anyone from NFL HQ traveling through New England to learn the hard way that invariably their luggage will be lost, their hotel room will be too hot or too cold, their meal orders will be jumbled up, and their drinks will be watered down to a ridiculous degree.,  
 
THE NORTH REMEMBERS
 

brandonchristensen

Loves Aaron Judge
SoSH Member
Feb 4, 2012
35,471
Was just sent a pic of Hernandez and Brady together with the caption: "Hey man, I believe you...I was innocent too!"
 
*sigh*
 

garzooma

lurker
Mar 4, 2011
126
From the Wells interview:
 
And for them later on to say I could not have a second interview of the most important person in the case was just a lack of cooperation
 
said the man who says people can't have a first interview of the professor he's relying on to give credibility to the report's science.
 
Snark aside, I'd like to hear McNally's explanation of his text messages.  Maybe Kraft can arrange a press conference for McNally to give his side of things.
 
 

Eddie Jurak

canderson-lite
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 12, 2002
38,924
Melrose, MA
I am a little surprised by the way Wells popped off. Isn't this exactly the time to say, "I was appointed by the commissioner to do a fair investigation and that is exactly what I did. Well, more probably than not."
 

AB in DC

OG Football Writing
SoSH Member
Jul 10, 2002
10,607
Springfield, VA
LuckyBen said:
The only thing Kraft screwed up, was siding with that dick during the Rice debacle. All other aspects, you are choosing to listen to Wells narrative. Godspeed
No, I'm going by Kraft's own statement, where he said a "fifth" interview was unreasonable -- even though it would have only been McNally's second interview with the Wells team.  
 
Wells was wrong about so, so many things in his report.  This was not one of them.
 

pappymojo

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 28, 2010
6,109
NatetheGreat said:
 
I disagree. The Spurs have been by far the most successful NBA team of the last 15 years, and don't face nearly the same level of resentment from opposing teams or fans. A certain level of animosity will always come with winning, but that doesn't mean successful teams are incapable of shaping their public image in any way. The Patriots and BB in particular like to operate as though popularity is irrelevant and results are all that matter, but when severe unpopularity is translating directly into on-field consequences I'm not sure how well that holds up. I don't think the Patriots are ever going to be well-liked, but I do think that going forward the battle for public perception has a good chance of effecting not only legacies and endorsement opportunities but also on-field performance via the severity of penalties handed down to them. In Roger Goodell, they luckily face one of the few antagonists in football arguably even more hated than Belichick. That said, I still think that it would be counterproductive for the Pats to double-down on the mentality of "fuck everybody". Play to win as many games as possible, obviously, but beyond that I don't see any point to directing ire at other players that by all rights should be directed at RG and the league office.
Are you suggesting that we all become the equivalent of a San Antonio Spurs fanbase?

Or are you suggesting that Brady needs to be more like Tim Duncan?
 
To be clear, I'm stating that the Patriots problem with their public image in the eyes of the rest of the country is in many ways a reflection of how the rest of the country views Boston sports fans. 
 

LuckyBen

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 5, 2012
3,396
AB in DC said:
No, I'm going by Kraft's own statement, where he said a "fifth" interview was unreasonable -- even though it would have only been McNally's second interview with the Wells team.  
 
Wells was wrong about so, so many things in his report.  This was not one of them.
Do you not buy Florios report that it was McNallys decision? Why are you do certain Wells is right here?
 

Bongorific

Thinks he’s clever
SoSH Member
Jul 16, 2005
7,870
Balboa Towers
I'm stunned Wells held the conference call.  It brings him right into the mud of the Patriots/League/Media shitshow.  If the report were truly a fact-finding mission, he needs to remain completely neutral before, during, and after the work is complete. 
 
I know they weren't in litigation at the time, but typically, lawyers only get one chance to depose/interview a witness.  You need to actually develop the evidence in the case first because of this, and if things come out during the deposition, you need to be quick enough to adjust on the fly.  Now, if there is an issue that evidence was intentionally withheld, you may get a second crack at the witness.  However, Wells hasn't done enough to demonstrate to me that McNally's texts were intentionally withheld.
 
On a different note, I don't understand the logic by some in the media and some here saying the Patriots brought this on themselves by letting Brady have a press conference and Kraft defiantly denying any wrong doing before the Super Bowl.  WTF were they supposed to do?  The media and national news was running with the story for an entire week leading up the Super Bowl.  Were they supposed to just sit back and let their names and Brand be questioned?  And if they said nothing, the same crowd would say, "well if you're really innocent you would be singing it from the mountain tops."
 

54thMA

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 15, 2012
9,530
Westwood MA
I've made the classic mistake of engaging in debates with fans from other teams on this, one asshole in particular who's a Cowboys fan.
 
Talk about an exercise in futility; I've explained how since 2006, in 65 home games, Brady has 131 touchdowns, while in 64 road games, he's got 138 touchdowns, so he's performed better on the road where the home team supplies the ballboys, not the Patriots, ie, no ability to deflate the footballs.
 
I've also pointed out that in the AFCCG that everyone points to as the tipping point on this, they scored more points in the second half with properly inflated balls than in the first half with underinflated balls.
 
All I get back is Brady is a liar and a cheater, first Spygate, now this, your team are a bunch of cheaters.
 
Can't say I didn't try.
 
I think I'll just stay here and avoid all other forums, it's a total waste of time.
 

Hoya81

Member
SoSH Member
Feb 3, 2010
6,916
Bongorific said:
I'm stunned Wells held the conference call.  It brings him right into the mud of the Patriots/League/Media shitshow.  If the report were truly a fact-finding mission, he needs to remain completely neutral before, during, and after the work is complete. 
 
I know they weren't in litigation at the time, but typically, lawyers only get one chance to depose/interview a witness.  You need to actually develop the evidence in the case first because of this, and if things come out during the deposition, you need to be quick enough to adjust on the fly.  Now, if there is an issue that evidence was intentionally withheld, you may get a second crack at the witness.  However, Wells hasn't done enough to demonstrate to me that McNally's texts were intentionally withheld.
 
On a different note, I don't understand the logic by some in the media and some here saying the Patriots brought this on themselves by letting Brady have a press conference and Kraft defiantly denying any wrong doing before the Super Bowl.  WTF were they supposed to do?  The media and national news was running with the story for an entire week leading up the Super Bowl.  Were they supposed to just sit back and let their names and Brand be questioned?  And if they said nothing, the same crowd would say, "well if you're really innocent you would be singing it from the mountain tops."
They would have run into Media Day eventually. 
 

kartvelo

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Aug 12, 2003
9,759
At home
Hoya81 said:
They would have run into Media Day eventually. 
"Why did they wait until Media Day, when they had no choice but to face the media? Why didn't they speak out right away, if they were innocent?"
 

Bosoxfan5034

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 16, 2013
39
After following this entire disaster since January and reading the Wells report, I want to try and clarify one point mentioned a few pages back. 

Isn't the most damning part of the evidence that McNally was clearly doing something to the balls, sometime? Everyone interviewed, including Brady, said that he had no role in ball preparation. The texts show that's not true. 

Even if all the texts are explained as deflating balls prior to inspection, why does neither Brady nor any of the clubhouse personnel mention that McNally was ever involved in ball preparation? Isn't this the biggest problem with the Pats' defense? Am I missing something? 

 
 

ilol@u

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 2, 2009
3,889
Foxboro
Didn't Roger have an interview which he stated that the first time he heard of any issues with the balls were AFTER the AFCCG. Yet Wells stated today that the Colts reported the issue to the NFL beforehand and the NFL didn't take it seriously.
Which one is it?
 

Jettisoned

Member
SoSH Member
May 6, 2008
1,006
AB in DC said:
No, I'm going by Kraft's own statement, where he said a "fifth" interview was unreasonable -- even though it would have only been McNally's second interview with the Wells team. 
 
In your estimation, what is a reasonable number of interviews for McNally to submit to?  6? 7?  The NFL started an investigation, then hired someone else to continue it.  McNally was requested a fifth time.  That is unreasonable.  So is leaking McNally's name and address to the press.
 
Also, if McNally refused to submit to another interview there isn't anything Kraft could have done about it.  McNally isn't Kraft's vassal; Kraft doesn't even employ him full time.
 

GeorgeCostanza

Member
SoSH Member
May 16, 2009
6,683
Found in central mass
ilol@u said:
Didn't Roger have an interview which he stated that the first time he heard of any issues with the balls were AFTER the AFCCG. Yet Wells stated today that the Colts reported the issue to the NFL beforehand and the NFL didn't take it seriously.
Which one is it?
Well if they really didn't take it seriously (which I doubt since just about everyone was told to BOLO) then it stands to reason Roger wouldn't have been told. Just playing devils advocate because I think he knew, just as I think he saw the ray rice tape or at least knew exactly what was on it.
 

brandonchristensen

Loves Aaron Judge
SoSH Member
Feb 4, 2012
35,471
54thMA said:
I've made the classic mistake of engaging in debates with fans from other teams on this, one asshole in particular who's a Cowboys fan.
 
Talk about an exercise in futility; I've explained how since 2006, in 65 home games, Brady has 131 touchdowns, while in 64 road games, he's got 138 touchdowns, so he's performed better on the road where the home team supplies the ballboys, not the Patriots, ie, no ability to deflate the footballs.
 
I've also pointed out that in the AFCCG that everyone points to as the tipping point on this, they scored more points in the second half with properly inflated balls than in the first half with underinflated balls.
 
All I get back is Brady is a liar and a cheater, first Spygate, now this, your team are a bunch of cheaters.
 
Can't say I didn't try.
 
I think I'll just stay here and avoid all other forums, it's a total waste of time.
Facts have a way of getting in the way of feelings.
 

AB in DC

OG Football Writing
SoSH Member
Jul 10, 2002
10,607
Springfield, VA
LuckyBen said:
Do you not buy Florios report that it was McNallys decision? Why are you do certain Wells is right here?
 
Because that would contradict Kraft's own statement.  " I was offended by the comments made in the Wells Report in reference to not making an individual available for a follow-up interview. What the report fails to mention is that he had already been interviewed four times and we felt the fifth request for access was excessive for a part-time game day employee who has a full-time job with another employer."  
 
There is no possible way to read this as "it was McNally's decison, we had nothing to do with it."
 

pappymojo

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 28, 2010
6,109
Jettisoned said:
 
In your estimation, what is a reasonable number of interviews for McNally to submit to?  6? 7?  The NFL started an investigation, then hired someone else to continue it.  McNally was requested a fifth time.  That is unreasonable.  So is leaking McNally's name and address to the press.
 
Also, if McNally refused to submit to another interview there isn't anything Kraft could have done about it.  McNally isn't Kraft's vassal; Kraft doesn't even employ him full time.
 
Agreed.  Just because the NFL says this is a very serious issue doesn't mean that it is a serious issue.  It's a million dollar investigation when it's not even clear that the balls were out of spec, and McNally is a guy with a job and his position with the Patriots was a side thing.  "Can you come here one more time to talk about these balls?"  I can very easily see myself if innocent saying 'fuck this. I don't care anymore.   If you want to talk again, call me.'
 

kartvelo

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Aug 12, 2003
9,759
At home
Jettisoned said:
 
In your estimation, what is a reasonable number of interviews for McNally to submit to?  6? 7?  The NFL started an investigation, then hired someone else to continue it.  McNally was requested a fifth time.  That is unreasonable.  So is leaking McNally's name and address to the press.
 
Also, if McNally refused to submit to another interview there isn't anything Kraft could have done about it.  McNally isn't Kraft's vassal; Kraft doesn't even employ him full time.
JM: Those fuckers leaked my address! I had reporters coming to my house! I'm done! If they call again, tell them to fuck off!
Pats' counsel: What about if it's over the phone?
JM: Fuck. OK. But that's it!
...some time later...
TW: We'd like to talk to JM again. We finally got around to reading through the texts he gave us, and we want another bite at the apple now.
Pats' counsel: Not gonna happen.
TW: Tell him we want to see him!
Pats' counsel: He'll talk to you on the phone.
TW: Uncooperative!
 

DeJesus Built My Hotrod

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 24, 2002
39,722
54thMA said:
I've made the classic mistake of engaging in debates with fans from other teams on this, one asshole in particular who's a Cowboys fan.
 
Talk about an exercise in futility; I've explained how since 2006, in 65 home games, Brady has 131 touchdowns, while in 64 road games, he's got 138 touchdowns, so he's performed better on the road where the home team supplies the ballboys, not the Patriots, ie, no ability to deflate the footballs.
 
I've also pointed out that in the AFCCG that everyone points to as the tipping point on this, they scored more points in the second half with properly inflated balls than in the first half with underinflated balls.
 
All I get back is Brady is a liar and a cheater, first Spygate, now this, your team are a bunch of cheaters.
 
Can't say I didn't try.
 
I think I'll just stay here and avoid all other forums, it's a total waste of time.
 
 
Why bother?  I live in 49ers territory and their fans are gleefully calling Brady a cheater until I point out that they had a slew of domestic abusers playing for their team.  As for the Cowboys, look no further than here.  The minute a fan from an opposing team starts in, I check the arrest records and then point out that slightly deflated footballs are nothing compared to the horrific nature of domestic abuse or the danger to innocents that results from DUIs.  That usually shuts people up.   
 

pappymojo

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 28, 2010
6,109
AB in DC said:
 
Because that would contradict Kraft's own statement.  " I was offended by the comments made in the Wells Report in reference to not making an individual available for a follow-up interview. What the report fails to mention is that he had already been interviewed four times and we felt the fifth request for access was excessive for a part-time game day employee who has a full-time job with another employer."  
 
There is no possible way to read this as "it was McNally's decison, we had nothing to do with it."
 
Huh?  How else could you read that statement? 
 

AB in DC

OG Football Writing
SoSH Member
Jul 10, 2002
10,607
Springfield, VA
PedroKsBambino said:
 
Yeah, what has he ever won anyway?  No reason to think he knows what he is doing.
 
Do you even realize how this statement looks to anyone outside Boston?  "Yes, Kraft knows what he's doing.  He tolerate cheating because he knows that cheating is how to win championships.  This was his plan all along, knowing that the NFL would never strip away the titles won by cheating.  Because cheating!!!1!!"
 

Ralphwiggum

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 27, 2012
9,157
Needham, MA
AB in DC said:
Do you even realize how this statement looks to anyone outside Boston?  "Yes, Kraft knows what he's doing.  He tolerate cheating because he knows that cheating is how to win championships.  This was his plan all along, knowing that the NFL would never strip away the titles won by cheating.  Because cheating!!!1!!"
Who cares what anyone outside of Boston thinks. Kraft saved the team from being moved and has presided over the most successful run of football in modern NFL history. He's not infallible but it would be pretty hard for us to do better for an owner. Jealous fans of other teams can suck it.
 

brandonchristensen

Loves Aaron Judge
SoSH Member
Feb 4, 2012
35,471
DeJesus Built My Hotrod said:
 
 
Why bother?  I live in 49ers territory and their fans are gleefully calling Brady a cheater until I point out that they had a slew of domestic abusers playing for their team.  As for the Cowboys, look no further than here.  The minute a fan from an opposing team starts in, I check the arrest records and then point out that slightly deflated footballs are nothing compared to the horrific nature of domestic abuse or the danger to innocents that results from DUIs.  That usually shuts people up.   
Yeah but that's OFF THE FIELD.
 

DJnVa

Dorito Dawg
SoSH Member
Dec 16, 2010
49,105
Bosoxfan5034 said:
After following this entire disaster since January and reading the Wells report, I want to try and clarify one point mentioned a few pages back. 

Isn't the most damning part of the evidence that McNally was clearly doing something to the balls, sometime? Everyone interviewed, including Brady, said that he had no role in ball preparation. The texts show that's not true. 

Even if all the texts are explained as deflating balls prior to inspection, why does neither Brady nor any of the clubhouse personnel mention that McNally was ever involved in ball preparation? Isn't this the biggest problem with the Pats' defense? Am I missing something? 
 
 
McNally fucking with the balls isn't *really* the issue. It's if Brady told him to specifically do it.
 

kartvelo

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Aug 12, 2003
9,759
At home
AB in DC said:
 
Because that would contradict Kraft's own statement.  " I was offended by the comments made in the Wells Report in reference to not making an individual available for a follow-up interview. What the report fails to mention is that he had already been interviewed four times and we felt the fifth request for access was excessive for a part-time game day employee who has a full-time job with another employer."  
 
There is no possible way to read this as "it was McNally's decison, we had nothing to do with it."
I wonder what Kraft could have meant by "we"....
 

Brand Name

make hers mark
Staff member
Dope
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Oct 6, 2010
3,744
Behind Studio 42
From my Ravens (I know, I know) fan friend. I think this is a mostly a decent take, but I think he's expanding the scope of the charge a bit far. I had compared the concern about this contrasted with Rice's 2 games, Rodgers' overinflation discussed during the Pats game in Lambeau last season, the loss of picks, Brady suspension, plus why the Chargers and Vikings got a lot less. What say you of these statements? Reasonable guy, decent opinion, and so forth. But I hold strong in that it's at least somewhat apples-to-apples to compare this suspension with an actual crime (like Rice), unlike what he states below.
 


 
My opinion on this as simple. The Patriots took something that didn't need to be a big deal and made it one. It was bad enough that the media ran with it, but the media is a child looking for its next toy, it would've dropped this story, moved on to the Super Bowl and hardly brush over it again. Instead, Tom Brady lied, the Patriots did not cooperate, and instead of preparing for the Super Bowl the entire week, the first thing they do when they land in Arizona is demand an apology, talk about scientific stuff they have no business talking about, and pretend they're a martyr. What occurred is really punishable by a very small fine, but since they themselves wouldn't shut up about it and turned it into a federal crime this is the end result. They set themselves up.
 
And to those that say the NFL has it out for Tom Brady, that doesn't make sense. The NFL has essentially taken the biggest star in the league currently and benched him for the 1st game of the entire season. The game they hype up, play in primetime, and sponsor a concert prior to the game. That wasn't an easy decision to make in the lightest because even on appeal Tom Brady still has a very good chance of missing that first game no matter what.
See. This isn't comparable to Ray Rice or anyone possibly connect to an actual crime. There's a difference between an actual crime and a rule infraction. To hold the two side by side is an apples to cantaloupes type of comparison. 

To that degree though, EVERYONE in the NFL should be walking on eggshells in the aftermath of the Ray Rice debacle. The league screwed the pooch on that one and will come down hard on what they see fit from now on to prove that they aren't "soft" on anything.

Also, I don't like people bringing up the other instances of teams found doing this or warming up balls (i.e. the Chargers and Vikings). Both of those teams hardly denied it, and if they did they certainly didn't make it as public as the Patriots did. Like I said, I think the Patriots' fatal flaw was making this a bigger deal than it had to be. That made them seem more guilty than just denying it with a few statements. Also, neither of teams caught were in the championship game or Super Bowl. Regardless of how small the rule broken was, it was a rule. And to have potential rule breakers moving to the biggest game in all of American sports is not a good look. There's a difference to some low profile team being caught in some low profile game, and the 2nd most valuable team in the NFL being caught in a championship game.

(quote about questioning if Rodgers should be suspended given similar actions)
Fined maybe, but not suspended. Why? Because he just came up and outright said it. Tom Brady went as far as to deny even knowing about the preparation of his footballs.

We can talk about the Colts having the underinflated balls on the Colts side, but again, I don't recall them acting so shady about it or having such dubious circumstances. Plus, with the trouble Irsay's been in recently, he knows he has no right to run his mouth off against the league like Kraft did.

The rule should be adjusted, and perhaps even outright abolished as I've seen suggested. However, that doesn't mean you can break it because it's pointless.
 
I think this is honestly this will be as good as it will get from fans of opposing teams, especially Baltimore fans. 2001-2006 perceptions of The Patriot Way aren't coming back, we all know this, but still. Thought it'd be interesting to add another team's opinion, especially given the nature of his fanbase, and his mostly reasonable outlook, a lot of which we haven't had here yet.
 
 

kartvelo

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Aug 12, 2003
9,759
At home
 
We can talk about the Colts having the underinflated balls on the Colts side, but again, I don't recall them acting so shady about it or having such dubious circumstances.
Denying an accusation is acting shady?
And the only thing "dubious" about all this is the idea that anything actually happened.
 

Myt1

serves you chicken wings
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Mar 13, 2006
37,339
South Boston
AB in DC said:
 
Because that would contradict Kraft's own statement.  " I was offended by the comments made in the Wells Report in reference to not making an individual available for a follow-up interview. What the report fails to mention is that he had already been interviewed four times and we felt the fifth request for access was excessive for a part-time game day employee who has a full-time job with another employer."  
 
There is no possible way to read this as "it was McNally's decison, we had nothing to do with it."
The two aren't mutually exclusive.
 

Hoya81

Member
SoSH Member
Feb 3, 2010
6,916
Bosoxfan5034 said:
After following this entire disaster since January and reading the Wells report, I want to try and clarify one point mentioned a few pages back. 

Isn't the most damning part of the evidence that McNally was clearly doing something to the balls, sometime? Everyone interviewed, including Brady, said that he had no role in ball preparation. The texts show that's not true. 

Even if all the texts are explained as deflating balls prior to inspection, why does neither Brady nor any of the clubhouse personnel mention that McNally was ever involved in ball preparation? Isn't this the biggest problem with the Pats' defense? Am I missing something? 
 
 
 
Could be as simple as Brady was really bearing down on Jastresmki in terms of the gameday process. Jastremski asked McNally to help him out with the final touches, and offers gear and Brady autographs as a sweetener.  Jastremski doesn't tell anyone because McNally isn't a full time employee and isn't supposed to be involved. 
 

AB in DC

OG Football Writing
SoSH Member
Jul 10, 2002
10,607
Springfield, VA
Bongorific said:
 
I know they weren't in litigation at the time, but typically, lawyers only get one chance to depose/interview a witness.  You need to actually develop the evidence in the case first because of this, and if things come out during the deposition, you need to be quick enough to adjust on the fly.  Now, if there is an issue that evidence was intentionally withheld, you may get a second crack at the witness.  However, Wells hasn't done enough to demonstrate to me that McNally's texts were intentionally withheld.
 
 
 
Irrelevant.  There was no judge enforcing the rules of evidence.  There was no defendant's counsel ensuring that that his client was getting a fair shake.  There was just Wells.  The process sucked, but it was the best they could do.
 
One of many reasons why Kraft's lawyers should get fired.  This was not a legal contest, it was a street fight.  It's like the scene from Raiders of the Lost Ark -- the Patriots thought they were pretty cool waving their sword around, only to see Wells pull out a (metaphorical) gun and shoot the Patriots down.  
 

DJnVa

Dorito Dawg
SoSH Member
Dec 16, 2010
49,105
AB in DC said:
 
Because that would contradict Kraft's own statement.  " I was offended by the comments made in the Wells Report in reference to not making an individual available for a follow-up interview. What the report fails to mention is that he had already been interviewed four times and we felt the fifth request for access was excessive for a part-time game day employee who has a full-time job with another employer."  
 
There is no possible way to read this as "it was McNally's decison, we had nothing to do with it."
 
Really?
 
McNally tells the Patriots that Wells wants to talk to him again, but he's talked about this 4 times already and he has a real full-time job and this is getting ridiculous. Pats take the side of their employee (who may or may not have dirt, so of course they'll want to play nice) and tell Wells that 4 times is enough.
 

J.McG

lurker
Aug 11, 2011
204
Further evidence that no one really gave a damn about football underinflation until Belichick's Patriots (allegedly) were involved - according to football historian Dan Daly, the use of underinflated footballs in the NFL made the news on just one other occasion since 1960, in a game between Al Davis' Raiders & Chuck Noll's Steelers in 1973:

For starters, underinflated footballs have never been much of an issue in the NFL before now. Fascinating, dont you think? A search of various newspaper archives the other day turned up almost nothing since 1960, at least.

There was one story, in 1973, about the Steelers accusing the Raiders of dirty tricks. (And this was after a 17-9 win!) They complained that the Raiders had smeared their uniforms with a greasy substance, had underinflated the footballs and had written obscenities on one of them, The Associated Press reported. There were also complaints that the Oakland Coliseum clock was not operated properly.

Several days later days, mind you, not months the NFL handed down its verdict: not guilty.
Link to Daly's full piece, which does a nice job of putting this incident in its proper historical context: http://profootballdaly.com/the-deflategate-disaster/
 

AB in DC

OG Football Writing
SoSH Member
Jul 10, 2002
10,607
Springfield, VA
Jettisoned said:
 
In your estimation, what is a reasonable number of interviews for McNally to submit to?  6? 7?  The NFL started an investigation, then hired someone else to continue it.  McNally was requested a fifth time.  That is unreasonable.  
 
When you're the one being investigated, you're in absolutely no position to dictate the rules.
 
 
Hasn't anyone been audited before?  Try that kind of attitude with the IRS and see how far it gets you.
 

Morgan's Magic Snowplow

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 2, 2006
21,259
Philadelphia
Delonte James Jr. said:
 
From my Ravens (I know, I know) fan friend. I think this is a mostly a decent take, but I think he's expanding the scope of the charge a bit far. I had compared the concern about this contrasted with Rice's 2 games, Rodgers' overinflation discussed during the Pats game in Lambeau last season, the loss of picks, Brady suspension, plus why the Chargers and Vikings got a lot less. What say you of these statements? Reasonable guy, decent opinion, and so forth. But I hold strong in that it's at least somewhat apples-to-apples to compare this suspension with an actual crime (like Rice), unlike what he states below.
 
 
He seems to have a very strange interpretation of the events following the AFC Championship game.  When he talks about the Patriots making this a big story, he seems to have forgotten about how the 24/7 hottakez  media lynch mob, spurred on by leaks from the NFL office, spent that entire week screaming Cheatriots at the top of their lungs and calling for Bill Belichick to be suspended from the Super Bowl.
 
Get the chronology right at least.
 

EvilEmpire

paying for his sins
Staff member
Dope
Apr 9, 2007
16,160
Washington
One of many reasons why Kraft's lawyers should get fired.  This was not a legal contest, it was a street fight.  It's like the scene from Raiders of the Lost Ark -- the Patriots thought they were pretty cool waving their sword around, only to see Wells pull out a (metaphorical) gun and shoot the Patriots down.
I think Myt1 sort of said as much already, but doesn't it really depend on what McNally would have said in that additional interview? He could have made things worse. Maybe Kraft's lawyers prevented that from happening by not making him available. Maybe they were doing a controlled burn to keep the whole forest from going up in flames.
 

DJnVa

Dorito Dawg
SoSH Member
Dec 16, 2010
49,105
AB in DC said:
 
When you're the one being investigated, you're in absolutely no position to dictate the rules.
 
 
Hasn't anyone been audited before?  Try that kind of attitude with the IRS and see how far it gets you.
 
Well, since he wasn't interviewed again, and he personally wasn't sanctioned, then it seems he was in position to dictate.
 
But that's exactly the same as an audit, which has the power of the federal government behind it.
 

AB in DC

OG Football Writing
SoSH Member
Jul 10, 2002
10,607
Springfield, VA
DrewDawg said:
 
Really?
 
McNally tells the Patriots that Wells wants to talk to him again, but he's talked about this 4 times already and he has a real full-time job and this is getting ridiculous. Pats take the side of their employee (who may or may not have dirt, so of course they'll want to play nice) and tell Wells that 4 times is enough.
 
We'll have to agree to disagree on this.  I don't see reason why Kraft would make the statement he did if that were the case.  If it's Mcnally's decision then there's no reason for Kraft to take ownership of it.
 

Eck'sSneakyCheese

Member
SoSH Member
May 11, 2011
9,973
NH
We all realize we're talking about the highly volatile air pressure in a regulation football. Something that fluctuates throughout different game environments and situations. Something every QB likes a particular way,and every equipment manager configures to comfort their players. This was something so ridiculously minor as far as impact on the game and it was made by the league to be looked at in the same vein as PEDs. The NFL should be ashamed of itself for the circus they've created by this bullshit investigation. The Patriots acted the way they did because they thought this was less than a minor infraction. The league turned what should have been a slap on the wrist into a public flogging. I seriously hope the Pats organization fights this tooth and nail.
 

Myt1

serves you chicken wings
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Mar 13, 2006
37,339
South Boston
AB in DC said:
 
We'll have to agree to disagree on this.  I don't see reason why Kraft would make the statement he did if that were the case.  If it's Mcnally's decision then there's no reason for Kraft to take ownership of it.
Well, the reason is because Wells already putting the decision on the Patriots, lying by omission/selectively reporting the facts to make them look bad, and because they likely played a role, along with McNally, because Kraft's version is in no way mutually exclusive with the issues that are being reported and McNally's desire not to be interviewed yet again.

I can't tell if you're concern trolling, or just really unimaginative.
 

AB in DC

OG Football Writing
SoSH Member
Jul 10, 2002
10,607
Springfield, VA
Nice job turning everything into personal attacks on me.  Congratulations, the pro-Patriots mob is now just as bad as the anti-Patriots mob.  Bye now.
 

Ed Hillel

Wants to be startin somethin
SoSH Member
Dec 12, 2007
35,198
Here
I want to take the same stance as you, Eck, but there's still a part of me that believes Brady never wanted to break any rules here. Hearing from Wells himself today made me question the conclusions he drew even more. I could see reasonable roads to either conclusion at this point. That makes the actions of the NFL even worse, mind you.
 

EvilEmpire

paying for his sins
Staff member
Dope
Apr 9, 2007
16,160
Washington
The Patriots were obligated to cooperate fully with the investigation. If their part-time employee told them he refused to participate in the investigation further, they should have immediately terminated him and reported to Wells that he refused to cooperate further and was fired as a result. No way to cite the Patriots for failing to cooperate then, I think.