#DFG: Canceling the Noise
- Thread starter nattysez
- Start date
OnWisc said:
Yeah, next time the NFL disciplines the Pats, they'll try something like lowering the team's salary cap allowance by $15 million/season for 4 years.
I think every indication has been that the other owners are pissed off at the way that Goodell has turned the league into the WWE this calendar year and as there's no way that he's backing down they desperately want Kraft to to help preserve the august image of the league. There is no money in the NFL becoming sports entertainment (in the legal sense) over sports entertainment (in the practical sense).NatetheGreat said:
dcmissle said:
Well, last year we started off 2 and 2, and in 2012 we were also 2 and 2 and got to the AFC title game and in 2003 we were 2 and 2 and went to the SB. Obviously you dont want to lose games, but I also dont think Jimmy G can possibly be worse than Cassel was for the first 6 or so games when he was playing and they held up well. Plus, I have to imagine this team is going to go in full out assault mode once the season begins.
Super Nomario said:
Sure, but winning the SB and picking 64th (63rd really) is better than finishing 8-8 and picking 50th.
Yes, you are. The point is, you don't have the chance to pick someone great.Ferm Sheller said:
Corsi said:
Didn't Goodell designate Wells to do the report in the first place. "You must designate a neutral party" sounds nice in theory, but what are the odds Goodell doesn't just pick someone he knows will rule against the Pats regardless? In a way, it'd almost be better if RG handled the appeal, because then at least the odds of it being thrown out later in court seem higher
This sucks. I think that the suspension will absolutely be reduced (maybe thrown out). I am more concerned with the legacy and the shit talking. Not of other fans, but of talk radio (i am looking at you F and M). It just sucks that this will be more ammo for the next 5, 6 years and render my drive home sports-talk free.
There is no Rev said:
Take it from me. Really good NFL QB's are hard to find. You don't want the one you have retiring to prove a point.
djbayko said:
I know, but you could have used a better example than a guy who wasn't picked in the first round.
I'd rather win the SB and pick 32nd. There is no diminishing the punishment..it is what it is.Ferm Sheller said:
I didn't say he was first round. That's not the point. Sorry for confusing people with thst example though.Marciano490 said:
Because it means that the NFLPA lawyer doesn't get a chance to shred this case in court. If it gets to federal court the story probably leaks out into the wider news world, and that story isn't going to make the NFL look good. If he cans the suspension, then the questions about the competence and impartiality of the league office go away and the Wells report isn't given a thorough and official legal evisceration.wibi said:
PC Drunken Friar said:
The legacy stuff strikes me as pretty important. This SB win was supposed to be Brady's definitive "I am the GOAT QB" statement, and going forward huge numbers of people are going to mentally asterisk it. I don't think it keeps him out of the HoF--this isn't McGwire or Pete Rose level--but I do think its going to be part of the conversation literally anytime someone has a "best QB" debate or ranking, especially in future years when memories of actual play have dimmed and people increasingly look to media coverage to inform their opinions of the era.
Even though I know Peyton has obvious reasons for not wanting to publicly side against the Colts (and to be fair, it's not like he's publicly sided with them either, his statements have all been studiously neutral from what I've seen), cynically part of me wonders if he isn't a little pleased about how this has played out, just for what it potentially means for his own legacy/historical ranking
Ian Rapoport @RapSheet 1m1 minute ago
Expect Roger Goodell’s response to the NFLPA’s request to not include a change. He wants to look Tom Brady in the eye, hear his story.
Expect Roger Goodell’s response to the NFLPA’s request to not include a change. He wants to look Tom Brady in the eye, hear his story.
M
MentalDisabldLst
Guest
joe dokes said:
Smiling Joe Hesketh said:
I can't agree, as long as we're talking about pre-2003 Al Davis. The fact that there is still today a New England Patriots organization is due to the efforts of Al Davis, more than any other single person, to win respect and attention for the AFL. He got the better of the NFL time and again (signing players under their noses, especially QBs in the late 60s as AFL Commissioner). He was a leader in a ton of things, like the first black head coach (Art Shell) and female team President (Amy Trask). That Al Davis goes to the mat for his players and franchise, and usually wins. He had a lifetime of canny, sometimes underhanded dealing in order to out-maneuver opponents.
Kraft is not as dissimilar as we might like to think. His first job out of HBS was working for his father-in-law's paper business; 4 years later, he engineered an LBO to take over the business, slim it down, and aggressively grew it from there. He bought Schaefer Stadium in order to give him leverage to buy the team from Sullivan. The whole Hartford debacle. Kraft might not quite be in Al Davis's league, but one underestimates his ability as a tactician and dealmaker at one's peril.
Few NFL ownerships survive amicably across generations. Look at the Bensons now in New Orleans, or the DeBartolos a decade ago; there are many more examples. Who cares if Kraft "ends up" with a similar dotage to Al Davis; what made Davis a laughingstock in his old age was football incompetence, not a lack of business acumen. Kraft has been smart enough to delegate anything football-related to a legendary talent in that regard, and stay the F out of it. In all business matters, though, I don't see why Kraft might have been worried about ending up as Al Davis.
And ending up like Donald Sterling or Frank McCourt was never a possibility, I don't think. I don't know the NFL constitution at all, but if you can show me a portion that suggests Kraft's ownership might be terminated were he to pursue legal action against the league, I'll change my opinion. Short of that, I don't think he had much to lose beyond the 1st- and 4th-round picks and $1M that was already on its way out.
Corsi said:
What's with all this "look people in the eye" nonsense. Everyone thinks they're everyone else's dad.
Chris Mortensen @mortreport 55s55 seconds ago
Despite NFL public confirmation, NFLPA has yet to receive formal notice that Goodell will be arbitrator on Brady appeal & no date set
Despite NFL public confirmation, NFLPA has yet to receive formal notice that Goodell will be arbitrator on Brady appeal & no date set
When Goodell refuses to recuse himself and then doesn't completely eliminate the suspension, it will look much better for Kessler and company in the courts that they laid out their case to Goodell himself and used every available internal structure they had to try to ensure a neutral process. They might be 100% sure that Goodell won't recuse himself, but this is still a smart step, obviously.
I'm pretty sure RG just wants Brady to admit wrongdoing and that he, Roger Goodell, was right all along. If he does that, I think RG will happily play the "magnanimous"/merciful judge, lowering the suspension because he "believes Tom Brady has really learned his lesson" or something
I don't see RG voluntarily modifying his punishment in any way that would suggest that he, Roger Goodell, made a mistake or was in the wrong.
The whole "look him in the eye" stuff just plays right into that, because it lets RG justify whatever decision he wants to make based not on facts or arguments, but a "gut feeling" or some such.
I don't see RG voluntarily modifying his punishment in any way that would suggest that he, Roger Goodell, made a mistake or was in the wrong.
The whole "look him in the eye" stuff just plays right into that, because it lets RG justify whatever decision he wants to make based not on facts or arguments, but a "gut feeling" or some such.
Re "The North remembers"
If there was a quid pro quo "hug" about Brady in exchange for Kraft's mea culpa, what are the chances King Roger pulls a King Joffrey and does in TB12?
If there was a quid pro quo "hug" about Brady in exchange for Kraft's mea culpa, what are the chances King Roger pulls a King Joffrey and does in TB12?
It's "who is the boss?" time, and Tom will have to endure some suck before entering the court house door.
From another great American movie:
"You little scumbag! I got your name, I got your ass! You will not laugh, you will not cry, you will learn by the numbers I will teach you. Now get up, get on your feet! You had best un-fuck yourself or I will unscrew your head and shit down your neck!"
Being a powerful owner isn't carte blanch to put your team first. It's being able to wield the power of the organization to enact and enable things that otherwise someone else would do or wouldn't be possible at all.OnWisc said:
Kraft believes football is a great sport. He's a fan first in many ways and is, in general, more interested in using his position to promote the sport than line his pockets or swing his dick around. So while he's giving up something of substantial value here, he is also in effect getting of perhaps greater value: a family name synonymous with "the good of the league."
Whether it's future CBAs, revenue deals—or even the choice of commissioner—there will be ample opportunities to wield this power in the years—and generations—ahead. And this whole episode will have made that more, not less, likely.
bankshot1 said:
The quid pro quo/backroom deal interpretation of this has a number of flaws. Relying on Goodell to keep his word when he has no actual reason to is one of them. Expecting him to completely drop the suspension (in effect admitting that the league was wrong to suspend Brady in the first place), based on a backroom deal that provides no real public cover for Goodell's ego is another.
NatetheGreat said:
Unless all of the owners talked about it, agreed on the compromise and told Roger to carry it out.
Not that he'd respond, but has anyone bothered to call out Mortenson about his bullshit assertion (yes, relying on a league source) that the balls were all 2 psi under the required level? Has anyone even emailed him directly about it?Ed Hillel said: