#DFG: Canceling the Noise

[lexrageorge]

++++++100000 on Poutine's comments. 
 
Seriously, there is nothing more Kraft can do about Deflategate at this point.  There is nothing he can say about it that helps either him, the Patriots, or Brady.  But there's plenty he could say that could make the situation worse.  We need to accept the fact the draft picks are gone.  The other owners are not going to oust Goodell over the Pats draft picks.   Kraft is not Al Davis; we need to get over that fact.  But he's also not Billy Sullivan or Victor Kiam or Daniel Snyder; that's something we should embrace. 
 
The suspension is Brady's (and the NFLPA's) battle to fight.  

 

[joe dokes]

I've lost respect for Kraft.
 
if he couldn't offer some support for Brady, he should have said "We respect the process" and then STFU. The qualifier of those "deserving" to play begs the question, is Tom deserving? He did not have to say that.

 
Bob Kraft does not care about your respect. Nor should he.  Kraft obviously wants Brady to be on the field opening day (is this really in dispute?). What he does and says publicly has nothing to do with *anything* Tom Brady and the NFLPA is doing. In fact there is *nothing* (other than perhaps gaining the mythical "respect" of fans who seem to think they are owed it) to be gained by Kraft saying *anything* at this point that's any different from what he said yesterday.  Nothing he says will make Brady's NFLPA case any easier. Bob Kraft's only job right now is to ensure that Bob Kraft remains in good standing with the league.  OTOH -- Given Goodell's track record, anything Kraft says that would likely earn the fans' "respect" carries with it the more-than-zero chance that Goodell takes his butt-hurt out on Brady.  Neither Kraft nor Brady nor Brady's people are stupid.  Not only do they *know* all of this, but I would be shocked if Kraft hasn't told them exactly this and Brady understands it 100%.  Kraft did what he could by running interference during the runup to the SuperBowl. 
 
and...

++++++100000 on Poutine's comments.
 

 

[BigJimEd]

I don't think Kraft is a "bumbling fool" and I doubt you'll find many that do.
Kraft has been and still is a good owner. No one can realistically argue otherwise.

Does Kraft have more information than us? Of course. That doesn't mean people can't discuss or even disagree with his choices sometimes.
His interests and Patriots fans interests aren't identical. They overlap a great deal but Kraft's primary interest is the business. As a fan I care about on the field and only care about the business as it affects that.

I don't care what committees Kraft is on or how much as a whole NFL owners make. As I see little evidence they help the on field product.


What do I expect Kraft to say? Nothing. I haven't lost respect for Kraft as others have.
I don't really have a problem with the statement per se. I just don't really see it as that supportive of Brady.
Not negative but purposely vague and worded in a way that could be interpreted as supportive of Goodell a well as Brady.
Actually that us exactly what I'd expect Kraft to do as an owner. Play both sides.


How would other owners handle this? Who knows? Who else has gone through this once never mind twice. Kraft's biggest mistake has been supporting Goodell. Who I don't think is a good commissioner.


As for Kraft possibly saying something that could make the situation worse. I'm not sure that is really possible at this point. I mean if he said he hopes Brady (by name) is on the field for the opener. Is that going to have any affect on the appeals? No and it's not going to bring more punishment down on the team.

 

[RIFan]

Has the thought even crossed anyone's mind that maybe Brady did tell them to deflate and has some culpability in all this. I'm not saying that the punishment would meet the crime. As others have stated Kraft knows more than us and possibly isn't willing to make himself look like a fool when the "truth" comes out. Is it really not possible that Brady told them "I don't give a fuck what you do, just make sure the balls are at 12.5 when they hit the field or I'll find someone that can take care of it!" If you can't see the possibility of Brady being even slightly involved in something than your fan blinders are in full force. The whole thing is a farce, but I can at least imagine why Kraft is treading more lightly now.

 

[Myt1]

Good rant.  People claiming that Kraft did not support Tom enough need to step back indeed and realize that Bob Kraft isn't an idiot.  As PP wrote, he does understand the lay of the land, and undoubtedly has more facts at his disposal than any of us.  He also has had a hand in the Pats' success and the deference he requested at his prior press conference is not unwarranted, albeit not an unlimited basis.  In short, he's not some bumbling fool and assuming that is wrong headed.
 
Yesterday he reiterated his prior stance and said, for the first time, that Brady deserves to be on the field and that Kraft hopes to see that.  What did people want or expect regarding Brady?  "I LOVE Tom and this whole thing just makes me puke!!"  
 
If that's what you were looking for, or anything much more than what Kraft said, I think you're dreaming. 

There are far more alternatives than Kraft being a bumbling idiot vs. he was supportive of Brady in his statement. He could have said anything and you'd have praised it by way of deference.

It's possible to both act in what he perceives to be as his best interests and not support Brady. It's fine to think that he did the former, and even to think it was the right move, but you're just inventing things if you think he did the latter to any material degree.

 

[lexrageorge]

Has the thought even crossed anyone's mind that maybe Brady did tell them to deflate and has some culpability in all this. I'm not saying that the punishment would meet the crime. As others have stated Kraft knows more than us and possibly isn't willing to make himself look like a fool when the "truth" comes out. Is it really not possible that Brady told them "I don't give a fuck what you do, just make sure the balls are at 12.5 when they hit the field or I'll find someone that can take care of it!" If you can't see the possibility of Brady being even slightly involved in something than your fan blinders are in full force. The whole thing is a farce, but I can at least imagine why Kraft is treading more lightly now.

It's certainly possible that Kraft either knows that Brady had some involvement, or just suspects it.  I'm not completely ruling out Brady's culpability.  But I'm not reading that into Kraft's statements.  A simpler explanation is that two Patriots employees were caught sending texts about PSI and deflation (yes, I know it's more nuanced than that).  That's enough in the mind of the other owners to punish the team.  Kraft became aware of this during the league meetings, and realized he really cannot win.  
 
There is the issue that the Wells report cites no evidence that Brady had anything to do with any ball tampering, assuming tampering occurred.  But that's Brady's issue to fight.  

 

[bankshot1]

Jesus Christ people need to cut this bullshit out. (It's not just you, I'm on my phone or I'd quote a dozen other people, so sorry to single you out.) but nobody gives a shit about your or anyone else's respect level for Kraft or your future attendance or your future TV viewing habits.

Who the fuck do you think he was talking about? Why do you think he chose to use those words? If you honestly think Kraft isn't supporting Brady then you need to wake the fuck up.

It was fun to pound the table and cry for Kraft to go full on Al Davis, rogue owner. It was a worthwhile thought experiment. It was never going to happen. Ever.

I'm sorry you and others have gotten butt hurt by this fact. But people need to grow up. Robert Kraft is easily one of the best few owners to have for your team in the NFL if not all of professional sports. That he doesn't choose to commit professional seppuku to please the unwashed masses of his fanbase does not detract from this.

Would you prefer Jerry Jones? Schneider? Do you think Mara or Rooney would have come out guns blazing? Maybe we should go full on GB and we can all buy shares and then beat off looking at the certificate hanging in our mancave?

This whole thing sucks. And it stinks. And it sucks and it stinks. But he got handed a shit sandwich and a lot people expected him to make filet mignon out of it. People are actively looking for more shit to criticize him on and complain about, when there's already plenty there to be upset about that is no fault of his own. It's fucking tiring and nauseating to watch.

Here's the indisputable facts: Robert Kraft knows a metric fuckton more than any person here about what he is and was able to do about this situation. And about being an NFL owner. And about the back channels of the billionaires club he is in. And the league he owns a team in.

He has lawyers and PR guys and advisors and then more lawyers and he has loyalists/friends amongst the other owners that I assure you he has spoken to and he has analysts and BB and then more lawyers and PR guys and analysts and everything else. He's not waking up and pulling shit out of his ass.

We wouldn't even have a team if not for Robert Kraft. So everyone do your arm chair quarterbacking elsewhere so this forum can get back to some respectability, huh? Please.




Sorry, I'm done now. Again, not directed entirely at you.

No offense taken, but I don't have to agree with what Kraft said, in this instance or other instances and I can still believe he's been the best  owner the Pats have had. I think he could have said "we respect the process" and that would have been a perfectly adequate response without adding the qualifier. 
 
And yes we can all agree that Kraft probably cares little what a ny individual fan thinks.
 
Nice rant, most of t was irrelevant to my post/position, but it read well.

 

[RIFan]

It's certainly possible that Kraft either knows that Brady had some involvement, or just suspects it.  I'm not completely ruling out Brady's culpability.  But I'm not reading that into Kraft's statements.  A simpler explanation is that two Patriots employees were caught sending texts about PSI and deflation (yes, I know it's more nuanced than that).  That's enough in the mind of the other owners to punish the team.  Kraft became aware of this during the league meetings, and realized he really cannot win.  
 
There is the issue that the Wells report cites no evidence that Brady had anything to do with any ball tampering, assuming tampering occurred.  But that's Brady's issue to fight.  

I was more directing that at those who seem to take offense to Kraft not stomping his foot and demanding justice for Brady. I remain in the camp that Brady ripped those guys a new one over the over inflated balls and told them to not let it happen again. The knuckleheads took it upon themselves to tamper with the balls after inspection.

 

[Hoya81]

Has the thought even crossed anyone's mind that maybe Brady did tell them to deflate and has some culpability in all this.

I've considered it, but the Wells Report stated that :

"On Thursday, January 22, Belichick reportedly discussed these issues for the first time with Brady, shortly before a team meeting. Belichick asked Brady directly whether he had any knowledge about any of the issues raised by the press since the AFC Championship Game. According to Belichick, Brady said “absolutely not.” Belichick stated that he then asked if Brady or anyone Brady knew had tampered with or in any way altered the footballs. Brady again denied any knowledge or involvement. Belichick recalled that Brady also explained that once he inspects and approves game balls, those balls are exactly as he likes them and that he would not want anyone to do anything to them after that point. Belichick believed Brady. Belichick and Brady attended the team meeting, and Belichick told the team that there was “not one shred of truth” to the deflation allegations. When given the floor, Brady repeated what he had told Belichick about wanting game balls to be exactly as he approved them."

I find it hard to believe that Brady would lie directly to BB and then the team, unless Brady has gone full Armstrong/Braun and is willing to sacrifice his relationships with Kraft/BB/Pats Players by having them perpetuate a lie.

 

[RIFan]

I've considered it, but the Wells Report stated that :

"On Thursday, January 22, Belichick reportedly discussed these issues for the first time with Brady, shortly before a team meeting. Belichick asked Brady directly whether he had any knowledge about any of the issues raised by the press since the AFC Championship Game. According to Belichick, Brady said “absolutely not.” Belichick stated that he then asked if Brady or anyone Brady knew had tampered with or in any way altered the footballs. Brady again denied any knowledge or involvement. Belichick recalled that Brady also explained that once he inspects and approves game balls, those balls are exactly as he likes them and that he would not want anyone to do anything to them after that point. Belichick believed Brady. Belichick and Brady attended the team meeting, and Belichick told the team that there was “not one shred of truth” to the deflation allegations. When given the floor, Brady repeated what he had told Belichick about wanting game balls to be exactly as he approved them."

I find it hard to believe that Brady would lie directly to BB and then the team, unless Brady has gone full Armstrong/Braun and is willing to sacrifice his relationships with Kraft/BB/Pats Players by having them perpetuate a lie.

It's really not hard to believe. Given the perceived significance of the infraction, he could view the initial denial as a little white lie, not a matter of historical importance that the league has made this into. There is no way anyone could have expected this to mushroom as it did. Brady isn't stupid and wouldn't directly order someone to break a rule. The NFL and the general public could still find him culpable if it was felt his tirades against the equipment guys implied that he expected them to do what was necessary. I don't think there is a doubt he was an ass to these guys and that they could have leaped to conclusions. Goodell and the public don't care if he gave the unequivocal direction to deflate. They'll hang him on an implication.

 

[kartvelo]

The air pressure in the balls is explainable by simple science and math. The only time McNally could have done anything to them is during his brief stop in the bathroom, and everyone knows what he was doing in there, and it wasn't deflating footballs - because, again, the air pressure in the balls is explainable by simple science and math, which indicates that nothing was done to them in the bathroom or anywhere else.
The whole thing was a witch hunt, plain and simple. The question for Kraft, Belichick, Brady, et al to consider is - what do you do when you stand accused of wrongdoing, but you are 100% innocent? Different factors are involved for each, and the "best" move for each will be different. Kraft appears to have decided that his best move is to take his beating and make nice with his serial abuser. Belichick appears to have just moved on, as there's no reason for him to do otherwise and there's really nothing else he can do at this point anyway. Brady's fighting his suspension, and we don't know yet how far (or if) he (and/or NFLPA) will take things beyond that.
It's really disheartening to me to see even Pats fans at this point saying, "I wonder if Brady might be guilty after all, at least in some small way," when there's still zero evidence that there's anything for anyone to be guilty of, despite a multi-million dollar effort to find something, anything, to blame on someone, anyone.

 

[Cabin Mirror]

The air pressure in the balls is explainable by simple science and math. The only time McNally could have done anything to them is during his brief stop in the bathroom, and everyone knows what he was doing in there, and it wasn't deflating footballs - because, again, the air pressure in the balls is explainable by simple science and math, which indicates that nothing was done to them in the bathroom or anywhere else.
The whole thing was a witch hunt, plain and simple. The question for Kraft, Belichick, Brady, et al to consider is - what do you do when you stand accused of wrongdoing, but you are 100% innocent? Different factors are involved for each, and the "best" move for each will be different. Kraft appears to have decided that his best move is to take his beating and make nice with his serial abuser. Belichick appears to have just moved on, as there's no reason for him to do otherwise and there's really nothing else he can do at this point anyway. Brady's fighting his suspension, and we don't know yet how far (or if) he (and/or NFLPA) will take things beyond that.
It's really disheartening to me to see even Pats fans at this point saying, "I wonder if Brady might be guilty after all, at least in some small way," when there's still zero evidence that there's anything for anyone to be guilty of, despite a multi-million dollar effort to find something, anything, to blame on someone, anyone.

 
I am in 100% agreement with you.
 
I believe the logic for many who wonder if Brady has some tiny shred of culpability is "how could anyone spend this much time and energy if there was nothing there?" As sure as I am of his innocence, I have to admit that this very question pops into my head occasionally. I mean, it's really stupefying.

 

[TheoShmeo]

Myt1, you could not be more wrong about the deference point. When Kraft first informed us that he was not going to pursue the appeal, my reaction -- and it's here somewhere -- was that I understood what Kraft was doing regarding not fighting a fight that could not be won, but preferred that he was more openly supportive of Tom.
 
Yesterday, he was.  In just the right amount.  Going on and on about it would have been unnecessary in my view and I think he struck just the right chord.  Bob said that Tom deserves to be there and Bob hopes that happens, as do the fans.  Please, what more did he need to say to satisfy your support meter?  That Tom did nothing wrong?  That he believes Tom?  Those kinds of comments would have very likely done more harm than good in that it would have lead to a media frenzy and I doubt Tom's lawyers or Kessler would have viewed those as helpful to Tom's appeal.  I also think there is SOME shot that Goodell reduces the penalty -- not that I am holding my breath -- and had Bob spoken in any way like he did before the SB, that his comments would have been counterproductive.  Again, Kraft walked the line perfectly, and not because he is owed deference.    
 
The notion that I would support anything because in general I think a successful owner who has many more facts at his disposal than we do is owed a little deference is simply wrong.  As I wrote, the deference I think he is due is not limitless, and had Kraft again said nothing supportive about Tom, I would have again noted that.

 

[JokersWildJIMED]

I know this has been discussed to death, but I it is frustrating that few "journalists" refuse to see the games that Ted Wells played with language on their report.  We can all argue the science, validity of Exponent, texts, etc. but the fact that they played games with language to acquiesce to the NFL is beyond blatant.  The proper term based on their their own conclusions were that it was "possible" that Tom Brady was involved (probable something happened x probable generally aware).  However, by purposely misstating their conclusions they leave the impression that was desired.

 

[Myt1]

Myt1, you could not be more wrong about the deference point. When Kraft first informed us that he was not going to pursue the appeal, my reaction -- and it's here somewhere -- was that I understood what Kraft was doing regarding not fighting a fight that could not be won, but preferred that he was more openly supportive of Tom.

And it was the only criticism of an otherwise glowing review.
 

Yesterday, he was.  In just the right amount.  Going on and on about it would have been unnecessary in my view and I think he struck just the right chord.  Bob said that Tom deserves to be there

Did he? I don't see it in the quote.

and Bob hopes that happens, as do the fans.  Please, what more did he need to say to satisfy your support meter?  That Tom did nothing wrong?  That he believes Tom?  Those kinds of comments would have very likely done more harm than good in that it would have lead to a media frenzy

I'm sorry, you think that if the owner of the New England Patriots had said that he believed that the player he has referred to as a son had done nothing wrong, it's very likely that the comment would have led to a media frenzy that would have done any material amount of harm? Come on. Pull the other one.

and I doubt Tom's lawyers or Kessler would have viewed those as helpful to Tom's appeal.  I also think there is SOME shot that Goodell reduces the penalty -- not that I am holding my breath -- and had Bob spoken in any way like he did before the SB, that his comments would have been counterproductive.  Again, Kraft walked the line perfectly, and not because he is owed deference.    
 
The notion that I would support anything because in general I think a successful owner who has many more facts at his disposal than we do is owed a little deference is simply wrong.  As I wrote, the deference I think he is due is not limitless, and had Kraft again said nothing supportive about Tom, I would have again noted that.

He didn't even mention the guy by name or say that he deserves to be out there (at least in the quote that was posted and is in the link). Typically when I'm trying to be supportive of someone, I find that doing so is helpful. The statement may have even been the best thing for the Patriots. But let's not pretend that it was love from 1 Corinthians 13.

The notion that this was the platonic ideal of Brady support is beyond silly. It was a company line non-answer to the question. And that's perfectly fine, company line non-answers have their place. But don't pretend it's something it's not.

 

[nighthob]

It was fun to pound the table and cry for Kraft to go full on Al Davis, rogue owner. It was a worthwhile thought experiment. It was never going to happen. Ever.

I'm sorry you and others have gotten butt hurt by this fact. But people need to grow up. Robert Kraft is easily one of the best few owners to have for your team in the NFL if not all of professional sports. That he doesn't choose to commit professional seppuku to please the unwashed masses of his fanbase does not detract from this.

I mean I'm not sure what people expected. The guy is one of the most powerful members of the billionaire boys club that is the NFL, there was never a way that he was giving that up to appease message board users on Patriots fan sites. He'll get his revenge on the Artless Roger the old fashioned way, by making sure that when his contract comes up for renewal it doesn't. That was always going to be the result.

 

[RIFan]

The air pressure in the balls is explainable by simple science and math. The only time McNally could have done anything to them is during his brief stop in the bathroom, and everyone knows what he was doing in there, and it wasn't deflating footballs - because, again, the air pressure in the balls is explainable by simple science and math, which indicates that nothing was done to them in the bathroom or anywhere else.
 

 
Here's the thing, this all culminated with sting operation at the AFC Championship but it's obviously not just about that game.  Science possibly explains that the balls were not tampered with in that game only (which is impossible to say since all there is to go on is Anderson's recollection that he set them to 12.5).  I'm sure a lot of the league has tinfoil hats when it comes to the Pats, but this was a huge straw to grasp at if someone didn't have strong suspicions that something was going on with the balls post inspection previously.  The league office is sketchy enough that if they felt certain that the rumors that the Pats had screwed with the balls in prior games they would hang their hats on whatever thread of "evidence" they could obtain from the AFC Championship.  They have something more than what is in the report.  It might be nothing more than a chorus of disparate rumors and hearsay, but they have something that motivated them to go all in on the investigation and punishment.   Good for anybody who feels with 100% conviction that Brady and the Pats are fully innocent, but I guess I'm cynical enough about sports to think that it's at least possible that everyone at that level has the potential to push the boundaries a little to far.
 
I don't want to get drawn into an argument that they're punishing them for the AFC Championship only and they can't use rumors from prior games as justification.  I completely agree with that, but we're not dealing with logic here.  Goodell and his minions are jokes who have some kind of agenda that only makes sense to them.  

 

[TheoShmeo]

Myt1, Kraft said explicitly that Tom deserved to be on the field and that he hoped he would be. 
 
My comments were not glowing and if you're reading that in, you are missing my point.  My comment was that the "part of the club" speech was not new, the support of Tom was indeed new and in my view sufficient for the reasons I mentioned, and that I think it's appropriate to grant Kraft some deference under the circumstances (and in particular, given that he has a grip on a lot more of the pertinent facts than we do).
 
You can blow that up as much as you like, but I have trouble believing that if we were just having a beer that you or anyone could turn what I said into glowing support of the Owner.  I promise you that's not what was intended.  Yep, I have a healthy amount of respect for what I don't know, and I have trouble believing that Kraft wouldn't have said more or done more if he thought that there was something to be gained by doing it.  But Kraft is human and subject to criticism, just like the rest of us.
 
One last thing.  I am likely colored by the fact that a friend who went to UMichigan with Tom and knows him and Tom's dad very well (and was with Tom's dad at the SB before the game, just before we met after the  brief SoSH meet up on site) told me that Tom and Bob are on the same page on all things DeflateGate, and that there is no fissure in their relationship whatsoever.  Because I believe my friend completely, I view things like yesterday's statement through that lens.  And I have to admit that I had been reasonably concerned about the extent to which this whole incident might drive a wedge between Tom and Bill/Bob, and I believe I posted along those lines before I heard that from my friend.  And no, this friend is not one of the people who incorrectly informed me about DeflateGate penalties, so that particular low hanging fruit is inapposite.

 

[nighthob]

Here's the thing, this all culminated with sting operation at the AFC Championship but it's obviously not just about that game.  Science possibly explains that the balls were not tampered with in that game only (which is impossible to say since all there is to go on is Anderson's recollection that he set them to 12.5).  I'm sure a lot of the league has tinfoil hats when it comes to the Pats, but this was a huge straw to grasp at if someone didn't have strong suspicions that something was going on with the balls post inspection previously.  The league office is sketchy enough that if they felt certain that the rumors that the Pats had screwed with the balls in prior games they would hang their hats on whatever thread of "evidence" they could obtain from the AFC Championship.  They have something more than what is in the report.  It might be nothing more than a chorus of disparate rumors and hearsay, but they have something that motivated them to go all in on the investigation and punishment.   Good for anybody who feels with 100% conviction that Brady and the Pats are fully innocent, but I guess I'm cynical enough about sports to think that it's at least possible that everyone at that level has the potential to push the boundaries a little to far.

We already know what other game that is/was being hinted at. It was the one from the week before when the Ravens were accusing the Patriots of messing with the kicking balls because they didn't like the inflation levels. Because no one on the Baltimore sideline, much like the Keystone Kops in the league office, understood the effect of 15º degree weather on footballs.

 

[dcmissle]

We really will benefit with the start of training camp and then the season. There is nothing to add -- and there won't be until Goodell rules and then a court rules, if it gets that far. The recent admissions of Montana and Shaq have confirmed this as farce.

All we're doing is recycling the same 10 to 20 points, and stamping out foreheads with a banner that reads, "Butt Hurt Nation."

 

[Mugsy's Walk-Off Bunt]

I just want to say I'm really grateful that Wells and the league left out certain elements of the case against the patriots because it would've been really uncool and unjust to include rumors and insinuation in an official and independent report.

 

[Myt1]

Myt1, Kraft said explicitly that Tom deserved to be on the field and that he hoped he would be. 

Have you got a cite for that? Because I'm not seeing it anywhere, and Boston.com claims that Kraft didn't even refer to Brady by name. Volin claims that he didn't. Here's the answer that's been reported:

"We're part of a system and we'll follow the rules. And it's our hope that opening game here, we'll have the privilege of having everyone who deserves to be on the field starting that game. I know that's what our fans want and what we want."

Is there some other part of the statement that I haven't been able to find? If not, what part of the statement do you think is particularly supportive of Brady? Because I think we've probably both heard hundreds or thousands of non-answers in our lives, and that seems like a typical non-answer to me.

If there was more to it, I apologize for not being able to find it.

My comments were not glowing and if you're reading that in, you are missing my point.  My comment was that the "part of the club" speech was not new, the support of Tom was indeed new and in my view sufficient for the reasons I mentioned, and that I think it's appropriate to grant Kraft some deference under the circumstances (and in particular, given that he has a grip on a lot more of the pertinent facts than we do)
 
You can blow that up as much as you like, but I have trouble believing that if we were just having a beer that you or anyone could turn what I said into glowing support of the Owner.  I promise you that's not what was intended.  Yep, I have a healthy amount of respect for what I don't know, and I have trouble believing that Kraft wouldn't have said more or done more if he thought that there was something to be gained by doing it.  But Kraft is human and subject to criticism, just like the rest of us.

I don't know what you're talking about now. When I said that your comments were glowing, we were talking about your initial reaction to Kraft's statement about not appealing the Pats' punishment, right? Because that's the one in which your lone criticism was that he didn't support Brady, isn't it? I'd really prefer not to go back and look this up, but I think I have a pretty good memory of it.
 

One last thing.  I am likely colored by the fact that a friend who went to UMichigan with Tom and knows him and Tom's dad very well (and was with Tom's dad at the SB before the game, just before we met after the  brief SoSH meet up on site) told me that Tom and Bob are on the same page on all things DeflateGate, and that there is no fissure in their relationship whatsoever.  Because I believe my friend completely, I view things like yesterday's statement through that lens.  And I have to admit that I had been reasonably concerned about the extent to which this whole incident might drive a wedge between Tom and Bill/Bob, and I believe I posted along those lines before I heard that from my friend.  And no, this friend is not one of the people who incorrectly informed me about DeflateGate penalties, so that particular low hanging fruit is inapposite.

So just say that. They can be on the same page without transforming a pretty typical non-answer into a statement of support. I don't understand why thinking we don't need to gild the lily here is such a controversial stance.

The quoted answer isn't a statement of support. It's not a recipe for chicken a la king, either. Neither of those qualities makes it inherently bad, but as someone who really likes words and language and rhetoric, I like to at least be able to agree with other reasonable people on what's perceivable about the universe.

 

[TheoShmeo]

Myt1, when Kraft said that about having someone who deserves to be on the field on opening night, I thought he was referring to Brady.  If that's incorrect, then I'm of course wrong about Bob making a supportive comment.  But I think it's clear from the context that he means Tom.
 
Oh, you were referring to my comments several weeks ago.  I missed that.  I don't view those as glowing, either.  I think the decision not to fight a battle that cannot be won was a good one, but not a difficult one.  So yeah, I was glad and am glad that Kraft didn't fight just to mollify the fan base or for other equally invalid reasons, and am glad that he did not boot what I think is a straightforward decision.
 
As to Tom and Bob being on the same page, that's a gloss or a prism with which to view this.  If I am right and Bob's comment was about Tom, the comment is the main thing, not what my friend told me.

 

[Myt1]

I think it probably was vaguely about Tom, but the question was about the conflict of interest in Goodell hearing the appeal. Given the rather narrow question, I think the answer sounds a lot more like typical corporate doublespeak than anything else. And that's merely intended to be descriptive, not a value judgment.

I guess I'm just saying that this isn't really anything we're unfamiliar with in that regard. It's more a "how the game's played" thing than any real expansion beyond the earlier remarks where I think we both found the support for Brady lacking.

 

[joe dokes]

I think it probably was vaguely about Tom, but the question was about the conflict of interest in Goodell hearing the appeal. Given the rather narrow question, I think the answer sounds a lot more like typical corporate doublespeak than anything else. And that's merely intended to be descriptive, not a value judgment.

I guess I'm just saying that this isn't really anything we're unfamiliar with in that regard. It's more a "how the game's played" thing than any real expansion beyond the earlier remarks where I think we both found the support for Brady lacking.

 
I would bet the house on the fact that there is -- and has continuously been -- a shitload of virtually unconditional support for Brady from Kraft. Just not in public.

 

[drbretto]

If the comments we're talking about are the ones they showed after the Sox game last night on NESN (after the post game) then I think we're all definitely reading to much into it. It looked like a reporter basically accosting him at a charity event and Kraft tried to change the subject a bunch of times before finally offering a nothing of a vague statement. I definitely did get the impression that in context, he was referring to Tom being on the field, but didn't want to really go on the record as saying anything about anything. His role is done here and he seemed annoyed at first that they were even asking him questions.
 
Then they have the gall to put this scroll on the bottom saying Kraft "finally speaking out on deflategate" or whatever and I just want to punch everyone who has ever been in the media. A more accurate line would be "Kraft reluctantly aknowledges that this deflategate thing is a thing"

 

[TheoShmeo]

If Kraft was saying that Tom Brady deserves to be on the field and he hopes he is, that's a supportive statement and more than the zippo he offered when he first said he was not going to fight the NFL.  I have no idea who he could have been referring to besides Tom as there's no question about anyone else being on the field on opening night.  Unless, of course, Bob was referring to the much maligned LeGarette Blount.  Or Steve Grogan.  Or some other person who might not be on the field that night.
 
I don't see any "doublespeak" in that remark.  Tom deserves to be there.  Bob said as much.

 

[simplyeric]

We really will benefit with the start of training camp and then the season. There is nothing to add -- and there won't be until Goodell rules and then a court rules, if it gets that far. The recent admissions of Montana and Shaq have confirmed this as farce.

All we're doing is recycling the same 10 to 20 points, and stamping out foreheads with a banner that reads, "Butt Hurt Nation."

To be fair, our butts hurt because we've been bent over and asked to squeal like a pig. It's not like we're complaining about a missed holding call or 'they played too rough!'
We're being asked to accept a substantial change in our chances of making the playoffs next year (if Brady has to sit for 4 games), and a possibly pretty noticeable affect on future performance (the first round pick).
All for Tom possibly knowing about something that might have happened.

Within the self-contained world of being a sports fan, that's a pretty big deal.

 

[simplyeric]

If Kraft was saying that Tom Brady deserves to be on the field and he hopes he is, that's a supportive statement and more than the zippo he offered when he first said he was not going to fight the NFL.  I have no idea who he could have been referring to besides Tom as there's no question about anyone else being on the field on opening night.  Unless, of course, Bob was referring to the much maligned LeGarette Blount.  Or Steve Grogan.  Or some other person who might not be on the field that night.
 
I don't see any "doublespeak" in that remark.  Tom deserves to be there.  Bob said as much.

It's definitely referencing Tom, but one could interpret it the other way: Maybe he's saying 'Tom should be there...but only IF he deserves to be' (implying that he's not sure he deserves to be).

I don't at all believe that's what he believes or is implying, but it's a perfectly logical alternate interpretation of his statement.

 

[snowmanny]

It's definitely referencing Tom, but one could interpret it the other way: Maybe he's saying 'Tom should be there...but only IF he deserves to be' (implying that he's not sure he deserves to be).

I don't at all believe that's what he believes or is implying, but it's a perfectly logical alternate interpretation of his statement.

Yes, sometimes words can have two meanings.
 
Ted Wells is probably interpreting it as absolute proof that Kraft believes Brady is guilty/not deserving, as Brady is not expected to be there.

 

[TheoShmeo]

The injustice is indeed real.  DCMisile, If we repeat ourselves on a message board under these circumstances...so what?
 
To me, this repeated -- though not repeated enough -- fact screams out loudly and decisively:
 
Three of the four Colts balls that were tested at half time were, under one of the two gauges that were used, BELOW 12.5 PSI.
 
Why doesn't that fact make everyone realize that this is a giant NOTHING?  Am I missing an angle here?  When I look at that fact, and I consider the penalties levied on the team and Tom Brady, and I think about all the yahoos who have hurled the "Cheaters" nonsense in the wake of this thing, I can only conclude that people are totally batshit insane.
 
Again, what am I missing?

 

[Super Nomario]

It's definitely referencing Tom, but one could interpret it the other way: Maybe he's saying 'Tom should be there...but only IF he deserves to be' (implying that he's not sure he deserves to be).

I don't at all believe that's what he believes or is implying, but it's a perfectly logical alternate interpretation of his statement.

I think the "I know that's what our fans want" statement essentially rules out that interpretation.

 

[simplyeric]

I think the "I know that's what our fans want" statement essentially rules out that interpretation.

.

Don't get me wrong. He was implying 'Tom should be there'. But he was saying it in a very specific way, so that it could not be interpreted as defiant towards Goodell.
He very explicitly did not say that Tom should be there. And I'm pretty sure, after the owners meetings and Kraft's compliance and statements of confidence in Roger, that Kraft's choice of words is being parsed very carefully.

 

[Myt1]

If Kraft was saying that Tom Brady deserves to be on the field and he hopes he is, that's a supportive statement and more than the zippo he offered when he first said he was not going to fight the NFL.  I have no idea who he could have been referring to besides Tom as there's no question about anyone else being on the field on opening night.  Unless, of course, Bob was referring to the much maligned LeGarette Blount.  Or Steve Grogan.  Or some other person who might not be on the field that night.
 
I don't see any "doublespeak" in that remark.  Tom deserves to be there.  Bob said as much.

No, he didn't.

You don't see any doublespeak in a vague response that doesn't answer the question, which was about the conflict of interest?

 

[Super Nomario]

No, he didn't.

You don't see any doublespeak in a vague response that doesn't answer the question, which was about the conflict of interest?

Do any of the articles actually post the exact question? I haven't seen it, if so.

 

[TheoShmeo]

No, I don't, Myt1. 
 
I think it takes a lot of imagination to believe that Kraft was referring to anyone other than Tom Brady when he said that he deserves to be there, Kraft wants to see that and the fans want that, too.   
 
If you want to believe that, bully for you.

 

[drbretto]

After saying that he hopes everyone who deserves to be on the field gets to play, he said "I think that's what the fans want as well". It's obviously in reference to Tom and it's really a huge stretch to imagine it as anything different. It was also, again, not like he went and called a press conference. He was asked these questions, tried to bring the subject back to the charity or whatever that he was there for, then reluctantly answered the question in as diplomatic a way as possible. This quote isn't worth this many posts.

 

[Reverend]

Don't get me wrong. He was implying 'Tom should be there'. But he was saying it in a very specific way, so that it could not be interpreted as defiant towards Goodell.
He very explicitly did not say that Tom should be there. And I'm pretty sure, after the owners meetings and Kraft's compliance and statements of confidence in Roger, that Kraft's choice of words is being parsed very carefully.

 
I think it's probable that some of Kraft's past actions and statements have actually crossed the line with respect to the owners' agreement, which is very different than the CBA pact binding players, and I think it's likely that some of the other owners have mentioned this to Kraft.
 
And I think that's likely why Brady was not mentioned by name and why there were some key qualifiers. So I think that Brady likely took this as a show of support as it was intended as such, but it's also clear why the qualifiers and vagueness was there which is what the comments about corporate speak are about. In the absence of the business, Kraft would have said things differently, ergo, by definition, that's corporate double speak. QED. Ipso facto. E pluribus unum.
 

 

[Myt1]

No, I don't, Myt1. 
 
I think it takes a lot of imagination to believe that Kraft was referring to anyone other than Tom Brady when he said that he deserves to be there, Kraft wants to see that and the fans want that, too.   
 
If you want to believe that, bully for you.

He was referring to Brady, obliquely. Stop with the strawmen and false dilemmas like when you tried to claim that people who disagreed with you regarding support thought Kraft was a bumbling idiot. There are many more things in this heaven and earth, than are dreamt of in your philosophy.

He didn't say that he deserves to be there, because he's trying to serve two masters. It's pretty much a paragon non-answer to the question, which was about the conflict of interest, hence, the doublespeak.

I'm not the one who's in imagination land.

 

[DJnVa]

Yeah, it's pretty clear that his statement will be "true" no matter what happens with Brady:
 
1--not playing then he's not "deserving"
2--playing then he is "deserving"

 

[mwonow]

Yeah, it's pretty clear that his statement will be "true" no matter what happens with Brady:
 
1--not playing then he's not "deserving"
2--playing then he is "deserving"

 
That's the way I read it, too - which makes the statement much less supportive than it is given credit for here.
 
The follow on about what the fans want clearly references outcome #2 - but equally clearly isn't couched as Kraft's position as owner, but rather as the desires of the team's fans.
 
There's an old saying, "it's not what you make it's what you leave." Kraft is in a tricky position here - in an ideal world, he leaves himself as a powerful insider in the billionaire's club and as a supporter of the team and fans, but it isn't obvious to me that these positions can be reconciled in this case. The fans expect more than doublespeak, the other owners (and the clueless Sheriff) expect nothing more than that...

 

[Super Nomario]

That's the way I read it, too - which makes the statement much less supportive than it is given credit for here.
 
The follow on about what the fans want clearly references outcome #2 - but equally clearly isn't couched as Kraft's position as owner, but rather as the desires of the team's fans.

He said, "I know that’s what our fans want and that’s what we want." He's presenting the team's wishes as in line with the fans'.
 

There's an old saying, "it's not what you make it's what you leave." Kraft is in a tricky position here - in an ideal world, he leaves himself as a powerful insider in the billionaire's club and as a supporter of the team and fans, but it isn't obvious to me that these positions can be reconciled in this case. The fans expect more than doublespeak, the other owners (and the clueless Sheriff) expect nothing more than that...

Yeah, and probably neither side is 100% happy with Kraft's comments but neither side is upset enough to do anything about them, which means he probably hit it right.

 

[riboflav]

He was referring to Brady, obliquely. Stop with the strawmen and false dilemmas like when you tried to claim that people who disagreed with you regarding support thought Kraft was a bumbling idiot. There are many more things in this heaven and earth, than are dreamt of in your philosophy.

He didn't say that he deserves to be there, because he's trying to serve two masters. It's pretty much a paragon non-answer to the question, which was about the conflict of interest, hence, the doublespeak.

I'm not the one who's in imagination land.

 
Correct. Kraft is saying anyone, including Brady, deserve to be there IF they did nothing wrong. He's not saying Brady deserves to be there. He's not saying Brady doesn't deserve to be there. Or, what Drewdawg said.

 

[TheoShmeo]

I disagree, Myt1, riboflav and DrewDog. 
 
I think it's inconceivable that Kraft doesn't think that Brady deserves to be there on opening night. 
 
Kraft's comment needs to be understood in the context of the Context Report and what was forcefully written there (notwithstanding the unfortunate inclusion of the Deflator stuff).  Unless Kraft has had a sudden and complete change of mind, he thinks that the Wells Report did not establish wrongdoing.  And since the Wells Report did not establish that sufficiently, it follows that Tom should not have been punished.  It also follows that his comment that he hopes that all those who deserve to be there will be there includes Tom.
 
Could Kraft have been more straightforward about this?  Of course.  I assume that he spoke the way he did because he thinks that being explicit will not advance Tom's interests or the team's interest in having him on the field.
 
At the end of the day, the notion that Kraft was preserving optionality on the notion that Tom is deserving of being on the field is nonsense.  Does anyone really believe that Kraft is hedging on that question?

 

[drbretto]

I think some of you who are "reading" it differently are reading it differently because you read it and didn't see it, especially in context.
 
You're also analyzing it WAY too much. That line literally meant absolutely nothing. Nothing at all. 

 

[Myt1]

I disagree, Myt1, riboflav and DrewDog. 
 
I think it's inconceivable that Kraft doesn't think that Brady deserves to be there on opening night. 

Why do you do this? Stop changing what people are saying into something that's easier for you to respond to.

We're not talking about what Kraft thinks. We're talking about what he said. The two aren't identical.
 

Kraft's comment needs to be understood in the context of the Context Report and what was forcefully written there (notwithstanding the unfortunate inclusion of the Deflator stuff).  Unless Kraft has had a sudden and complete change of mind, he thinks that the Wells Report did not establish wrongdoing.  And since the Wells Report did not establish that sufficiently, it follows that Tom should not have been punished.  It also follows that his comment that he hopes that all those who deserve to be there will be there includes Tom.

The question was about the conflict of interest. He didn't want to answer the question, so he gave a vague nothing answer. It doesn't have to be understood in the context of anything else, because it's pretty damn easy to understand.

 

[Myt1]

That line literally meant absolutely nothing. Nothing at all. 

Exactly.

 

[bankshot1]

Exactly.

 
 


Exactly.

 

[TheoShmeo]

Kraft's comment was informed by what he thinks.  Not a difficult concept, Myt1.
 
I don't think Kraft's comment meant nothing, no matter how many people parrot that.  That said, I don't claim that it was earth shattering.  My original and continuing point was that it was supportive, albeit not explicit.    
 
You can repeat your line about the question he was responding to as many times as you like.  One, you have not linked it and who knows if that's actually right.  Two, even if it is right, Kraft said what he said. 
 
I'm now done with this topic so the last word is yours if you so choose.  Apologies if I am frustrating you or anyone else with this.

 

[drbretto]

I agree with you that it is unambiguously pro-Brady in context. I was just saying that I don't think it really means anything because it was just some reporter trying to get something out of him and that was to shut him up.