. While failure to bow down to his betters is Brady's biggest offense, I don't think the stated reasons for his punishment refer solely to obstruction.In Vino Vinatieri said:
It's really telling that the only punishments that anyone is aware of (the Brady suspension, $1 million fine, and draft picks) are all for obstruction.
snowmanny said:Yeah, I don't get it either. The guy everyone wanted to nail was Belichick, and he walks while they really extend themselves in order to nail Brady and management.
Either he is an evil genius -- parity and headlines above everything -- or he is not very bright and has a weak bench.Red(s)HawksFan said:
The problem everyone is having here is trying to find rationality in Goodell and his office's actions. There is no rationality to find.
dcmissle said:But they have the Pats on obstruction, and as flimsy as that is, everyone agrees it is likely to stick because there are no viable avenues to attack it. So again, why Brady?
1. They want to put their thumbs on next season's scale. Parity uber alles. Even for them, that is a stretch. Plus, for two reasons it is unlikely to be effective.
2. They are really pissed at him. Well that's taking this very personal, and they are substantially likely to lose.
3. They want to establish a precedent re general awareness or obligation to surrender personal records. But they don't care about precedent, and they are substantially likely to lose.
Any other thoughts?
This is so right. BB was an immediate cause of Spygate, just as TB could have been an immediate cause of this with "read the rule book."MarcSullivaFan said:Nowhere, but it doesn't matter. If you disagree with the interpretation, you make an official protest and follow it until you are told you can do otherwise. Moreover, you really really need to pick your battles when you're taking on the highest authority in your governing body, and this definitely was not worth it.
Belichick acted like a petulant child and we're still paying for it.
Ding-ding-ding, at least insofar as Public opinion is concerned. And they will still sleep soundly if they lose the Brady piece, as nobody will be looking for a re-do for the team. It will be too late.Morgan's Magic Snowplow said:
I think it would have been difficult to penalize the Patriots to the tune of a 1st, 4th, and $1M (the biggest organizational penalty ever levied in the history of the NFL) if they also claimed that only Jastremski and McNally were involved in the ball tampering. Vincent refers to the "fundamental principle that the club is responsible for the actions of club employees" in justifying a punishment of the franchise itself, but this whole "it occurred on their watch" rationale is a lot easier to sell if the claim is that the star QB and face of the franchise was cheating under BB/Kraft's nose than if it was just two clowns in the equipment room.
. That could be. Plus, the Dorito Dinks' phones were not the only ones turned over to Wells. Probably there just was not anything else to find.Morgan's Magic Snowplow said:
I think it would have been difficult to penalize the Patriots to the tune of a 1st, 4th, and $1M (the biggest organizational penalty ever levied in the history of the NFL) if they also claimed that only Jastremski and McNally were involved in the ball tampering. Vincent refers to the "fundamental principle that the club is responsible for the actions of club employees" in justifying a punishment of the franchise itself, but this whole "it occurred on their watch" rationale is a lot easier to sell if the claim is that the star QB and face of the franchise was cheating under BB/Kraft's nose than if it was just two clowns in the equipment room.
dcmissle said:This is so right. BB was an immediate cause of Spygate, just as TB could have been an immediate cause of this with "read the rule book."
When you are the hunted, you basically can't make any mistakes.
The choice was that they had to nail someone or else admit to running a failed sting at the AFC Championship game.snowmanny said:Yeah, I don't get it either. The guy everyone wanted to nail was Belichick, and he walks while they really extend themselves in order to nail Brady and management.
MarcSullivaFan said:Nowhere, but it doesn't matter. If you disagree with the interpretation, you make an official protest and follow it until you are told you can do otherwise. Moreover, you really really need to pick your battles when you're taking on the highest authority in your governing body, and this definitely was not worth it.
Not realizing Harbaugh is a street brawler and forgetting or not knowing the Pagano connection. When you find out too late that Tatagglia is a pimp, you get shot.Red(s)HawksFan said:
What mistake has Brady actually made here? His "read the rule book" comment wasn't a violation of anything.
I'll buy Belichick brought Spygate on himself by actually, you know, committing a violation by ignoring/misunderstanding the memo. Brady hasn't been shown to have done anything here. I'm not sure the two are comparable in that way.
There is a faction of GMs and coaches who sincerely believe this is how you get BB who is just another coach without Brady.This is the constuency the league office is answering to.snowmanny said:Yeah, I don't get it either. The guy everyone wanted to nail was Belichick, and he walks while they really extend themselves in order to nail Brady and management.
J.McG said:Not that it means much of anything, but I was mildly amused to hear that some members of the Wells family are apparently Jets fans - at least Ted's daughter appears to be:
Ted Wells' daughter is a Jets fan per irrefutable Twitter evidence as found in exhibit A above. IANAL but almost nobody just becomes a Jets fan voluntarily with the Giants in town. You inherit that shit. This is, at the very least, a safe assumption.AB in DC said:
Waitwaitwaitwait....is this true? Can this confirmed?
If so, that would be a huge game-changer. Can you just imagine the headlines? "Deflategate investigator has ties to Jets fandom".
I mean, it may be stretch that Jets fandom makes Wells a biased investigator, but they nailed Brady on a lot less. Think about Joe Average Sportsfan hearing this for the first time. Wouldn't the first reaction be "Oh, so that's why they came down hard on the Pats. He's a Jets fan!"
I mean, it's not exactly implausible. Big New York law firm, staffed with New Yorkers, would it be a shock to anyone if they had some Jets fans on the investigation?
They aren't. I know it makes for a better tale and a wider net of anger, but there's no evidence Harbaugh had any involvement in the Colts accusations, is there?Red(s)HawksFan said:
What mistake has Brady actually made here? His "read the rule book" comment wasn't a violation of anything.
I'll buy Belichick brought Spygate on himself by actually, you know, committing a violation by ignoring/misunderstanding the memo. Brady hasn't been shown to have done anything here. I'm not sure the two are comparable in that way.
If the eventual arbiter for Brady's appeal were to takedown the actions of the NFL's "investigation" in their judgment, it is possible the failed sting could come to the forefront.Average Reds said:The choice was that they had to nail someone or else admit to running a failed sting at the AFC Championship game.
They had no plausible way to tie this to Belichick. They had a way to tie this to Brady. (Weak, but they could make a connection) So they nailed Brady.
Even if Brady wins his appeal(s) and the NFL looks like idiots, people (probably) won't be talking about the failed sting. That's a win for them.
Try to get a judge disqualified for such a conflict of interest, and check with me later.amarshal2 said:Ted Wells' daughter is a Jets fan per irrefutable Twitter evidence as found in exhibit A above. IANAL but almost nobody just becomes a Jets fan voluntarily with the Giants in town. You inherit that shit. This is, at the very least, a safe assumption.
Additionally, we can all agree that more often than not, when fandom is inherited, it is inherited from the father.
Therefore, it's more probable than not based on the preponderance of evidence that Ted Wells is a Jets fan.
Jets fans cannot be impartial when it comes to the New England Patriots. This is a known fact, similar to QBs having total control of football preparation.
By the transitive property, noted Jets fan Ted Wells cannot be impartial in any case involving the NEP and his findings are invalid.
Can I have my law degree now?
dcmissle said:Try to get a judge disqualified for such a conflict of interest, and check with me later.
Sorry.
I'll footnote that shit or maybe just leave it out entirely.Harry Hooper said:I thought Teresa Wells was married to Wells' son. He's the real Jets fan. Do I have that wrong?
Since when does my argument have to hold up in a court of law? All I need is a ginger dictator on a power trip to agree with me.dcmissle said:Try to get a judge disqualified for such a conflict of interest, and check with me later.
Sorry.
bradmahn said:They aren't. I know it makes for a better tale and a wider net of anger, but there's no evidence Harbaugh had any involvement in the Colts accusations, is there?
I think you mean from the bottom of your heart.jacklamabe65 said:I was reprimanded by a friend of The Globe for being a homer and not looking at all of this objectively as The Globe has been doing over the past few weeks after I accused The Globe of appealing to the national press in order to seem to be objective of this matter. I informed them that I will never sell my soul to "appear" to be fair when I know in my heart that this was all total bullshit - and the bullshit did not start in Foxboro.
I don't have to tell you, but never overestimate the power of liberal guilt. It generally serves me poorly.jacklamabe65 said:I was reprimanded by a friend of The Globe for being a homer and not looking at all of this objectively as The Globe has been doing over the past few weeks after I accused The Globe of appealing to the national press in order to seem to be objective of this matter. I informed them that I will never sell my soul to "appear" to be fair when I know in my heart that this was all total bullshit - and the bullshit did not start in Foxboro.
I think it's much simpler.dcmissle said:But they have the Pats on obstruction, and as flimsy as that is, everyone agrees it is likely to stick because there are no viable avenues to attack it. So again, why Brady?
1. They want to put their thumbs on next season's scale. Parity uber alles. Even for them, that is a stretch. Plus, for two reasons it is unlikely to be effective.
2. They are really pissed at him. Well that's taking this very personal, and they are substantially likely to lose.
3. They want to establish a precedent re general awareness or obligation to surrender personal records. But they don't care about precedent, and they are substantially likely to lose.
Any other thoughts?
That's actually more in line with the tweets themselves...which made it sound like her fiance at the time (current husband?) was in a pissy mood because the Jets lost.Harry Hooper said:I thought Teresa Wells was married to Wells' son. He's the real Jets fan. Do I have that wrong?
crystalline said:I think it's much simpler.
The owners are Goodell's bosses. The players are antagonistic parties who take as much of the owners' profit as they can. A significant part of Goodell's job is to play hardball with the players to extract as much money as possible. The coaches are closer to the owners than to the players- their salaries are not capped and negotiated in the CBA.
Therefore the first priority in every NFL investigation is to exonerate the owner. That happened in Incognito/Martin, in Ballghazi, in the Saints bounty case, and with Ray Rice. Second priority is to blame the players as much as possible. After that, it's better to exonerate the head coach, but if making the owner look good involves throwing the head coach under the bus, you do it. (Saints case).
Seems like a simple matter of Goodell figuring out where his salary comes from. And Wells too.
Win it for....Tom Brady.soxhop411 said:@BenVolin: #TrollinWithVolin RT @ShaunLKelly1955: @BenVolin Now referred on SoSH as Ben Trolin.
This is also a case of figuring out where your salary comes from. CHB showed the way- attack the hometown team, create a curse, write a book, get clicks, make bank.dcmissle said:I don't have to tell you, but never overestimate the power of liberal guilt. It generally serves me poorly.
I mean the Pats have won so much, it's just unseemly. Better to drive your Volvos and have bobble heads in honor of lovable losers.
Seems to me that locals are tying to establish national chops by trashing our team
Your legal comments are insightful, your political trash talking less so.dcmissle said:I don't have to tell you, but never overestimate the power of liberal guilt. It generally serves me poorly.
I mean the Pats have won so much, it's just unseemly. Better to drive your Volvos and have bobble heads in honor of lovable losers.
Seems to me that locals are tying to establish national chops by trashing our team
AB in DC said:Chances are, at least one owner was already anti-Goodell before any of this mess.
Chances are, Kraft knows who the anti-Goodell owners are.
That's where things start. What happens from there depends on just how powerful and/or persuasive these guys are. Don't forget -- Kraft has always been very well-respected. If Kraft starts talking, they'll listen.
Sorry if I offended.Otis Foster said:Your legal comments are insightful, your political trash talking less so.
BigSoxFan said:And subjected us to an eternity of annoying "gate" controversies.
I wonder if this is part of it. Show players that none of them are immune from the power of the league. That seems like a stretch even for the NFL - the general formula to protect the owners and blame any wrongdoing on player is probably enough.Harry Hooper said:There's also the matter of the original Brady v. NFL lawsuit.
Ralphwiggum said:It's just an enormously Patriot-centric viewpoint to believe this (and not the Rice debacle, where pretty much every human being who was not a Ravens fan was calling for Roger's head) would be the tipping point for Goodell. On this one almost everyone not a Pats fan thinks he got it right.
Each owner has their business riding on the performance of Goodell. The serious owners and their lawyers are doing more than listening to sports radio. They are reading all the documents, and judging Goodell's performance. They also took heed of Tagliabue's opinion on Goodell's performance.Ralphwiggum said:It's just an enormously Patriot-centric viewpoint to believe this (and not the Rice debacle, where pretty much every human being who was not a Ravens fan was calling for Roger's head) would be the tipping point for Goodell. On this one almost everyone not a Pats fan thinks he got it right.
The legal principle of vicarious liability (when it applies) holds an *employer* liable for the acts of its employees committed within the scope of their employment. For the most part, "employer" for this purpose means the corporate entity, not its officers, owners, etc. There aren't many circumstances I can think of under which a manager--even at the CEO level--would be *personally* liable for acts of a subordinate of which he was totally unaware.tims4wins said:Apologies of this has come up and I missed it, but if the Pats organization is getting dinged because they are responsible for all employees actions, and if BB is both the coach and the GM, then how is he not respnsible under the same logic and therefore subject to punishment?
JeffLedbetter said:The response:
I had similar questions as you did until I talked to a physicist yesterday. He said the question of the gauges is something of a smokescreen, that it's the disparity in variances between the balls used by the Colts and the Patriots that show the tampering, as well as the disparity from one Patriots football to another.
He explained it much better than I am, but it made sense. That, coupled with the texts, the ridiculous arguments in the rebuttal and the fact the Patriots suspended McNally and Jastremski were enough to convince me.
You can't compare the variance of four balls to the variance in 11, especially when one of the readings for the Colts' balls (#3) is clearly wrong. Moreover, tampering does not explain anything like the standard deviation seen in New England's footballs. Exponent ran three tests where people (after only one practice run) deflated 13 footballs in 90 seconds, and none of them had a SD worse than 0.1. To ascribe a 0.4 variance in the Patriots' footballs to tampering doesn't make any sense - clearly there are factors that Exponent does not understand driving that.JeffLedbetter said:I had similar questions as you did until I talked to a physicist yesterday. He said the question of the gauges is something of a smokescreen, that it's the disparity in variances between the balls used by the Colts and the Patriots that show the tampering, as well as the disparity from one Patriots football to another.
JeffLedbetter said:How about a viewpoint from a national media outlet reporter. I got tired of reading the narrative and emailed a reporter (albeit on an iPhone from my airplane seat on Friday so excuse auto-correct mistakes). There's a saying that "no one ever got fired for hiring IBM." I think most reporters are buying the NFL/Wells storyline because it's the safe route...first what I wrote and then what I got in response:
I couldn't agree more that McNally's weight loss explaining "deflator" was a bizarre and damaging inclusion in the Patriots' rebuttal. But Wells's insistence on legitimizing the ball measurements for the Patriots only from the gauge that measured .35 lbs lower is nonsensical and strong evidence of what the Patriots contend, that there was a predetermined conclusion. How more members of the media, including and especially you since you have been such a vocal critic of Brady and the Patriots, don't delve into this more deeply is confusing to me. If they use the measurements from the gauge the referee thinks he used at the beginning of the game, the Patriots' balls at halftime fell within the range of the ideal gas law. On the other hand, use the gauge that measured lower on the Colts' balls and the Colts likewise are below the legal minimum with three of the four they measured. How is that not the FIRST thing that you and others are referencing? It's the only thing that matters.
No one wants to be accused of changing their minds. What a crime that would be. But how does it feel that the NFL for whatever reason has brought you along on such a farce of a story for God knows what reason, where the court of public opinion is driving every decision the NFL is making? Is their not enough introspection among the media and integrity to take a real look at the facts in a truly independent way and come to a conclusion other than I've made up my mind, don't confuse me with the facts?
When does the story line that seems so clear when you read even just the Wells report that Wells's conclusions and the NFL's penalties have been based on faulty logic and with ignorance of scientific data become the sexier of the two narratives?
I am concerned that the idiotic explanation of the "deflator" reference now will prefer that from happening. But you and the rest of the media should be better than that, you should be willing to overlook one point of idiocy in the rebuttal if you were willing to accept the Wells Report's abundance of questionable statements and conclusions.
The response:
I had similar questions as you did until I talked to a physicist yesterday. He said the question of the gauges is something of a smokescreen, that it's the disparity in variances between the balls used by the Colts and the Patriots that show the tampering, as well as the disparity from one Patriots football to another.
He explained it much better than I am, but it made sense. That, coupled with the texts, the ridiculous arguments in the rebuttal and the fact the Patriots suspended McNally and Jastremski were enough to convince me.