#DFG: Canceling the Noise
- Thread starter nattysez
- Start date
. 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:
snowmanny 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:
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.
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:
Thank you sir.
. 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:
dcmissle 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.
The choice was that they had to nail someone or else admit to running a failed sting at the AFC Championship game.snowmanny said:
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.
MarcSullivaFan said:
I kind of agree about the picking your battles thing, and the general inadvisability of Belichick just completely blowing off that memo. However, I disagree that the "taping signals" aspect of that memo was merely an "interpretation" of existing rules. Nowhere in the actual rules is there any mention whatsoever of taping signals being illegal or improper. Not for that matter, is there any prohibition or restriction at all regarding the types of activities that can or can't be the subject of videotaping. The only restrictions mentioned in the rules are regarding the allowable location(s) of the cameras. For Goodell to spontaneously add "you can't tape defensive signals" to the mix isn't interpreting or clarifying any existing rule; it's making up an entirely new substantive restriction that has no basis whatsoever in the existing rule text. It is tantamount to creating a entirely new rule from scratch.
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:
The NFL has picked up where the Mob left off.
His statement may have been a cause in fact, but I can't really blame him for something that's not a proximate cause. Harbaugh is a fool and I see no reason that Brady needs to refrain from a comment that's about 9 billionth on the list of offensive things that get said publicly in this league just because the powers that be are corrupt and stupid.
At a certain point, enough is enough. They're not going to mollified, so fuck 'em.
At a certain point, enough is enough. They're not going to mollified, so fuck 'em.
J.McG said:
https://twitter.com/tvwells/status/135942654121881600
link to tweet
https://twitter.com/tvwells/status/135950043734740992
link to tweet
link to tweet
https://twitter.com/tvwells/status/135950043734740992
link to tweet
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?
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:
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?
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:
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:
Between the ineligible receiver rule they passed this offseason to this entire farce, it is obvious the NFL is on the hunt for the Patriots. That, of course, makes their incompetence even more stark. I mean, how do you come up with no significant evidence of something so widely regarded as true by other teams? The Patriots and Bill Belichick have inserted themselves so far in the heads of their rivals.
I thought Teresa Wells was married to Wells' son. He's the real Jets fan. Do I have that wrong?
bradmahn said:
Wells Report, P. 23: The NFL did not impose any constraints on the investigation, and provided its full
cooperation. League employees, NFL game officials, and representatives of the Indianapolis
Colts, the Baltimore Ravens, Wilson Sporting Goods Company (“Wilson”) and the unions that
represent NFL players and NFL game officials also cooperated in the investigation. The NFL,
the Colts and Wilson provided access to various documents and materials.
Wells Report, list of witnesses interviewed starting on p. 24: Dean Pees, Defensive Coordinator, Baltimore Ravens and Jerry Rosburg, Special Teams Coordinator/Assistant Head Coach, Baltimore Ravens
Wells Report, footnote #24 on p. 45: The message from Sullivan also included an express request that the Colts be permitted during the AFC
Championship Game to use kicking balls that Sullivan would break in. The email referenced as the basis for the
request information said to come from the Baltimore Ravens that Ravens players had not been provided with
Ravens-prepared kicking balls during the divisional playoff game. As discussed in Section IX, it was ultimately
agreed that the Patriots would use kicking balls prepared by Jastremski and the Colts would use kicking balls
prepared by Sullivan.
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 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
I think it's much simpler.dcmissle said:
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.
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:
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:
What else is there to say? Chad Finn and Mike Reiss are guys with the brainpower to think about this independently, and the ethics to say what they believe even if they get fewer clicks.
Everyone else is acting like a member of today's sports entertainment media. They're doing what gets them paid- saying the Pats cheated.
With respect to all of these - Goodell, Wells, Exponent and the media -
It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends on not understanding it.
The other owners don't give a fuck. Showing their attorneys won't accomplish anything.
1. It benefits all of the other teams for the Pats to get dinged for draft picks. Kraft and BB have been doing it better than everyone else for a decade and a half. Even if other owners know that the Pats are being railroaded, they probably don't care.
2. When Goodell bared his unique brand of idiocy for the whole world to see last summer Kraft stood up for the guy publicly. Why would any other owner suddenly give a shit if Bob has changed his opinion of Roger based on the events of the last few months?
I know these points have been made here a million times in the last few weeks. But we still have people who apparently believe it is possible for Kraft to somehow build a faction of owners who would be outraged at this whole affair. Why would any of them give two shits about this? It sucks as a Pats fan and I hope Kraft does everything in his power to publicly flay Rog, but he (Kraft) doesn't deserve any support from his fellow owners on this.
1. It benefits all of the other teams for the Pats to get dinged for draft picks. Kraft and BB have been doing it better than everyone else for a decade and a half. Even if other owners know that the Pats are being railroaded, they probably don't care.
2. When Goodell bared his unique brand of idiocy for the whole world to see last summer Kraft stood up for the guy publicly. Why would any other owner suddenly give a shit if Bob has changed his opinion of Roger based on the events of the last few months?
I know these points have been made here a million times in the last few weeks. But we still have people who apparently believe it is possible for Kraft to somehow build a faction of owners who would be outraged at this whole affair. Why would any of them give two shits about this? It sucks as a Pats fan and I hope Kraft does everything in his power to publicly flay Rog, but he (Kraft) doesn't deserve any support from his fellow owners on this.
All things considered, this wasn't a terrible take on SNL (can't seem to embed this).
http://www.nbc.com/saturday-night-live/video/weekend-update-tom-brady/2866698
http://www.nbc.com/saturday-night-live/video/weekend-update-tom-brady/2866698
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.
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.
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?
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.
AB in DC said:
There are owners who believe Kraft mucked up their hardline stance with the last CBA round and gave away too much to the players.
BigSoxFan said:
John Clayton was on WEEI the other day and was talking about being a beat reporter in the late 70s for the Steelers. Chuck Noll had closed some practices to the public during training camp, which was unheard of in the day. When they opened back up, Clayton discovered (with the pointed help of the players) that they had been having illegal practices, wearing pads when they were not allowed to. He published it and was blackballed by the team. They called it 'Shoudlergate'. The media is like fashion, I supposed and the gate is just back in vogue, pumped up on steroids by Twitter and ESPN.
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:
If Goodell was trying to retaliate for the antitrust suit he has gone too far. Who would be surprised if this case leads to a restructuring of discipline in the next CBA?
Ralphwiggum said:
And everyone who thinks Goodell got it right is either insane or not familiar enough with the details of the investigation.
This is why the relatively simple step of making sure the owners get an impartial legal perspective on the horseshit Wells document is so important. The owners almost certainly can't dump Roger now, they could maybe possibly dump Roger when the judge writes a scathing rebuke of the league office as Brady skates, but Kraft better make damn sure the owners have added this one to the tally before the next Goodell screw-up.
The only way the Pats look back in 10 years on this ordeal with any kind of fondness is if, in the interim, Goodell has been booted by the owners for incompetence, corruption or both. It doesn't have to be now. In fact, it would be better for the Pats legacy-wise if he goes down for something else.
Although a league office whistleblower would be pretty clutch right now.
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:
The PR from Ballghazi won't force Goodell out. But his handling of the incident will count when owners judge his job performance.
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.
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.
Well, I hope I'm wrong and you guys are right. Goodell bungled the Rice situation about as badly as you could have ever imagined. And that involved a subject matter that actually could have resulted in fans deciding they don't want to watch anymore. And Kraft stood up and defended him at his worst moment.
I fail to see why this incident changes any owners opinion (other than Bob Kraft) who didn't already want him gone.
I fail to see why this incident changes any owners opinion (other than Bob Kraft) who didn't already want him gone.
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:
Obviously we're talking about NFL policy, not the law, but it seems like this is the theory that the league is applying.
JeffLedbetter said:
You can't fix willful stupidity. JJ apparently appropriated memorabilia and (with the active encouragement of McNally) defied direct orders from his boss not to give out athletic gear swag, but the Pats shouldn't suspend these guys. Plus, if the Pats had something to hide, they'd want to keep these guys feeling friendly toward the team so they wouldn't suspend them. Oh, they did suspend them? Then everything in the Wells Report must be true!
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:
EDIT: Also, Exponent and Wells both admit that the difference in Standard Deviations is not statistically significant ... which doesn't stop them from mentioning it like six times.
JeffLedbetter said:
He should find a physicist who actually went to a four-year college and try again. Without knowing the starting PSI, it's first-level wrong to suggest the above.