Ed Hillel said:
Biscotti probably shouldn't use the words "getting away with murder"Jim Irsay of the Colts. Steve Bisciotti of the Ravens and others in the AFC who believe the Patriots have gotten away with murder for years and have not been publicly punished properly.”
Hopefully Goodell remembers what happened the last time he caved in to Biscotti regarding a player a suspension.Ed Hillel said:
Can someone explain why the owner who made him look really bad doing a favor for him in that case and the addict who owns a Midwestern small market team are so particularly influential with the commissioner?Hopefully Goodell remembers what happened the last time he caved in to Biscotti regarding a player a suspension.
of course....Im shocked the jets were not namedEd Hillel said:
soxhop411 said:of course....Im shocked the jets were not named
It gets more ludicrous by the day, does it not? Another mocking refutation of the Bob Kraft/Mighty Owner fantasy. Bisciotti is a newbie -- a newbie who damn near got Goodell fired after Goodell did him a solid on Rice. Then Bob Kraft rode to the rescue. Throw up in mouth time.judyb said:Can someone explain why the owner who made him look really bad doing a favor for him in that case and the addict who owns a Midwestern small market team are so particularly influential with the commissioner?
dcmissle said:It gets more ludicrous by the day, does it not? Another mocking refutation of the Bob Kraft/Mighty Owner fantasy. Bisciotti is a newbie -- a newbie who damn near got Goodell fired after Goodell did him a solid on Rice. Then Bob Kraft rode to the rescue. Throw up in mouth time.
I am not surprised. Long believed that one of the main drivers of this is envy AND the need for executives and coaches who keep coming up short to build excuses to save their more than a few seven-figure salaries.
dcmissle said:People have asked many times whether there will be much in the way of discovery during a federal court case. I have been among those saying, not much but maybe some going to RG's bias.
Based on this report alone, I would seek to depose this unholy trinity of RG, Bisciotti and Irsay. And, of course, there is more than this report -- these two franchises were the instigators in January.
One might just get some discovery along these lies. They will lie in all probability -- but if deposed I'd put them in the uncomfortable position of telling the whole lie. Under oath.
The bottom line is that the NFL's attorneys have most likely, from what I've been told, gone to the commissioner and said, 'We can't come up with a ruling that is defensible in court.' The NFL, I believe, thinks it's going to lose in court.
Seagull said:There was another interesting nugget in Sal Paolantonio's report, as transcribed by Mike Reiss. I don't think we have heard the internal assessment of the NFL attorneys at this level before.
http://espn.go.com/blog/boston/new-england-patriots/post/_/id/4782832/nullhttp://espn.go.com/blog/boston/new-england-patriots/post/_/id/4782832/null
Which has what to do with Tom Brady?""Not only that, add in that you’re angering some of the hardcore owners out there, and I know who they are and I'm going to name them right now -- Jim Irsay of the Colts, Steve Bisciotti of the Ravens, and others in the AFC who believe that the Patriots have gotten away with murder for years and have not been publicly punished properly.
Yeah I am at the point where if he willingly accepts a suspension then he is admitting to some level of guilt.Seels said:I'll lose a great deal of respect for Brady if he accepts even 1 missed play for this. If he truly did nothing wrong he should fight this until the end.
Several lawyers in this thread have suggested this has to be the case. The NFL has some good lawyers at its disposal---eventually the adults were bound to tell RG there are rules and this did not satisfy or follow them.Seagull said:There was another interesting nugget in Sal Paolantonio's report, as transcribed by Mike Reiss. I don't think we have heard the internal assessment of the NFL attorneys at this level before.
http://espn.go.com/blog/boston/new-england-patriots/post/_/id/4782832/nullhttp://espn.go.com/blog/boston/new-england-patriots/post/_/id/4782832/null
Parity?Gorton Fisherman said:... Jim Irsay or Steve Bisciotti. They are just garden-variety chump owners of a couple of relatively small market franchises. Why would the commissioner give any special consideration to what these two clowns think?
TB12 isn't Kraft and has his own recourse in the form of the NFLPA. He needs to listen to them and not the Patriots.DavidTai said:I'm kinda convinced they think Brady would accept the suspension -because- they overran Bob Kraft, who capitulated twice before when the NFL levied punishment.
EFFFING BOB KRAFT.
What makes you think that the Patriots are trying to tell him what to do or even giving him advice?jsinger121 said:TB12 isn't Kraft and has his own recourse in the form of the NFLPA. He needs to listen to them and not the Patriots.
Assuming the report of his involvement is accurate.dcmissle said:Actually, Steve Bisciotti is an entirely self made billionaire. And in almost every respect, he is an ideal owner. Understated, under the radar, allows professionals to run the team.
This is disappointing.
Question for the lawyers: At this point can the Patriots even address this issue at all with Brady directly? Wouldn't there be some concern that the team could be placing undue influence/pressure in a player management issue?pappymojo said:What makes you think that the Patriots are trying to tell him what to do or even giving him advice?
There was at least one article in the days following the Deflategate break with a Chinese menu of rule bending examples. Everyone here was livid about the claims.Mugsy said:I hope they are successful in lobbying Goodell to keep it at 4 games. I want no part of Brady capitulating. And why don't these hard-core owners - or any other ones - share with the effing class WHAT EXACTLY the infractions are that the Patriots have been getting away with all these years? Like...specifically. Name them. Hell, don't even put your name to it, do it anonymously. What is it that you feel the Patriots have gotten away with?
Seriously - LEAK what they are. You know how to do that, call Bob Kravitz or whoever, put your lips together and blow (me).
Edit: typos and to capitalize Patriots. Because one should.
I think it means they're absolutely nuts when it comes to competition. I mean, they all are to some degree, but we know Irsay's story, and I think it's fair to say Harbaugh is an extension of his owner. They're wah wah pants, just like Irsay. When they lose, it's never because they were outplayed, there's always some excuse, and hell if they're not going to spend their millions to find and/or create it.Gorton Fisherman said:Still trying to figure out exactly what is "hardcore" about either Jim Irsay or Steve Bisciotti. They are just garden-variety chump owners of a couple of relatively small market franchises. Why would the commissioner give any special consideration to what these two clowns think?
Agreed. And they're probably gone, which pisses me off to no end.Ed Hillel said:What's starting to anger me again are the draft picks. Fuck!
dcmissle said:I believe the above is correct. That is what I would be advising the NFL. We'll do the best we can, but you probably will lose. So know that going in or cut your losses now.
Mugsy's Walk-Off Bunt said:I hope they are successful in lobbying Goodell to keep it at 4 games. I want no part of Brady capitulating. And why don't these hard-core owners - or any other ones - share with the effing class WHAT EXACTLY the infractions are that the Patriots have been getting away with all these years? Like...specifically. Name them. Hell, don't even put your name to it, do it anonymously. What is it that you feel the Patriots have gotten away with?
Seriously - LEAK what they are. You know how to do that, call Bob Kravitz or whoever, put your lips together and blow (me).
Edit: typos and to capitalize Patriots. Because one should.
Ding dingThere is no Rev said:Psychology even has names for this kind of "priming" to set people up to accept an idea as true.
There is no Rev said:
Well, yes. But, given the legal talent Goodell has access to, we also have to assume that he was told he would almost certainly lose in other recent moves he made, yeah? I mean, the Hardy suspension was pretty clearly too big given the timing... but the Ray Rice double jeopardy second-ruling was just absurd.
You are confusing tactics with strategy. You're also missing the fact that the NFL and /or any franchise has the power to do that without making complete donkeys of themselves in the process.AB in DC said:
The Commish got exactly what he wanted on the Rice case part deux -- he got Rice off the field at the time when the NFL was getting beaten up the most. And Rice hasn't played a down since. So in that case, yeah, I don't think Goodell cares that it got overturned in court.
The fact that the Patriots have no recourse really chaps my hide. I mean, what mechanism exists to stop Goodell from having penalized the Patriots, say, their first round pick for the next ten years? If there's no recourse, there's no recourse, no matter what the penalty is.Section15Box113 said:Agreed. And they're probably gone, which pisses me off to no end.
But take the long game and see where public sentiment is in the weeks leading up to the draft. April is a long way away.
Seels said:I'll lose a great deal of respect for Brady if he accepts even 1 missed play for this. If he truly did nothing wrong he should fight this until the end.
Or he just wants to get on the field and have this whole shitshow over when he says so -- instead of some unknown time down the road when a judge *might* say so. "Hope is a good thing, Red." So is certainty.Yeah I am at the point where if he willingly accepts a suspension then he is admitting to some level of guilt.
Mr. Kraft had a few opportunities to be the one to sit up and take notice. I clearly can't be certain but my take is that he failed to do so.ivanvamp said:Given this, it really is amazing to me how short sighted the other owners are. Yes it's wonderful that their main competition gets hammered in this case. But they are supporting a system that also leaves THEM with no recourse should Goodell bring a totally unreasonable hammer down on them. You'd think that some of them at least would sit up and take notice of this.
I would have advised the NFL that it was very likely to lose both the RR and AP cases. Hardy was a tougher call because it went to Harold Henderson, who had a reputation as RG's go-to guy. Now that makes the defeat sting more.There is no Rev said:
Well, yes. But, given the legal talent Goodell has access to, we also have to assume that he was told he would almost certainly lose in other recent moves he made, yeah? I mean, the Hardy suspension was pretty clearly too big given the timing... but the Ray Rice double jeopardy second-ruling was just absurd.
So we know the NFL will make moves that they will probably lose if they think they have good reason to. I mean, that's part of what makes this so fascinating.
And, frankly, objectionable. So, based on your history in the field--and I know there are vagaries here--when might a judge get irritated when it becomes sufficiently evident that a repeat player entity is playing the system this way? I mean, I know it happens, but is there any consistent threshold or is it just happenstance?
The annoying thing about that crap--and I don't want to go to far into Public Perception thread territory here, though people are welcome to quote this there--is that this case, because of Goodell's timing of things, now works as evidence against itself. That is to say, the only evidence before this was spygate. But the investigate went on so long, that people got used to hearing about the Patriots cheating with respect to deflating balls, and then when the ruling came out, people were like, "Hey, yeah, I think I remember hearing about them doing that before!" when is was the same. damned. incident.
Psychology even has names for this kind of "priming" to set people up to accept an idea as true.
Federal judges, however, tend to be more rigorous in separating out discrete issues than does the media or the public.
Not picking on you because this has been said multiple times, but the Rice double jeapordy case did not end up in court. Goodell appointed a truly neutral arbitrator (a *retired* federal judge) to hear Rice's appeal and she tore Goodell a new one. Likewise the Hardy appeal was heard by Harold Henderson, the not-neutral Goodell associate who also heard the Peterson appeal--which was indeed vacated in federal court.AB in DC said:
The Commish got exactly what he wanted on the Rice case part deux -- he got Rice off the field at the time when the NFL was getting beaten up the most. And Rice hasn't played a down since. So in that case, yeah, I don't think Goodell cares that it got overturned in court.
Section15Box113 said:Sal Paolantonio on WEEI, suggesting the following "compromise" to satisfy Brady and the hard-line owners:
- League reduces suspension to two games for non-cooperation.
- League issues an official statement exonerating Brady of any wrongdoing related to deflating the footballs.
Brady happy because he's cleared of wrongdoing.
Hardliners happy because he is still punished.
And the Patriots still fined and docked the 1 and 4.
Butch and Bradford seemed to think it was viable and a "common sense" solution, but wondered whether the union would go along.
Personally, I think it's insane. I don't think Brady would take it. And don't think the union would either.
If that's what the NFL office comes up with, we're where we've been for awhile now: see you in court.
You have made this argument several times and I think that people understand it. The problem is that you are making a general statement rather than a specific judgment about this case.joe dokes said:
People settle for all kinds of reasons. Whether people they dont know will lose respect for them is usually pretty far down the list.
Or he just wants to get on the field and have this whole shitshow over when he says so -- instead of some unknown time down the road when a judge *might* say so. "Hope is a good thing, Red." So is certainty.