I have never heard of a kangaroo court reversing its' decision and this one won't either. King is whistling in the wind.
#DFG: Canceling the Noise
- Thread starter nattysez
- Start date
The only person in a position to lead a successful campaign is Kraft, and he's not doing it.
Not only that but the hatred for the Pats is strong. If Roger backed down (which he would never do in this case) the outrage from the league offices to the owners to the fans is a problem the league doesn't need. There is no chance of those picks coming back. NONE.
I know that a lot of people felt like Kraft sold out the fan base by not suing, but I never felt like he had much choice. The league and the other owners have long memories. One of the things that struck me in the recent NYT mag article was this quote from Bob McNair:
That's from an owner who didn't even come into the league until 2002, long after the Davis/Rozelle wars. I can't blame Kraft for taking the long view.
After reading an article about how the Rams relocation played out among the owners, it seems pretty clear that there are various cliques that hang together and would not back Kraft no matter how obvious it was that the Patriots got fucked over. Jerry Jones does not give a single fuck about fair play; I have no doubt that he'd shit all over Kraft's pleas for getting the picks back because Kraft is a rival, influential, owner.
Most of those guys are petty and vindictive as fuck. Kraft isn't, which makes him simultaneously very useful when they need someone to broker a deal or act as a mediator, but it works against him when he's the one under fire.
That being said, I'm not sure what the proper play was for Kraft. I think he came out of the whole thing a lot weaker than when he went in, but I don't know if he was smart to cut his losses or if it could have been prevented in the first place.
Most of those guys are petty and vindictive as fuck. Kraft isn't, which makes him simultaneously very useful when they need someone to broker a deal or act as a mediator, but it works against him when he's the one under fire.
That being said, I'm not sure what the proper play was for Kraft. I think he came out of the whole thing a lot weaker than when he went in, but I don't know if he was smart to cut his losses or if it could have been prevented in the first place.
Jones and Snyder got fucked over when the league decided to penalize them for spending money in an uncapped year, and Kraft happily went along with that decision even though it was fundamentally unfair and stupid. So there's no pressing reason why Jerrah's going to step up and right the wrong that's being done to the Pats now.
The league owners and offices are run just like high school cliques, only less mature.
The league owners and offices are run just like high school cliques, only less mature.
Yes, and this is only one well known example. God knows what ridiculous garbage goes on behind closed doors. Hair, nay, toupee pulling is for their eyes only in many cases.
The biggest sin Kraft committed in this case was beating these guys repeatedly and decisively on the field for over a decade. Kraft had few options here and he thought a show of good faith would help. It did not. Revenge is best served by the Ginger and his enablers. Just about every owner in the league couldn't be happier to see the Pats lose at least something over this.
Starting with a premise that King usually only writes what was hinted to him by those in power, this could well be part of laying powder for next week's argument. Float the concept through the mouthpiece (King) so that the concept is out there. If Clement gets hammered by the panel on Thursday the NFL can begin settlement discussions in the context of "fairness" and that even before the appellate hearing "Roger was thinking of doing the right thing" rather than "Roger is afraid of an embarrasing loss & horrible precedent by the appellate court."
No. F-ing. Way.
The NFL has shown confidence at every turn and has chosen to take this as far as they can for a potential victory. There have been plenty of chances for hem to exit this thing gracefully. They're not going to spend all that money and all that time and give up at the last second.
Even if the NFL was considering a settlement, why would they want to bring the draft picks into play in those discussions? They're gone. Nothing can bring them back unless the NFL volunteers it. Best case settlement negotiations is the status quo - everyone simply moves on.
I don't know where this new Peter King is coming from. Maybe he's sick of being considered the NFL's PR wing, only to get burned from time to time. But it's definitely not coming from the NFL.
I would say the biggest sin Kraft committed in this case was naively thinking he'd get a fair shake on this regarding Brady if he just went along with the league's punishment. He proved himself completely out of his depth when the league turned around and tried to suspend Brady anyway. So Kraft did the wrong thing (accepting the loss of the draft picks) for what he thought were the right reasons (no punishment for Brady) only to find that the league was fully intending on having its cake and eating it too, all at his expense.
He should have known better.
I'd like a pony, and a unicorn, and some fairy dust and...
Amen.
Did he really naively think he'd get a fair shake or did he just publicly fall on the sword thinking it would help Brady? I'd vote the latter. I don't think he was naive, it just didn't work out.
My brain keeps screaming that at some point, the NFL has to give in to common sense but you are 100% correct. They will take it to the edge of the universe knowing full well they are wrong.
Sometimes intelligent, well calculated, and well informed people just make the wrong call. Or what turns out to have been the wrong call.
That doesn't make those persons naïve or out of their depth.
In this case, I think it was reasonable to believe that Goodell would take Kraft's capitulation into account when determining Tom's penalty. I think it was also reasonable to believe that Goodell would take Kraft's loyal support into account. Kraft has known Goodell for a long time and based on their relationship, he could have reasonably believed that Goodell would be impacted by those things. And it's possible that Kraft took into account how Goodell acted and interacted with him on SpyGate. Those two had a world of conversations over the years that none of us are privy to.
Now, yeah, maybe Kraft should have known that Goodell is a craven piece of crap and would continue to take advantage of this made up controversy to exact a "better late than never penalty" for SpyGate and mollify league owners who were still butthurt over how easily they perceive that the Pats got off on that bullshit controversy.
As to accepting the Pats penalty in this case, I continue to not understand why choosing not to piss directly into a fan, and fight a fight that was destined to failure, was the wrong decision. I think it was the exactly right call. I always counsel clients not to pay me to fight battles they cannot win. Now maybe Kraft capitulated too quickly. One can quibble fairly with the timing. And his language was certainly too flowery. But the decision not to fight? That was the only decision given that he could not win AND there was reason to think that Goodell would not behave like a total shithead if Kraft acted as he did.
In short, being wrong doesn't make one naïve or out of his depth, and Kraft is neither. He's a remarkably successful and respected NFL owner.
PS: Ifmanis5 managed to capture my long winded comments in one line. Kudos to him.
Yes, capitulating was Kraft's only decision. And really, calling it a "decision" is too strong. It didn't matter what Kraft did at that point; nothing was going to change anything.
I dunno. Because capitulating was Kraft's only realistc option, I'm not sure we can take it seriously when Kraft said he thought it might help Brady's appeal. Maybe he did really think that, but it seems just as likely to me he didn't really think it would make a difference but he thought he could sell his actions better to the fanbase by putting a "we're taking the high road" face on things.
This is such a bizarre post that I don't even know where to start.
- The "concept" you appear to be referring to is the idea that the NFL will restore the draft picks that were wrongfully taken from the Pats.
- Those picks are not at issue in the legal case.
- The Pats aren't even a party to the case, except that as an NFL franchise they are (indirectly) being represented by Clement.
- This case concerns Goodell's power to suspend a player (Brady) and whether that power was used properly.
- None of the actual issues in this case appear to be represented in your post.
Last edited:
I think we can take it seriously. While we agree that the only move was to capitulate, there was some reason to believe that Kraft would fight to mollify his fans. Many fans felt abandoned when Kraft chose to accept the penalty, and Kraft had to know that doing so would engender that reaction. He actually indicated as such by essentially asking fans to give him the benefit of the doubt when he announced his decision, and said that he knew it would be a bitter pill for some to swallow. (Based on posts like SJH's, he was right).
I also don't think Kraft would have thought that he would gain a lot of fan support by taking the high road. If he thought that, he was very much wrong. But he had to know that fans would want a fight, even a fight that could not be won. "Be more like Al Davis," some said at the time, and some still say.
By removing all doubt and throwing his support behind the system, and even Goodell the Commish, I think it was reasonable to think, and I believe Kraft really did think, that he would score some points for Tom. But I could be wrong, and without inside knowledge (no pun intended), it's impossible to really know. That said, IF Kraft actually thought that, I don't think it was a naïve or fanciful approach. Goodell should have appreciated the fealty to the league process, and should have taken that into account. Many other owners would have waged the war for PR reasons and because they are less able to go down without a fight.
Not to derail this thread (if it's even possible to derail a runaway train), but did they really get fucked over? It forced two teams with poor cap management skills to pocket $10mil (Cowboys) and $36mil (Racists) instead of spending it on the next Haynesworth. Not that it matters to the context of the Patriots, but I always think it's dubious when this is used to point out Kraft's own inaction against the league.
Sure, some (unrealistic) people say that, but I don't think that was ever an option, do you? And if it wasn't, then everything else Kraft did really comes down to posturing and mollifying the fan base. Kraft is akin to a guy who's girlfriend broke up with him and he's saying, "Yeah, it's probably for the best; I don't think it would have worked out anyway." Maybe he really feels like that way, and maybe he doesn't, but there's nothing to be gained by saying or doing anything else. At the point your girlfriend breaks up with, you can be a man about it or you can be a fool, and at the point where the league punishes you, you can be a man about it or you can be a fool. Either way, it's done.
I don't think Kraft got any points with the league office; I think it was a neutral outcome. If he sued, there would have been a negative outcome. At the end of the day, Kraft did what was expected of him, and what every other owner ultimately has done in the same situation.
Kraft initially went on the offensive, but had no choice but to back down when he learned that he had absolutely zero leverage with any of the other owners. Kraft's decision had little or nothing to do with reducing Brady's suspension, although Kraft himself almost admitted he had expected some reduction during the appeal. But the latter expectation was not necessarily naive: nearly every player suspension handed out by the NFL has been reduced upon appeal. And Kraft was indeed correct that Goodell's intransigence has only cost the league even more money in unnecessary legal fees, and has opened up potential cans of worms for the league in the future if and when the league loses their appeal.
The proper analogy is the movie Braveheart.
Tom "Braveheart" Brady was battling Roger "Longshanks" Goodell when Robert "The Bruce" Kraft decided to protect his own land and titles by betraying Braveheart.
Robert the Bruce regretted his actions and later lead the charge to battle Longshanks.
Tom "Braveheart" Brady was battling Roger "Longshanks" Goodell when Robert "The Bruce" Kraft decided to protect his own land and titles by betraying Braveheart.
Robert the Bruce regretted his actions and later lead the charge to battle Longshanks.
Ouch. I agree it is a longshot, but in my defense, my opinion of King is so minimal that I can't believe he would come up with a theory unless there is some NFL sponsored tie-in.
Is it out of the realm of possibility that it's a trial balloon in advance of a reconsideration of giving the Pats their picks back? No.
Does it have anything to do with the court case? Not at all.
Does it have anything to do with the court case? Not at all.
Of course it is connected to the court case. That is the next and probably final bit of PR pressure Goodell faces. I imagine Goodell is holding off owners' questions by telling them the appellate court will correct the rogue judge. You don't think that if the 2d Circuit upholds Berman, the owners will pay attention to the week of ESPN bashing Goodell will receive, leading to many calls by the other owners? At that point Goodell either has to explain to idiots like Irsay that the things are unrelated, or be prepared to soften the punishment.
In fairness to King, he went off the NFL Reservation on this months ago. He seemed particularly upset about the nefarious & ludicrous spin the NFL tried to put on Brady's signing of gear and memorabilia, which was a precursor for Glampers' total misrepresentation of Brady's testimony.
Ok, well now I go back to my original point: this is an incoherent mess with no basis in fact. And if you are going to insist otherwise, please explain the connection, because what you are saying makes no sense at all to me. (Note: saying "of course they are connected" is not an explanation. It's an assertion.)
A loss with the 2nd Circuit means nothing with respect to the Patriots picks. Nothing at all.
Last edited:
What questions are you referring to? I highly doubt the owners have given this a lick of thought over the last 6 months since the suspension was overturned
I think he's maybe saying that the General public doesn't know that and if the headlines just say NFL loses the public reaction is more or less the same vis a vis opinion on the picks.
I don't agree with that in any way.
Regardless of Berman's ruling, the public has pretty well decided that the Pats are guilty. And any loss by the NFL at the 2nd Circuit will be seen as a technical issue related to the specifics of the CBA.
I've not seen anything that would lead me to a different conclusion.
Regardless of Berman's ruling, the public has pretty well decided that the Pats are guilty. And any loss by the NFL at the 2nd Circuit will be seen as a technical issue related to the specifics of the CBA.
I've not seen anything that would lead me to a different conclusion.
Last edited:
Yes, the only way anyone possibly starts thinking about the picks is if there is some sort of major TMZ-type reveal. So don't count on it because the monetary value of such leaks has been waning since last February, so unless someone in the NFL has a grudge...
For all the talk about Kraft capitulating, this site is still alive and still getting updated as actual facts roll in:
http://wellsreportcontext.com/
After the Spygate fiasco, roughly 90% of football fans outside New England labeled the Patriots as cheaters. When Deflategate broke, that probably went up to 98%, mostly thanks to the clueless media types that have no idea that an Ideal Gas Law exists in real life. Between actual scientists' (as opposed to celebrities disguised as scientists) debunking the Exponent study, and the NFL's mishandling of the pressure readings, the mainstream national media is starting to come around. As a result, that 98% of fans is probably back down to 94.23%, and will likely asymptotically approach 91.2% over time. And the local mediots such as Volin, Tomase, Shank, Borges will still believe Brady and Belichick did "something" (quoting Tomase), because in their view science is voodoo anyway.
And the opinion of the league's owners, the ones that actually matter to Goodell, will not change in the slightest; they've long since moved on to matters far more important to their pocketbooks.
So, no, those picks are not coming back.
http://wellsreportcontext.com/
After the Spygate fiasco, roughly 90% of football fans outside New England labeled the Patriots as cheaters. When Deflategate broke, that probably went up to 98%, mostly thanks to the clueless media types that have no idea that an Ideal Gas Law exists in real life. Between actual scientists' (as opposed to celebrities disguised as scientists) debunking the Exponent study, and the NFL's mishandling of the pressure readings, the mainstream national media is starting to come around. As a result, that 98% of fans is probably back down to 94.23%, and will likely asymptotically approach 91.2% over time. And the local mediots such as Volin, Tomase, Shank, Borges will still believe Brady and Belichick did "something" (quoting Tomase), because in their view science is voodoo anyway.
And the opinion of the league's owners, the ones that actually matter to Goodell, will not change in the slightest; they've long since moved on to matters far more important to their pocketbooks.
So, no, those picks are not coming back.
The picks are not coming back. Brady's legal case will be decided by 3 judges, which almost certainly will put an end to it. Peter King wrote what he believes and has been saying for some time.
... and it was an American Airlines jet that hit the Pentagon, not a missile.
... and it was an American Airlines jet that hit the Pentagon, not a missile.
You're a blind Patriots homer! Everyone knows that Belicheat was behind 9/11!
Not only that, but a reversal by the 2d circuit will be seen as proof positive of cheating. In the end, there is absolutely nothing that will move the public needle. Even a Goodell capitulation will simply be seen as him polishing his buddy Kraft's knob by 88% of the football public.
Shouldn't the NFLPA fight for the return of the draft picks? It's one fewer player drafted. More significantly, based on the estimates from http://overthecap.com/draft/, the 32nd player picked in 2016 is going to get screwed.
The information below shows the draft pick, team, overall contract value, average salary, and signing bonus for 2015 and 2016 (projected).
31 New Orleans $7,731,716 / $1,932,929 / $6,242,392
32 New England $7,613,229 / $1,903,307 / $6,140,062
33 New York $6,120,557 / $1,530,139 / $ -
34 Tampa Bay $6,068,860 / $1,517,215 / $3,899,042
31 Denver $8,013,830 / $1,457,060 / $4,028,240
32 Cleveland $6,430,208 / $1,169,129 / $2,876,516
33 Tennessee $6,375,358 / $1,159,156 / $2,836,624
34 Dallas $6,320,516 / $1,149,185 / $2,796,740
In general, picks are expected to increase about 4%. Yet the overall compensation for the 32nd pick in 2016 is projected to drop 15%. Player agents can argue for more money, but unless the rookie pool increases it could squeeze teams with high picks.
The folks at overthecap.com could be wrong, of course, so this might be a non-issue.
The information below shows the draft pick, team, overall contract value, average salary, and signing bonus for 2015 and 2016 (projected).
31 New Orleans $7,731,716 / $1,932,929 / $6,242,392
32 New England $7,613,229 / $1,903,307 / $6,140,062
33 New York $6,120,557 / $1,530,139 / $ -
34 Tampa Bay $6,068,860 / $1,517,215 / $3,899,042
31 Denver $8,013,830 / $1,457,060 / $4,028,240
32 Cleveland $6,430,208 / $1,169,129 / $2,876,516
33 Tennessee $6,375,358 / $1,159,156 / $2,836,624
34 Dallas $6,320,516 / $1,149,185 / $2,796,740
In general, picks are expected to increase about 4%. Yet the overall compensation for the 32nd pick in 2016 is projected to drop 15%. Player agents can argue for more money, but unless the rookie pool increases it could squeeze teams with high picks.
The folks at overthecap.com could be wrong, of course, so this might be a non-issue.
Considering the league fucked the NFLPA by hiding 120 million from them until they got thr courts involved I think they should have done more to fight for that draft pick for the Patriots.
Shhhhhh! Do you really want the NFL to give the Colts and Jets free draft picks?
My Vice President at work is a good guy. I like working for him, he is good at his job but he looks like he could be Roger Goodell's twin. It's shocking. Dim the lights or look at him from the side and I'd swear to was Roger in the room. If you told me they are related I wouldn't be surprised. At all.
It sucks. Every meeting when we are talking I'm also thinking about punching him in the face. I'm worried that one day I might just skip and take my Roger frustration out on him.
It sucks. Every meeting when we are talking I'm also thinking about punching him in the face. I'm worried that one day I might just skip and take my Roger frustration out on him.
Steph Stradley chimes in about returning draft picks:
http://www.stradleylaw.com/patriots-draft-picks/
http://www.stradleylaw.com/patriots-draft-picks/
Can someone get this televised? Whether you're right or not that we will learn "nothing of value", that won't stop my need for the lawyers in here to opine on the three judges and their leanings, etc. Maybe it's just that I lived/died with this thread about a year ago, but I consider today to be a big day vis a vis the 2016/17 season.
Excellent article. Runs rings around PK's meager efforts on the same subject.
It was a great article. It will also go completely unnoticed by football fans as a whole, sadly.
This is where the panel will get posted (I assume at some point a refresh will yield actual names):
http://ww2.ca2.uscourts.gov/calendar/index.php?eID=932
Beware judicial tea leaf reading. Unless its a judge at the margins ("Unions are a scourge on the Earth"; "Unions are the only thing preventing the return of slavery"), I think "nothing of value" is the likely outcome. That won't stop the prognostications, but those should be taken with truckloads of salt.
The Stradley column is excellent - comprehensive and logical.
One nit-picky semantics point that I have resisted commenting on, but decided to now. I don't think that technically the effects of the ideal gas law are to "deflate" the football. To me, deflate implies removal of air. The ideal gas law speaks to a reduction in the pressure of a given amount of air within the football...an amount that doesn't change. And when the ball warms, that same amount of air remains in the ball, but is again at a higher pressure. No additional air is put into the football at that time.
This may be semantics, but there is a subtle issue. We should NOT acknowledge in any way that the balls deflated (and then magically reinflated when warmed.) We should be saying that the air pressure was reduced (or declined, or whatever term we want) and then increased again with warming. In no way should be accept any conceptual construct that these balls "deflated."
One nit-picky semantics point that I have resisted commenting on, but decided to now. I don't think that technically the effects of the ideal gas law are to "deflate" the football. To me, deflate implies removal of air. The ideal gas law speaks to a reduction in the pressure of a given amount of air within the football...an amount that doesn't change. And when the ball warms, that same amount of air remains in the ball, but is again at a higher pressure. No additional air is put into the football at that time.
This may be semantics, but there is a subtle issue. We should NOT acknowledge in any way that the balls deflated (and then magically reinflated when warmed.) We should be saying that the air pressure was reduced (or declined, or whatever term we want) and then increased again with warming. In no way should be accept any conceptual construct that these balls "deflated."