2015 NFL Season

[pilferk]

George

I have not read thru all the reports and documents...not my thing.. it really doesn't interest me much..

I just think there is some common sense involved. This story is not just a big conspiracy so the NFL can suspend and make their best player look bad for the world to see... If it is one big smoke show to let Goodell appear to be flexing his muscles or righting some wrongs... i would think he would do it to a different player, maybe i'm being COMPLETELY naive... I don't know.

I just can't buy that.. If you don't think there is precise proof as to what brady did... maybe you are right.. I'm just not looking at it that way.

When the shoe fits...

I have.

I think there are far too many "coincidences" and "benefits of the doubt" and leap of logic explanations present in all this to get to "there was nothing going on".  Any one piece of this stuff...fine.  But there's just WAAAAAAAYYYYYYY too much to get me around to "hey, it was all just one big misunderstanding".

All that being said, I think 4 games is WAY over the top.  I think a fine would have been more appropriate OR, maybe, 1 game for being "uncooperative".

[pilferk]

Minnesota judge just moved the case to Manhattan...which is a MUCH less "player friendly" location.

[GeorgeSteele]

JB --- I understand your point, but what we call common sense is very influenced by individual perspectives and that's not reliable in terms of declaring guilt.  For example, from my perspective, it's common sense that if the NFL wanted to manufacture a controversy for PR purposes, the perfect target would be a high profile guy who, while he is a historically great player, is close to the end of his career and has already given to the league far more than he has left to give.  This story would have no legs if they went after Ryan Fitzpatrick.  Plus, everyone hates the Pats and nobody will sympathize with them under any circumstances.  

That's my common sense perspective but if someone wanted to build a case to punish the NFL, for example, by revoking its anti-trust exemption, they would need actual evidence, not just my or anyone else's common sense take.  By the same token, I think legit evidence standards should apply when a player gets punished.

[pilferk]

JB --- I understand your point, but what we call common sense is very influenced by individual perspectives and that's not reliable in terms of declaring guilt.  For example, from my perspective, it's common sense that if the NFL wanted to manufacture a controversy for PR purposes, the perfect target would be a high profile guy who, while he is a historically great player, is close to the end of his career and has already given to the league far more than he has left to give.  This story would have no legs if they went after Ryan Fitzpatrick.  Plus, everyone hates the Pats and nobody will sympathize with them under any circumstances.  

That's my common sense perspective but if someone wanted to build a case to punish the NFL, for example, by revoking its anti-trust exemption, they would need actual evidence, not just my or anyone else's common sense take.  By the same token, I think legit evidence standards should apply when a player gets punished.

On the evidence standards:

They were established, and teams were notified of that standard (it's similar to civil court standards...preponderance of the evidence, which means 51% sure, which translates to "more probable than not"), after Spygate.

The courts (since it's been challenged twice before) upheld that standard.

On the other: I have a hard time buying into the conspiracy theories that the NFL is out to get it's poster boy, one of it's high profile teams, and one of it's most influencial owners.  I don't see the real benefit of it.  Again, this goes to having to create a convoluted narrative to explain away everything we've seen, heard, and read....when the simpler explanation seems to be, to me, that "they" tampered with the balls (even if it was 2 guys who were going too far on a known QB preference).

[JAEBALL]

George

I have not read thru all the reports and documents...not my thing.. it really doesn't interest me much..

I just think there is some common sense involved. This story is not just a big conspiracy so the NFL can suspend and make their best player look bad for the world to see... If it is one big smoke show to let Goodell appear to be flexing his muscles or righting some wrongs... i would think he would do it to a different player, maybe i'm being COMPLETELY naive... I don't know.

I just can't buy that.. If you don't think there is precise proof as to what brady did... maybe you are right.. I'm just not looking at it that way.

When the shoe fits...

I have.

I think there are far too many "coincidences" and "benefits of the doubt" and leap of logic explanations present in all this to get to "there was nothing going on".  Any one piece of this stuff...fine.  But there's just WAAAAAAAYYYYYYY too much to get me around to "hey, it was all just one big misunderstanding".

All that being said, I think 4 games is WAY over the top.  I think a fine would have been more appropriate OR, maybe, 1 game for being "uncooperative".

No doubt. One or two games would have been best from the get go. As it was pointed out a couple months ago, the cover up and the running around after burned him.

[GeorgeSteele]

JB --- I understand your point, but what we call common sense is very influenced by individual perspectives and that's not reliable in terms of declaring guilt.  For example, from my perspective, it's common sense that if the NFL wanted to manufacture a controversy for PR purposes, the perfect target would be a high profile guy who, while he is a historically great player, is close to the end of his career and has already given to the league far more than he has left to give.  This story would have no legs if they went after Ryan Fitzpatrick.  Plus, everyone hates the Pats and nobody will sympathize with them under any circumstances.  

That's my common sense perspective but if someone wanted to build a case to punish the NFL, for example, by revoking its anti-trust exemption, they would need actual evidence, not just my or anyone else's common sense take.  By the same token, I think legit evidence standards should apply when a player gets punished.

On the evidence standards:

They were established, and teams were notified of that standard (it's similar to civil court standards...preponderance of the evidence, which means 51% sure, which translates to "more probable than not"), after Spygate.

The courts (since it's been challenged twice before) upheld that standard.

On the other: I have a hard time buying into the conspiracy theories that the NFL is out to get it's poster boy, one of it's high profile teams, and one of it's most influencial owners.  I don't see the real benefit of it.  Again, this goes to having to create a convoluted narrative to explain away everything we've seen, heard, and read....when the simpler explanation seems to be, to me, that "they" tampered with the balls (even if it was 2 guys who were going too far on a known QB preference).

I'm not questioning the "more probable than not" standard; just questioning deciding guilt based on the "common sense" take that the mere fact that the NFL went after the poster boy is proof that the poster boy is guilty.  I'm fine with the "more probable than not" standard, I just don't think the evidence was there to overcome it.  Roger Goodell and the law firm he hired to prepare an "independent report" disagrees with me, not surprised.

The benefit of this controversy is that since this 'scandal' has dominated the news, the NFL has not had to address any negative issues affecting its brand (concussions, former player suicides, domestic violence, etc.).  Plus, the NFL just back-doored its way into subpoena power.  Even though the CBA does not give the NFL the right to subpoena a player's personal property, if a player (even the poster boy) does not comply with an evidence request, they get suspended for not cooperating. 

[pilferk]

George

I have not read thru all the reports and documents...not my thing.. it really doesn't interest me much..

I just think there is some common sense involved. This story is not just a big conspiracy so the NFL can suspend and make their best player look bad for the world to see... If it is one big smoke show to let Goodell appear to be flexing his muscles or righting some wrongs... i would think he would do it to a different player, maybe i'm being COMPLETELY naive... I don't know.

I just can't buy that.. If you don't think there is precise proof as to what brady did... maybe you are right.. I'm just not looking at it that way.

When the shoe fits...

I have.

I think there are far too many "coincidences" and "benefits of the doubt" and leap of logic explanations present in all this to get to "there was nothing going on".  Any one piece of this stuff...fine.  But there's just WAAAAAAAYYYYYYY too much to get me around to "hey, it was all just one big misunderstanding".

All that being said, I think 4 games is WAY over the top.  I think a fine would have been more appropriate OR, maybe, 1 game for being "uncooperative".

No doubt. One or two games would have been best from the get go. As it was pointed out a couple months ago, the cover up and the running around after burned him.

"You know, I'm not exactly sure what happened.  I know that guy.  He's a good guy.  And all those guys know I like the balls a little on the softer side.  So, maybe those guys took that knowledge and did something they thought would help me out.  And, if thats the case...I'm really sorry.  As one of the leaders of this club, I take responsibility for whatever part I had in those actions, and I'm sorry.  Whatever fine or whatever the league thinks I deserve for that, I understand".

If delivered right after the AFC Championship game: Done, finished, over. Fined.  If delivered a week after the Superbowl (when it appeared pretty obvious what had been found, to the Pats): Done, finished, over, fined.

The Pats, Kraft, and Brady made it worse for themselves in their very public responses, and in their actions and handling of the investigation.  They seem, from my POV, to have been obstructionist and confrontational right from the get go.

How hard is it to say "We have a policy not to comment on league investigations or potential rule violations until the league has ruled".

[faldor]

TOM BRADY IS GUILTY

Let's move on 

I don't care about his cell phone.. whether he broke it..whether the NFL exaggerated it for PR...none of that...

Tom Brady either instructed, hinted to or knew the equipment guy was tampering with the balls.... END OF STORY

AND THEN INSTEAD of saying I did not realize what an error in judgement that was and apologizing ... he has now cost himself 4 games, his team a first round pick and a ton of embarrassment. none of which would have happened to him and the pats if he didn't lie and act so defiant and all high n mighty. Also... YES he is being hammered because the other owners have had enough of Kraft and Bill getting away with murder, but again... if he didn't thumb his nose at the league...this would have been over with months ago.

With all this said... when the time comes in a few weeks... I will be all over him in fantasy drafts if he slips tot he right spot 

You are reacting in the exact manner the NFL has hoped to lead the public to act. The way they have presented things, with these attention getting headlines. Of course you think he's guilty. Who wouldn't? Mission accomplished for the NFL. Doesn't mean it's right though.

And it's no longer about guilt. Regardless of what happens, Brady will be viewed as guilty. It's about whether the way the NFL has handled things fairly through the process, specifically the punishment.

Is being generally aware that a fractional amount of air may have been taken out of a football equal to taking PED's? Because that's what the NFL is saying. Not to mention the fine and the loss of draft picks. If you think that's fair, I'd hate to get on your bad side.

[pilferk]

I'm not questioning the "more probable than not" standard; just questioning deciding guilt based on the "common sense" take that the mere fact that the NFL went after the poster boy is proof that the poster boy is guilty.  I'm fine with the "more probable than not" standard, I just don't think the evidence was there to overcome it.  Roger Goodell and the law firm he hired to prepare an "independent report" disagrees with me, not surprised.

Again, I don't think the league going after him means he's guilty.

But I don't think just BECAUSE he's the poster boy that he's innocent, either.

After reading the report, and the Pats response, and everything else in between....I think they easily break 51%.  Not 99%...but well over 51%.  Simply because there is way too much to try to explain away.  Again, you can poo poo any ONE thing...but all of them?  That takes too much of a leap for me.

The benefit of this controversy is that since this 'scandal' has dominated the news, the NFL has not had to address any negative issues affecting its brand (concussions, former player suicides, domestic violence, etc.).  Plus, the NFL just back-doored its way into subpoena power.  Even though the CBA does not give the NFL the right to subpoena a player's personal property, if a player (even the poster boy) does not comply with an evidence request, they get suspended for not cooperating. 

I can't see that as a benefit...at least not one that could be planned for.  And I can't see the league managing a convoluted, labyrinthian "plot" to, maybe (if everything breaks exactly right) possibly, control the news cycle on some of the NFL's warts.  Especially if they're "manufacturing" all the charges...because then the league rep takes ANOTHER hit at the end of this process.

It sounds too convoluted to be a) plausible and b) for THIS league to pull off.  Isn't it much more likely (and simple) that the NFL simply believes Brady did it?

[JAEBALL]

TOM BRADY IS GUILTY

Let's move on 

I don't care about his cell phone.. whether he broke it..whether the NFL exaggerated it for PR...none of that...

Tom Brady either instructed, hinted to or knew the equipment guy was tampering with the balls.... END OF STORY

AND THEN INSTEAD of saying I did not realize what an error in judgement that was and apologizing ... he has now cost himself 4 games, his team a first round pick and a ton of embarrassment. none of which would have happened to him and the pats if he didn't lie and act so defiant and all high n mighty. Also... YES he is being hammered because the other owners have had enough of Kraft and Bill getting away with murder, but again... if he didn't thumb his nose at the league...this would have been over with months ago.

With all this said... when the time comes in a few weeks... I will be all over him in fantasy drafts if he slips tot he right spot 

You are reacting in the exact manner the NFL has hoped to lead the public to act. The way they have presented things, with these attention getting headlines. Of course you think he's guilty. Who wouldn't? Mission accomplished for the NFL. Doesn't mean it's right though.

And it's no longer about guilt. Regardless of what happens, Brady will be viewed as guilty. It's about whether the way the NFL has handled things fairly through the process, specifically the punishment.

Is being generally aware that a fractional amount of air may have been taken out of a football equal to taking PED's? Because that's what the NFL is saying. Not to mention the fine and the loss of draft picks. If you think that's fair, I'd hate to get on your bad side.

I've never said the punishment is fair.. I thought I made it clear that they are being hammered by their past discretions and the fact that the other owners put the screws to Goodell.

I just think PATRIOT NATION needs to stop crying about it... they are still way ahead of the what is fair and what's not game...

[JAEBALL]

I'm not questioning the "more probable than not" standard; just questioning deciding guilt based on the "common sense" take that the mere fact that the NFL went after the poster boy is proof that the poster boy is guilty.  I'm fine with the "more probable than not" standard, I just don't think the evidence was there to overcome it.  Roger Goodell and the law firm he hired to prepare an "independent report" disagrees with me, not surprised.

Again, I don't think the league going after him means he's guilty.

But I don't think just BECAUSE he's the poster boy that he's innocent, either.

After reading the report, and the Pats response, and everything else in between....I think they easily break 51%.  Not 99%...but well over 51%.  Simply because there is way too much to try to explain away.  Again, you can poo poo any ONE thing...but all of them?  That takes too much of a leap for me.

The benefit of this controversy is that since this 'scandal' has dominated the news, the NFL has not had to address any negative issues affecting its brand (concussions, former player suicides, domestic violence, etc.).  Plus, the NFL just back-doored its way into subpoena power.  Even though the CBA does not give the NFL the right to subpoena a player's personal property, if a player (even the poster boy) does not comply with an evidence request, they get suspended for not cooperating. 

I can't see that as a benefit...at least not one that could be planned for.  And I can't see the league managing a convoluted, labyrinthian "plot" to, maybe (if everything breaks exactly right) possibly, control the news cycle on some of the NFL's warts.  Especially if they're "manufacturing" all the charges...because then the league rep takes ANOTHER hit at the end of this process.

It sounds too convoluted to be a) plausible and b) for THIS league to pull off.  Isn't it much more likely (and simple) that the NFL simply believes Brady did it?

DING DING DING

[faldor]

JB --- I understand your point, but what we call common sense is very influenced by individual perspectives and that's not reliable in terms of declaring guilt.  For example, from my perspective, it's common sense that if the NFL wanted to manufacture a controversy for PR purposes, the perfect target would be a high profile guy who, while he is a historically great player, is close to the end of his career and has already given to the league far more than he has left to give.  This story would have no legs if they went after Ryan Fitzpatrick.  Plus, everyone hates the Pats and nobody will sympathize with them under any circumstances.  

That's my common sense perspective but if someone wanted to build a case to punish the NFL, for example, by revoking its anti-trust exemption, they would need actual evidence, not just my or anyone else's common sense take.  By the same token, I think legit evidence standards should apply when a player gets punished.

On the evidence standards:

They were established, and teams were notified of that standard (it's similar to civil court standards...preponderance of the evidence, which means 51% sure, which translates to "more probable than not"), after Spygate.

The courts (since it's been challenged twice before) upheld that standard.

On the other: I have a hard time buying into the conspiracy theories that the NFL is out to get it's poster boy, one of it's high profile teams, and one of it's most influencial owners.  I don't see the real benefit of it.  Again, this goes to having to create a convoluted narrative to explain away everything we've seen, heard, and read....when the simpler explanation seems to be, to me, that "they" tampered with the balls (even if it was 2 guys who were going too far on a known QB preference).

How about wanting to get at the head coach of the Patriots? How do a majority of owners, coaches, league officials, etc. feel about him? You don't think a large majority of people around the league would like to see him squirm? They couldn't go directly after him in this case, but what better place to hit him, and the team, than his All Pro QB? It's well known that there are many organizations, maybe all 31, that believe the Patriots have been cheating this entire time. They were just waiting to get them in an "I gotcha" moment. Here we are.

[pilferk]

How about wanting to get at the head coach of the Patriots? How do a majority of owners, coaches, league officials, etc. feel about him? You don't think a large majority of people around the league would like to see him squirm? They couldn't go directly after him in this case, but what better place to hit him, and the team, than his All Pro QB? It's well known that there are many organizations, maybe all 31, that believe the Patriots have been cheating this entire time. They were just waiting to get them in an "I gotcha" moment. Here we are.

I don't buy that this is an NFL wide conspiracy to go after Bellicheck...no. I thnk that's an even tougher pill to swallow

1) because someone would talk about it
2) because I don't think you can get 31 teams to agree on anything, never mind a conspiracy theory this elaborate
3) I don't think Goodell would/could stage something this elaborate based on a "feeling"
4) I don't think it accomplishes anything. He's not going to lose his job over it.  He's not going to lose his rings over it.  He's not going to be kept out of the HOF over it. He might lose 4 games in one season because of it, and they'll still likely make the playoffs.  Hell, if I were Bellicheck...I'd be calling Brady and PLEADING with him to take the suspension, so there's no chance I lose him mid-season.
5) I see no benefit to the league to do it.

I think it's a lot more likely that, agree or disagree,  the league offices simply think Brady did it.

[faldor]

George

I have not read thru all the reports and documents...not my thing.. it really doesn't interest me much..

I just think there is some common sense involved. This story is not just a big conspiracy so the NFL can suspend and make their best player look bad for the world to see... If it is one big smoke show to let Goodell appear to be flexing his muscles or righting some wrongs... i would think he would do it to a different player, maybe i'm being COMPLETELY naive... I don't know.

I just can't buy that.. If you don't think there is precise proof as to what brady did... maybe you are right.. I'm just not looking at it that way.

When the shoe fits...

I have.

I think there are far too many "coincidences" and "benefits of the doubt" and leap of logic explanations present in all this to get to "there was nothing going on".  Any one piece of this stuff...fine.  But there's just WAAAAAAAYYYYYYY too much to get me around to "hey, it was all just one big misunderstanding".

All that being said, I think 4 games is WAY over the top.  I think a fine would have been more appropriate OR, maybe, 1 game for being "uncooperative".

No doubt. One or two games would have been best from the get go. As it was pointed out a couple months ago, the cover up and the running around after burned him.

"You know, I'm not exactly sure what happened.  I know that guy.  He's a good guy.  And all those guys know I like the balls a little on the softer side.  So, maybe those guys took that knowledge and did something they thought would help me out.  And, if thats the case...I'm really sorry.  As one of the leaders of this club, I take responsibility for whatever part I had in those actions, and I'm sorry.  Whatever fine or whatever the league thinks I deserve for that, I understand".

If delivered right after the AFC Championship game: Done, finished, over. Fined.  If delivered a week after the Superbowl (when it appeared pretty obvious what had been found, to the Pats): Done, finished, over, fined.

The Pats, Kraft, and Brady made it worse for themselves in their very public responses, and in their actions and handling of the investigation.  They seem, from my POV, to have been obstructionist and confrontational right from the get go.

How hard is it to say "We have a policy not to comment on league investigations or potential rule violations until the league has ruled".

What about the league? Are they held to a lower standard? It's ok for them to leak erroneous information casting the Patriots in a horrible light and dragging them through the mud in the weeks leading up to the Super Bowl? It's ok for them to find out the information they leaked was completely false and do nothing to retract that and let the public believe it for months, just adding to the public didain for the Patriots? All that gets done and the Patriots are supposed to sit back and take it? Doesn't seem fair to me.

[faldor]

How about wanting to get at the head coach of the Patriots? How do a majority of owners, coaches, league officials, etc. feel about him? You don't think a large majority of people around the league would like to see him squirm? They couldn't go directly after him in this case, but what better place to hit him, and the team, than his All Pro QB? It's well known that there are many organizations, maybe all 31, that believe the Patriots have been cheating this entire time. They were just waiting to get them in an "I gotcha" moment. Here we are.

I don't buy that this is an NFL wide conspiracy to go after Bellicheck...no. I thnk that's an even tougher pill to swallow

1) because someone would talk about it
2) because I don't think you can get 31 teams to agree on anything, never mind a conspiracy theory this elaborate
3) I don't think Goodell would/could stage something this elaborate based on a "feeling"
4) I don't think it accomplishes anything. He's not going to lose his job over it.  He's not going to lose his rings over it.  He's not going to be kept out of the HOF over it. He might lose 4 games in one season because of it, and they'll still likely make the playoffs.  Hell, if I were Bellicheck...I'd be calling Brady and PLEADING with him to take the suspension, so there's no chance I lose him mid-season.
5) I see no benefit to the league to do it.

I think it's a lot more likely that, agree or disagree,  the league offices simply think Brady did it.

Oh I think they believe he did it too, but they haven't been able to prove that. So they've twisted and turned things in such a manner to make it look like he did it. They obviously had something to go on here. I don't believe they manufactured this from the ground up. But they were warned by other teams. Other teams are wary of the way Belichick does things. Once the NFL found something, they went full throttle after them.

Maybe they hoped the Pats would have reacted differently, and they would have gone easier on them. That, we'll never know. But once the ball got rolling, they did everything they could to control the story and make the Patriots look bad.

Again, this all started because of the initial report from Mortensen that the balls measured 2 psi below the limit. That was erroneous and inflammatory. THAT is what started the wheels in motion. If that's not controlling the story, I don't know what is.

[faldor]

TOM BRADY IS GUILTY

Let's move on 

I don't care about his cell phone.. whether he broke it..whether the NFL exaggerated it for PR...none of that...

Tom Brady either instructed, hinted to or knew the equipment guy was tampering with the balls.... END OF STORY

AND THEN INSTEAD of saying I did not realize what an error in judgement that was and apologizing ... he has now cost himself 4 games, his team a first round pick and a ton of embarrassment. none of which would have happened to him and the pats if he didn't lie and act so defiant and all high n mighty. Also... YES he is being hammered because the other owners have had enough of Kraft and Bill getting away with murder, but again... if he didn't thumb his nose at the league...this would have been over with months ago.

With all this said... when the time comes in a few weeks... I will be all over him in fantasy drafts if he slips tot he right spot 

You are reacting in the exact manner the NFL has hoped to lead the public to act. The way they have presented things, with these attention getting headlines. Of course you think he's guilty. Who wouldn't? Mission accomplished for the NFL. Doesn't mean it's right though.

And it's no longer about guilt. Regardless of what happens, Brady will be viewed as guilty. It's about whether the way the NFL has handled things fairly through the process, specifically the punishment.

Is being generally aware that a fractional amount of air may have been taken out of a football equal to taking PED's? Because that's what the NFL is saying. Not to mention the fine and the loss of draft picks. If you think that's fair, I'd hate to get on your bad side.

I've never said the punishment is fair.. I thought I made it clear that they are being hammered by their past discretions and the fact that the other owners put the screws to Goodell.

I just think PATRIOT NATION needs to stop crying about it... they are still way ahead of the what is fair and what's not game...

Believe me, I'd love to stop crying about this. But it's been the only story going for the last 6 months. There's not much else to discuss. You can thank the NFL for that.

[pilferk]

What about the league? Are they held to a lower standard? It's ok for them to leak erroneous information casting the Patriots in a horrible light and dragging them through the mud in the weeks leading up to the Super Bowl? It's ok for them to find out the information they leaked was completely false and do nothing to retract that and let the public believe it for months, just adding to the public didain for the Patriots? All that gets done and the Patriots are supposed to sit back and take it? Doesn't seem fair to me.

Yup.  Because the league is your BOSS.  Well, the alternative is to succeed (and lose the CBA protections), I guess. Or disband the franchise. Or...do what they did.

But, yes.  You put your head down, go the "no comment, we're confident when all the information comes to light, the situation will be clear, etc" route.  Brady issues the non-specific, non-incriminating apology.

If they did that, all the leagues PR moves lose their bite. There's no "gotcha".  It disappears into the news cycle, and becomes a "2 rogue, low level, employees fucked up" story...until they get let go.  The Pats don't antagonize the league, the league doesn't escalate (they can't...they have not fighting partner), the Pats cooperate with the investigation without the pissy attitude and general obstruction, and when the Wells Report comes out (if there even needs to be one at that point...more likely a league report), everyone gets to decide for themselves what they think. And it's a blip in the news cycle, because in that scenario, there's NO FRAKKING way Brady gets 4 games.  The team might still get slapped around (organizational guilt from the "Spygate probation"), still.

You think what they've done has HELPED the Pats brand MORE than my suggestion would?  And harmed it LESS than just taking the initial incorrect information and letting it sit?

I certainly don't.

[faldor]

One thing I don't get, maybe someone could help to explain. It is documented in the Wells Report that after the Jets game, in which the balls measured at 16 psi, Brady had the psi rules and regulations printed out and delivered to the officials so that wouldn't happen again.

Why in the world would he do that if he was knowingly taking air out of the balls? Isn't that asking to get caught?

There's suppositions and leaps made on each side. Let's not pretend like everything the NFL has presented has been fair and balanced and all the Patriots are coming forth with are lies, propaganda, and excuses.

[faldor]

What about the league? Are they held to a lower standard? It's ok for them to leak erroneous information casting the Patriots in a horrible light and dragging them through the mud in the weeks leading up to the Super Bowl? It's ok for them to find out the information they leaked was completely false and do nothing to retract that and let the public believe it for months, just adding to the public didain for the Patriots? All that gets done and the Patriots are supposed to sit back and take it? Doesn't seem fair to me.

Yup.  Because the league is your BOSS.  Well, the alternative is to succeed (and lose the CBA protections), I guess. Or disband the franchise. Or...do what they did.

But, yes.  You put your head down, go the "no comment, we're confident when all the information comes to light, the situation will be clear, etc" route.  Brady issues the non-specific, non-incriminating apology.

If they did that, all the leagues PR moves lose their bite. There's no "gotcha".  It disappears into the news cycle, and becomes a "2 rogue, low level, employees fucked up" story...until they get let go.  The Pats don't antagonize the league, the league doesn't escalate (they can't...they have not fighting partner), the Pats cooperate with the investigation without the pissy attitude and general obstruction, and when the Wells Report comes out (if there even needs to be one at that point...more likely a league report), everyone gets to decide for themselves what they think. And it's a blip in the news cycle, because in that scenario, there's NO FRAKKING way Brady gets 4 games.  The team might still get slapped around (organizational guilt from the "Spygate probation"), still.

You think what they've done has HELPED the Pats brand MORE than my suggestion would?  And harmed it LESS than just taking the initial incorrect information and letting it sit?

I certainly don't.

I agreed with you long ago that the Patriots should've taken a more gentle approach off the bat. But let's not forget that this story was gaining steam the day after they crushed the Colts. The media was running with the false information the league had leaked. People were calling for Brady and Belichick to be suspended for the Super Bowl. Michael Wilbon was taking the stance that the team should forfeit their appearance in the Super Bowl. And a lot of people agreed with any and all of these things. Maybe they felt they had to be defiant to make sure that stuff didn't happen. Who knows what would've happened if they took a different approach. I'd like to think the they wouldn't have been that extreme, but I don't trust the league one iota. Again, public pressure could've reached the point where Goodell could've felt the need to do something drastic. I see that as a certain possibility.

[pilferk]

Oh I think they believe he did it too, but they haven't been able to prove that. So they've twisted and turned things in such a manner to make it look like he did it. They obviously had something to go on here. I don't believe they manufactured this from the ground up. But they were warned by other teams. Other teams are wary of the way Belichick does things. Once the NFL found something, they went full throttle after them.

Define "proof".  To the standard of criminal court? No, not beyond a shadow of a doubt.

But that's not their standard.  They use the standard of civil court, which is "after preponderance of the evidence". I'm sorry..I think they've done that.  I get you might not..but there are WAY too many other, reasonable people coming to the same conclusion, some as informed, some better informed, than we are.  I get there are people who also disagree...but it's not as cut and dry as "they didn't prove it".  I think there is easily a 51% chance he did it.

As for the NFL going full throttle after it..um...that's their job.  To enforce the rules.  Are you saying they should pick and choose which rules to enforce?

Or just that they put the full weight of the league behind this violation.  I'd argue you do that when there is ANY question that ANYTHING is having ANY effect (even if minimal) on your championship game outcomes.  I get THIS instance likely didn't effect the score.  But the fact it MIGHT HAVE is enough for the league to jump on it.

And I'd say they fought as publically as they did as much because of the Pats response, and posturing, as anything else.  They were confronted in an aggressive way.  You have to know..the league can NOT back down from that. It's impossible for them to do that.

Maybe they hoped the Pats would have reacted differently, and they would have gone easier on them. That, we'll never know. But once the ball got rolling, they did everything they could to control the story and make the Patriots look bad.

Maybe they expected the Pats to react the way the other teams caught tampering did....see my above suggestions...and then issue a quick "We're sorry" and take their fines.

So, you're saying they did what every major sports league on earth does? What MLB did with Biogenesis, or with the Arod PED stuff, or with the Braun PED stuff, or with anything they do? Or what the NBA has done with tampering, with domestic violence issues, and even with player wardrobe issues in the past few years?

What they all do when "confronted" by a player, team, or the union?

I'm failing to see the issue, here.

Again, this all started because of the initial report from Mortensen that the balls measured 2 psi below the limit. That was erroneous and inflammatory. THAT is what started the wheels in motion. If that's not controlling the story, I don't know what is.

Doesn't matter what you think started it.  It REALLY doesn't.

One path leads to a better outcome for the Pats, their people, and their brand.

One path leads to a worse outcome.

And it doesn't take clairvoyance to see which was which.  I mean...we were talking about exactly what was going to happen right after Krafts/Brayd's first response.  And, other than underestimating the punishment amount...so it has come to pass.

Are they not as smart as we are?  I don't buy that.