Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.
Patriots being investigated after Colts game (3 Viewers)
- Thread starter HobbesAB
- Start date
The modern Steelers have cheated the salary cap ($400,000 to Will Wolford), and had a doctor on their payroll from '85 to '07 who was indicted in '12 for decades of purchasing and prescribing anabolic steroids (and somewhat more hilariously, over-diagnosing "pituitary dwarfism" so as to prescribe HGH and drugs meant to counter the effects of steroid use).I don't know man. It's so tough to compare eras. In many ways they are as much an apples and oranges comparison as on and off field behavior comparisons are. JFK was a great president, but he got away with things the media would crucify our current president for.Yeah, I think that is a pretty fair response and appreciate you providing it. I don't think I have seen you post in this thread and wasn't directing my earlier post(s) toward you and most steeler fans (or the vast majority who aren't throwing stones). You might be the 1st in this thread to acknowledge what BR did and the conflict it presents when rooting for him and your team; again I appreciate it. As for the consequences and vitriol BR received it almost seems as if it never happened.
I concede the distinction you make regarding on field and off field is very pertinent and certainly valid. Sticking to the glass houses theme and shifting to the on field "effect the game" stuff I would like to follow up and sincerely ask your honest answer to the following 2 questions. 1. Does the Steelers alleged rampant use of steroids in any way diminish the 70s titles or accomplishments? 2. Bradshaw bragged about cheating and the steelers doing far worse to footballs in his book, does that in any way diminish their titles and or accomplishments? Personally I don't think much of it, except when I am in a rock fightbut I am curious to hear what you might think about it. TIA
I will try to answer your questions.
1) Do I wish that there were no allegations of Steelers steroid use in the 70's? Obviously given today's environment and thought on the topic, yes, I would. But, as so many have pointed out in this thread it wasn't illegal at the time. They didn't have all the access to the information we have today in regards to negative health consequences. I can't fault the guys for trying the latest and greatest if there are no negatives out there to make them question it. If we found out multi vitamins were ruining our livers and causing enlarged hearts 40 years from now would I knock today's multivitamin users? Probably not. Additionally, I tend to think the use of steroids wasn't limited to the Steelers alone in that era. In context, no, I don't think it impacts the way Steelers teams of that era should be viewed is the bottom line. In rock throwing contests, I understand why it comes up.
2) I will freely admit, I'm not specifically sure of what Bradshaw claimed and I don't know how the football psi rules have evolved. If they were doctoring footballs post inspection and there were rules in place governing that at the time, I think it is about as big a deal then as it is now. That is to say, not really a big deal other than it would have opened them to all the same questions that the Pats are now open to. What has changed is the magnitude of interest and money related to the transgressions. I have zero doubt that back "in the day" there was all kinds of envelope pushing if not outright breaking of the rules. As the level of interest and scrutiny have increased it takes progressively smaller and smaller transgressions to be a big deal because they hopefully become much more isolated instances. For the record, I don't think there is any competitive advantage conferred by a slightly under football then or now, but for the record also I think it is a far more substantial transgression in today's environment than it was in the 70's.
Really I think part of being a fan of a team is being able to embrace, enjoy, and laugh about the history and colorful characters both good and bad that make up that team's legacy. The Steelers have had and still have some scummy players on their rosters, just like every other team in the league. I don't think BR tarnishes the Steelers any more than AH does the Pats in that respect. The Steelers have had some truly great players both on and off the field, as has every other team in the league. They are all just part of the individual stories that make up the team's history. I like being a fan of the Steelers because of the entire breadth of that history, good and bad. I'm sure you feel similarly about the Pats.
I do think repeated organizational attempts to circumvent the rules, no matter how small, in today's environment begs the questions of what else has happened and what don't we know. It opens the Pats up to questions they shouldn't have to answer because they have had a dominant run with some truly great players and football minds involved. Personally, I respect the hell out of what Kraft and BB have orchestrated. They are a great adversary and have had my team's number for a pretty good stretch. But, they have also opened themselves up to these questions that are unique to them and the era they play in. I think the questions are fair and should be addressed without deflection.
They were also fined in 2012 for Emmanuel Sanders faking cramps on the field. Then of course, there's Tomlin with his timely little stroll to impede Jacoby Jones.
The whole situation with Roethlisberger is/was awful, but I understand the point that it had no effect on the field of play. I think the above examples are more relevant.
You seem like good people, please don't consider this as an attempt to antagonize you.
treat88
Footballguy
The Steelers self reported the salary cap issue and the doc was never accused of providing roids to the Steelers. I dont think those are really relevannt to the on field comparisons.The modern Steelers have cheated the salary cap ($400,000 to Will Wolford), and had a doctor on their payroll from '85 to '07 who was indicted in '12 for decades of purchasing and prescribing anabolic steroids (and somewhat more hilariously, over-diagnosing "pituitary dwarfism" so as to prescribe HGH and drugs meant to counter the effects of steroid use).I don't know man. It's so tough to compare eras. In many ways they are as much an apples and oranges comparison as on and off field behavior comparisons are. JFK was a great president, but he got away with things the media would crucify our current president for.Yeah, I think that is a pretty fair response and appreciate you providing it. I don't think I have seen you post in this thread and wasn't directing my earlier post(s) toward you and most steeler fans (or the vast majority who aren't throwing stones). You might be the 1st in this thread to acknowledge what BR did and the conflict it presents when rooting for him and your team; again I appreciate it. As for the consequences and vitriol BR received it almost seems as if it never happened.I concede the distinction you make regarding on field and off field is very pertinent and certainly valid. Sticking to the glass houses theme and shifting to the on field "effect the game" stuff I would like to follow up and sincerely ask your honest answer to the following 2 questions. 1. Does the Steelers alleged rampant use of steroids in any way diminish the 70s titles or accomplishments? 2. Bradshaw bragged about cheating and the steelers doing far worse to footballs in his book, does that in any way diminish their titles and or accomplishments? Personally I don't think much of it, except when I am in a rock fight
I will try to answer your questions.
1) Do I wish that there were no allegations of Steelers steroid use in the 70's? Obviously given today's environment and thought on the topic, yes, I would. But, as so many have pointed out in this thread it wasn't illegal at the time. They didn't have all the access to the information we have today in regards to negative health consequences. I can't fault the guys for trying the latest and greatest if there are no negatives out there to make them question it. If we found out multi vitamins were ruining our livers and causing enlarged hearts 40 years from now would I knock today's multivitamin users? Probably not. Additionally, I tend to think the use of steroids wasn't limited to the Steelers alone in that era. In context, no, I don't think it impacts the way Steelers teams of that era should be viewed is the bottom line. In rock throwing contests, I understand why it comes up.
2) I will freely admit, I'm not specifically sure of what Bradshaw claimed and I don't know how the football psi rules have evolved. If they were doctoring footballs post inspection and there were rules in place governing that at the time, I think it is about as big a deal then as it is now. That is to say, not really a big deal other than it would have opened them to all the same questions that the Pats are now open to. What has changed is the magnitude of interest and money related to the transgressions. I have zero doubt that back "in the day" there was all kinds of envelope pushing if not outright breaking of the rules. As the level of interest and scrutiny have increased it takes progressively smaller and smaller transgressions to be a big deal because they hopefully become much more isolated instances. For the record, I don't think there is any competitive advantage conferred by a slightly under football then or now, but for the record also I think it is a far more substantial transgression in today's environment than it was in the 70's.
Really I think part of being a fan of a team is being able to embrace, enjoy, and laugh about the history and colorful characters both good and bad that make up that team's legacy. The Steelers have had and still have some scummy players on their rosters, just like every other team in the league. I don't think BR tarnishes the Steelers any more than AH does the Pats in that respect. The Steelers have had some truly great players both on and off the field, as has every other team in the league. They are all just part of the individual stories that make up the team's history. I like being a fan of the Steelers because of the entire breadth of that history, good and bad. I'm sure you feel similarly about the Pats.
I do think repeated organizational attempts to circumvent the rules, no matter how small, in today's environment begs the questions of what else has happened and what don't we know. It opens the Pats up to questions they shouldn't have to answer because they have had a dominant run with some truly great players and football minds involved. Personally, I respect the hell out of what Kraft and BB have orchestrated. They are a great adversary and have had my team's number for a pretty good stretch. But, they have also opened themselves up to these questions that are unique to them and the era they play in. I think the questions are fair and should be addressed without deflection.
They were also fined in 2012 for Emmanuel Sanders faking cramps on the field. Then of course, there's Tomlin with his timely little stroll to impede Jacoby Jones.
The whole situation with Roethlisberger is/was awful, but I understand the point that it had no effect on the field of play. I think the above examples are more relevant.
You seem like good people, please don't consider this as an attempt to antagonize you.
Faking cramps and Tomlins trip attempt certainly are relevant. They definitely affected isolated plays. Neither had the potential to impact every play or offensive play quite like Spy and Deflategate did. Am I wrong?
I agree every team has had its run ins with the rules, but what the Pats have been accused of has a pretty unique standing in that hierarchy. We can mimimize the actual impacts, but those accusations definitely had a potential overarching impact on every single play of multiple games.
biju
Footballguy
Harbaugh's assistant does something which Harbaugh may or may not know about, so he's a ##### that lied.
Brady's assistant does something which Brady may or may not know about, but it's Brady so why is he getting punished?
rockaction
Footballguy
The Ravens knew they got ####ed and hated Brady's little piss-ant response to the OL stuff.
Boy, did the Pats ever piss off the wrong coach. He's a freaking Harbaugh.
Boy, did the Pats ever piss off the wrong coach. He's a freaking Harbaugh.
See, that's just the thing, there is no unique standing in the hierarchy.The Steelers self reported the salary cap issue and the doc was never accused of providing roids to the Steelers. I dont think those are really relevannt to the on field comparisons.The modern Steelers have cheated the salary cap ($400,000 to Will Wolford), and had a doctor on their payroll from '85 to '07 who was indicted in '12 for decades of purchasing and prescribing anabolic steroids (and somewhat more hilariously, over-diagnosing "pituitary dwarfism" so as to prescribe HGH and drugs meant to counter the effects of steroid use).I don't know man. It's so tough to compare eras. In many ways they are as much an apples and oranges comparison as on and off field behavior comparisons are. JFK was a great president, but he got away with things the media would crucify our current president for.Yeah, I think that is a pretty fair response and appreciate you providing it. I don't think I have seen you post in this thread and wasn't directing my earlier post(s) toward you and most steeler fans (or the vast majority who aren't throwing stones). You might be the 1st in this thread to acknowledge what BR did and the conflict it presents when rooting for him and your team; again I appreciate it. As for the consequences and vitriol BR received it almost seems as if it never happened.I concede the distinction you make regarding on field and off field is very pertinent and certainly valid. Sticking to the glass houses theme and shifting to the on field "effect the game" stuff I would like to follow up and sincerely ask your honest answer to the following 2 questions. 1. Does the Steelers alleged rampant use of steroids in any way diminish the 70s titles or accomplishments? 2. Bradshaw bragged about cheating and the steelers doing far worse to footballs in his book, does that in any way diminish their titles and or accomplishments? Personally I don't think much of it, except when I am in a rock fight
I will try to answer your questions.
1) Do I wish that there were no allegations of Steelers steroid use in the 70's? Obviously given today's environment and thought on the topic, yes, I would. But, as so many have pointed out in this thread it wasn't illegal at the time. They didn't have all the access to the information we have today in regards to negative health consequences. I can't fault the guys for trying the latest and greatest if there are no negatives out there to make them question it. If we found out multi vitamins were ruining our livers and causing enlarged hearts 40 years from now would I knock today's multivitamin users? Probably not. Additionally, I tend to think the use of steroids wasn't limited to the Steelers alone in that era. In context, no, I don't think it impacts the way Steelers teams of that era should be viewed is the bottom line. In rock throwing contests, I understand why it comes up.
2) I will freely admit, I'm not specifically sure of what Bradshaw claimed and I don't know how the football psi rules have evolved. If they were doctoring footballs post inspection and there were rules in place governing that at the time, I think it is about as big a deal then as it is now. That is to say, not really a big deal other than it would have opened them to all the same questions that the Pats are now open to. What has changed is the magnitude of interest and money related to the transgressions. I have zero doubt that back "in the day" there was all kinds of envelope pushing if not outright breaking of the rules. As the level of interest and scrutiny have increased it takes progressively smaller and smaller transgressions to be a big deal because they hopefully become much more isolated instances. For the record, I don't think there is any competitive advantage conferred by a slightly under football then or now, but for the record also I think it is a far more substantial transgression in today's environment than it was in the 70's.
Really I think part of being a fan of a team is being able to embrace, enjoy, and laugh about the history and colorful characters both good and bad that make up that team's legacy. The Steelers have had and still have some scummy players on their rosters, just like every other team in the league. I don't think BR tarnishes the Steelers any more than AH does the Pats in that respect. The Steelers have had some truly great players both on and off the field, as has every other team in the league. They are all just part of the individual stories that make up the team's history. I like being a fan of the Steelers because of the entire breadth of that history, good and bad. I'm sure you feel similarly about the Pats.
I do think repeated organizational attempts to circumvent the rules, no matter how small, in today's environment begs the questions of what else has happened and what don't we know. It opens the Pats up to questions they shouldn't have to answer because they have had a dominant run with some truly great players and football minds involved. Personally, I respect the hell out of what Kraft and BB have orchestrated. They are a great adversary and have had my team's number for a pretty good stretch. But, they have also opened themselves up to these questions that are unique to them and the era they play in. I think the questions are fair and should be addressed without deflection.
They were also fined in 2012 for Emmanuel Sanders faking cramps on the field. Then of course, there's Tomlin with his timely little stroll to impede Jacoby Jones.
The whole situation with Roethlisberger is/was awful, but I understand the point that it had no effect on the field of play. I think the above examples are more relevant.
You seem like good people, please don't consider this as an attempt to antagonize you.
Faking cramps and Tomlins trip attempt certainly are relevant. They definitely affected isolated plays. Neither had the potential to impact every play or offensive play quite like Spy and Deflategate did. Am I wrong?
I agree every team has had its run ins with the rules, but what the Pats have been accused of has a pretty unique standing in that hierarchy. We can mimimize the actual impacts, but those accusations definitely had a potential overarching impact on every single play of multiple games.
Spygate was a technical violation: You could make film of an opposing DC with the intention of decoding signals, you just couldn't/can't have your cameraman on the sidelines (which is where you get the best shot, which is why the Patriots did it anyhow).
Deflategate? There's a little more there: Deflated footballs offer a slight advantage, particularly in the cold.
It's nice that the Steelers self-reported their cap shenanigans with Wolford (I'll take your word for it), but the league still saw fit to fine them $150,000 and strip their 2001 third round draft pick.
And as for the good doctor, I'm willing to make you a deal:
You pretend Brady is 100% honest when he says nothing wrong happened, and that McNally really was just losing weight...
I'll pretend it's just a coincidence that a Pittsburgh Steelers doctor turns out to be Pennsylvania's answer to Victor Conte: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/10/19/steelers-ex-doctor-richard-rydze-steroids-indicted_n_1987821.html?
Baloney Sandwich
Footballguy
It is going to be great when the Pats win Super Bowl 50.
Anarchy99
Footballguy
I don't remember seeing this in this thread, but here is one of the things the league is suggesting was violated . . .
INTEGRITY OF THE GAME CERTIFICATION
Pursuant to Section 8.13 (A) of the NFL Constitution and Bylaws, each of the undersigned certifies that on best information and belief, and after having made appropriate inquiries of persons likely to have knowledge of these matters, the ________________ (“Club”) complied with all League competitive policies for the 2013 season, and each of the undersigned further certifies that the Club has not engaged in any of the following prohibited acts:
violations of the “equity rule” relating to game-day facilities, tampering with the use of any equipment properly available to an opposing team, unauthorized use of computers or electronic equipment on game day, interference with a team’s or stadium’s game-day communication systems, unauthorized use of game-day frequencies, unauthorized videotaping on game-day or of practices, meetings, or other organized team activities, unauthorized and/or unreported game-day use of mies on players, or electronic eavesdropping; unauthorized entry into locker rooms, coaches’ booths, meeting rooms or other private areas; violations of the anti-tampering policies; violations of player personnel or eligibility rules; tampering with any gameday clocks or timing equipment, or artificially increasing “crowd” or other noise levels in a stadium during the reporting period.*
Further, each signatory hereby certifies that he or she has no knowledge of any:
- betting on NFL games, of any efforts to influence or alter the outcome of any game, of any sharing of non-public information with gamblers or persons with an interest in any gambling-related enterprise, or any prohibited association with gamblers.
- violation of the bounty rule, including but not limited to the offer, payment or acceptance of a bonus of any sort for on-field misconduct, play that incentivizes or may result in injury to opposing players, “pay for performance” or for team performance against a particular player, position group or team.
- club or club employee promising, announcing or providing any form of non-contract consideration to a player in violation of the Constitution & Bylaws or Collective Bargaining Agreement.
- any sale, use or distribution of substances prohibited by the NFL Policy on Anabolic Steroids and Related Substances. (No club will be deemed to have violated this aspect of the certification merely because a player violates the Policy.)
Finally, each signatory further certifies that the Club has reported all actual or suspected violations that it became aware of, including actual or suspected violations committed by the Club, any club employee, or third parties.
Any exceptions to the above representations are set forth on the attached page(s).
(Date) (Principal Owner/CEO)
(Date) (President)
(Date) (General Manager)
(Date) (Head Coach)
One of the things the NFLPA is arguing is that that is something team owners / GMs / coaches have to sign, not individual players and thus does not directly pertain to Brady.
INTEGRITY OF THE GAME CERTIFICATION
Pursuant to Section 8.13 (A) of the NFL Constitution and Bylaws, each of the undersigned certifies that on best information and belief, and after having made appropriate inquiries of persons likely to have knowledge of these matters, the ________________ (“Club”) complied with all League competitive policies for the 2013 season, and each of the undersigned further certifies that the Club has not engaged in any of the following prohibited acts:
violations of the “equity rule” relating to game-day facilities, tampering with the use of any equipment properly available to an opposing team, unauthorized use of computers or electronic equipment on game day, interference with a team’s or stadium’s game-day communication systems, unauthorized use of game-day frequencies, unauthorized videotaping on game-day or of practices, meetings, or other organized team activities, unauthorized and/or unreported game-day use of mies on players, or electronic eavesdropping; unauthorized entry into locker rooms, coaches’ booths, meeting rooms or other private areas; violations of the anti-tampering policies; violations of player personnel or eligibility rules; tampering with any gameday clocks or timing equipment, or artificially increasing “crowd” or other noise levels in a stadium during the reporting period.*
Further, each signatory hereby certifies that he or she has no knowledge of any:
- betting on NFL games, of any efforts to influence or alter the outcome of any game, of any sharing of non-public information with gamblers or persons with an interest in any gambling-related enterprise, or any prohibited association with gamblers.
- violation of the bounty rule, including but not limited to the offer, payment or acceptance of a bonus of any sort for on-field misconduct, play that incentivizes or may result in injury to opposing players, “pay for performance” or for team performance against a particular player, position group or team.
- club or club employee promising, announcing or providing any form of non-contract consideration to a player in violation of the Constitution & Bylaws or Collective Bargaining Agreement.
- any sale, use or distribution of substances prohibited by the NFL Policy on Anabolic Steroids and Related Substances. (No club will be deemed to have violated this aspect of the certification merely because a player violates the Policy.)
Finally, each signatory further certifies that the Club has reported all actual or suspected violations that it became aware of, including actual or suspected violations committed by the Club, any club employee, or third parties.
Any exceptions to the above representations are set forth on the attached page(s).
(Date) (Principal Owner/CEO)
(Date) (President)
(Date) (General Manager)
(Date) (Head Coach)
One of the things the NFLPA is arguing is that that is something team owners / GMs / coaches have to sign, not individual players and thus does not directly pertain to Brady.
Ditkaless Wonders
Footballguy
Wasn't there a time, quite recently, when Robert Kraft embraced and endorsed Aaron Hernandez, saying that he also had Kraft's trust and faith. It may be a little soon for N.E. fans to be pulling the murder card on other teams, particularly when the other alleged murderer is walking free and theirs is in the slammer. (For the record I do think Roethlisberger and Lewis are both guilty of the crimes alleged)NE_REVIVAL said:
Ahem....I fought tooth and nail back in the nether-pages of this thread to make the case of the Ravens role on this. Nearly everyone fell for the gushing Harbaugh comments about BB and I was swimming upstream pointing out the craftiness of his comments.
I still say there was something fishy with Tucker's kickoffs that day. Man, they were short... and despite Tucker's crafty denials, he was in the midst of it too.
Doesnt much matter now. Brady's ridiculous cover-up is what put his butt in a sling.
HobbesAB
Footballguy
Troy Vincent admitted Tom Brady was disciplined under policy not given to players
https://twitter.com/ProFootballTalk/status/628776327240417280
IvanKaramazov
Footballguy
So what? That's one of things that makes this story so great. The Colts and Ravens told the NFL exactly how Brady and the Patriots equipment people were cheating, and they proceeded to get caught red handed. That's awesome.
bostonfred
Footballguy
The Patriots cut hernandez before there was even an arrest. The Ravens put up a Ray Lewis statue, and the steelers aren't far behind with Roethlisberger.
Yeah, its star QB is a poor cover-up artist for petty crimes who is a clown himself, has even worse clowns as advisors and an incoherent, rambling, embarrassing owner. Meanwhile, RG is a disaster-a-minute whose teflon is chipped in all the wrong places.
satch
Footballguy
If the Patriots practice of deflating footballs post-inspection was "well known around the league", and considered a competitive advantage, why did everyone wait so long to address it? Why didn't Baltimore, or Indy protest the footballs early in the 1st quarter of their respective games to make sure they weren't at a disadvantage? I'm having a hard time understanding this. Why did the Ravens allow the Patriots to play with an advantage? Why did the Colts wait until the Pats had the game in hand before speaking up?
I'm not implying anything, I just don't get why all the teams who "knew" the Pats were "cheating" allowed them to cheat and subsequently win? If I'm Harbaugh I get a hold of a Patriots football as soon as the game starts and bring it to the refs demanding it be taken out of play and inspected. From his point of view, that competitive advantage might've been the difference in the outcome if their game, yet he didn't say a word about it to the refs. Why?
I'm not implying anything, I just don't get why all the teams who "knew" the Pats were "cheating" allowed them to cheat and subsequently win? If I'm Harbaugh I get a hold of a Patriots football as soon as the game starts and bring it to the refs demanding it be taken out of play and inspected. From his point of view, that competitive advantage might've been the difference in the outcome if their game, yet he didn't say a word about it to the refs. Why?
satch
Footballguy
You asked obviously rhetorical questions, knowing that any attempt by me to answer those questions would only provide you the opportunity to continue your anti-Patriot rhetoric. Thanks, but I'll pass.satch
Last edited by a moderator:
bostonfred
Footballguy
I don't know if anyone will recognize this reference but I'll try anyways:
If it isn't Satch it's tango, b if it isn't tango it's Satch
If it isn't Satch it's tango, b if it isn't tango it's Satch
My opinion (and it's based on nothing more than my own take) is that he didn't want to sound like (too much) of a whiny tool.
Probably the same reason that he didn't want to admit that they were the one who informed the Colts.
Can anyone link me to a full copy of the transcript? I've read some of the excerpts that I've found, but I can't find a full copy.
Brady comes off pretty good from what I've read. There are still some questions that I don't feel were answered, but his answers feel logical. I'd like to see the entire transcript, without any editorializing and comments.
satch
Footballguy
Your explanation of Harbaugh's reluctance to address the Patriots alleged deflation practices was what I was thinking too. Didn't want to look like a whiner. Though I would think a professional coach would be obligated to speak up if he truly thought his opponent had a legitimate competitive advantage. Gamesmanship is one thing, an unfair advantage is another in my opinion. It also doesn't jibe with his willingness to "whine" about the formation the Pats used, which was actually legal. Why would Harbaugh knowingly allow his team to play at a competitive disadvantage in a huge game and keep that to himself, yet complain publicly about a formation that was technically legal?My explanation is that evidenced by Harbaugh's inaction he really doesn't think the deflation thing is a big deal. Not even worth mentioning in fact. But he was so embarrassed by not being prepared for that formation that he couldn't stop himself from complaining about it. That was a big deal to him, not the deflated footballs the Pats allegedly used all game. Then when Brady told him to read the rulebook all bets were off and he wanted revenge. So he sets Pagano and the Colts up to do his dirty work, to be te whiners, and attempt to embarrass the Pats for something so insignificant that it wasn't even worth mentioning one week prior when his own team was "victimized" by it. That should tell you how much if a competitive advantage this really was.
Deflategate is a story of revenge, not air pressure in a football.
Last edited by a moderator:
Godsbrother
Footballguy
Nice try at a deflection.You asked obviously rhetorical questions, knowing that any attempt by me to answer those questions would only provide you the opportunity to continue your anti-Patriot rhetoric. Thanks, but I'll pass.
This is simple:
You and I agree Brady is guilty of the underlying crime and that the crime is petty. So what do you think the punishment should be for the lying, temper-tantrums by his reps and the cover-up?
CoolHandLukeB
Footballguy
Kessler questioning Brady.
Q. Okay. As you are sitting here today, I am
9 going to ask you to be very clear. Did you ever
10 give anyone any directions or instructions or
11 authorization, anything, for the AFC Championship
12 Game that they should alter, change, lower the
13 pressure of footballs?
14 A. Absolutely not.
15 Q. Okay. You never authorized it?
16 A. No.
17 Q. Okay. Do you know somebody did it despite
18 your authorization?
19 A. I don't know what you mean.
20 Q. In other words, are you aware that, even know
21 you didn't authorize it, they did it anyway?
22 A. No.
23 Q. Are you aware of that?
24 A. No.
25 Q. Do you know that?
DIRECT/BRADY/KESSLERPage
97 1 A. Absolutely not. I wasn't there.
2 Q. Okay. As you are sitting here right now, do
3 you still believe Mr. Jastremski that when he told
4 you he didn't know anything about it and he didn't
5 do anything?
6 A. Yes.
7 Q. Has anyone in the Patriots organization,
8 anyone else ever told you that they did anything to
9 deflate the footballs on that day after they were
10 tested by the referees?
11 A. Absolutely not.
Remember that this is under oath. So either Brady is perjuring himself or he is innocent.
Q. Okay. As you are sitting here today, I am
9 going to ask you to be very clear. Did you ever
10 give anyone any directions or instructions or
11 authorization, anything, for the AFC Championship
12 Game that they should alter, change, lower the
13 pressure of footballs?
14 A. Absolutely not.
15 Q. Okay. You never authorized it?
16 A. No.
17 Q. Okay. Do you know somebody did it despite
18 your authorization?
19 A. I don't know what you mean.
20 Q. In other words, are you aware that, even know
21 you didn't authorize it, they did it anyway?
22 A. No.
23 Q. Are you aware of that?
24 A. No.
25 Q. Do you know that?
DIRECT/BRADY/KESSLERPage
97 1 A. Absolutely not. I wasn't there.
2 Q. Okay. As you are sitting here right now, do
3 you still believe Mr. Jastremski that when he told
4 you he didn't know anything about it and he didn't
5 do anything?
6 A. Yes.
7 Q. Has anyone in the Patriots organization,
8 anyone else ever told you that they did anything to
9 deflate the footballs on that day after they were
10 tested by the referees?
11 A. Absolutely not.
Remember that this is under oath. So either Brady is perjuring himself or he is innocent.
treat88
Footballguy
That's cool. I still don't see the comparisons between the doc/salary cap and the Pats on field issues. But, I'm not here to sell you or persuade you of anything either.See, that's just the thing, there is no unique standing in the hierarchy.The Steelers self reported the salary cap issue and the doc was never accused of providing roids to the Steelers. I dont think those are really relevannt to the on field comparisons.The modern Steelers have cheated the salary cap ($400,000 to Will Wolford), and had a doctor on their payroll from '85 to '07 who was indicted in '12 for decades of purchasing and prescribing anabolic steroids (and somewhat more hilariously, over-diagnosing "pituitary dwarfism" so as to prescribe HGH and drugs meant to counter the effects of steroid use).I don't know man. It's so tough to compare eras. In many ways they are as much an apples and oranges comparison as on and off field behavior comparisons are. JFK was a great president, but he got away with things the media would crucify our current president for.Yeah, I think that is a pretty fair response and appreciate you providing it. I don't think I have seen you post in this thread and wasn't directing my earlier post(s) toward you and most steeler fans (or the vast majority who aren't throwing stones). You might be the 1st in this thread to acknowledge what BR did and the conflict it presents when rooting for him and your team; again I appreciate it. As for the consequences and vitriol BR received it almost seems as if it never happened.I concede the distinction you make regarding on field and off field is very pertinent and certainly valid. Sticking to the glass houses theme and shifting to the on field "effect the game" stuff I would like to follow up and sincerely ask your honest answer to the following 2 questions. 1. Does the Steelers alleged rampant use of steroids in any way diminish the 70s titles or accomplishments? 2. Bradshaw bragged about cheating and the steelers doing far worse to footballs in his book, does that in any way diminish their titles and or accomplishments? Personally I don't think much of it, except when I am in a rock fight
I will try to answer your questions.
1) Do I wish that there were no allegations of Steelers steroid use in the 70's? Obviously given today's environment and thought on the topic, yes, I would. But, as so many have pointed out in this thread it wasn't illegal at the time. They didn't have all the access to the information we have today in regards to negative health consequences. I can't fault the guys for trying the latest and greatest if there are no negatives out there to make them question it. If we found out multi vitamins were ruining our livers and causing enlarged hearts 40 years from now would I knock today's multivitamin users? Probably not. Additionally, I tend to think the use of steroids wasn't limited to the Steelers alone in that era. In context, no, I don't think it impacts the way Steelers teams of that era should be viewed is the bottom line. In rock throwing contests, I understand why it comes up.
2) I will freely admit, I'm not specifically sure of what Bradshaw claimed and I don't know how the football psi rules have evolved. If they were doctoring footballs post inspection and there were rules in place governing that at the time, I think it is about as big a deal then as it is now. That is to say, not really a big deal other than it would have opened them to all the same questions that the Pats are now open to. What has changed is the magnitude of interest and money related to the transgressions. I have zero doubt that back "in the day" there was all kinds of envelope pushing if not outright breaking of the rules. As the level of interest and scrutiny have increased it takes progressively smaller and smaller transgressions to be a big deal because they hopefully become much more isolated instances. For the record, I don't think there is any competitive advantage conferred by a slightly under football then or now, but for the record also I think it is a far more substantial transgression in today's environment than it was in the 70's.
Really I think part of being a fan of a team is being able to embrace, enjoy, and laugh about the history and colorful characters both good and bad that make up that team's legacy. The Steelers have had and still have some scummy players on their rosters, just like every other team in the league. I don't think BR tarnishes the Steelers any more than AH does the Pats in that respect. The Steelers have had some truly great players both on and off the field, as has every other team in the league. They are all just part of the individual stories that make up the team's history. I like being a fan of the Steelers because of the entire breadth of that history, good and bad. I'm sure you feel similarly about the Pats.
I do think repeated organizational attempts to circumvent the rules, no matter how small, in today's environment begs the questions of what else has happened and what don't we know. It opens the Pats up to questions they shouldn't have to answer because they have had a dominant run with some truly great players and football minds involved. Personally, I respect the hell out of what Kraft and BB have orchestrated. They are a great adversary and have had my team's number for a pretty good stretch. But, they have also opened themselves up to these questions that are unique to them and the era they play in. I think the questions are fair and should be addressed without deflection.
They were also fined in 2012 for Emmanuel Sanders faking cramps on the field. Then of course, there's Tomlin with his timely little stroll to impede Jacoby Jones.
The whole situation with Roethlisberger is/was awful, but I understand the point that it had no effect on the field of play. I think the above examples are more relevant.
You seem like good people, please don't consider this as an attempt to antagonize you.
Faking cramps and Tomlins trip attempt certainly are relevant. They definitely affected isolated plays. Neither had the potential to impact every play or offensive play quite like Spy and Deflategate did. Am I wrong?
I agree every team has had its run ins with the rules, but what the Pats have been accused of has a pretty unique standing in that hierarchy. We can mimimize the actual impacts, but those accusations definitely had a potential overarching impact on every single play of multiple games.
Spygate was a technical violation: You could make film of an opposing DC with the intention of decoding signals, you just couldn't/can't have your cameraman on the sidelines (which is where you get the best shot, which is why the Patriots did it anyhow).
Deflategate? There's a little more there: Deflated footballs offer a slight advantage, particularly in the cold.
It's nice that the Steelers self-reported their cap shenanigans with Wolford (I'll take your word for it), but the league still saw fit to fine them $150,000 and strip their 2001 third round draft pick.
And as for the good doctor, I'm willing to make you a deal:
You pretend Brady is 100% honest when he says nothing wrong happened, and that McNally really was just losing weight...
I'll pretend it's just a coincidence that a Pittsburgh Steelers doctor turns out to be Pennsylvania's answer to Victor Conte: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/10/19/steelers-ex-doctor-richard-rydze-steroids-indicted_n_1987821.html?
I should rephrase one of my lines, I believe that the two incidents that the Pats have been uniquely punished for are unique in the hierarchy of league wide incidents. For some reason, I get the impression that you aren't going to see eye to eye with me on that. Again, that's cool.
Read the transcript from the Costas interview or better yet, watch the interview. Brady barely even denied anything in that interview. Brady has changed his tone so drastically that if you lay that out as the only options, a thinking person would have to say "perjure himself".
satch
Footballguy
I understand that you want to continue insulting me and Patriot nation, keep the focus on us, keep the pedal to the metal. But this story is far more interesting once you start to see the bigger picture. If this was made into a movie, the storyline would involve a lot more than a slightly deflated football, and the movie would be awesome.
satch
Footballguy
Are you incapable of posting something without trying to push buttons? Was the inclusion of "temper tantrums" really necessary? Is lying and cover up not enough for you? Regardless, I answered your question the first time you asked it pages ago. Go back and read it if you want my answer.Nice try at a deflection.You asked obviously rhetorical questions, knowing that any attempt by me to answer those questions would only provide you the opportunity to continue your anti-Patriot rhetoric. Thanks, but I'll pass.
This is simple:
You and I agree Brady is guilty of the underlying crime and that the crime is petty. So what do you think the punishment should be for the lying, temper-tantrums by his reps and the cover-up?
I think (again, my opinion only, no hard "facts" to base it on) that Harbaugh complained about the formations during the game because he saw those plays giving NE an obvious advantage. They were legal, but he complained to the refs, then talked about it after the game. (maybe he truly thought they were illegal, maybe he was just trying to get the officials to mistakenly prevent the Pats from doing it the rest of the game; then in post-game press conferences he would have to had talked about it). I believe he had heard about NE taking air out of the balls, but didn't really think it was much of an advantage. After the game, annoyed at the Pats, and Brady specifically for his "read the rule-book" comment, he (or someone in Balt) talked to the Colts.
Again, I don't think the air pressure is a competitive advantage, at least not a significant one. The league, though does. As a result, this incident is being treated by the league as an individual/team breaking a rule (cheating) to get a competitive advantage.
Old Smiley
Footballguy
Okay, WTF is up with the email from Sullivan to Grigson? Out and out fake? Who is Volin? General WTF.
Question for lawyers.
From everything I had read, and based on how far I've gotten in the appeal transcript; the league seems to be punishing Brady under Article 46 of the CBA (although Brady's team is contending that he is being punished based on a different policy, which they contend isn't a player policy). The applicable section is here:
ARTICLE 46
COMMISSIONER DISCIPLINE
Section 1.
League Discipline: Notwithstanding anything stated in Article 43:
(a)All disputes involving a fine or suspension imposed upon a player for conduct on the playing field (other than as
described in Subsection (b) below) or involving action taken against a player by the Commissioner for conduct
detrimental to the integrity of, or public confidence in, the game of professional football, will be processed exclusively
as follows:
So my question is:
1-Is this clause too vague, legally speaking, to justify commissioner discipline? Common sense says players can't tamper with equipment after officials have approved it, but it seems that the policy that has that wording isn't directed at players.
From everything I had read, and based on how far I've gotten in the appeal transcript; the league seems to be punishing Brady under Article 46 of the CBA (although Brady's team is contending that he is being punished based on a different policy, which they contend isn't a player policy). The applicable section is here:
ARTICLE 46
COMMISSIONER DISCIPLINE
Section 1.
League Discipline: Notwithstanding anything stated in Article 43:
(a)All disputes involving a fine or suspension imposed upon a player for conduct on the playing field (other than as
described in Subsection (b) below) or involving action taken against a player by the Commissioner for conduct
detrimental to the integrity of, or public confidence in, the game of professional football, will be processed exclusively
as follows:
So my question is:
1-Is this clause too vague, legally speaking, to justify commissioner discipline? Common sense says players can't tamper with equipment after officials have approved it, but it seems that the policy that has that wording isn't directed at players.
Old Smiley
Footballguy
I think his agent's responses can accurately be termed as temper tantrums. But hey, that's subjective...Are you incapable of posting something without trying to push buttons? Was the inclusion of "temper tantrums" really necessary? Is lying and cover up not enough for you?Regardless, I answered your question the first time you asked it pages ago. Go back and read it if you want my answer.Nice try at a deflection.You asked obviously rhetorical questions, knowing that any attempt by me to answer those questions would only provide you the opportunity to continue your anti-Patriot rhetoric. Thanks, but I'll pass.
This is simple:
You and I agree Brady is guilty of the underlying crime and that the crime is petty. So what do you think the punishment should be for the lying, temper-tantrums by his reps and the cover-up?
There's 265 pages here. Pls give me the quick&dirty: How many games, if any, for the cover-up-related activities?
Old Smiley
Footballguy
Bill Simmons @BillSimmons 7m7 minutes ago
Yeah who cares what Bill Simmons think. Your expert reporting experience led to this tweet - https://twitter.com/bkravitz/status/557766880459759617…
Bob KravitzVerified account @bkravitz
And seriously who cares what Bill Simmons think? He's a self styled Boston super fan who has limited reporting experience
Mods? I think these two need to step back a bit...
Yeah who cares what Bill Simmons think. Your expert reporting experience led to this tweet - https://twitter.com/bkravitz/status/557766880459759617…
Bob KravitzVerified account @bkravitz
And seriously who cares what Bill Simmons think? He's a self styled Boston super fan who has limited reporting experience
Mods? I think these two need to step back a bit...
We knew all about this around January 22nd:
January 22, 2015
Clearly Harbaugh's objective was (1) not to lie, and (2) not to draw the ire of the Patriots in the future.
When it comes to #1 he states definitively that the Ravens special teams complained to him and that the league contacted them about it. You fill in the blank about how the league heard about a private conversation between him and his special teams.
When it comes to #2, he states clearly he thinks there was no wrongdoing. That is a total CYA statement; fine, I'd do the same thing. But it does not take away from #1 at all.
Nice to see confirmation though....
Last edited by a moderator:
Old Smiley
Footballguy
But we've got extremely strong denials from the Ravens today, and we seem to have an email -- which was reported yesterday -- staring us in the face.
Like I say, I just don't get it. Is the email fake?
Like I say, I just don't get it. Is the email fake?
When you go back and listen to that interview of Harbaugh the day after the AFCG, he says on the record (though very quickly and faintly) that his special teams brought it to his attention and the NFL talked to them about it. This has been a closed case for some time, but very few paid attention to that part of his press conferecne. Instead, they paid attention to the gushing comments about BB.
P.S. Didnt we cover this exact ground 7 months ago
-- this whole thing has been a media-dream. There's so much cr*p that we all forget it and so they get to recycle it as new-news!
NE_REVIVAL
Footballguy
Thanks for responding, that's all pretty reasonable imo. As BF pointed out, NE cut AH at great cost while BAL built a statue. To be clear, I feel 100% certain that Brady had no knowledge of any post inspection wrong doing period; that is nonsense afaic. I do concede it is possible an equipment guy(s) might have taken matters into his own hands, just like its possible other teams did similar but I don't think Qbs necessarily know about it. QBs like the ball a certain way and the equipment guys do everything they can to make them happy. I make the br comparison to highlight what I see as an attempt by many to vilify a good man (brady) with very little evidence (never mind proof, there Is none) while simultaneously letting a not so good man get off scott free (when there is a lot more evidence that there was actual wrong doing). It may be apples and watermelons, but it just seems so, so wrong.I don't know man. It's so tough to compare eras. In many ways they are as much an apples and oranges comparison as on and off field behavior comparisons are. JFK was a great president, but he got away with things the media would crucify our current president for.Yeah, I think that is a pretty fair response and appreciate you providing it. I don't think I have seen you post in this thread and wasn't directing my earlier post(s) toward you and most steeler fans (or the vast majority who aren't throwing stones). You might be the 1st in this thread to acknowledge what BR did and the conflict it presents when rooting for him and your team; again I appreciate it. As for the consequences and vitriol BR received it almost seems as if it never happened.
I concede the distinction you make regarding on field and off field is very pertinent and certainly valid. Sticking to the glass houses theme and shifting to the on field "effect the game" stuff I would like to follow up and sincerely ask your honest answer to the following 2 questions. 1. Does the Steelers alleged rampant use of steroids in any way diminish the 70s titles or accomplishments? 2. Bradshaw bragged about cheating and the steelers doing far worse to footballs in his book, does that in any way diminish their titles and or accomplishments? Personally I don't think much of it, except when I am in a rock fight
I will try to answer your questions.
1) Do I wish that there were no allegations of Steelers steroid use in the 70's? Obviously given today's environment and thought on the topic, yes, I would. But, as so many have pointed out in this thread it wasn't illegal at the time. They didn't have all the access to the information we have today in regards to negative health consequences. I can't fault the guys for trying the latest and greatest if there are no negatives out there to make them question it. If we found out multi vitamins were ruining our livers and causing enlarged hearts 40 years from now would I knock today's multivitamin users? Probably not. Additionally, I tend to think the use of steroids wasn't limited to the Steelers alone in that era. In context, no, I don't think it impacts the way Steelers teams of that era should be viewed is the bottom line. In rock throwing contests, I understand why it comes up.
2) I will freely admit, I'm not specifically sure of what Bradshaw claimed and I don't know how the football psi rules have evolved. If they were doctoring footballs post inspection and there were rules in place governing that at the time, I think it is about as big a deal then as it is now. That is to say, not really a big deal other than it would have opened them to all the same questions that the Pats are now open to. What has changed is the magnitude of interest and money related to the transgressions. I have zero doubt that back "in the day" there was all kinds of envelope pushing if not outright breaking of the rules. As the level of interest and scrutiny have increased it takes progressively smaller and smaller transgressions to be a big deal because they hopefully become much more isolated instances. For the record, I don't think there is any competitive advantage conferred by a slightly under football then or now, but for the record also I think it is a far more substantial transgression in today's environment than it was in the 70's.
Really I think part of being a fan of a team is being able to embrace, enjoy, and laugh about the history and colorful characters both good and bad that make up that team's legacy. The Steelers have had and still have some scummy players on their rosters, just like every other team in the league. I don't think BR tarnishes the Steelers any more than AH does the Pats in that respect. The Steelers have had some truly great players both on and off the field, as has every other team in the league. They are all just part of the individual stories that make up the team's history. I like being a fan of the Steelers because of the entire breadth of that history, good and bad. I'm sure you feel similarly about the Pats.
I do think repeated organizational attempts to circumvent the rules, no matter how small, in today's environment begs the questions of what else has happened and what don't we know. It opens the Pats up to questions they shouldn't have to answer because they have had a dominant run with some truly great players and football minds involved. Personally, I respect the hell out of what Kraft and BB have orchestrated. They are a great adversary and have had my team's number for a pretty good stretch. But, they have also opened themselves up to these questions that are unique to them and the era they play in. I think the questions are fair and should be addressed without deflection.
You mentioned repeated org attempts to circumvent the rules and your far from the first to make the claim. I believe this more myth than fact and don't think NE has a broken the rules anymore often than the average nfl team. There is spygate which was and is a load of crap that the tinfoil hat conspiracy theorists make out to be so much more than it was (ask Bill Cowher).
Imho, the problem for most of the rest of the league isn't that NE has repeatedly attempted to break the rules so much more than anyone else. The problem is they have repeatedly been so dominant over the last 15 years they have made a lot of enemies. What are some of the many other violations that distinguish NE from other NFL teams? Is it primarily spyhate which Brady had nothing to do with?
BroadwayG
Footballguy
The Ravens statement seems to mesh with the email. The email indicates the Ravens notified the Colts about the kicking ball issue. Then it goes on about the deflating part as a completely separate complaint but like Mort, doesn't give a source for this deflating info.
Last edited by a moderator:
Old Smiley
Footballguy
No. The Ravens are denying they knew anything about under inflation. Flatly contradicts the email.
GregR
Footballguy
Can you clarify what you're talking about here? I'm not following this very closely, but I don't understand what you're confused about.
I see an email from a Colts coach to a Colts coach. It mentions two situations. One, the Ravens mentioned a situation about the kicking balls to them, which apparently Harbaugh confirmed happened.
Second, the email, from a Colt to a Colt, mentions that "it is well known around the league" about the Patriots messing with game balls. The email doesn't say that came from the Ravens. It just makes it as a statement with no attribution other than "it is well known". From what I understand from reading here, Harbaugh said the game ball stuff didn't come from the Ravens.
What discrepancy has you flummoxed?
Last edited by a moderator:
BroadwayG
Footballguy
Where in the email does it say the Ravens knew about underinflation?
It pretty clear to me that the Ravens complained about the quality of the K balls and that's it. The deflation tip is not attributed to the Ravens at all. "well known around the league" doesn't mean the Ravens told us.
Last edited by a moderator:
Old Smiley
Footballguy
Okay. Sorry gang. Misread it as Sullivan working for Ravens. Stronger coffee needed.
I'm working my way through the appeal transcript, and Brady's testimony (so far) continues to sound very realistic, and his answers make sense.
I want to clarify something though. When BB gave his "My Cousin Vinny" press conference, I seem to recall that he said that NE's ball prep created an artificially high PSI as a result of the process (essentially heating the balls by friction/rubbing them). So, the balls were inflated to 12.5 PSI at the end of this process, then given to the officials immediately. So, if/when the officials gauged them, they'd measure 12.5, but as the heat from the friction wore off, the balls PSI would drop. I thought when I heard this that NE was not breaking the rule, but bending it.
Is my recollection correct, or am I remembering this wrong?
I want to clarify something though. When BB gave his "My Cousin Vinny" press conference, I seem to recall that he said that NE's ball prep created an artificially high PSI as a result of the process (essentially heating the balls by friction/rubbing them). So, the balls were inflated to 12.5 PSI at the end of this process, then given to the officials immediately. So, if/when the officials gauged them, they'd measure 12.5, but as the heat from the friction wore off, the balls PSI would drop. I thought when I heard this that NE was not breaking the rule, but bending it.
Is my recollection correct, or am I remembering this wrong?
Last edited by a moderator:
