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 (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter HobbesAB
- Start date
sho nuff
Footballguy
Thing much later...and you are still trying this load of BS on people?
He accepted the penalty...time to move on.
sho nuff
Footballguy
Not sure the last time the Pats beat my favorite team in a meaningful game.
There was that regular season game when Matt Flynn started at QB.
Ghost Rider
Footballguy
Yep, my Broncos might be down 4-1 in Super Bowls this century, but they are 3-1 agains the Belichick/Brady Patriots in the playoffs, with the only loss being when Tebow started, so I'm good, too.
Last edited by a moderator:
Yeah, the Ravens are known to give the Pats nightmares so they're good as well.Yep, my Broncos might be down 4-1 in Super Bowls this century, but they are 3-1 agains the Belichick/Brady Patriots in the playoffs, with the only loss being when Tebow started, so I'm good, too.
Well, NE gets to showcase Jimmy G and, with any luck, flip him to Cleveland or Denver for picks. Brady, at his advanced age, gets 4 games shaved off his season early in the year, when the team ought to be healthy and otherwise dominant. Maybe they learn how to play without the GOAT QB bailing them out of tough spots.
Still wish we had the makings of a viable running game, and I'm terrified this may end up like last season (where we barely miss out on home field advantage, or a bye, because of one loss or two, and it totally would've mattered), but all-in-all... it could be worse fellow Pats fans; we could be followers of... gosh... any other team in the NFL!
Still wish we had the makings of a viable running game, and I'm terrified this may end up like last season (where we barely miss out on home field advantage, or a bye, because of one loss or two, and it totally would've mattered), but all-in-all... it could be worse fellow Pats fans; we could be followers of... gosh... any other team in the NFL!
Evilgrin 72
Distributor of Pain
You Pats fans are nouveau riche. I know Raiders fans that still run smack over the Immaculate Reception. Prepare to hear about this when you're in a rest home.
![[icon]](/data/avatars/m/5/5167.jpg?1660313464){kind=avatar}
[icon]
Insoxicated
[icon]
Insoxicated
We really want to compare the Ravens to the Pats over the last decade or so?
You don't compare sustained excellence vs a flash in the pan.
There is no team in the modern era that holds a candle to the stretch of sustained dominance exhibited by Bill & Tom. During thier tenure theyve been to 2/3rds of the AFC title games and won nearly 1/3 of the super bowls. Sorry guys.
15 years
13 division titles (including active streak of 7 straight titles)
10 conference title appearances (including active streak of 5 straight appearances)
6 conference titles
4 Super Bowls
Last edited by a moderator:
LBH
Footballguy
You forgot to add- caught cheating 2x and forfeited 2 1st round draft picksWe really want to compare the Ravens to the Pats over the last decade or so?
You don't compare sustained excellence vs a flash in the pan.
There is no team in the modern era that holds a candle to the stretch of sustained dominance exhibited by Bill & Tom. During thier tenure theyve been to 2/3rds of the AFC title games and won nearly 1/3 of the super bowls. Sorry guys.
15 years
13 division titles (including active streak of 7 straight titles)
10 conference title appearances (including active streak of 5 straight appearances)
6 conference titles
4 Super Bowls
Ghost Rider
Footballguy
The Patriots sustained excellence is impossible to argue against. Unbelievably great run since 2001.
Which makes the Broncos record against them during that stretch even sweeter.
Which makes the Broncos record against them during that stretch even sweeter.
Stealthycat
Footballguy
best thing is, Garrapalo will excel, Patriots will move him for a high draft pick and again ... the Patriots just win
hoping they test Indy balls this season, ban Luck for a while, cheatin somebeatch that he is
hoping they test Indy balls this season, ban Luck for a while, cheatin somebeatch that he is
I didn't like this whole thing and felt like it was extremely unnecessary to make such a gigantic deal out of it. Years have changed emotions or mood or attitude here. Initially I found this to be super petty. Everyone uses the ball, the advantage was minimal and not result changing. I leaned toward that they would have lost anyway and other people do it, but I also had a "if you didn't mess with the balls you wouldn't be in this mess" thought that was looming. Now, years later, the Colts kind of seem like sore losers. I'm stuck rationalizing checking the air in balls as anything other than sore losers.
I forget the list of players. I think it was Hass, Rodgers, and Peyton. Whomever admitted to altering the air in balls, I'm still wondering why they were never fined or suspended.
I think most of all, I am surprised the NFL made such a big deal of this and continued to for such a long time.
I forget the list of players. I think it was Hass, Rodgers, and Peyton. Whomever admitted to altering the air in balls, I'm still wondering why they were never fined or suspended.
I think most of all, I am surprised the NFL made such a big deal of this and continued to for such a long time.
It's almost like you have to get caught doing something wrong/illegal to get punished. Like when a friend of mine gets a speeding ticket, and I comment that I speed in that area all the time, I don't get a ticket in the mail. Weird, huh?
Also, continuing with the speeding comparison, the guy who gets stopped and is respectful and cooperative with the officer is more likely to get off with a warning, to a lesser infraction than the guy who is argumentative, confrontational, denies any wrongdoing, lies in court, tries to hide information (or not share the entire truth). Funny how those guys are much more likely to have the book thrown at them.
This analogy would work if Tom Brady was assessed the equivalent of a speeding ticket for his "crimes."
Or if he had a fair, impartial hearing where he could appeal the charges, like you are entitled to when you get a speeding ticket.
I realize it's all about the CBA at the end of the day, and the 4 game suspension is what it is, but it's foolish to say that Tom Brady got the penalty he did because of how HE acted after he was deemed guilty before even being tried, based on a bunch of lies and misconceptions that the league never felt the need to correct.
The analogy was with regards to the mistaken belief that because other QBs agreed with Brady, or said they'd also manipulated the PSI of footballs (although NO ONE said they did so AFTER they'd been inspected), they should have been punished. That's an absurd position, and the analogy was making that point.
Brady's position (I'm not going to admit to anything) most definitely was a huge part in the way this turned out. Instead of admitting any wrongdoing, he chose to dig his heels in. I've maintained since very early on that had he said something along the lines of "I told my guys how I like my footballs prepared, and its possible they unknowingly broke the rule trying to prepare them to my liking," this would have been over long ago. But he didn't; he chose to follow the course he did, and the NFL wasn't going to just let that go.
JohnnyU
Footballguy
This thread should be given a decent burial and then Tom should say, "I quit". That will sure tell off Goodell and the NFL.
.......in before someone says Tom will lead the Patriots to a 5th Super Bowl victory, that will tell off Goodell and the NFL.
It sure as hell would though.
.......in before someone says Tom will lead the Patriots to a 5th Super Bowl victory, that will tell off Goodell and the NFL.
It sure as hell would though.
Last edited by a moderator:
Godsbrother
Footballguy
Please.... There were 31 of 32 teams that voted on ratifying the contract. The only team that voted against it did so precisely because of the suspension/appeals process.
http://www.post-gazette.com/sports/steelers/2015/07/29/Brady-blasts-NFL-Deflategate-suspension-denies-wrongdoing-new-england-patriots/stories/201507290155
This was not the case of fine print or the NFL trying to pull a fast one on the players -- it was all well documented and debated but the players overwhelming agreed to take the money and run. If the players are mad at anyone it should be at themselves and DeMaurice Smith.
I think the whole thing was ridiculous but the Patriots were well aware of the process. Once they lost the NFL's appeal they should have accepted the commissioner's ruling because that's what they agreed to do. Instead they acted like big babies.
Ditkaless Wonders
Footballguy
Salty hate waning ... Moving on.
Shutout
Footballguy
I was really only wanting to discuss lightly, not get into taking it THAT seriously like some of you guys are in trying to be all matter of fact about it but I will say this and then that will be that:
You can't possibly stand on that argument and treat it like it is real in any fashion. The reality of it is in MANY case is when someone says "well, they agreed to it" or "they knew what they were signing up for", they significantly fail to acknowledge the reality that the choices are far from pure choice. You get 1900+ people trying to decide on something and you expect a clear an overwhelming consensus and completely ignore peer pressure and the absolute fact that there is truly little choice because the alternative is what? To not earn an income? To not play? To not have a job?
It is a compromise where the league has the leverage where it really matters, pure and simple. The players accept the leverage and as a result the players are rich but never forget the owners are WEALTHY. Big difference there. It is often a pick your poison proposition. In this case, a scenario of calculated risk where nearly 2000 people agree to get a paycheck and chance that the technicality of some league with heavy-handed authority doesn't do something simply because they can. Players hope it never happens to them. That they aren't the James Harrisons or Tom Bradys or other guys that get involved in things like this because their options are simple "accept and make a lot of money or don't and take the chance that you may never see resolution before you are able to earn money."
If any of us had our employer come to us and say "here's the deal, due to a new law, I can offer you to either not accept or accept this proposal: I can give you a 10% raise and you go back to work tomorrow OR you have to not work and not earn any money until we agree. And here is what you have to also agree to if you agree to the raise: If your wife or kids are ever seen in public eating ice cream, we suspend you without pay. Deal?" It is about as stupid as that but that is what players have to compromise to in order to keep a paycheck going. And then when your kid buys ice cream off the ice cream truck (something nobody gives a rat's ### about) and your boss suspends you, you probably say "wait a second! What does that REALLY have to do with anything and, by the way, that wasn't my kid. I'm innocent." The company hires their internal investigator to prepare a report and surprise, they agree with their employer. Ok. Time to give attorneys money to fight a 3 year old's game.
This is long..Too long. But the entire thing is idiotic and only serves the people who love to nit pick and bash on the Patriots. There is no real anything that gets served in this. Nobody cares. We draw the line in the sand with our ##### because of principle. Just my opinion and I won't carry on a disagreement about it other to say my only point: just because two parties agree to something does NOT make it right. That should be self-evident.
Perhaps not, but it is fair. It doesn't matter that the players had to compromise & give in on this issue to get more $$, they DID agree to thus system. It is no more an unfair process than our Constitution is unfair (since it is the result of a bunch of compromises).Shutout said:
Shutout
Footballguy
Yes, it IS fair in terms of they ultimately say yes. I don't argue that. I just think it's not as cut and dired an ultra even playing field as some make it to be or ignore. They made their bed and must lie in it.
Last edited by a moderator:
The NFLPA was trying to use the courts to alter the CBA; the NFL is using the courts to strengthen their side of the CBA. That's what this is about anymore; not the PSI of balls, NEs cheating or non-cheating. If Brady and the NFLPA had agreed to admit some guilt in exchange for a lesser punishment, the NFL's collectively bargained position would not have been strengthened by the courts (likewise, if Brady would have won, you could have said the same thing, on the flip side). The NFL gambled, & won; but it wasn't about Brady, the Pats, or football PSI- it was about the CBA.
Is it that way though?
If player Xi says he bet on games, does he have to be caught in the act? If player Y brags he gets high before games and thinks he adds speed to his game, but passes the NFL drug test- can't they just suspend him?
I heard that "integrity of the game" phrase 5000 times because of this issue. How would the integrity of the game be affected moreso when Brady is caught than when Rodgers admits it?
OR
what was that line? Moral competitive responsibility? Some lawyer way of saying "play fair."
It will be funny when the next star player gets an overly harsh penalty from the league and fans of that team and NFL fans in general act all outraged at how out of control Goodell's power has gotten.
I hope it doesn't happen, because it's bad for the sport, for fantasy football, and frankly it gets really tiresome to have these so called scandals dominate the news 24/7.
But if/when it does happen it will be funny to watch how many people completely change their tune about what is fair, right, and just.
You realize that if Roger Goodell's decides to, he could make up some phony violation and fudge a bunch of "data" and suspend any player he wants, and take any number of draft picks from any team in the league, right?
Dr. Octopus
Footballguy
Godsbrother
Footballguy
The two sides negotiated and this what was agreed on -- whether or not you think it is right is a moot point.Shutout said:
I'm not nit-picking on just the Patriots. One team felt like it was worth taking a stand against Goodell and the other 31 didn't. As far as I am concerned the players of those 31 teams have no reason to complain that Goodell has absolute power because they were the ones that gave it to him.
They should have all stood with the players making a stand but they didn't cause they weren't feeling Goodell's wrath at the time. I have zero sympathy when those that voted on the CBA get burned by the NFL's goofy appeals & suspension process now.
Most of what you posted is just wrong. Goodell didn't make up any violations, he didn't fudge any data, and the suspension & fines were based on the violations & data. You may think the violation was minor, the data was suspect, and the fines & suspension were excessive (I'd agree with you), but it is what it is.
Goodell has too much power; I've never argued otherwise. But he has too much power b/c the PLAYERS LET HIM have too much power. According to the CBA, and the courts, he exercised that power in the way the PLAYERS LET HIM.
What I'm referring to is the fact that the "league sources" leaked a bunch of erroneous information about the measurements of the footballs. That leak stood as the ONLY information the public would have access to for WEEKS, until the Wells Report was released and proved that information to have been completely inaccurate. The league knew it was inaccurate, and rather than correct it in the interest of letting the "investigation" prove or disprove wrongdoing, they allowed the media and the public to run with it, creating a situation where Brady and the Patriots were guilty until proven innocent.
The Exponent/Wells Report was a joke, and most scientists or legal experts who have read it and analyzed it agree that it was neither "independent" nor scientific in nature. The NFL paid Wells to create a report that the general public would buy hook, line, and sinker, and astonishingly it worked, even though it did not even attempt to address natural fluctuations in air pressure caused by the ideal gas law. They somehow got by with the "more likely than not" standard even though there was never anything that linked Brady directly to any wrongdoing, nor any actual proof of any wrongdoing.
There have been multiple equipment violations in the past for tampering with footballs. The Vikings were heating footballs on the sidelines. The Chargers were applying a sticky/tacky substance to footballs on the sidelines. There are many more examples, and many more players who have come out and admitted that this is a common practice that has gone on (and continues to go on) forever. In the past, the league either did nothing, sent a memo to the teams asking them politely not to do it, or levied a small fine. So for this one infraction to suddenly warrant a 4 game suspension, a $1 million fine, and the lost of multiple draft picks (including a first rounder), is just asinine. Maybe Goodell didn't "make up the violation," but he did choose to pursue this one in a completely different manner than he had pursued similar violations in the past.
Finally, the NFL made it clear that they considered the PSI of footballs to be HUGELY important through their handling of this case. So why then did they refuse to record PSI measurements of footballs during the 2015 season? Why did they only do "spot checks," and why were the results of those "spot checks" not made public? The answer is pretty obvious - they would lose all credibility if it was discovered that footballs routinely fall outside of the accepted range during the course of play, without the aid of any sort of tampering. The overwhelming evidence from the scientific community about the ideal gas law and it's effects on PSI must have scared the league away from recording/publicizing any PSI readings. Which says a lot.
Last edited by a moderator:
Again, you are posting stuff that isn't true or relevant.
The leaks weren't what the punishment/appeal is based in, so that's not relevant to your claim Goodell made up violations or fudged data.
There have been just as many experts that have stated the Wekks/Exponent report is valid. There is scientific disagreement about the report/data; that doesn't make it false data. You want to believe that; that's your prerogative. Pretending that is the accepted conclusion is a falsehood.
Again, you want to argue the punishment for the violation is too severe, I won't argue with you. But that's NOT what you originally posted. You said Goodell could make up violations. He didn't do that (as you yourself even admitted in your mist recent post).
Finally, you're jumping to conclusions that aren't even relevant with your comments a/b the NFL not sharing it's PSI data. Perhaps your conclusion is correct; it doesn't change the facts that Goodell didn't make up any violations, didn't fudge any data, didn't suspend anyone without reason, & didn't strip any draft picks without cause-those were your original assertions & there is nothing from "deflate gate" to support them.
Anarchy99
Footballguy
Actually, to the letter of the CBA, Goodell could fabricate whatever he wanted, invoke a harsh penalty, hear the appeal, and have his opinion be the only one heard. There is nothing anyone could do about it. It's in the CBA that he can use his discretion and implement whatever punishment he sees fit.
I don't feel like rehashing a year and a half of discussion, but the Wells report was mostly irrelevant. IMO, the league had determined what the outcome of their investigation was beforehand and then framed the report to fit the outcome they wanted.
I also think the whole thing was the majority of other owners looking for their pound of flesh as an outgrowth of Spygate. Not saying NE didn't deserve to be punished, as they likely had it coming to them, but the way things played out could have been handled a lot better all around.
I don't feel like rehashing a year and a half of discussion, but the Wells report was mostly irrelevant. IMO, the league had determined what the outcome of their investigation was beforehand and then framed the report to fit the outcome they wanted.
I also think the whole thing was the majority of other owners looking for their pound of flesh as an outgrowth of Spygate. Not saying NE didn't deserve to be punished, as they likely had it coming to them, but the way things played out could have been handled a lot better all around.
I think you're being intentionally obtuse.
The leaks were directly responsible for the media coverage of this issue. Again, for almost 2 months the only information anyone (including other NFL owners) had to go on was the misinformation leaked by the league. If you think that didn't have any impact on the outcome and the punishment/appeal, I don't know what to tell you.
There have not been just as many experts that have stated the Wells/Exponent report is valid. The overwhelming sentiment from completely unbiased people has been that the Wells Report completely and utterly fails to make a connection between the PSI of footballs and any wrongdoing by anyone. The officials of that AFC Championship game in January 2015 admitted to not knowing which gauges they used to record their measurements, and the two gauges were proven to give significantly different readings. The Wells Report makes an assumption of which gauge was used by which official during each measurement in order to prove what they set out to prove. If you think that's valid, I don't know what to tell you.
Goodell and the league has/had NEVER levied a punishment anywhere near this severe for an equipment violation. In fact, the penalties for an equipment violation are very clear. Goodell and the league had to make this into an issue of "league integrity," which PSI levels of footballs had never been before, in order to get carte blanche in handing out punishment. If you think that doesn't constitute a "made up violation," I think you're arguing semantics. Call it whatever you want, I guess, but this same sort of violation of league policy was never handled this way before. It should make you wonder what other violations could be taken out of their normal context and called something else in order to hand down overly severe punishments/suspensions/fines/loss of draft picks.
I don't think I'm "jumping to conclusions" in reference to the NFL not sharing PSI data. If this was as serious/important of an issue as they made it out to be, they would record PSI of every game ball before, during, and after every game. The fact that they do not care to even record it at all should raise eyebrows. Give me one legitimate reason that the league would not want to closely monitor football PSI. I'm genuinely curious what reasons people can come up with.
AGAIN, you're arguing points that are irrelevant to your original premise, are assumptions, or are just wrong.
Provide links to the overwhelming denouncement of the Wells report from the scientific (not economic) community or stop pretending its a fact that data was fudged; stop citing media links as proof that Goodell made up violations, and stop arguing about the NFLs refusal to share PSI dar as being relevant to your original premise, b/c it isn't. Cite FACTS, not NE fanboy conspiracy theories.
If you want to argue Goodell was looking for a reason to "get" NE, that's a different discussion (the one you seem to be arguing), but he didn't make anything up, he didn't fudge any data, and his based his unfair fines, suspension, & docked draft picks on a real violation and data that may be questionable, but was not "fudged."
Dr. Octopus
Footballguy
403 pages of the same tired arguments wasn't enough I see.
Why would anyone try and change biased Pat fans minds at this point (and the same can be said for the anti-Pats contingent, yes)?
Why would anyone try and change biased Pat fans minds at this point (and the same can be said for the anti-Pats contingent, yes)?
First of all, I think it's funny that you're telling me to stop posting about this on a message board, in a thread specifically about this topic. I think I'm well within my rights to post my thoughts on this topic. You can feel to ignore me.
This all started because you said that Brady's defiance is what led to him getting such a stiff penalty, and that if he had handled himself differently, the penalties would have been lighter.
I reject that hypothesis completely. The leagues' leaking of false/erroneous/inflammatory information is relevant here. If you follow the chain of events, it is clear that Brady was deemed guilty until proven innocent, and the league had every intention of making an example out of him and the Patriots. It became a witch hunt, and the Patriots and Brady were left to figure out how to defend themselves from allegations that weren't even based in fact. Meanwhile the 24 hour news cycle had already aided most of America to come to their conclusions, and changing the opinion of millions of people and 31 other owners was an extremely uphill battle.
This is why I also say that the data the league relied on to determine their conclusions, and to hand out punishment, was deeply flawed. (9I used the word "fudge" about four posts back, and you've been latched onto it ever since (again, arguing semantics). The league/officials don't even know what gauge was used for which set of measurements, and still they used those readings as evidence of wrongdoing. They also admit they never even considered the ideal gas law, which if you analyze/apply the readings again with the laws of physics in mind, you come to a completely different set of conclusions than if you don't.
The Wells report was not independent. Exponent has a long history of providing lengthy, detailed reports that come to the exact conclusion that the people paying them were hoping for. It's the same company that concluded that second hand smoke doesn't cause cancer.
Simply enter "Wells Report" into your google search and you will see how easy it is to find the overwhelming denouncement of the Wells report from every community. It's MUCH harder to find links that back the report and conclude that it was well executed.
"Making up" a violation was, perhaps, a poor choice of words (again, semantics), but I've tried on about three separate occasions now to use different words to clarify what I meant by that. For some reason you're still saying that I'm arguing that this particular violation was completely made up. For the last time, what I'm saying is this: There is/was a clear process for dealing with equipment violations, but the league chose to take a completely approach with the handling of this particular equipment violation. This is why I say that it should be concerning to football fans everywhere that Goodell has the power to take an issue with a clear set of penalties, and decide that this specific violation falls into a different category, with no limits to the severity of the punishment he can dole out. In his appeal decision, Goodell likened this particular equipment violation to taking PEDs. When did allegedly tampering with footballs reach this critical level of concern for the league?
Which leads me to the last point, which also clearly ties into all of this. If the league suddenly finds PSI levels of footballs to be on the same level of importance as PED violations, then what is being done to prevent this from happening going forward? The answer is very little. They're supposedly doing secret "spot checks," but they won't even share the findings of those spot checks. How can you simultaneously give someone an unprecedented penalty for allegedly having knowledge of a scheme to tamper with footballs, and then implement no concrete measures to protect the integrity of the footballs the next season? I think you clearly lose credibility when you are that inconsistent.
For fans of football and teams/players league wide, I think this is all very troubling for the future of the league. That is and has been my point.
That's how this all started? That's news to me. Your original post didn't quote my post that contained that statement, nor did you mention that AT ALL until this most recent post. If you want to discuss that point, that's fine, but that is most definitely not how this all started. Perhaps next time, you include the point you want to discuss, rather than bringing up other, completely un-related issues? I was under the impression that we were discussing your original premise that Goodell could make up violations (he didn't) and fudge data (he didn't). Fudged DOES NOT equal flawed. Fudged implies that data was changed/altered purposefully. Flawed indicates mistakes were made. That's not semantics, that's two completely different terms. I'll consider that discussion closed, and we can discuss "how this all started."
I've NEVER argued that Goodell or the NFL didn't want to catch NE doing something. I've NEVER said that PSI of footballs was a big deal, and I've NEVER said that the fines, docked draft picks, and suspension were not unfair. What I have said is that if Brady hadn't been so adamant about admitting nothing, un-cooperative, and confrontational, this would have been over much sooner & with a lesser punishment. I thought I've been clear that was my opinion. I can't prove it, b/c it is just that-my opinion. You are free to disagree (or reject completely, to use your words).
Last edited by a moderator:
It's not really that hard to look up and see what comments were made by whom, and what conversation spun off of them. This comment by you basically says that the NFL took their stance only after Brady took his position. I simply don't believe that to be true, and I think it's an important distinction. I tried to show all the ways that I feel it was the NFL who dug in first, by disseminating misinformation, allowing that misinformation to stand uncorrected for months, relying on deeply flawed/unreliable data to make their conclusions, hiring an "independent" company to investigate the issue, etc... Perhaps I failed to quote you properly in each of my subsequent posts, which may have muddied the waters a bit. My apologies for that.
We're beating a dead horse here, though. It's probably best if we agree to disagree.
I enjoyed the discussion though, and mean no disrespect.
I enjoyed it, also. I do want to say 1 last thing; I didn't mean the NFL took their stance only after Brady took his position. I think the NFL was looking for a reason to punish NE (NE posters in this thread have offered various theories as to why-I don't know which might be accurate, but my opinion is that they were, for whatever reason). I believe If Brady hadn't been so "stubborn" (not the right word, but can't come up with a better one, right now), the punishment wouldn't have been so severe (probably still a significant fine, though).
Dinsy Ejotuz
Footballguy
If only there were some explanation for why the other owners threw the book at the Pats this whole thing would make more sense. It's almost like they didn't get the benefit of the doubt for some reason.
Last edited by a moderator:
BoltBacker
Footballguy
I agree with you that the only rule that really matters in the NFL is thou shalt not bruise the ego of Saint Goodell, but I disagree that Brady could have saved himself just by not being "stubborn", or kissing the ring or whatever.
There was a guy named Ray Rice who was told to come to NY, tell the truth, throw your career on the mercy of his highness..... you'll be treated fairly and your spotless record before this incident will be taken into consideration. Rice does all that and gets two games. Video leaks that shows exactly what Rice says happened, did in fact happen. Goodell decides to let twitter-verse be final judge and jury of a decision he's already ruled on and tucks his tail between his legs. Ray Rice get's banished even though he was never "stubborn".
In the end all that matters is the daily whims of an ego-maniac making the decisions and he's fought very hard to keep it that way.
BoltBacker
Footballguy
If they had thrown the book at the Patriots I don't think we would still be talking about this. But they threw the book at the Patriots and Brady, even though Brady has never been guilty of anything before ONE football was slightly deflated.
It's odd that you use that example; it's almost like you don't understand the example you chose directly contradicts the point you were trying to make.
If all that mattered was the "daily whims of an ego-maniac making the decisions," Goodell would have stuck to his original 2-game suspension (you know, being an ego-maniac and all, he is right & to hell with public opinion). But he didn't; he bowed to public pressure and issued a much harsher punishment (which he didn't have the authority to do & hisblegal advisors must have told him would be overturned in the courts). An egomaniac wouldn't have changed their mind, wouldn't have bowed to public pressure, & wouldn't have made a decision that he knew was likely to be overturned. Nice attempt though.
