Anarchy99
Footballguy
If the Pats may have a gripe, it may be with the laissez-faire attitude of the ball inspection and certification process, which had been going on for years and years. If the stories that have come out are true, it appears that it was rare that every game ball in every game was thoroughly gauged and inspected. Some games it sounds like the balls weren't inspected at all. Some practices (by teams) seemed to be done repeatedly and against the rules of ball inspection or preparation (with emphasis given to being done pre-inspection). Bottom line, the NFL didn't seem to care too much about the inspection process (or lack thereof) until this year's AFCCG. If nothing else, this whole ordeal has shown the process to be riddled with potential issues and very little chain of custody to the pregame handling of footballs.I think an element missing in a lot of those other situations has to do with the violation being something immediately following such a specific certification process.We are just going to go in circles again, but here goes.Not sure why Kraft is so pissed at Goodell. You'd think he'd be pissed at Brady for cheating, lying about it, and making him look like a fool in public.Interesting discussion I heard this morning (I think it was on the radio, I was only half awake . . . which admittedly may be 50% more than normal). One theory was that Kraft is going to go nuclear over this and if things don't get overturned he will take steps to have Goodell removed as commissioner. That would make for an interesting showdown. I am not sure how the commissioner is viewed by the 31 other owners and if Kraft has the clout to get Goodell ousted.
In the past, for potential violations teams were told to stop what they were doing or league wide memos/letters were sent out telling people that from that point forward ISSUE X would no longer be tolerated and there would be penalties for repeat abusers. No such notice was given this time around. In the past, for equipment violations throughout the history of the league, no investigations were launched, no players were ever suspended, and no draft picks were ever docked. On several occasions, the league looked the other way, did not punish teams, or handed out small fines.
In the Wells report itself, it found that whatever happened was between the two locker room attendants and Brady. Yet the team was fined and picks were taken away. In other sports, when a pitcher is caught tampering with the baseball or a player is caught with a corked bat, does the team get fined and lose draft picks?
With regard to Deflategate, the entire process has been conducted in an entirely different direction than in the past. Kraft (and many others) feel the penalties handed out are Draconian and hugely unfair based on the (in their minds) misdemeanor of a crime committed. Kraft still feels the Wells report didn't prove a thing.
This entire fiasco could have been avoided (from the Pats perspective) without dragging the team's reputation in the muck by not having a Spanish Inquisition and could have been handled behind closed doors and not in the public. (The concept of not trying to circumvent the rules is apparently a foreign concept to the business model in NE.)
I am not specifically making all these claims, but that is the way the team seems to feel.
Take Spygate as a contrast. The Pats broke a rule about where they could have cameras, and got punished.
Now imagine if in addition to that rule, the league had a certification process similar to the refs certifying the game balls. Say, an official that it is required that he visit the location of each team camera and certify that it is in a legal location. And after that certification took place, then the team had moved the camera to the illegal locations actually used in Spygate.
I think the league would have come down even harder in such a case. When something is made so abundantly clear you're not supposed to do it, and you still do it, I'd expect the reaction to be even more harsh. I think that contributes even though it isn't something overtly discussed.
While all that may be true, the Pats still violated the rules. A (weak) argument can be made that if 1) the process was consistently implemented properly on a weekly basis and 2) the process itself was better insulated and foolproof then none of this could ever have happened. One of my biggest complaints with the NFL rules and policies is some infractions the penalties are spelled out. Other areas they indicate that something is illegal but don't indicate what the penalty would be if that rule was broken. And for the rules that DO HAVE set penalties, they don't consistently apply them anyway.
The league needs to literally have a column of infractions and a second column of penalties, and a third column for increased penalties for repeat offenders. If everything is spelled out, then we don't have to sit here and gripe that things were not adjudicated fairly.