Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 107 (8805 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 12-13-2017 12:15 AM
329 online now:
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: jaufre
Post Volume:
Total: 824,060 Year: 28,666/21,208 Month: 732/1,847 Week: 107/475 Day: 0/17 Hour: 0/0

Announcements: Reporting debate problems OR discussing moderation actions/inactions


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
RewPrev1
...
27282930
31
32Next
Author Topic:   Deflation-gate
Percy
Member
Posts: 16298
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 2.5


Message 451 of 466 (785809)
06-11-2016 2:07 PM
Reply to: Message 450 by Percy
06-11-2016 10:54 AM


A New Theory
Columnist Robert Parry of Consoritumnew.com has a new theory: Deflategate Twist: 31 NFL Teams Are Cheating

The accusations of cheating are just exaggeration, but he does have an interesting theory. Goodell has relentlessly pursued Brady and the Patriots with charges and penalties for cheating because that's what the majority of his employers want. Barry claims that a preponderance of the management organizations of the 32 teams are pressuring Goodell to do this, and that explains why none of the evidence has held up.

Barry quotes Mike Reiss's report that, "I think Goodell would do it [end Deflategate] if that's what 31 other ownership groups wanted, but it was clear as a possible settlement was recently explored behind the scenes that the majority of owners want the full penalty for Brady and the Patriots. Goodell is following their lead."

Barry then argues that, "the Management Council, which controls [Goodell's] $35 million salary, urged him to view the absence of two Patriots equipment employees at the appeal hearing as proof of Bradys guilt..."

Recall that Officials Locker Room attendant McNally and Equipment Manager Jastremski are accused of conspiring with Brady to implement a scheme to deflate footballs. As part of their evidence the NFL cites text messages between McNally and Jastremski after the Jets game earlier in the season when the balls were discovered to have been overinflated by more than 3 PSI. Barry then introduces a new argument:

quote:
But an objective reading of those text messages would have undercut the NFLs allegations, since neither McNally nor Jastremski made any reference to why they had failed to under-inflate the balls after they were filled with air by the officials. You would have expected Jastremski to chastise McNally for his failure to deflate the balls or for McNally to offer an excuse about why he didnt, but that topic is never raised in the exchange.

When looked at in this light it's fairly convincing. The text messages in the Wells Report after the October 17, 2014, Jets game (see page 5) have a bewildering number of interpretations given their lack of specificity but look damning until one realizes that there is no mention of how McNally screwed up in not deflating the footballs to Brady's desired level. Not just that, but rereading these texts again after all this time it is apparent that both McNally and Jastremski believe the referees to be the last ones to have adjusted ball inflation. And in this exchange it is clear that McNally's plan is to overinflate the footballs even more than the previous week (it reads very strangely, and I think gross exaggeration of counterproductive intent must just be McNally's style):

JastremskiCan't wait to give you your needle this week :)
McNallyFuck tom....make sure the pump is attached to the needle.....fuckin watermelons coming

But fatally damning for the NFL position as stated by Wells (though only to the interested public, since this isn't reviewable by the courts, though the courts could send this back to the NFL to rehear the arbitration) is the glaring contradiction that Barry next notes but which somehow have been missed until now. According to the Wells Report, "It was the first time in [Walt] Anderson‟s nineteen years as an NFL official that he could not locate the game balls at the start of a game." So if McNally, Jastremski and Brady had developed a scheme to deflate footballs after they'd been checked by the officials and before they reached the field, then the AFC Championship Game was the first time they'd ever succeeded, and what's more, it required an unexpected confluence of circumstances, as described by Barry:

quote:
If, as Goodell acknowledges, this was the only time that McNally could have slightly deflated some footballs for whatever miniscule benefit that might have created, then that would mean that Brady and his co-conspirators anticipated that the NFC game would go into overtime, that it would delay the start of the AFC game, and that the sudden-death ending would cause confusion among the referees, allowing McNally to slip away, enter a bathroom and take a tiny amount of air out of the Patriots footballs.

And as I myself have stated several times, it would make no sense for Brady to have underinflated footballs at home but not away where he wouldn't have the benefit of the home locker room attendant, because of the inconsistency.

So while I don't believe that the other 31 owners are cheating, I do think they are encouraging Goodell to come down hard on Brady and the Patriots, that Goodell made that need very apparent to Wells, and that that explains why the improving understanding of the evidence is running so strongly against the NFL.

--Percy

Edited by Percy, : Typos.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 450 by Percy, posted 06-11-2016 10:54 AM Percy has acknowledged this reply

Replies to this message:
 Message 452 by NoNukes, posted 06-12-2016 12:57 PM Percy has responded

    
NoNukes
Member
Posts: 10116
From: Central NC USA
Joined: 08-13-2010
Member Rating: 1.7


Message 452 of 466 (785859)
06-12-2016 12:57 PM
Reply to: Message 451 by Percy
06-11-2016 2:07 PM


Re: A New Theory
The accusations of cheating are just exaggeration, but he does have an interesting theory. Goodell has relentlessly pursued Brady and the Patriots with charges and penalties for cheating because that's what the majority of his employers want.

I have no evidence for this one way or the other, but I've always assumed that Goodell was doing what the owners want with regards to pursuing this matter. My reasoning is that from a pure PR perspective it would have been best to let this blow over without a hearing and that a decision based on any long term view would have to be supported by ownership.

Again, I've no facts to back that up, but it makes sense to me.

Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.


Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)

History will have to record that the greatest tragedy of this period of social transition was not the strident clamor of the bad people, but the appalling silence of the good people. Martin Luther King

If there are no stupid questions, then what kind of questions do stupid people ask? Do they get smart just in time to ask questions? Scott Adams


This message is a reply to:
 Message 451 by Percy, posted 06-11-2016 2:07 PM Percy has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 453 by Percy, posted 06-12-2016 8:46 PM NoNukes has responded

    
Percy
Member
Posts: 16298
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 2.5


Message 453 of 466 (785878)
06-12-2016 8:46 PM
Reply to: Message 452 by NoNukes
06-12-2016 12:57 PM


Re: A New Theory
NoNukes writes:

I have no evidence for this one way or the other, but I've always assumed that Goodell was doing what the owners want with regards to pursuing this matter.

Not sure what you mean by "pursuing this matter," so just to be clear, the article wasn't suggesting that Goodell pursued the Deflategate charges at the behest of owners. It was suggesting that Goodell orchestrated a ruling of guilty at the behest of owners.

--Percy


This message is a reply to:
 Message 452 by NoNukes, posted 06-12-2016 12:57 PM NoNukes has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 454 by NoNukes, posted 06-13-2016 7:34 AM Percy has responded

    
NoNukes
Member
Posts: 10116
From: Central NC USA
Joined: 08-13-2010
Member Rating: 1.7


Message 454 of 466 (785886)
06-13-2016 7:34 AM
Reply to: Message 453 by Percy
06-12-2016 8:46 PM


Re: A New Theory
It was suggesting that Goodell orchestrated a ruling of guilty at the behest of owners.

I've expressed my own opinion. If it is not the same as the one expressed in the article, that's fine too.


Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)

History will have to record that the greatest tragedy of this period of social transition was not the strident clamor of the bad people, but the appalling silence of the good people. Martin Luther King

If there are no stupid questions, then what kind of questions do stupid people ask? Do they get smart just in time to ask questions? Scott Adams


This message is a reply to:
 Message 453 by Percy, posted 06-12-2016 8:46 PM Percy has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 455 by Percy, posted 06-13-2016 10:23 AM NoNukes has responded

    
Percy
Member
Posts: 16298
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 2.5


Message 455 of 466 (785903)
06-13-2016 10:23 AM
Reply to: Message 454 by NoNukes
06-13-2016 7:34 AM


Re: A New Theory
NoNukes writes:

I've expressed my own opinion. If it is not the same as the one expressed in the article, that's fine too.

But what's your opinion? It can't be known unless you reveal what you meant by "pursuing this matter?" Without that information no one can know your opinion or whether it agrees with the article. If "pursuing this matter" means pursuing the Deflategate charges, then you don't agree with the article's main premise, while if it means orchestrating a ruling of guilty then you do agree.

Myself, I don't think the evidence is conclusive, just that it's an interesting theory. I *do* believe that Goodell is bozo enough to screw up the investigation and arbitration efforts without much encouragement, but whether a subset of owners gave him an extra push, who knows.

--Percy


This message is a reply to:
 Message 454 by NoNukes, posted 06-13-2016 7:34 AM NoNukes has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 456 by NoNukes, posted 06-13-2016 11:39 AM Percy has responded

    
NoNukes
Member
Posts: 10116
From: Central NC USA
Joined: 08-13-2010
Member Rating: 1.7


Message 456 of 466 (785907)
06-13-2016 11:39 AM
Reply to: Message 455 by Percy
06-13-2016 10:23 AM


Re: A New Theory
If "pursuing this matter" means pursuing the Deflategate charges, then you don't agree with the article's main premise, while if it means orchestrating a ruling of guilty then you do agree.

That's okay, too. My comment is not a rebuttal of the articles premise. It expresses a related but distinct idea. But for the record, by pursuing the matter, what I am referring to is the fact that the owners appear to want a tough, management favorable punishment system, and that they negotiated for exactly that in the protective bargaining agreement. Goodell has by now, had several opportunities to drop the matter, but has taken none of them.

That particular line of argument might be correct regardless of whether or not I agree with the article. As I'm saying for the second time, I'm making a completely different point. Since you seem to want me to comment about the article, as to the point about orchestrating a ruling of guilty, I find that a bit silly. (And again that's not a comment on Brady's guilt or innocence). The CBA, as written, allows Goodell the final say if he so elects, accordingly, little orchestration was even needed. Goodell could have listened to anything, met with anyone, and reviewed anything short of a confession by the Patriots owner that he deflated the footballs, and pronounced the same conclusion.


Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)

History will have to record that the greatest tragedy of this period of social transition was not the strident clamor of the bad people, but the appalling silence of the good people. Martin Luther King

If there are no stupid questions, then what kind of questions do stupid people ask? Do they get smart just in time to ask questions? Scott Adams


This message is a reply to:
 Message 455 by Percy, posted 06-13-2016 10:23 AM Percy has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 457 by Percy, posted 06-15-2016 10:22 AM NoNukes has responded

    
Percy
Member
Posts: 16298
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 2.5


Message 457 of 466 (786054)
06-15-2016 10:22 AM
Reply to: Message 456 by NoNukes
06-13-2016 11:39 AM


Re: A New Theory
NoNukes writes:

My comment is not a rebuttal of the articles premise. It expresses a related but distinct idea. But for the record, by pursuing the matter, what I am referring to is the fact that the owners appear to want a tough, management favorable punishment system, and that they negotiated for exactly that in the protective bargaining agreement. Goodell has by now, had several opportunities to drop the matter, but has taken none of them.

Okay, I get it.

The CBA, as written, allows Goodell the final say if he so elects, accordingly, little orchestration was even needed. Goodell could have listened to anything, met with anyone, and reviewed anything short of a confession by the Patriots owner that he deflated the footballs, and pronounced the same conclusion.

You seem to be saying that the investigative process and Goodell's performance as an arbitrator could have been even worse than they were. I guess that would have made the legal process easier. As it is, most of the briefs have argued that agreement to a non-neutral arbitrator does not relinquish rights to fairness and due process. Arbitrators have broad discretion and can even fail in according with these rights, but within bounds.

Recent articles have not been as sanguine as me about Brady's chances. I see fewer signs now of the optimism that emerged during the flood of amicus briefs. My assessment of Brady's petition chances have diminished somewhat.

--Percy


This message is a reply to:
 Message 456 by NoNukes, posted 06-13-2016 11:39 AM NoNukes has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 458 by NoNukes, posted 06-18-2016 11:11 PM Percy has responded

    
NoNukes
Member
Posts: 10116
From: Central NC USA
Joined: 08-13-2010
Member Rating: 1.7


Message 458 of 466 (786217)
06-18-2016 11:11 PM
Reply to: Message 457 by Percy
06-15-2016 10:22 AM


Re: A New Theory
As it is, most of the briefs have argued that agreement to a non-neutral arbitrator does not relinquish rights to fairness and due process.

Of course that is correct. However, the agreement does put set some boundaries on what might be considered fair and unfair. Perhaps ultimately, what Goodell did will be found to be unfair. However IMO, it will be difficult/impossible to argue successfully that the mere fact that Goodell was the hearing officer is outside of the agreement or that it was not what the parties meant when the agreement was signed. Perhaps that portion of the agreement is something that the players ought to take up with their representation.

Generally speaking, the decider of a case is the one who gets to assign the weight to the facts, decide what's credible and not credible, and more importantly, to decide who to believe and who to disbelieve. An appellate court is not supposed to second guess any of that weighing/credibility assigning process. Accordingly, the choice of decider in a case is an enormously huge thing to ... (trying to chose words carefully to avoid a fight) let's just say 'leave as the choice is left in the text of the collective bargaining agreement.'

Recent articles have not been as sanguine as me about Brady's chances. I see fewer signs now of the optimism that emerged during the flood of amicus briefs. My assessment of Brady's petition chances have diminished somewhat.

Your assessment may have changed, but the fact is that nothing that you might have seen in the media has actually affected Brady's chances in the least. If what you see in the media does not come from folks who have actually practiced before that particular court, then what you see is opinion probably not worth using in a probability calculation.

Who is writing about this stuff nowadays? Aren't most folks watching hockey, basketball, or baseball?

Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.

Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.

Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.


Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)

History will have to record that the greatest tragedy of this period of social transition was not the strident clamor of the bad people, but the appalling silence of the good people. Martin Luther King

If there are no stupid questions, then what kind of questions do stupid people ask? Do they get smart just in time to ask questions? Scott Adams


This message is a reply to:
 Message 457 by Percy, posted 06-15-2016 10:22 AM Percy has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 459 by Percy, posted 06-20-2016 10:47 AM NoNukes has responded

    
Percy
Member
Posts: 16298
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 2.5


Message 459 of 466 (786321)
06-20-2016 10:47 AM
Reply to: Message 458 by NoNukes
06-18-2016 11:11 PM


Re: A New Theory
NoNukes writes:

However IMO, it will be difficult/impossible to argue successfully that the mere fact that Goodell was the hearing officer is outside of the agreement or that it was not what the parties meant when the agreement was signed.

Brady/NFLPA isn't arguing this, and none of the amicus briefs argue this position. You may be thinking of things I said a while back before I understood the CBA.

Who is writing about this stuff nowadays? Aren't most folks watching hockey, basketball, or baseball?

The amicus briefs generated a flurry of articles and responses, things seem to be quiet again now.

--Percy


This message is a reply to:
 Message 458 by NoNukes, posted 06-18-2016 11:11 PM NoNukes has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 460 by NoNukes, posted 06-20-2016 11:02 AM Percy has responded

    
NoNukes
Member
Posts: 10116
From: Central NC USA
Joined: 08-13-2010
Member Rating: 1.7


Message 460 of 466 (786322)
06-20-2016 11:02 AM
Reply to: Message 459 by Percy
06-20-2016 10:47 AM


Re: A New Theory
Brady/NFLPA isn't arguing this, and none of the amicus briefs argue this position.

Of course not. Surely, they have more sense than to bother with that argument.

You may be thinking of things I said a while back before I understood the CBA.

Yes, and things you continued to say after I pointed out the text in Article 46. It's nearly impossible to tell when you've dropped or conceded an issue.

Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.


Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)

History will have to record that the greatest tragedy of this period of social transition was not the strident clamor of the bad people, but the appalling silence of the good people. Martin Luther King

If there are no stupid questions, then what kind of questions do stupid people ask? Do they get smart just in time to ask questions? Scott Adams


This message is a reply to:
 Message 459 by Percy, posted 06-20-2016 10:47 AM Percy has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 461 by Percy, posted 06-20-2016 11:58 AM NoNukes has acknowledged this reply

    
Percy
Member
Posts: 16298
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 2.5


Message 461 of 466 (786329)
06-20-2016 11:58 AM
Reply to: Message 460 by NoNukes
06-20-2016 11:02 AM


Re: A New Theory
NoNukes writes:

Yes, and things you continued to say after I pointed out the text in Article 46. It's nearly impossible to tell when you've dropped or conceded an issue.

Sorry - you were right.

--Percy


This message is a reply to:
 Message 460 by NoNukes, posted 06-20-2016 11:02 AM NoNukes has acknowledged this reply

Replies to this message:
 Message 462 by Diomedes, posted 06-23-2016 10:17 AM Percy has acknowledged this reply

    
Diomedes
Member
Posts: 669
From: Central Florida, USA
Joined: 09-13-2013
Member Rating: 6.7


(1)
Message 462 of 466 (786560)
06-23-2016 10:17 AM
Reply to: Message 461 by Percy
06-20-2016 11:58 AM


Ben Affleck Rant on Deflate-gate

Ben certainly does like his F-bombs.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 461 by Percy, posted 06-20-2016 11:58 AM Percy has acknowledged this reply

  
NoNukes
Member
Posts: 10116
From: Central NC USA
Joined: 08-13-2010
Member Rating: 1.7


(1)
Message 463 of 466 (787487)
07-15-2016 3:30 PM


Rehearing denied. No appeal to the Supreme Court.
http://bleacherreport.com/...on-wont-appeal-to-supreme-court

quote:
After the Second U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals denied Tom Brady's request for a rehearing of his Deflategate case, the New England Patriots quarterback decided against using his last legal option available.

Statement from Brady:

quote:
I'm very grateful for the overwhelming support I've received from Mr. Kraft, the Kraft family, coach Belichick, my coaches and teammates, the NFLPA, my agents, my loving family and most of all, our fans. It has been a challenging 18 months and I have made the difficult decision to no longer proceed with the legal process. I'm going to work hard to be the best player I can be for the New England Patriots and I look forward to having the opportunity to return to the field this fall.

Edited by NoNukes, : Add link.


Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)

History will have to record that the greatest tragedy of this period of social transition was not the strident clamor of the bad people, but the appalling silence of the good people. Martin Luther King

If there are no stupid questions, then what kind of questions do stupid people ask? Do they get smart just in time to ask questions? Scott Adams


    
Percy
Member
Posts: 16298
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 2.5


Message 464 of 466 (792466)
10-10-2016 7:52 AM


Deflategate Over
Tom Brady returned to the field yesterday in a game between the New England Patriots and the Cleveland Browns. When asked about Deflategate at the post game press conference Brady said, "I'm moving on."

--Percy


    
Percy
Member
Posts: 16298
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 2.5


Message 465 of 466 (825050)
12-06-2017 8:08 PM


How'd that prediction pan out?
Prediction I made in this thread: That smoldering hard feelings about Deflategate would cause Roger Goodell to lose the support of Patriot owner Robert Kraft. Combined with hard feelings from a few other owners over other issues (Cowboys owner Jerry Jones is really ticked at him right now), his contract would not be extended.

Outcome: Today Roger Goodell signed a 5-year contract extension with the NFL.

How do I feel about this: I think Roger Goodell has done a very good job for the league and deserves the extension. He actually made an appearance at Gillette Stadium for a Patriot game this year, though he kept his presence secret during the game, only revealing video that he'd been in the stadium after the game. Still, took a lot of courage.

Earlier this week the NFL suspended Patriot tight end Rob Gronkowski one game for a blatant cheap shot hit on a player lying prone on the ground. It should have been more, even potentially for the season. Maybe suffering Deflategate cut us a break? I don't actually believe that, but it's a nice thought.

--Percy


Replies to this message:
 Message 466 by NoNukes, posted 12-07-2017 1:27 AM Percy has acknowledged this reply

    
RewPrev1
...
27282930
31
32Next
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2015 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2017