Keep Texans Talk Google Ad Free!
Venmo Tip Jar | Paypal Tip Jar
Thanks for your support! 🍺😎👍

Patriots under investigation

I'm a big Brady fan and I'd put him at the top of my QB list. I gotta say that destroying the cellphone is a game changer. I still don't believe that a suspension is warranted because deflated balls are an equipment issue and should be penalized accordingly. Fine him a million bucks and call it done. I also think the official in charge of the AFCCG Patriot game balls should get the same sentence as Brady. If he'd done his job we wouldn't be having this discussion. The league office screwed this up from soup to nuts.
 
eriadoc said:
I don't care what anyone says, I don't put Brady up there with Montana or Bradshaw.
Click to expand...
Bradshaw? Talk about the ultimate system QB. Chuck the ball as far as you can and have Swan or Stallworth track it down. If that turns into an INT, you've got the Steel Curtain and Franco Harris as trump cards. Montana? Hello, Rice, Taylor and Craig. Not to mention stellar D's. Brady has rarely had even a cousin to the stellar supporting casts Bradshaw, Staubach, Montana, Kelly, Elway, Wilson, Rothliesburger, Aikman or Manning (either one) had. Just check out how many HOFr's or potential HOFr's were on each team. The difference in quality supporting players is stunning. BB and TB have accomplished more, with less, than any of the others. And the sustained that success. Troy Aikman deserves to be in the HOF about as much as Trent Dilfer does. It's a complete disgrace that he's a HOF'r. At least Bradshaw and Staubach were standouts, in their own right, in their era. Aikman wasn't He was thoroughly outplayed by other QB's of his era in every category other than SB wins.
Brady is pure clutch and the only QB I'd want on my team in a clutch situation. Elway and Wilson would be my next two picks.
 
disaacks3 said:
Interesting to see how Elway beats out Montana.
Click to expand...
On the subject of Montana, the media usually ranks him at the top, as if they know anything about football anyway ? But the media is all about the big event, the SB.
I give the players career over the regular seasons at least as much importance as SB performances.
 
suspendweb-2-web.jpg
 
IDEXAN said:
On the subject of Montana, the media usually ranks him at the top, as if they know anything about football anyway ? But the media is all about the big event, the SB.
I give the players career over the regular seasons at least as much importance as SB performances.
Click to expand...
Montana was clutch in big plays. I love Joe Montana's play, but I concede that he had a great supporting cast. See my above post.
 
IDEXAN said:
On the subject of Montana, the media usually ranks him at the top, as if they know anything about football anyway ? But the media is all about the big event, the SB.
I give the players career over the regular seasons at least as much importance as SB performances.
Click to expand...
What are your thoughts on Aikman?
 
Wow this again. Roger Staubach could have led any team any era. He's a natural born and then groomed warrior/leader.

Troy not deserving the hall? Now there's a joke. Possibly the most accurate passer to ever play.
 
DocBar said:
I'm a big Brady fan and I'd put him at the top of my QB list. I gotta say that destroying the cellphone is a game changer. I still don't believe that a suspension is warranted because deflated balls are an equipment issue and should be penalized accordingly. Fine him a million bucks and call it done. I also think the official in charge of the AFCCG Patriot game balls should get the same sentence as Brady. If he'd done his job we wouldn't be having this discussion. The league office screwed this up from soup to nuts.
Click to expand...
That nugget of info has changed my position too. Willful destruction of evidence implies guilt and a bit of arrogance IMO. Let him sit for a month.
 
DocBar said:
Montana? Hello, Rice, Taylor and Craig
Click to expand...
Slow your roll there DB. Montana won his first TWO SBs with Freddie Solomon and Dwight Clark as his WRs. Rice and Taylor came later. Roger Craig was there for the 2nd title (3 yrs later) but not the first. Rice grad Earl Cooper and Bill Ring were in the backfield.
Everyone always thinks Rice was there the whole time but Montana won two SBs without he and John Taylor.
 
Back to the Patriots discussion.

PFT reports that before the final decision, the League offered to reduce Brady's suspension to at least 50% if he admitted guilt and admitted to obstructing the investigation............and apologized.
 
Indy Star: Tom Brady is worse than a liar. Worse than a cheat

It's worse than we thought. Well, not it. Him. Tom Brady. He's worse than we thought.

And we thought he was bad. Nah, we knew it. The Ted Wells report on DeflateGate made it clear the Patriots deflated footballs for the AFC title game against the Colts, made it clear which team employees did it, and left just about no doubt — for anyone outside of New England — that quarterback Tom Brady was ultimately responsible.

Tom Brady, cheater.

Then he appealed his four-game suspension on the grounds that he was innocent.

Tom Brady, liar.

Bad, right? But it's worse. No, not it. Him. Tom Brady. He's worse than a liar, worse than a cheat. He’s a man of low integrity.

Before Tuesday, he was merely a garden variety cheater. But the revelation that Brady had destroyed his cell phone before his interview with Ted Wells makes it clear what species, what kind of cretin, we’re looking at.

Tom Brady, shameless.

Brady has left Rafael Palmeiro territory, wagging his figurative finger at the camera and saying, “I don't believe so,” when asked if he’s a cheater, and entered the more nefarious neighborhood of Ryan Braun and Lance Armstrong. Rigged muscles, rigged footballs — it’s rigging the contest. Gaming the system. Cheating the other team from the fair game it deserves.

Before Tuesday, Brady was a basic cheater. He was Mark McGwire. Sammy Sosa. Ben Johnson. Floyd Landis. Just another jerk in a sports landscape that has revealed so many of them. But now we see the depths of Brady's desperation.

In an effort to save himself, baseball star Ryan Braun threw the innocent specimen collector under the bus. Cyclist Lance Armstrong threw pretty much everybody under the bus.

Brady threw Roger Goodell under the bus.

The way Brady did it was more subtle than the scumbag moves of Braun and Armstrong, but it was devastating nonetheless. By appealing his suspension based on the argument that the Wells Report hadn’t definitively proved a thing — a calculation Brady was making based on the phone only he knew he had destroyed — he knew he had an army of millions willing to do his bidding in his holy war with the unpopular Goodell.

Fans in New England. Fans in other cities who have come to distrust the admittedly distasteful Goodell. Stooges in the media, especially at ESPN, where Brady's guilt hasn't been debated so much as the absurdity of suspending a player four games for doing what Brady did.

Makes you wonder what people are missing. What they want to miss, in their desire to attack the dislikable NFL commissioner while absolving the more likeable Patriots quarterback.

It takes some ferocious mental gymnastics to get here, but this is where people got: They decided the periphery stuff — Goodell, Ted Wells, even Ray Rice and Greg Hardy — had more bearing on Brady’s punishment than one fairly clear fact:

Brady rigged the AFC championship game.

He didn't need to rig it. The Patriots have owned the Colts for years and would have owned them on Jan. 18, maybe even by a score of 45-7, had the football been made of Havarti. But Brady rigged the game before the Super Bowl. Put that in italics. Stress what happened, because this wasn’t just any game Tom Brady rigged. He rigged the game before the Super Bowl.

Brady tried, and he succeeded — whether he needed to or not — in deflating the football. He tried, he succeeded, in giving the Patriots an unfair competitive advantage in the biggest game of the season not just for his team, but for the team he was playing.

This cheating involved a needle, which supplies some symmetry. Brady was playing with a football on Nandrolone.

That alone deserves the four-game suspension. The latest revelation, that Brady didn’t merely fail to cooperate with the investigation but actively hindered it by destroying evidence?

Brady’s lucky Goodell didn’t increase the suspension to five games. If not more.

And maybe Goodell would have done that if it weren’t for the NFL commissioner’s genius at making money. The Patriots’ fifth game, Brady’s first, will be Oct. 18 at Lucas Oil Stadium against the Colts. In prime time. National television commercial spots are for sale as we speak.

And the people said: Cha-ching.

Brady went for it, though. Knowing what nobody, not even the NFL knew — that he had destroyed his cell phone — Brady appealed his suspension and sat back while his thugs in the media (social and mainstream) bullied Roger Goodell for him.

Goodell refused to cave. He upheld the suspension. Now the ball is back in Brady’s court, only this ball hasn't been rigged and this game will be fairly contested. Let’s call it Brady vs. The Truth, and if Brady does in fact sue the NFL as has been reported, well, we already know the truth.

Tom Brady, guilty.​
 
Lester Munson, ESPN Legal Analyst

New England Patriots quarterback Tom Brady, the National Football League Players Association and their lawyers say they will ask a federal judge for an injunction that will prevent the NFL from enforcing the four-game suspension that commissioner Roger Goodell confirmed Tuesday in a detailed decision. Brady's threat of litigation and Goodell's decision raise questions about a court's role in a collectively-bargained arbitration process:

Question: Will Brady succeed in court and stop the NFL from suspending him for four games?
Answer: No, Brady will not succeed. Although he enjoys top-of-the-line legal representation and his lawyers will file a brilliantly written lawsuit, his effort to stop the suspension is doomed. There are two reasons why: First, federal judges are reluctant to reconsider the rulings of arbitrators; second, Goodell produced a decision on Brady that is brilliantly reasoned, meticulously detailed, and well-written. Goodell's recitation of the evidence of the tampering with game balls is powerful, and his description of Brady's attempt at a cover-up is persuasive.

Q: Why are federal judges reluctant to reconsider an arbitrator's decision?
A: If federal judges were to offer reviews of arbitrator decisions made throughout the nation, their dockets soon would be filled with arbitration cases. Throughout American business and industry, there are agreements to submit disputes to arbitration. It is viewed as a less-costly and more-efficient way to resolve issues. It avoids the expense and the endless delays of litigation. An essential element of any arbitration is that it is final and cannot be reviewed.

Federal judges understand the theory behind arbitration, and they are already inundated with criminal cases and thousands of civil lawsuits. They know that an arbitrator has considered the evidence, and the judges do not want a second look at the evidence. Even when the arbitrator is totally wrong, most federal judges will not reconsider the ruling. In a notorious case involving former Los Angeles Dodgers baseball player Steve Garvey at the U.S. Supreme Court in 2001, the high court ruled that even when the arbitrator's decision is "improvident or even silly," it does "not provide a basis for a court to refuse to enforce" the arbitrator's decision.

Q: But didn't a federal judge recently reverse an NFL arbitration ruling for Adrian Peterson?
A: Yes. U.S. District Court Judge David Doty in Minneapolis, who has presided over NFL litigation for 25 years, reversed the punishment imposed on Peterson. He based his ruling on what he thought was an egregious error by the NFL arbitrator -- the application of a new and harsher penalty to an incident that occurred before the adoption of the new penalty. The case is on appeal, and the NFL is likely to prevail in the appeal with the high court reminding Doty that federal judges should stay away from reviews of arbitrators' rulings.

Q: Bloomberg is reporting that the NFL filed a lawsuit in New York on Tuesday, beating the NFLPA and Brady to the punch. What's this about?
A: The NFL is clearly worried that Brady and his lawyers will file their lawsuit in Minneapolis, where NFL players have achieved historic triumphs over the NFL, including several decisions by Doty. The league attorneys filed their lawsuit first in New York, hoping that the league would have a greater chance of success. The league used a procedure known as a declaratory judgment lawsuit in its effort to win the race to choose the ultimate courthouse.

Q: What will Brady's lawyers argue in their attempt to reverse Goodell's ruling?
A: Led by the estimable Jeffrey Kessler, the Brady legal team will argue that Brady did nothing wrong, that the Wells report failed to establish that Brady had a role in the inflation of the game balls, that the penalty is too harsh, and that Goodell was not a neutral arbitrator. None of these arguments offers a compelling reason for a judge to reverse Goodell's decision. All of the arguments were raised in detail in the arbitration hearing, and Goodell answered each one of them in exquisite and persuasive detail in his 20-page opinion. It is difficult to imagine a judge reconsidering any of them. The players gave away the idea of a neutral arbitrator when they voluntarily agreed in collective bargaining that the commissioner would make the final decision in conduct detrimental cases.

Q: What evidence led Goodell to confirm the four-game suspension?
A: Goodell relied on evidence the Wells investigation, the 300 exhibits offered in the daylong hearing, and 450 pages of testimony. He also relied heavily on information that he did not learn during the hearing. Kessler and the NFLPA said there was no need for testimony from John Jastremski and James McNally, the Patriots employees who were involved in the machinations that led to the deflated game balls. The NFL attorneys argued, according to the Goodell opinion, that Goodell was entitled to make an "adverse inference" from Brady's failure to present key witnesses. Goodell went beyond the adverse inference and made a finding that both men lacked credibility in the statements they made to Wells. The Brady legal team also admitted that McNally had "more than enough time" during his famous 100-second visit into a locked bathroom to do what was necessary to deflate the balls.

Q: Was there other evidence that was important to Goodell?
A: Yes. Brady's refusal to cooperate with the Wells investigators and his destruction of his cell phone on the same day that he was to be interviewed by Wells were extremely important in Goodell's decision. Goodell said that the destruction of the cell phone was "very troubling." He added that it was clear that Brady made an "affirmative effort to conceal relevant evidence and to undermine the investigation." And Goodell took his reasoning one step further when he wrote that Brady's destruction of the phone "gives rise to an inference that information from his cellphone, if it were available, would further demonstrate [Brady's] direct knowledge of and involvement with the scheme to tamper with the game balls, just as he concealed for months the fact that he had destroyed the cellphone requested by the investigators."

Q: What was Brady's biggest mistake?
A: There was more than one. There is little doubt that Brady blundered when he refused to cooperate with the Wells investigators by turning over his phone and his text messages. He made it even worse when he destroyed the phone. And then, incredibly, after he had destroyed the phone, he and his lawyers suggested to Goodell that Brady routinely destroyed his old phones when he purchased a new one. The problem was that the Wells investigators had already found an old phone that Brady had not destroyed. But the worst mistake was a series of phone calls and text messages on the day after the Indianapolis game with Jastremski and a visit with him in the "QB Room." Goodell, in a brilliant passage in his masterly opinion, explained that the frantic calls in the three days after the game showed that Brady "was undermining efforts by game officials to ensure compliance with league rules."​
 
Gotta wonder about Brady's response. - http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap3000000504572/article/tom-brady-responds-to-roger-goodells-ruling

"I am very disappointed by the NFL's decision to uphold the 4 game suspension against me. I did nothing wrong, and no one in the Patriots organization did either.

"Despite submitting to hours of testimony over the past 6 months, it is disappointing that the Commissioner upheld my suspension based upon a standard that it was "probable" that I was 'generally aware' of misconduct. The fact is that neither I, nor any equipment person, did anything of which we have been accused. He dismissed my hours of testimony and it is disappointing that he found it unreliable.

"I also disagree with yesterday's narrative surrounding my cellphone. I replaced my broken Samsung phone with a new iPhone 6 AFTER my attorneys made it clear to the NFL that my actual phone device would not be subjected to investigation under ANY circumstances. As a member of a union, I was under no obligation to set a new precedent going forward, nor was I made aware at any time during Mr. Wells investigation, that failing to subject my cell phone to investigation would result in ANY discipline.

"Most importantly, I have never written, texted, emailed to anybody at anytime, anything related to football air pressure before this issue was raised at the AFC Championship game in January. To suggest that I destroyed a phone to avoid giving the NFL information it requested is completely wrong.

"To try and reconcile the record and fully cooperate with the investigation after I was disciplined in May, we turned over detailed pages of cell phone records and all of the emails that Mr. Wells requested. We even contacted the phone company to see if there was any possible way we could retrieve any/all of the actual text messages from my old phone. In short, we exhausted every possibility to give the NFL everything we could and offered to go thru the identity for every text and phone call during the relevant time. Regardless, the NFL knows that Mr. Wells already had ALL relevant communications with Patriots personnel that either Mr. Wells saw or that I was questioned about in my appeal hearing. There is no 'smoking gun' and this controversy is manufactured to distract from the fact they have zero evidence of wrongdoing.

"I authorized the NFLPA to make a settlement offer to the NFL so that we could avoid going to court and put this inconsequential issue behind us as we move forward into this season. The discipline was upheld without any counter offer. I respect the Commissioners authority, but he also has to respect the CBA and my rights as a private citizen. I will not allow my unfair discipline to become a precedent for other NFL players without a fight."
 
Last edited:
Ted Wells and his $5,000,000 must be laughing his ass off
...all the way to the bank.

He's the only clear winning in this mess
 
So why was the ball boys fired again then mr brady?

Deep down i am sure the patriots and brady are laughing at this..esp revenue each player got frim the suoer bowl along with the payriots getting merchandise money ..they can still boast the super bowl trophies
 
Chron.com's Brian T. Smith bringing the heat, high and inside hard one...

You’re a cheater, Tom Brady. You faked it on one of the world’s biggest sports stages. You lied in public view, hiding behind a podium as camera flashes popped. You’ll go down in history as someone who cheated at and manipulated the sport, just to win a game. Unless NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell is orchestrating the biggest conspiracy since Richard Nixon’s glory days, your name, the Patriots’ tarnished legacy and Bill Belichick’s already scarred image are forever stained. While New England truthers keep clinging to thin air, your intentionally destroyed cellphone deflated any faint hope you still had. Tom Brady: Four-time Super Bowl winner. Tom Brady: Suspended four games at the start of the 2015 season for cheating, then lying.
— Brian T. Smith​


NYDN doing its thing...

NYDNBradyCell_zpsucxtu67s.jpg
 
infantrycak said:
It's sad. He didn't need to do this. But he did.
Click to expand...

One of the radio guys yesterday made the point that the NFL has screwed up so many times with discipline in the eyes of the public, and been so heavy handed at times, that the only way Brady could have made the NFL look righteous is by doing the one thing he did. Monumentally stupid move by Brady.
 
“Mr. Brady explained that when he changes cellphones, he gives his old cellphone to an assistant to ‘destroy the phone so that no one can ever, you know, reset it or do something where the information is available to anyone.’

But this conflicts with the fact that the cellphone that he used prior to November 6, 2014, was, in fact, available for Mr. Maryman’s review.

Had Mr. Brady followed what he and his attorneys called his ‘ordinary practice,’ one would expect that the cellphone that he had used prior to November 6, 2014 would have been destroyed long before Mr. Maryman was hired. No explanation was provided for this anomaly.​


So destroying his old cellphones was not, apparently, Brady's common practice.
liar-3610.gif
 
Playoffs said:
“Mr. Brady explained that when he changes cellphones, he gives his old cellphone to an assistant to ‘destroy the phone so that no one can ever, you know, reset it or do something where the information is available to anyone.’

But this conflicts with the fact that the cellphone that he used prior to November 6, 2014, was, in fact, available for Mr. Maryman’s review.

Had Mr. Brady followed what he and his attorneys called his ‘ordinary practice,’ one would expect that the cellphone that he had used prior to November 6, 2014 would have been destroyed long before Mr. Maryman was hired. No explanation was provided for this anomaly.​


So destroying his old cellphones was not, apparently, Brady's common practice.
liar-3610.gif
Click to expand...
Thinking about this, since he'd already absolutely refused to turn over his cell to the NFL, what difference does it make what he did with it?
 
ObsiWan said:
Thinking about this, since he'd already absolutely refused to turn over his cell to the NFL, what difference does it make what he did with it?
Click to expand...

Because whatever lackof authority the NFL might have in requiring the cell phone is not shared by the judicial system. I think most people expected that Brady would either suck it up and serve the time or take it to court. And if he took it to court, his cell phone was going to be subpoenaed.
 
daniel kaplan ‏@dkaplanSBJ
NY federal judge Berman, who has Brady case, urges parties to "tone down their rhetoric," and urges them to resolve case. Good luck w/ both

Given the judge's harsh tone in his transfer order, NFLPA may almost feel relieved to have the case out of his court

Here is my writeup of the decision to move jurisdiction to NY for Brady. And it has bigger impact beyond (cont) http://tl.gd/n_1sn5vdt

Big news, Minnesota judge has ordered this morning the NFLPA lawsuit over Brady b transferred to Manhattan, where the NFL first filed​


Raffi Melkonian‏@RMFifthCircuit
Judge Kyle flatly say he thinks NFLPA was judge-shopping. Not happy.


https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CLKzFaTUkAAoohy.png​
 
Playoffs said:
daniel kaplan ‏@dkaplanSBJ
NY federal judge Berman, who has Brady case, urges parties to "tone down their rhetoric," and urges them to resolve case. Good luck w/ both

Given the judge's harsh tone in his transfer order, NFLPA may almost feel relieved to have the case out of his court

Here is my writeup of the decision to move jurisdiction to NY for Brady. And it has bigger impact beyond (cont) http://tl.gd/n_1sn5vdt

Big news, Minnesota judge has ordered this morning the NFLPA lawsuit over Brady b transferred to Manhattan, where the NFL first filed​


Raffi Melkonian‏@RMFifthCircuit
Judge Kyle flatly say he thinks NFLPA was judge-shopping. Not happy.


https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CLKzFaTUkAAoohy.png​
Click to expand...
I'd love to see how the NFLPA comes up with a plausible Breech of Contract scenario. I see no other reason this makes it out of the preliminary hearing phase since the methodology was agreed to in the NFLPA contract and courts tend to uphold any legal agreement as much as possible, even to the point of voiding only the illegal portions of a contract and enforcing the rest rather than voiding the whole thing.
 
I do not think the off-field ethics (or lack of) should have any bearing on analyzing on-field performances, but that's not how people are wired when forming judgments. I get it, but history will record Brady as one of the top 5 G.O.A.T. QBs in spite of this equipment issue. And let's not act like NOBODY with rings has ever pushed the boundaries of rules. The 70's and 80's are full of champions who consistently bent/broke rules and are now often celebrated by slick NFL Films documentaries.
 
Double Barrel said:
I do not think the off-field ethics (or lack of) should have any bearing on analyzing on-field performances, but that's not how people are wired when forming judgments.
Click to expand...

It's interesting. Some guys have done things that have rubbed the HoF voters the wrong way in every sport. Some guys have cheated and gotten a free pass. I don't know what the criteria is. But you look at guys like Ricky Watters, Barry Bonds, Roger Clemens, or even Pete Rose. Ricky Watters should absolutely be in the football HoF based on his football achievements, but his off the field persona and attitude have made him persona non grata. Barry Bonds and Roger Clemens were HoF players before the steroids issue came around, but that little bit of cheating has endangered their place in history. Pete Rose is a complete no brainer for the HoF, but he knowingly broke a rule that jeopardized the integrity of the game.

In the end, I think the Hall of Fame is the legacy that endures, unfortunately. Truly great players are forgotten by future generations if they're not in the HoF (see: Dr. Doom). And I don't think Brady will be excluded from the HoF for a second. So this really won't hurt his long term legacy. But for me, in my eyes, he's a cheating bastard that deserves to be excluded, not because he deflated a few footballs, but because he's been a defiant jackass throughout the process, has an established association with cheating, and destroyed the cell phone. It's the difference between Andy Pettitte and Roger Clemens. They both did hGH/steroids/whatever it was. One admitted to it and apologized, and everyone pretty much forgot about it. The other one got all defiant, hired a big shot lawyer, told Congress he wanted to testify, and ended up getting burned. If you're an athlete that cheats on such a minor level, I think people more or less expect it. So when you get caught, take your lumps and move on, and everyone will give you a pass as being ultra-competitive. But when you start defiantly lying and covering up, that really leaves a bad taste in peoples' mouths.
 
Mollywhopper said:
Ricky Watters? Hall of pretty freakin' good, sure. But absolutely in the HoF? Ehhh ...
Click to expand...

Reasonable people can disagree, so feel free. I'm not even a Ricky Watters fan. But he posted 7 seasons over 1000 yards (5 over 1200) for a career total of 10643 on a 4.1 average. That ranks somewhere in the mid-teens all time. He also added 467 receptions, which puts him just behind Roger Craig, Marshall Faulk, and Marcus Allen. He was a key member of a Super Bowl team. So all I'm really saying is if the guy chummed it up with the media and wasn't a jackass, he'd probably be in, since he has comparable and even better stats than some HoF RBs.

Point being, attitude and off the field stuff matters to the HoF voters. It shouldn't IMO, but it definitely seems to. As I said above, I don't think it'll hurt Brady enough to stop him from being inducted (even first ballot), but it's possible he loses some votes over it. We'll see.
 
eriadoc said:
Reasonable people can disagree, so feel free. I'm not even a Ricky Watters fan. But he posted 7 seasons over 1000 yards (5 over 1200) for a career total of 10643 on a 4.1 average. That ranks somewhere in the mid-teens all time. He also added 467 receptions, which puts him just behind Roger Craig, Marshall Faulk, and Marcus Allen. He was a key member of a Super Bowl team. So all I'm really saying is if the guy chummed it up with the media and wasn't a jackass, he'd probably be in, since he has comparable and even better stats than some HoF RBs.

Point being, attitude and off the field stuff matters to the HoF voters. It shouldn't IMO, but it definitely seems to. As I said above, I don't think it'll hurt Brady enough to stop him from being inducted (even first ballot), but it's possible he loses some votes over it. We'll see.
Click to expand...

On Ricky Watters, still not seeing HoF. 22nd in rushing, from when guys still ran the ball, for 4.1 ypc and less than 4 for a number of those years. And he was behind a good few more people in receptions for a rb than just who you listed. He was quite good though, and he helped a good team win. Still just not seeing a best of the best there is all.

On the bolded part, and your more important point, couldn't agree more.
 
eriadoc said:
It's interesting. Some guys have done things that have rubbed the HoF voters the wrong way in every sport. Some guys have cheated and gotten a free pass. I don't know what the criteria is. But you look at guys like Ricky Watters, Barry Bonds, Roger Clemens, or even Pete Rose. Ricky Watters should absolutely be in the football HoF based on his football achievements, but his off the field persona and attitude have made him persona non grata. Barry Bonds and Roger Clemens were HoF players before the steroids issue came around, but that little bit of cheating has endangered their place in history. Pete Rose is a complete no brainer for the HoF, but he knowingly broke a rule that jeopardized the integrity of the game.

In the end, I think the Hall of Fame is the legacy that endures, unfortunately. Truly great players are forgotten by future generations if they're not in the HoF (see: Dr. Doom). And I don't think Brady will be excluded from the HoF for a second. So this really won't hurt his long term legacy. But for me, in my eyes, he's a cheating bastard that deserves to be excluded, not because he deflated a few footballs, but because he's been a defiant jackass throughout the process, has an established association with cheating, and destroyed the cell phone. It's the difference between Andy Pettitte and Roger Clemens. They both did hGH/steroids/whatever it was. One admitted to it and apologized, and everyone pretty much forgot about it. The other one got all defiant, hired a big shot lawyer, told Congress he wanted to testify, and ended up getting burned. If you're an athlete that cheats on such a minor level, I think people more or less expect it. So when you get caught, take your lumps and move on, and everyone will give you a pass as being ultra-competitive. But when you start defiantly lying and covering up, that really leaves a bad taste in peoples' mouths.
Click to expand...

Well said, man. This is the well thought out perspective that provides a logical foundation for taking your position, which I would expect nothing less from you. :thumbup
 
Double Barrel said:
I do not think the off-field ethics (or lack of) should have any bearing on analyzing on-field performances, but that's not how people are wired when forming judgments. I get it, but history will record Brady as one of the top 5 G.O.A.T. QBs in spite of this equipment issue. And let's not act like NOBODY with rings has ever pushed the boundaries of rules. The 70's and 80's are full of champions who consistently bent/broke rules and are now often celebrated by slick NFL Films documentaries.
Click to expand...
I do not care how great an athlete or entertainer is at their job; if they punk out as a private citizen. Domestic abuse, burglary, animal abuse, Manzelism, whatever; a punk is a punk and I don't want to watch them or listen to them. All this punk had to do was accept the 4 games and it would have been out of mind by mid season if that.
 
Couldn't really figure out where to put this.

Gisele, you wouldn’t need a burqa if you followed your own advice
By Barbara Hoffman

July 29, 2015 | 3:35pm


gisele_gallery.jpg

Gisele and her sister donned burqas to secretly slip in and out of a Paris plastic surgery clinic.
CHP/FAMEFLYNET PICTURES

Dear Gisele,

What a tough day for the Brady household! First Tom gets sacked by the NFL for those deflated footballs, and now, here you are, photographed in a burqa in France, to cover up a bout of plastic surgery.

There are so many things wrong with that sentence, it makes our heads spin.

r
gisele.jpg

The cover of The Post of Gisele wearing a burqa.

Never mind that France outlawed burqas years ago, Ramadan or no Ramadan. Or that your metallic T-strap sandals were the wrong way to go, shoe-wise. And while we’re at it, that massive black satchel on your shoulder looks like Morticia Addams’ diaper bag.

Fashion faux pas aside, it’s troubling that THIS is your idea of going undercover — draping yourself in Muslim garb when it suits you, like the Rachel Dolezal of Islam.

If you didn’t want to be seen, you might have picked something less loaded, something devoid of religious and cultural significance. Hell, you could have grabbed a bath towel and stuck it over your head, just as “Bachelorette” winner Shawn Booth did when he snuck onto “Jimmy Kimmel Live.”

But that’s not what really galls us, Gisele. What we want to know is, whatever happened to the gal who said “no way” she’d ever have plastic surgery? Is that just the rule before you turn 35?

Just how obsessed is Tom with deflation, anyway?
 
Giants owner John Mara is also saddened the scandal has dragged on so long.

“We went the two weeks going into the Super Bowl that’s all we talked about, Deflategate and now coming into training camp that’s all we’re talking about,’’ he said. “Listen, the commissioner had a very difficult job to do here. But at the end of the day I think he made a decision based on the evidence and the facts that were before him and without regard to the profile of the player or his personal relationship with the owner.

“You know what? That’s what he’s paid to do and he did his job here. You can argue with whether it was fair or unfair but he had to make a very tough decision in very difficult circumstances and that’s what he’s paid to do.’’​
 
I wonder if they can INCREASE the down time to include litigation time. Imagine making him ineligible (as opposed to suspended) pending resolution of his legal case against the NFL. I personally would have increased the penalty to a year after he destroyed evidence. But imagine this dragging out for two years while he plays. It takes the bite out of penalties for cheating.
 
Being speculated that Brady destroying his "phone device" was not just to hide his conversations with the ball boys - equipment managers - but more to wipe any trace of text conversations he had with higher up members of the Patriots organization who knew about the practice.

I guess we'll never know. :thinking:
 
Playoffs said:
Giants owner John Mara is also saddened the scandal has dragged on so long.

“We went the two weeks going into the Super Bowl that’s all we talked about, Deflategate and now coming into training camp that’s all we’re talking about,’’ he said. “Listen, the commissioner had a very difficult job to do here. But at the end of the day I think he made a decision based on the evidence and the facts that were before him and without regard to the profile of the player or his personal relationship with the owner.

“You know what? That’s what he’s paid to do and he did his job here. You can argue with whether it was fair or unfair but he had to make a very tough decision in very difficult circumstances and that’s what he’s paid to do.’’​
Click to expand...

Instead of continuing to drag this out, Brady might grab this opportunity to take some extra practice reps with a fully inflated football.:chef:
 
So without having to go through and read a bunch of pages and pages worth of posts, what's been the general consensus in this thread? Did Brady do it or not?

Some things I have found interesting when doing some limited research on this.

1. I find it strange the Wells Report would choose to deny the very recollection of the lead official over which gauge he used. Walt Anderson said based on his best recollection, he used the Logo gauge but inexplicably, the Wells Report chooses to throw out his claim and says it was more likely he used the Non-Logo gauge.
2. If Brady did in fact like his footballs at the lowest allowed limit, would the Ideal Gas Law explain the loss of pressure?
3. Why did the NFL and Ted Wells tell Brady he didn't need to turn over his phone but instead could simply supply them with the phone records and they would hunt down the needed text messages, but now Brady's destruction of his own personal phone is their justification for the suspension? It makes no sense.
4. How much could Brady really stand to gain by lowering the pressure of his footballs by such a minuscule amount?
5. To continue with question 4, wouldn't it be more dangerous to the levels of the footballs for the equipment manager to use such a crude method to deflate the footballs? Seems like there would be a lot more to worry about in those 30-60 seconds the equipment manager spent in the bathroom, as he'd have had to be so quick deflating the balls that he could hardly have done so in any controlled way. Essentially, they'd have all been random readings based on the short amount of time he was in the restroom.

Anyway, I'd like to get some more opinions based on the information. I don't have a dog in the fight, but the whole thing seems a bit like a smear campaign. Why the NFL would do this is beyond me. Maybe Brady pissed off Goodell or something. But the whole thing seems rather fishy.
 
Say Watt said:
So without having to go through and read a bunch of pages and pages worth of posts, what's been the general consensus in this thread? Did Brady do it or not?

Some things I have found interesting when doing some limited research on this.

1. I find it strange the Wells Report would choose to deny the very recollection of the lead official over which gauge he used. Walt Anderson said based on his best recollection, he used the Logo gauge but inexplicably, the Wells Report chooses to throw out his claim and says it was more likely he used the Non-Logo gauge.
2. If Brady did in fact like his footballs at the lowest allowed limit, would the Ideal Gas Law explain the loss of pressure?
3. Why did the NFL and Ted Wells tell Brady he didn't need to turn over his phone but instead could simply supply them with the phone records and they would hunt down the needed text messages, but now Brady's destruction of his own personal phone is their justification for the suspension? It makes no sense.
4. How much could Brady really stand to gain by lowering the pressure of his footballs by such a minuscule amount?
5. To continue with question 4, wouldn't it be more dangerous to the levels of the footballs for the equipment manager to use such a crude method to deflate the footballs? Seems like there would be a lot more to worry about in those 30-60 seconds the equipment manager spent in the bathroom, as he'd have had to be so quick deflating the balls that he could hardly have done so in any controlled way. Essentially, they'd have all been random readings based on the short amount of time he was in the restroom.

Anyway, I'd like to get some more opinions based on the information. I don't have a dog in the fight, but the whole thing seems a bit like a smear campaign. Why the NFL would do this is beyond me. Maybe Brady pissed off Goodell or something. But the whole thing seems rather fishy.
Click to expand...

I didn't spend quite as much time researching this as you did, but I went from "He's probably guilty" camp to "NFL really has no evidence and possibly has made things up" camp based on a couple of things.

1. Scientific conclusions were the clincher for me after the Wells report came out, but since then at least 2 other independent reports claimed that Wells report's scientific evidence and conclusions are flawed. To me this is a black and white issue. The evidence is either there or it's not.
2. The report that 10 out of 12 Patriots balls were underinflated was false. It was reported by espn originally, and I imagine it was a leak from the league office.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top