Not if but when and for how long, remains to be determined according to this article.
Brady vs. Goodell
Brady vs. Goodell
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Not if but when and for how long, remains to be determined according to this article.
Brady vs. Goodell
How about Belicheat?
C'mon MAG this is the only bad post ive seen from you lol. Read my lips...nobody cares about the stupid air pressure football thingy that happened when?Not if but when and for how long, remains to be determined according to this article.
Brady vs. Goodell
C'mon MAG this is the only bad post ive seen from you lol. Read my lips...nobody cares about the stupid air pressure football thingy that happened when?
I hear you. How much of an advantage did they think that it would bring them.I'll never understand why this was ever a "thing."
Enough to do it under the radar...I hear you. How much of an advantage did they think that it would bring them.
I've heard plenty seem to really care about this issue. Lots of players are pissed and fans. If they are nobody's then you're right.C'mon MAG this is the only bad post ive seen from you lol. Read my lips...nobody cares about the stupid air pressure football thingy that happened when?
I'll never understand why this was ever a "thing."
By definition, they definitely cheated, but I don't think the cheating was to the degree that anyone could say it led to a specific win or number of wins. "Cheating" occurs in many formats, including the type of shoes one wears, etc.Why won't they strip their Super Bowl title? Pretty clear they were cheating last season. Why reward their cheating with a Super Bowl title?
It would be kind of short sided to punish someone for something that has clearly been going on for decades unchecked. Eli wants his balls scuffed dirtied ect, Rodgers always wants his balls over inflated, people admitting to paying to have it done for them. This seems like the NFL is going to levy punishment and did this entire investigation to divert attention from the domestic violence problem and all the other things the NFL has miss handled lately.
I would still be shocked if Brady gets suspended and if he does if it sticks on appeal.
Well, he was suspended for four games and the team may forfeit draft picks.I've stayed out of this thread because I've been busy. Some comments:
1) I take the data provided in Tulsa Tom's link regarding fumbles to be the only hard data that deflated footballs do have a positive outcome on games. This is the data that troubles me the most. Of course Tom Brady prefers a softer ball, but any conjecture to the effect that he'd be a lesser quarterback with a harder ball is pure speculation. Every suggestion that he is somehow anything less than one of greatest quarterbacks in history based on it being "more probable than not" that he knew balls were sometimes under the legal limit is asinine (see point 4).
2) This is a "thing" for at least four reasons:
i) People despise Brady and it's not hard to see why. On the field he is a hothead and a bit of a baby. Off the field he has lived a privileged life, millionaire, married to a supermodel, is a bit of a metrosexual, and so on. The common man does not identify with Tom Brady (at least not since 2006).
ii) He plays for an organization that has a history of bending the rules. It's myopic to think Spygate is not having an effect on people's judgments of Deflategate.
iii) He plays for a team that has had an unprecedented amount of success. People love to find fault in those who are successful, so we can elevate ourselves, or as may be more appropriate in this case, our teams. Back in the 90s I hated the Cowboys, and I celebrated the fact that Michael Irvin got caught with cocaine because that somehow validated my hate. Of course, I was 14 years old then, but a lot of people don't make it beyond that mentality.
iv) This was a witch hunt from the media right from the beginning, which Goodell did nothing to appease and only exacerbated.
3) While I do not think Tom should be completely absolved, there is plenty of evidence to suggest that the NFL completely bundled and mishandled the investigation. The standards in place prior to the scandal were so lax that they did not foster a culture compliance, and only slapped others on the wrist for similar violations. Consider Mike Reiss' take on the Vikings-Saints game earlier in the year: http://espn.go.com/blog/new-england-patriots/post/_/id/4781318/quick-hit-thoughts-around-the-patriots. The NFL then hired a law firm to carry out an investigation to find fault, not merely discover the truth. I refer the interested reader to this article from a non-Patriots source: http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2015/05/10/wells-report-disregards-andersons-best-recollection-on-a-key-piece-of-evidence/
4) In conclusion, and I'm saying this as a Patriots fan who is trying to look at this scenario objectively. Tom Brady is culpable, was complicit, for what exactly no one knows. It could be that he instructed team employees to make damn sure the balls were inflated no more than the bear minimum, and of course he would not care if they just happened to go beneath it (either through natural deflation during the course of the game or the employee doing it deliberately). It could be that he told them to deflate them below the minimum (that he would have something inexact in mind seems implausible to me, however). We just don't know.
What is clear to me, in this situation and countless others, is that we simply love to vilify those who are successful, handsome, privileged, rich, and so on. We love to think they're lazy, that they don't deserve their accolades and success, that they are prideful and arrogant, exploitative, cheaters, and so on. And we'll hitch our wagon to the slightest and most suspect piece of evidence to ensure that we can do so legitimately. We do so because it makes us feel superior to them (of course, we'd never behave that way in their situation). Blame, blame, blame, punish, punish, punish. It makes us feel good to tell others they're bad. (Is that why the OP puts two exclamation points behind the thread's title?) Such a human thing for us to do and yet positively one of the worst human qualities.
Wow...just like I said...4 games it is!!! Spot on, commish.I'll be shocked if he gets more than two games. I do think he deserves it...maybe more like four games. Enough to be damaging to another super bowl run.
Sorry...if you played football (and especially if you played it in the cold) you would know that a softer ball is a benefit. That's not just Tom Brady. It's probably 95% of the people who played quarterback OR receiver.I've stayed out of this thread because I've been busy. Some comments:
Of course Tom Brady prefers a softer ball, but any conjecture to the effect that he'd be a lesser quarterback with a harder ball is pure speculation.
Sorry...if you played football (and especially if you played it in the cold) you would know that a softer ball is a benefit. That's not just Tom Brady. It's probably 95% of the people who played quarterback OR receiver.
It would be kind of short sided to punish someone for something that has clearly been going on for decades unchecked. Eli wants his balls scuffed dirtied ect, Rodgers always wants his balls over inflated, people admitting to paying to have it done for them. This seems like the NFL is going to levy punishment and did this entire investigation to divert attention from the domestic violence problem and all the other things the NFL has miss handled lately.
I would still be shocked if Brady gets suspended and if he does if it sticks on appeal.
He would be a lesser quarterback with a harder ball. There is no question about it. I'm sure he would be pretty stinking good still...but lesser than he has been. And its not just him. His receivers probably come up with a few more catches because the ball is softer.No where did I disagree it wasn't a benefit. Are you saying Tom Brady is not a hall of fame quarterback or one of the best to ever play the game? If yes, then we disagree.
I've stayed out of this thread because I've been busy. Some comments:
1) I take the data provided in Tulsa Tom's link regarding fumbles to be the only hard data that deflated footballs do have a positive outcome on games. This is the data that troubles me the most. Of course Tom Brady prefers a softer ball, but any conjecture to the effect that he'd be a lesser quarterback with a harder ball is pure speculation. Every suggestion that he is somehow anything less than one of greatest quarterbacks in history based on it being "more probable than not" that he knew balls were sometimes under the legal limit is asinine (see point 4).
2) This is a "thing" for at least four reasons:
i) People despise Brady and it's not hard to see why. On the field he is a hothead and a bit of a baby. Off the field he has lived a privileged life, millionaire, married to a supermodel, is a bit of a metrosexual, and so on. The common man does not identify with Tom Brady (at least not since 2006).
ii) He plays for an organization that has a history of bending the rules. It's myopic to think Spygate is not having an effect on people's judgments of Deflategate.
iii) He plays for a team that has had an unprecedented amount of success. People love to find fault in those who are successful, so we can elevate ourselves, or as may be more appropriate in this case, our teams. Back in the 90s I hated the Cowboys, and I celebrated the fact that Michael Irvin got caught with cocaine because that somehow validated my hate. Of course, I was 14 years old then, but a lot of people don't make it beyond that mentality.
iv) This was a witch hunt from the media right from the beginning, which Goodell did nothing to appease and only exacerbated.
3) While I do not think Tom should be completely absolved, there is plenty of evidence to suggest that the NFL completely bungled and mishandled the investigation. The standards in place prior to the scandal were so lax that they did not foster a culture compliance, and only slapped others on the wrist for similar violations. Consider Mike Reiss' take on the Vikings-Saints game earlier in the year: http://espn.go.com/blog/new-england-patriots/post/_/id/4781318/quick-hit-thoughts-around-the-patriots. The NFL then hired a law firm to carry out an investigation to find fault, not merely discover the truth. I refer the interested reader to this article from a non-Patriots source: http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2015/05/10/wells-report-disregards-andersons-best-recollection-on-a-key-piece-of-evidence/
4) In conclusion, and I'm saying this as a Patriots fan who is trying to look at this scenario objectively. Tom Brady is culpable, was complicit, for what exactly no one knows. It could be that he instructed team employees to make damn sure the balls were inflated no more than the bear minimum, and of course he would not care if they just happened to go beneath it (either through natural deflation during the course of the game or the employee doing it deliberately). It could be that he told them to deflate them below the minimum (that he would have something inexact in mind seems implausible to me, however). We just don't know.
What is clear to me, in this situation and countless others, is that we simply love to vilify those who are successful, handsome, privileged, rich, and so on. We love to think they're lazy, that they don't deserve their accolades and success, that they are prideful and arrogant, exploitative, cheaters, and so on. And we'll hitch our wagon to the slightest and most suspect piece of evidence to ensure that we can do so legitimately. We do so because it makes us feel superior to them (of course, we'd never behave that way in their situation). Blame, blame, blame, punish, punish, punish. It makes us feel good to tell others they're bad. (Is that why the OP puts two exclamation points behind the thread's title?) Such a human thing for us to do and yet positively one of the worst human qualities.
He would be a lesser quarterback with a harder ball. There is no question about it. I'm sure he would be pretty stinking good still...but lesser than he has been. And its not just him. His receivers probably come up with a few more catches because the ball is softer.
You put a lot of time into your response. It's admirable. However, I think most of it is too much thinking. You must have a persecution complex or such. Nobody is out to get your Patriots due to their success or at least the relevance to this controversy is minimal. Basically, the Patriots cheated. There are certain rules pertaining to the playing conditions and ball inflation is one of them. Obviously, they already won the contests. The NFL is not going to vacate their victories. However, claiming it to be insignificant is not being honest. If it wasn't then Brady would not have had half the balls deflated in the first place. I think that four games is adequate. If it happens again in the future then, yeah, bump it up to 8 games. Outside of what I just said I'm not going to spend a lot of time in this discussion. It was cheating, plain and simple.
I'm arguing hypotheticals? You are asking for evidence that shows Brady would have been a worse quarterback if he didn't cheat. How, pray tell, would anyone have that information? You are the one with the hypotheticals. "If Brady doesn't cheat he is still Hall of Fame material."I still don't get what we're disagreeing about because you still haven't made a claim worth disagreeing with.
...you're arguing in hypotheticals and drawing conclusions based on evidence you don't have. If that's the case, I don't care what your position or anyone else's is.
I'm arguing hypotheticals? You are asking for evidence that shows Brady would have been a worse quarterback if he didn't cheat. How, pray tell, would anyone have that information? You are the one with the hypotheticals. "If Brady doesn't cheat he is still Hall of Fame material."
None of us know how Brady would have responded with fully-inflated balls. Why? Because he cheated and didn't give us that opportunity.
The NFL handed down a four game suspension because he is guilty of cheating. Not much more needs to be said.The court of public opinion has concluded that he is guilty. The NFL concluded, and they are consistent in this so I don't have a problem with it, that "more probable than not" is sufficient to establish guilt in their court of law. From that you feel entitled to call him a cheater and impugn his character.
.
The NFL handed down a four game suspension because he is guilty of cheating. Not much more needs to be said.
Delete. My apologies, CC.
The NFL handed down a four game suspension because he is guilty of cheating. Not much more needs to be said.