How Will the NFL Punish the Patriots

[treeduck]

Confiscate Belichick's blue blanket hoodie...

[GabesCavesOfIce]

As I say in SOCN when people are talking about laws and bills, read the document yourself, not what people tell you about the document. I have to read this thing for myself, and I didn't get a chance today. I will say that if it is proved that Brady told McNally to deflate the balls, which is what I'm hearing is the case, it's immaterial whether Belichick also knew.

 

Indy Star columnist Greg Doyel is calling for an 8 game suspension for Brady.

 

It is definitely not proved that Brady told McNally to deflate the balls, so I'll end that suspense right there.

 

Yep. Just read the executive summary. It covers pretty much everything.

 

The NFL has set their threshold at preponderance, so the language of "more probable than not" throughout the document is key. If the question is "Did the investigation prove Brady told anyone to do it? " or "Was Brady aware of it happening?", the answer is no if we use the criminal court standard or even the basic argument of "prove it". But this is not a criminal court. The league can and will punish Brady and the Patriots organization, in general.

 

Brady's punishment, in my opinion, will be less about his awareness and more about his lack of cooperation and the fact that his communication with the staff (which had not apparently occurred for months prior) spiked after the story broke. In other words, it's still the cover up that gets you in trouble. In the bigger picture, the league knows it didn't really prove much and is operating behind preponderance rather than absolute guilt. The only legitimate course of action is to institute measures to ensure this kind of thing can't happen again (I still have trouble believing sports leagues allow any level of preparation of the game balls to be in the hands of teams - of course they are all going to try to cheat at some point).

 

And, no, it won't be a full year. The Sean Payton/Saints situation was much more serious and about player safety. This is simply about Tom Brady's balls.

 

Very rarely, if ever, is a criminal court's burden of proof thrust upon non-criminal proceedings. The report demonstrates that McNally and Jastremsky deflated balls due to Brady's wishes, but it doesn't have a smoking gun that league rules where deliberately broken by Brady. The report provides more than enough evidence that McNally and Jastremsky purposely deflated balls and that Brady blessed it with free schwag, and that Brady, McNally, and Jastremski all lied and that Brady and the Patriots were not fully cooperative in the investigation.

 

 

 

Deliberate should be 100% irrelevant. The Patriots and Brady petitioned the NFL to change the rules to allow them and all teams to have their own personal set of footballs, hence it is 100% the teams responsibility to maintain the integrity and compliance of the said equipment with league rules at all times. The Patriot equipment failed at a rate of 11 of 12, while all other like equipment passed compliance at a 100% rate.

 

They requested responsibility, then were caught using illegal equipment, and public statements confirm said user of such equipment prefers such usage of said equipment in the condition with which it was found.

 

Is any of that English?

 

It's not like they were minority little league ball players. In America,the land of equal rights and equal opportunity, those are the people we chose to punish, not multi- millionaire star athletes. The NFL is on a par with pro wrestling.

[laughedatbytime]

After having a night to sleep on it, i've done a 180. Tom Brady is a gem of a human being, who cares for the well being of even the lowest level employees of the team and generously gives them gifts without expecting anything in return....less than nothing, actually.

[LedRush]

If Brady's agent's response is anything to go by, it seems that Brady is going to continue to deny everything. His statement was even more ridiculous than Kraft's. It is clear these guys have no integrity.

[Del_Duio]

As I say in SOCN when people are talking about laws and bills, read the document yourself, not what people tell you about the document. I have to read this thing for myself, and I didn't get a chance today. I will say that if it is proved that Brady told McNally to deflate the balls, which is what I'm hearing is the case, it's immaterial whether Belichick also knew.

 

Indy Star columnist Greg Doyel is calling for an 8 game suspension for Brady.

 

Well of course, how else could the Colts beat the Pats?

 

I think he might get a 1 or 2 game suspension. This is disappointing news because it pretty much proves that Brady lied to the press in the few days after the AFC game :(

[Del_Duio]

Oh and to add: His punishment better not be worse than how they punish all the resident wife beaters in the league.

Or 'switch' enthusiasts.....

 

Say what you will, but taking some air out of a football <> crimes like those.

 

EDIT: Also you could say that he didn't want to turn his personal phone over because he's got Gisele nudes on it. Hey, probably right?

Edited May 7, 2015 by Del_Duio

[Disembodied Spirit]

As I say in SOCN when people are talking about laws and bills, read the document yourself, not what people tell you about the document. I have to read this thing for myself, and I didn't get a chance today. I will say that if it is proved that Brady told McNally to deflate the balls, which is what I'm hearing is the case, it's immaterial whether Belichick also knew.

 

Indy Star columnist Greg Doyel is calling for an 8 game suspension for Brady.

I'd like to read it but it's 243 f***ing pages. Longer than the Constitution, 1% as long as Dodd-Frank.

If I got paid $1000 per hour, like Wells, I would not have released this for another 6 months, and added 300 more pages

[LedRush]

As I say in SOCN when people are talking about laws and bills, read the document yourself, not what people tell you about the document. I have to read this thing for myself, and I didn't get a chance today. I will say that if it is proved that Brady told McNally to deflate the balls, which is what I'm hearing is the case, it's immaterial whether Belichick also knew.

 

Indy Star columnist Greg Doyel is calling for an 8 game suspension for Brady.

I'd like to read it but it's 243 f***ing pages. Longer than the Constitution, 1% as long as Dodd-Frank.

If I got paid $1000 per hour, like Wells, I would not have released this for another 6 months, and added 300 more pages

 

That's what he bills. At Paul Weiss I think he's bringing down more than $3 million a year.

[Xanadoood]

I'm no Brady fanboy, not even a huge pats fan, but from reading these texts, it seems these two clowns were out to f**k tom. Hilarious texts. They sound like a couple of teenage girls ..

 

http://www.boston.com/sports/football/patriots/2015/05/06/mean-texts-what-patriots-employees-said-about-tom-brady/5TAehtMZo1zKRLuK51UtjI/story.html?p1=feature_pri_hp#comments

[MusicHead]

To coin a phrase oft heard in this realm, "Witch Hunt."

[laughedatbytime]

Brady's the victim here, obviously.

 

[Fordgalaxy]

Tonight on the NBC news Bob Costas said that with the problems the NFL had over the past year, if they go soft on Brady and the Patriots, it would send a bad signal. I hope he's right and they hammer that cheater. Problem is, he could be made to retire tomorrow and still be a multi-millionaire with a decent looking wife.

[MusicHead]

Let's all jump to conclusions that Tom's a bonafide "cheater." Never mind the Wells report stated that Tom "probably" messed with the footballs. "Probably" doesn't cut it. All those knee-jerk, conniption-fit folks calling for a season-long ban--yeah, let's go harder on TB than players who abuse their wives, their girlfriends, steroids, commit crimes, rapists, thugs, and other low-lifes. Sounds about right in this kangaroo court of public opinion.

[laughedatbytime]

Let's all jump to conclusions that Tom's a bonafide "cheater." Never mind the Wells report stated that Tom "probably" messed with the footballs. "Probably" doesn't cut it. All those knee-jerk, conniption-fit folks calling for a season-long ban--yeah, let's go harder on TB than players who abuse their wives, their girlfriends, steroids, commit crimes, rapists, thugs, and other low-lifes. Sounds about right in this kangaroo court of public opinion.

Hard to breathe in here with all of the straw being tossed about.

 

As far as "probably" goes, you'd have to be an imbecile to believe, given all of the evidence, that Brady's not involved in a coverup. Please don't tell me that you apply the same standards when assessing everyone else's truthfulness.

[Rick N. Backer]

Here's how I would explain the burden of proof.

 

If you put all the believable evidence on a scale, the league on one side, Brady on the other, the league must put enough evidence on the scale to make it tip ever so slightly in its favor. If it does not, you must determine the case against Brady is not established.

 

FWIW, I think the preponderance of the credible evidence is against Brady.

[laughedatbytime]

Here's how I would explain the burden of proof.

 

If you put all the believable evidence on a scale, the league on one side, Brady on the other, the league must put enough evidence on the scale to make it tip ever so slightly in its favor. If it does not, you must determine the case against Brady is not established.

 

FWIW, I think the preponderance of the credible evidence is against Brady.

If I had a dime for everyone who posted on various forums that language used meant that the league thought that there was a 51% chance (or one laughable comment that put it at 50.1%) that he was aware of the cheating, I could buy the Patriots from Kraft and the commissioner five times over.

 

It's almost as if they didn't realize that there were actually other percentages between 50 and 100 that would also constitute "more likely than not".

 

[Rick N. Backer]

Here's how I would explain the burden of proof.

 

If you put all the believable evidence on a scale, the league on one side, Brady on the other, the league must put enough evidence on the scale to make it tip ever so slightly in its favor. If it does not, you must determine the case against Brady is not established.

 

FWIW, I think the preponderance of the credible evidence is against Brady.

If I had a dime for everyone who posted on various forums that language used meant that the league thought that there was a 51% chance (or one laughable comment that put it at 50.1%) that he was aware of the cheating, I could buy the Patriots from Kraft and the commissioner five times over.

 

It's almost as if they didn't realize that there were actually other percentages between 50 and 100 that would also constitute "more likely than not".

 

 

I think a better way of expressing it is that there is at least a 50.1% likelihood that Brady was aware and that McNally was acting on his wishes.

[laughedatbytime]

Here's how I would explain the burden of proof.

 

If you put all the believable evidence on a scale, the league on one side, Brady on the other, the league must put enough evidence on the scale to make it tip ever so slightly in its favor. If it does not, you must determine the case against Brady is not established.

 

FWIW, I think the preponderance of the credible evidence is against Brady.

If I had a dime for everyone who posted on various forums that language used meant that the league thought that there was a 51% chance (or one laughable comment that put it at 50.1%) that he was aware of the cheating, I could buy the Patriots from Kraft and the commissioner five times over.

 

It's almost as if they didn't realize that there were actually other percentages between 50 and 100 that would also constitute "more likely than not".

 

 

I think a better way of expressing it is that there is at least a 50.1% likelihood that Brady was aware and that McNally was acting on his wishes.

That is lost on a lot of people, seemingly purposefully for some. In a way, it's a kind of intelligence test.

[Rick N. Backer]

Tonight on the NBC news Bob Costas said that with the problems the NFL had over the past year, if they go soft on Brady and the Patriots, it would send a bad signal. I hope he's right and they hammer that cheater. Problem is, he could be made to retire tomorrow and still be a multi-millionaire with a decent looking wife.

 

Right. One who's been on 4 Super Bowl winning teams, having been the MVP of 3 of them.

[Rick N. Backer]

Here's how I would explain the burden of proof.

 

If you put all the believable evidence on a scale, the league on one side, Brady on the other, the league must put enough evidence on the scale to make it tip ever so slightly in its favor. If it does not, you must determine the case against Brady is not established.

 

FWIW, I think the preponderance of the credible evidence is against Brady.

If I had a dime for everyone who posted on various forums that language used meant that the league thought that there was a 51% chance (or one laughable comment that put it at 50.1%) that he was aware of the cheating, I could buy the Patriots from Kraft and the commissioner five times over.

 

It's almost as if they didn't realize that there were actually other percentages between 50 and 100 that would also constitute "more likely than not".

 

 

I think a better way of expressing it is that there is at least a 50.1% likelihood that Brady was aware and that McNally was acting on his wishes.

That is lost on a lot of people, seemingly purposefully for some. In a way, it's a kind of intelligence test.

 

Not just on this issue. Believe me. That concept is difficult to grasp for many people. The concept of what constitutes "reasonable" in the beyond a reasonable doubt standard is even more taxing.

[laughedatbytime]

Here's how I would explain the burden of proof.

 

If you put all the believable evidence on a scale, the league on one side, Brady on the other, the league must put enough evidence on the scale to make it tip ever so slightly in its favor. If it does not, you must determine the case against Brady is not established.

 

FWIW, I think the preponderance of the credible evidence is against Brady.

If I had a dime for everyone who posted on various forums that language used meant that the league thought that there was a 51% chance (or one laughable comment that put it at 50.1%) that he was aware of the cheating, I could buy the Patriots from Kraft and the commissioner five times over.

 

It's almost as if they didn't realize that there were actually other percentages between 50 and 100 that would also constitute "more likely than not".

 

 

I think a better way of expressing it is that there is at least a 50.1% likelihood that Brady was aware and that McNally was acting on his wishes.

That is lost on a lot of people, seemingly purposefully for some. In a way, it's a kind of intelligence test.

 

Not just on this issue. Believe me. That concept is difficult to grasp for many people. The concept of what constitutes "reasonable" in the beyond a reasonable doubt standard is even more taxing.

I can see that, it's more of a nebulous term. The concept of more probable than not should be one that could be understood by an average third grader.

[Rick N. Backer]

Here's how I would explain the burden of proof.

 

If you put all the believable evidence on a scale, the league on one side, Brady on the other, the league must put enough evidence on the scale to make it tip ever so slightly in its favor. If it does not, you must determine the case against Brady is not established.

 

FWIW, I think the preponderance of the credible evidence is against Brady.

If I had a dime for everyone who posted on various forums that language used meant that the league thought that there was a 51% chance (or one laughable comment that put it at 50.1%) that he was aware of the cheating, I could buy the Patriots from Kraft and the commissioner five times over.

 

It's almost as if they didn't realize that there were actually other percentages between 50 and 100 that would also constitute "more likely than not".

 

 

I think a better way of expressing it is that there is at least a 50.1% likelihood that Brady was aware and that McNally was acting on his wishes.

That is lost on a lot of people, seemingly purposefully for some. In a way, it's a kind of intelligence test.

 

Not just on this issue. Believe me. That concept is difficult to grasp for many people. The concept of what constitutes "reasonable" in the beyond a reasonable doubt standard is even more taxing.

I can see that, it's more of a nebulous term. The concept of more probable than not should be one that could be understood by an average third grader.

 

You'd be surprised.

[laughedatbytime]

Here's how I would explain the burden of proof.

 

If you put all the believable evidence on a scale, the league on one side, Brady on the other, the league must put enough evidence on the scale to make it tip ever so slightly in its favor. If it does not, you must determine the case against Brady is not established.

 

FWIW, I think the preponderance of the credible evidence is against Brady.

If I had a dime for everyone who posted on various forums that language used meant that the league thought that there was a 51% chance (or one laughable comment that put it at 50.1%) that he was aware of the cheating, I could buy the Patriots from Kraft and the commissioner five times over.

 

It's almost as if they didn't realize that there were actually other percentages between 50 and 100 that would also constitute "more likely than not".

 

 

I think a better way of expressing it is that there is at least a 50.1% likelihood that Brady was aware and that McNally was acting on his wishes.

That is lost on a lot of people, seemingly purposefully for some. In a way, it's a kind of intelligence test.

 

Not just on this issue. Believe me. That concept is difficult to grasp for many people. The concept of what constitutes "reasonable" in the beyond a reasonable doubt standard is even more taxing.

I can see that, it's more of a nebulous term. The concept of more probable than not should be one that could be understood by an average third grader.

 

You'd be surprised.

Doubt I'd be surprised. Discouraged, maybe. But it does expose the premise that everyone should go to college as a false one.

[treeduck]

Tom Brady will be suspended by Roger Goodell for role in DeflateGate, announcement expected next week

 

http://assets.nydailynews.com/polopoly_fs/1.2215848.1431121236!/img/httpImage/image.jpg_gen/derivatives/article_970/aptopix-patriots-chiefs-football.jpg?enlarged

 

Tom Brady will be the highest profile player ever suspended in the 96-year history of the NFL.

 

Roger Goodell's decision is expected to be announced next week and it is no longer a matter of if the NFL commissioner will suspend Brady, but for how long he will suspend him.

 

In conversations I've had with several key sources who always have a good sense of what goes on at 345 Park Avenue, there is little doubt Goodell considers Brady's role in DeflateGate a serious violation.

 

The NFL is convinced, according to sources, that connecting all the dots of the evidence supplied by Wells leads to one conclusion:

 

Brady cheated.

 

 

The feeling is the Wells Report supplied Goodell with enough ammunition to suspend Brady both for breaking the rules by ordering the deflation of footballs and by not cooperating with the investigation when he refused to turn over his cell phone to Wells’ investigators.

 

The only question now is how many games with which Goodell will hit the league’s star player?

 

Estimates have been all over the map. My feeling is he will wind up with two games, whether that is the initial discipline handed out or whether he is hit with four and ends up with two after an appeal..

 

The Miami Herald reported Brady's suspension could be as much as the entire 2015 season. Sources insist that is way off and not going to happen. There were reports in Boston on Friday on CSNNE that the Patriots fear Goodell could hit Brady with a 6-to-8 game suspension. Others have estimated 2-to-4 games.

 

Brady will not likely be the only one disciplined in DeflateGate. The Patriots could be fined, just as they were in SpyGate in 2007. Bill Belichick, who was hit with a $500,000 fine for running his spying operation, could also face sanctions, although Wells’ report did not link him to the deflating of the footballs.

 

Precedent is important. Remember, Sean Payton was not implicated in BountyGate, but Goodell still suspended him for the 2012 season, saying ignorance is not an excuse. Belichick runs the Patriots’ football operation, so it will be interesting to see if Goodell, who is not exactly fond of Belichick, ultimately holds him responsible because the whole thing it happened under his watch.

 

Clearly, any games Brady misses reduces the chance Belichick and the Patriots have to repeat as Super Bowl champions.

 

 

Second-year backup Jimmy Garoppolo better start warming up in the bullpen. But even if the Pats are without Brady for more than a few games, Bill Belichick is very resourceful.

 

In 2008, following the Patriots’ 16-0 regular season, Brady suffered a season ending torn ACL in the first quarter of the first game. In came Matt Cassel and the Pats finished 11-5, although they missed the playoffs on tiebreakers.

 

Considering how soft Goodell was in originally giving Ray Rice just a two-game suspension for slugging his future wife in an elevator — there were enough details about what happened for a stiffer suspension even before the second elevator video surfaced — how can Goodell possibly justify giving Brady 6-to-8 games?

 

 

This is not the outcome the NFL wanted out of the long investigation by Ted Wells. Brady and Peyton Manning together have been the faces of the league for more than a decade and this is not at all like Goodell having to suspend miscreants like Rice, Adrian Peterson and Greg Hardy for various degrees of domestic violence. This is Tom Brady, four-time Super Bowl champion, three-time Super Bowl MVP, husband to the world’s most famous supermodel and, at least to this point, everything Goodell wanted representing the NFL shield.

 

Meanwhile, sources say NFL owners are watching closely how Goodell deals not only with Brady but with the Patriots as well.

 

Wells’ constant use of "more probable than not" in explaining Brady's role is the standard the NFL was looking for to find him in violation of the rules. The league considers that as good as guilty and just a way of phrasing it in legal terms.

 

 

Two days ago, former Bills, Panthers and Colts GM Bill Polian, a former member of the competition committee, said on ESPN that the phrase “is the standard of proof that the NFL has used for about seven years or so that means in English: they're guilty. ... This is not running through a stop sign, this is not speeding five miles over the limit. This is a serious competitive violation that has to be treated as such by the league."

 

No matter how many games Goodell suspends Brady, the Jets’ chances of closing the gap on their long-time tormentors has just increased significantly.

 

http://assets.nydailynews.com/polopoly_fs/1.2215853.1431121241!/img/httpImage/image.jpg_gen/derivatives/article_970/nfl-deflate-brady.jpg?enlarged

 

Tom Brady says the DeflateGate report hasn’t diminished the afterglow of winning the Super Bowl. ‘Absolutely not,’ he says Thursday evening.

 

Edited May 9, 2015 by treeduck