NFL PLAYOFFS

[Baldy]

Go Pats

[JohnS]

Interesting thing about statistics. Depending how they are presented (read "skewed") ... the same group of stats can be used to prove both sides of a story.

I couldn't agree more. I guess when it comes down to the big games in the 'business' end of the season individual player consistency is what counts.

[Fosgate]

NFL is waiting until after the Super Bowl to decide if they are going to fine Marshawn Lynch.

http://espn.go.com/nfl/playoffs/2014/story/_/id/12254786/roger-goodell-says-fine-marshawn-lynch-determined-super-bowl-xlix

[mash]

NFL is waiting until after the Super Bowl to decide if they are going to fine Marshawn Lynch.

http://espn.go.com/nfl/playoffs/2014/story/_/id/12254786/roger-goodell-says-fine-marshawn-lynch-determined-super-bowl-xlix

You know when Goodell starts talking about how we all have responsibilities in our jobs that we don't like, and how much of a privilege it is to play in the NFL, fines are coming.

[erjaq]

For the first time in years I'm torn on the big game. I tend to think Seattle will come out much stronger after their near-death experience against the Packers -- it sounds silly at this stage of the season but that has to have been some sort of wake-up call. Meanwhile the Pats will have a few wrinkles, as always, and it's hard to go against Brady in a big game, especially with the deflategate stuff bringing them together.

I think my favorite bet is the under 47...have to imagine that if this game were played midseason it would be closer to 43. I'm expecting something like 20-17. A teaser with Pats +7 and under 53 looks tempting too.

Gun to my head I would take Seattle straight-up, but I don't like it much.

[Fosgate]

[JohnS]

Haha Fos! Both teams lose...we await an earthquake folks, like SF-Oak 1989 Game 1 World Series.

[JohnS]

Now the Pats have been found to deflate their balls. If they hadn't I don't think the outcome would be different but first Spygate and know Deflategate it makes one wonder what else they have been doing in terms of cheating and not getting caught.

And now the aftermath...was it worth a 4-game suspension for Brady, a $US 1 million team fine and the forfeiting of draft picks for the next two seasons?

http://edition.cnn.com/2015/05/11/us/nfl-deflategate-response/

[Ken Gargett]

And now the aftermath...was it worth a 4-game suspension for Brady, a $US 1 million team fine and the forfeiting of draft picks for the next two seasons?

http://edition.cnn.com/2015/05/11/us/nfl-deflategate-response/

i suspect a great many sporting teams will push the envelope. these guys seem very good at pushing it but not so good at not getting caught.

interesting bit in the aussie abc 'outsiders' program on the weekend - a tv sports show - which only touched on this at the end. they all agreed it was a storm in a tea cup. who cares. media beat up. and there was no way on god's green earth that they would dare suspend brady or penalise the pats.

i remember thinking that these blokes are dim enough about aussie sports and they have just shown they have not a clue about others.

i guess the old saying about how hard it is to win back-to-back superbowls already likely to come through.

i think that the nfl had to act. and act reasonably forcefully.

the loss of the first draft pick will hurt. hell, i know the skins usually lose theirs but at least we normally get an overpaid has-been for it.

[wabashcr]

Deflating the footballs itself is such a minor rules violation, that under normal circumstances this wouldn't have been given a second thought. Unfortunately for Brady and the Patriots, there were so many other factors at play, that it had to play out in a manner like this.

The devious nature of the deflating program makes it a little worse. It sounds like there's a guy whose job was to specifically get the footballs after the referees checked them, and deflate them. That's a little different than casually releasing a bit of air here and there, which they probably could have done to similar effect. And then Brady and the team were less than cooperative and forthcoming with the investigation. The NFL takes that as a personal insult, and made matters much worse. The Wells report made sure to mention that about Brady.

Then of course you have the fact that this is the Patriots, who probably have more detractors and enemies than any other team in the league. Some of that is envy, and some of it comes from a perceived sense of arrogance, and the notion that they're above the rules. Too many people never got over Spygate. Apparently that sentiment is pervasive throughout the league, with many GMs, owners, other team execs, and even league execs feeling like they have unsettled scores with the Patriots, some Spygate related, others not. From what I've read, it sounds like other than Robert Kraft and Roger Goodell being close, the relationship the team has with the league and the other teams is quite adversarial. Plenty of resentment exists, especially from teams that have had seasons ended by New England. A lot of it sounds like sour grapes, but it's grown into a general distaste for how Belichick and the team conduct themselves.

My guess as far as the actual punishment, is that the NFL went heavy, knowing that whatever they issued would be reduced on appeal. I think two games is what most think would be fair, given the above, and that's what I'd expect Brady to miss. I would imagine they'll get their first round pick back, too. Four games would put Brady's season debut here in Indianapolis against the Colts, which would make for possibly the worst week of media hype for a regular season game in league history. I hope Brady's suspension is reduced, if for no other reason than to avoid that overbearing narrative from the media.

[DrunkenMonkey]

When the NFL is investigating alleged cheating, and the subject of the investigation doesn't cooperate with the investigators, then it seems obvious that he should be judged guilty and punished. Kraft says there wasn't any hard evidence? That's because your guy witheld evidence and obstructed the investigation! I think the punishment is too lenient, if anything.

[Ken Gargett]

It sounds like there's a guy whose job was to specifically get the footballs after the referees checked them, and deflate them.

i may have misread but i thought i saw somewhere that the refs did not check the balls. that it was up to each team. is that not true? it is simple for the future. the refs have charge of the balls.

"Then of course you have the fact that this is the Patriots, who probably have more detractors and enemies than any other team in the league. "

have you not heard of dallas?

My guess as far as the actual punishment, is that the NFL went heavy, knowing that whatever they issued would be reduced on appeal. I think two games is what most think would be fair, given the above, and that's what I'd expect Brady to miss. I would imagine they'll get their first round pick back, too.

personally, i would have liked half the season. that would seem fair. also mean he missed the skins. that or just three weeks so he can play the cowgirls.

[Ken Gargett]

When the NFL is investigating alleged cheating, and the subject of the investigation doesn't cooperate with the investigators, then it seems obvious that he should be judged guilty and punished. Kraft says there wasn't any hard evidence? That's because your guy witheld evidence and obstructed the investigation! I think the punishment is too lenient, if anything.

i understand the sentiment behind this but, and it might be the old lawyer at work, is that not completely contrary to the concept of justice that applies throughout society? "you have the right to remain silent etc"??

we do not have 'plead the 5th' in oz, but is he/they entitled not to incriminate themselves?

is it not possible that brady does not have any evidence and therefore can't provide it, rather than that he is actually withholding anything? is it possible that the pats simply had nothing and thought the entire thing so absurd that they did not fall over themselves to assist (though one suspects that this is unlikely)? and that perhaps there is some lingering resentment towards the pats that kicks in?

that said, if they did have any evidence, i think it is quite a lenient punishment. however, at the moment, it seems that they have been punished on suspicion.

i saw kraft said they'd accept any punishment. in that case, will there be an appeal?

it does seem to me that the nfl/goodall has some serious power over these teams that gets thrown around behind closed doors. from what i have seen, and i confess that is hardly comprehensive, hard to see that a court of law would not overturn this penalty. same thing with when they whacked the skins (and others to a lesser degree) with that salary cap alleged infraction a few years ago. it really hurt the team and i could not see how they could lose an action in a court outside the nfl but they never went there. and i'd be surprised if the pats did this time.

i just wonder what pressure is put on the teams to cop this stuff. have always thought, based on no evidence, that one reason synder copped the penalty and did not fight harder was that there has been an unwritten promise behind closed doors that when the skins have the new stadium up and running they will be awarded a superbowl (only way we'll get close to one, i suspect). synder always been very keen on that. but we'll never know.

[wabashcr]

i may have misread but i thought i saw somewhere that the refs did not check the balls. that it was up to each team. is that not true? it is simple for the future. the refs have charge of the balls.

"Then of course you have the fact that this is the Patriots, who probably have more detractors and enemies than any other team in the league. "

have you not heard of dallas?

My guess as far as the actual punishment, is that the NFL went heavy, knowing that whatever they issued would be reduced on appeal. I think two games is what most think would be fair, given the above, and that's what I'd expect Brady to miss. I would imagine they'll get their first round pick back, too.

personally, i would have liked half the season. that would seem fair. also mean he missed the skins. that or just three weeks so he can play the cowgirls.

The referees check air pressure before the game, and the head referee signs or initials each ball to mark it as compliant. I think what you might be referring to is that they didn't record their measurements, even though the Colts tipped off the league and officials ahead of the game. The problem is that the Deflator took the Patriots' balls into a restroom after the refs approved them.

With respect, I'd say there's more anti-Patriots sentiment now than even Cowboys distaste. Many still despise the Cowboys, myself included. But their recent fortunes, while not cutting a sympathetic character, have taken the edge off the hatred a bit. Jerry Jones is more of a cartoon character than an evil villain anymore. New England, on the other hand, have been so good for so long, unprecedented in the salary cap era. Their coach is a brilliant curmudgeon that many find aloof at best, arrogant at worst. Their owner has been thought to have had the commissioner in his pocket. They got caught cheating once before. Even the other teams in the league resent them. I know I'll never convince a Washington fan, but I do think the Pats are the most disliked team these days.

[wabashcr]

i understand the sentiment behind this but, and it might be the old lawyer at work, is that not completely contrary to the concept of justice that applies throughout society? "you have the right to remain silent etc"??

we do not have 'plead the 5th' in oz, but is he/they entitled not to incriminate themselves?

Yes and no. I agree it offends my abstract concept of what constitutes justice. But private entities also aren't held to the same standards as the state in criminal prosecutions. The NFL's disciplinary procedures are based more on civil standards, hence terms like more probable than not and preponderance of evidence seen in the Wells report. Even still, wouldn't a defendant's cellphone records be subject to discovery or subpoena?

I'm torn on this one. I'd certainly be reluctant to turn over my phone to my employer, but maybe they decide my refusal to cooperate is enough to justify my firing. I'm not sure how that would play out.

[DrunkenMonkey]

i understand the sentiment behind this but, and it might be the old lawyer at work, is that not completely contrary to the concept of justice that applies throughout society? "you have the right to remain silent etc"??

we do not have 'plead the 5th' in oz, but is he/they entitled not to incriminate themselves?

is it not possible that brady does not have any evidence and therefore can't provide it, rather than that he is actually withholding anything? is it possible that the pats simply had nothing and thought the entire thing so absurd that they did not fall over themselves to assist (though one suspects that this is unlikely)? and that perhaps there is some lingering resentment towards the pats that kicks in?

that said, if they did have any evidence, i think it is quite a lenient punishment. however, at the moment, it seems that they have been punished on suspicion.

i saw kraft said they'd accept any punishment. in that case, will there be an appeal?

it does seem to me that the nfl/goodall has some serious power over these teams that gets thrown around behind closed doors. from what i have seen, and i confess that is hardly comprehensive, hard to see that a court of law would not overturn this penalty. same thing with when they whacked the skins (and others to a lesser degree) with that salary cap alleged infraction a few years ago. it really hurt the team and i could not see how they could lose an action in a court outside the nfl but they never went there. and i'd be surprised if the pats did this time.

i just wonder what pressure is put on the teams to cop this stuff. have always thought, based on no evidence, that one reason synder copped the penalty and did not fight harder was that there has been an unwritten promise behind closed doors that when the skins have the new stadium up and running they will be awarded a superbowl (only way we'll get close to one, i suspect). synder always been very keen on that. but we'll never know.

They asked Brady for his phone records, and he refused to give them up.

[Colt45]

is it possible that the pats simply had nothing and thought the entire thing so absurd that they did not fall over themselves to assist

KG, if you're really keen, do a little research on Ted Wells, Exponent, and who / what they've represented. Me, I'm not opening my trunk for anybody without a warrant.....

[Quint]

They asked Brady for his phone records, and he refused to give them up.

I don't blame him, I wouldn't give up my phone either. Do you trust these bozos not to leak private and personal information. Tom not only has his brand to protect but he has Gesile's brand to protect. You don't think that if their were personal conversations or compromising pictures they wouldn't get leak out. TMZ offers some shmuck $100,000 dollars for any tidbit you don't think that leaks out?

[Ken Gargett]

KG, if you're really keen, do a little research on Ted Wells, Exponent, and who / what they've represented. Me, I'm not opening my trunk for anybody without a warrant.....

interesting list.

re all the various posts, i can understand them all - and agree to an extent with most - not that anyone could hate the pats more than the cowgirls though (but understand divisional rivalries do magnify things).

if found guilty, i think the penalty is on the lenient side, but until found guilty, i'd be reluctant to believe that this has been handled well.

if the nfl rules stipulate that brady needed to hand over his phone and he refused (or breached other rules), i'd go indefinite suspension. ditto re other matters with pats - in that case, i'd also declare the superbowl vacant. no reason you can't do that - happened here with melbourne storm and salary cap breaches. stripped of their premierships.

but if they have fully complied to the extent that they are legally bound to do, then that is it.

[DrunkenMonkey]

I don't blame him, I wouldn't give up my phone either. Do you trust these bozos not to leak private and personal information. Tom not only has his brand to protect but he has Gesile's brand to protect. You don't think that if their were personal conversations or compromising pictures they wouldn't get leak out. TMZ offers some shmuck $100,000 dollars for any tidbit you don't think that leaks out?

So fine, don't turn your phone over. But then don't be surprised when the NFL rules against you after you refused to cooperate in the investigation.

[partriar]

Firstly im a big Pats fan so clearly bias....

Ted Wells report found "more probable than not" that Tom Brady was "generally aware" of tampering with NFL game footballs during the 2015 AFC Championship Game.

How is that innocent until proven guilty? sounds alot like circumstantial evidence at best. I realize this isnt a court of law and the NFL can rule on this but one can hardly give such a harsh penalty without hard evidence.

Ted Wells now says he has hard evidence, in the form of txt message's, if that is the case then why does the report leave it so ambiguous? He shouldn't need Brady's phone to prove that, just the recipient, which he apparently has.

I for the Patriots to be completely innocent in this, and im not convinced we are but i still think we are entitled to innocent until proven guilty.

[Ken Gargett]

So fine, don't turn your phone over. But then don't be surprised when the NFL rules against you after you refused to cooperate in the investigation.

i understand what you say and i do not know the nfl rules so i might be way out of line, but shouldn't the charge then be 'refusing to cooperate with blah blah etc'? hit them with a penalty for that. and fair enough.

but i struggle to see how they can be penalised for something if there is not evidence and because they did not provide evidence against themselves.

bit like saying to a defendant, we are pretty certain you shot the victim so turn over the gun. and if you won't, we'll find you guilty.

[Quint]

So fine, don't turn your phone over. But then don't be surprised when the NFL rules against you after you refused to cooperate in the investigation.

BTW his attorney's advised him not to turn over the phone.

As far as "other" evidence that people seemed to think was withheld from the report that Vincent says proves Brady knew, people are misinterpreting what he is saying. There is not other evidence. The evidence he is referring to are the text messages between the 2 equipment men that was released and everybody saw on TV. Vincent is stating that THOSE text messages, definitively in his mind, indicate Brady was aware. Not sure I see how he comes to that conclusion.

Anyway it is what it is the were doing something they shouldn't have been and got caught. Doesn't take away the championships, unless of course you want to take away Denver's 2 super bowls for cheating by hiding salary so they could cheat the salary cap keep a couple of their stars on the team. Was that a bit of an advantage hmmmmm yep. Or the 49'er's who illegally used stickum on their hands, hmmmmm sort of like a deflated ball advantage. Or Pittsburg for having about 50% of their team on steroids. Or Atlanta and Indy for piping in crowd noise....on and on and on.

[wabashcr]

Ted Wells report found "more probable than not" that Tom Brady was "generally aware" of tampering with NFL game footballs during the 2015 AFC Championship Game.

How is that innocent until proven guilty? sounds alot like circumstantial evidence at best. I realize this isnt a court of law and the NFL can rule on this but one can hardly give such a harsh penalty without hard evidence.

The "more probable than not" and "preponderance of evidence" standards are usually used in civil cases, and are what the NFL has adopted as their standards for disciplinary matters. That's why it's written that way. Wells explained further on his call yesterday that he felt like his conclusions would have been upheld by a judge or jury in civil court. Obviously criminal standards are different, but in a criminal case, Brady wouldn't have had the option to hide his phone records.

It's interesting to me that Brady's defenders keep touting circumstantial evidence, like circumstantial evidence doesn't count for anything. Circumstantial evidence is used to convict people in criminal court everyday, and almost always decides civil cases. In most cases, there isn't direct or "hard" evidence available, and circumstantial evidence is all there is. It can certainly prove someone's guilt beyond reasonable doubt, or liability via preponderance of evidence. In this case, the circumstantial evidence against Brady is pretty damning. I'm admittedly biased against Brady and New England, but I don't see how anyone could read the Wells report and think Brady is innocent, despite the lack of a smoking gun.

[ha1fway]

I'm guessing this is going to turn into a 0-1 game suspension