News My Thoughts on Deflategate - Share Yours!

[JohnPrior3]

I'll start by saying I am a huge Patriots fan and I love Touchdown Tommy. I've read both the Wells Report and the Patriot's rebuttal to the report. I feel like this whole scandal is just a media plot for increased NFL revenue in the off-season and the Wells Report did everything they could to make this a headliner.

I want to hear other people's thoughts on this case even if you hate the Patriots. I just am having a hard time wrapping my head around the NFL's logic behind their suspension.

 

[Greg Bernhardt]

Why do you think it's too harsh?

 

[russ_watters]

We have another thread on this:
https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/stupor-bowl.793715/

 

[JohnPrior3]

We have another thread on this:
https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/stupor-bowl.793715/

This thread is an analysis on the Wells Report and the NFL's Commissioners rulings on the case, not whether or not Brady used footballs outside of the regulation pressure.

 

[russ_watters]

. I feel like this whole scandal is just a media plot for increased NFL revenue in the off-season and the Wells Report did everything they could to make this a headliner.

I'm not quite following: how does a "media plot" get designed to increase NFL revenue? Do you mean an NFL plot?

Just to be clear: Do you think the Patriots cheated in this case? (I do)
Do you think Brady directed it? (I do)
Do you think Belichick knew? (I do)

If the answer is yes to all of those questions, then IMO, punishment is in order. I think 4 games is reasonable and if it gets knocked down to 2 like people are suggesting, that will be a bit light. And I think that Belichick should have been hit personally for this -- he's mostly been ignored.

 

[JohnPrior3]

Why do you think it's too harsh?

Have you read the alleged inconsistencies in the Patriot's rebuttal?

 

[russ_watters]

This thread is an analysis on the Wells Report and the NFL's Commissioners rulings on the case, not whether or not Brady used footballs outside of the regulation pressure.

I'm not following -- isn't the Wells Report about Brady using footballs outside of regulation pressure?

 

[russ_watters]

Have you read the alleged inconsistencies in the Patriot's rebuttal?

I'll admit to not having read either the report itself or the rebuttal. But I have read several articles with titles like:
"Patriots’ Rebuttal Is Foray Further Into Farce"
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/05/15/s...ze-wells-report-in-lengthy-rebuttal.html?_r=0

 

[JohnPrior3]

I'm not quite following: how does a "media plot" get designed to increase NFL revenue? Do you mean an NFL plot?

Just to be clear: Do you think the Patriots cheated in this case? (I do)
Do you think Brady directed it? (I do)
Do you think Belichick knew? (I do)

If the answer is yes to all of those questions, then IMO, punishment is in order. I think 4 games is reasonable and if it gets knocked down to 2 like people are suggesting, that will be a bit light. And I think that Belichick should have been hit personally for this -- he's mostly been ignored.

Well do you agree that the NFL has the lowest integrity in sports and that cheating happens with every team cheats? Visit yourteamcheats.com

I think it is an NFL/media plot because social media stories makes them money off ads. It coincidently happened after the draft and not during because the NFL had their spotlight there. Nobody cares about the NFL in May because the sports world money is going to the NBA playoffs. The media has been increasingly reporting stories with distorted facts that grab the attention of people to boost ratings. Look at Michael Brown. The media sided with police brutality because that's what the majority of the US is interested in. I just feel like I'm seeing the same load of baloney over and over again with the news. I'm not typically a conspiracy theorist, but it seems way to apparent to me that the media is being excessively bias and incorrect.,

 

[JohnPrior3]

I'll admit to not having read either the report itself or the rebuttal. But I have read several articles with titles like:
"Patriots’ Rebuttal Is Foray Further Into Farce"
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/05/15/s...ze-wells-report-in-lengthy-rebuttal.html?_r=0

I really think the locker room attend made the report lose validity. That conversation was really weird if you get a chance to read the whole conversation. Seems like a random time call him the deflator.

But there are two HUGE issues I have.

1. In the Wells Report, Wells claims the Patriots owner and coach did not have any involvement in the issue and it is only Brady and the locker room attendant who is more probable than not offending the integrity of the game... If Belichick and Kraft were reported to have no involvement, where was Goodell's logic in fining the Patriots 1 million and taking draft picks away? Shouldn't the penalty be focused solely on Brady? Teams don't get fined when a player uses performance enhancing drugs, why should the whole organization be penalized in this case then?2. Both attendant's handed over their phone records and complied completely to the investigation. What reason then does Brady have to turn over the texts? I can't imagine him relaying the message down a line of people to the attendant, its not like he was expecting this to happen so they have no reason to assume that. The Wells Report's main reasons for suspensions was the Patriot's unwillingness to comply with the investigation, but the rebuttal proves that he falsely reported the amount of interviews that were had and that they were compliant except Brady not turning over the texts.

 

[russ_watters]

Well do you agree that the NFL has the lowest integrity in sports...

Too broad, but I'll just say it is pretty low.

...and that cheating happens with every team cheats?

Probably, yes.

I think it is an NFL/media plot because social media stories makes them money off ads. It coincidently happened after the draft and not during because the NFL had their spotlight there.

The story broke right before the Super Bowl. I think it more likely (lots of commentators have said this) that the NFL delayed the report until after the season/draft so it wouldn't distract from the game. The timing provides the lowest impact, not the highest.

If Belichick and Kraft were reported to have no involvement, where was Goodell's logic in fining the Patriots 1 million and taking draft picks away? Shouldn't the penalty be focused solely on Brady?

No. Like a CEO or ship's captain, the coach is responsible for everything that happens on his team, regardless of if he knows about it or not. The NFL has made that clear in the past (Bountygate).

 

[JohnPrior3]

Too broad, but I'll just say it is pretty low.

Probably, yes.

The story broke right before the Super Bowl. I think it more likely (lots of commentators have said this) that the NFL delayed the report until after the season/draft so it wouldn't distract from the game. The timing provides the lowest impact, not the highest.

No. Like a CEO or ship's captain, the coach is responsible for everything that happens on his team, regardless of if he knows about it or not. The NFL has made that clear in the past (Bountygate).

But then you could say owner's are responsible for making sure their athletes do not use performance enhancing drugs with that argument. Honestly, I think that type of punishment should exist. It is just extremely inconsistent with previous punishment and that is what troubles me the most about this case.

The story had to break out when it first happened, that was inevitable regardless of the timing. The investigation could have been done immediately after the Super Bowl and done before the NFL Draft. This would have worked out better for the Patriots (and a more fair punishment) because they would have drafted players in a different fashion preparing for their lost 2016 first round draft pick.

 

[russ_watters]

But then you could say owner's are responsible for making sure their athletes do not use performance enhancing drugs with that argument.

If they do it in the locker room, using team staff to facilitate it, certainly yes. If they do it at home, no.

 

[JohnPrior3]

If they do it in the locker room, using team staff to facilitate it, certainly yes. If they do it at home, no.

Raphael Palmero was using his "muscle relaxing cream" in the locker room. Clemens injected in the locker room with the help of the team trainer. The 1963 San Diego Charger's strength coach added an artificial testosterone to the player's breakfast to their knowledge saying that "It is what we did at the US Olympic team." The Seahawks in 2015 had players taking adderall during games without a prescription and obviously without a waiver from the NFL. I could go on for days with violations during the game. The most comparable would be Sammy Sosa using a corked bat to avoid beating the dead horse with PEDs. Same type of violation with non-regulation equipment, but never has a team (in any sport) been fined before this ruling.

 

[russ_watters]

Raphael Palmero was using his "muscle relaxing cream" in the locker room. Clemens injected in the locker room with the help of the team trainer...

Yes, and the '90s are generally regarded today as a stain on the integrity of baseball (but it is generally regarded to have cleaned-up its act today). Is that the standard you believe the NFL should aspire to?

 

[JohnPrior3]

Yes, and the '90s are generally regarded today as a stain on the integrity of baseball (but it is generally regarded to have cleaned-up its act today). Is that the standard you believe the NFL should aspire to?

Definitely not, but you know no sport will ever be like the "old days" especially when you introduce replay to baseball and human error no longer exists. All I want is consistency in punishment. Brady's punishment is solely because of how elite he and his team is.

 

[BobG]

I'll start by saying I am a huge Patriots fan and I love Touchdown Tommy. I've read both the Wells Report and the Patriot's rebuttal to the report. I feel like this whole scandal is just a media plot for increased NFL revenue in the off-season and the Wells Report did everything they could to make this a headliner.

I want to hear other people's thoughts on this case even if you hate the Patriots. I just am having a hard time wrapping my head around the NFL's logic behind their suspension.

I think 2 to 4 games is reasonable. I was surprised by the punishment being 4 games, but 4 games isn't unreasonable given that Brady has probably been doing this for a long time.

But, I do think the suspension will be dropped to 2 games if it's appealed. It might not be, because Brady would have to submit his version of text messages in order to appeal the suspension. The punishment can't be made more severe, but revealing embarrassing text messages could devalue Brady's endorsements.

The real punishment to the Patriots team will be the draft choices they lose.

Why do I think the suspension will be decreased to 2 games? Because, as it stands now, the Patriots get around an $800,000 windfall if Brady is suspended. Brady loses $1.8 million in salary that the Patriots do not have to pay. The Patriots have to pay $1 million of that back to the NFL in fines. I think in the end that the money the Patriots save on Brady's salary will be roughly equal to the fine that they pay to the NFL.

 

[russ_watters]

Definitely not, but you know no sport will ever be like the "old days" especially when you introduce replay to baseball and human error no longer exists. All I want is consistency in punishment.

Consistency between two different sports, decades apart?

Regardless, it seems to me that the team part of the punishment is in-line with other team punishments (such as the Patriots' Spygate punishment). For Brady, his punishment is typical of performance enhancing drug suspensions (and the impact is presumably similar): http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...pensions_for_violating_the_substance_policies

Brady's punishment is solely because of how elite he and his team is.

Seeing nothing out of the ordinary about this punishment, I don't see any good reason to believe such speculation.

 

[jtbell]

A British journalist has been getting a lot of flak about Deflategate on Twitter lately. Why? His name happens to be Tom Bradby, and apparently some NFL fans can't spel worht a danm.

Furious NFL Fans Target British Journalist Tom Bradby Instead of Tom Brady (bleacherreport.com)

 

[mheslep]

The football Brady was convicted and soon to be punished based on circumstantial evidence by some vague group so why not the same for a faux Brady/Bradby? Everybody does it, right? Should one believe a mistaken identity excuse? I understand it is even likely Bradby went to the bathroom on occasion, what more evidence is required? The only reasonable debate now is burn or banish.

This just in, righteous fans have captured Bradby/Brady: