Bobsyouruncle
Experienced Starter w/First Big Contract
- Joined
- Dec 27, 2012
- Messages
- 5,836
- Reaction score
- 6,904
Registered Members experience this forum ad and noise-free.
CLICK HERE to Register for a free account and login for a smoother ad-free experience. It's easy, and only takes a few moments.
Kraft still has many friends....they just don't want to publicly take sides.The situation is quickly escalating and no one knows quite where it's heading. It doesn't surprise me in the least bit, that there are some who want to wait and see how everything unfolds. We could hear stirrings of discord as early as next week, at the Owner's meeting. But it's anyone's guess what's happening behind-the-scenes.
I can't speak for Kraft's resolve, but the door is still wide open for an appeal. Like I mentioned, he has until next Thursday to file an official appeal. So there's still time to contest the loss of draft picks and the million dollar fine.
So that being the case looking to limit Goodell and his stooges in the future looks like the best long term option.
I'm sure whichever team Goodell tries to punish and railroad in 10 years will appreciate it. The problem is that this does absolutely nothing to help the Patriots in their disastrous position.
My knowledge of Al Davis is rather limited....thank for the added perspective!
The article below gets into some of Davis' achievements. One of my favorite quotes from Davis was that if he were in charge of the merger the NFL would have paid them to join, not the other way around. He talked tough and backed it up. Every AFC fan should be thankful for what Big Al did for the AFL.
www.nfl.com/news/story/09000d5d822eddba/article/davis-contributions-to-professional-football-ran-the-gamut
Awesome read! Thanks
@everlong You're right. There are many many moving parts that go into a Federal law suit. That's why no owner has attempted to sue the League since Al Davis. It's not an easy choice to make, especially if you're a congenial person like Kraft. But if there was ever a time in which the 'nuclear option' was needed, it would be now.
This whole situation has gotten completely out of control. Look at where we are today. What started off as a minor infraction has since mushroomed into a living nightmare for Pats nation. In the last five months, the Patriots have been railroaded into the ground by false accusations, misinformation leaked to the press, and the malicious handling of an investigation that quickly turned into a witch-hunt. The NFL has finally shown its true colors. It's been compromised at the highest levels, by cronies who carry out personal agendas against other teams. And nowGoodell is overstepping his powers to try to dismantle the very accomplishments that have brought this organization so much pride and fame.
Kraft needs to hold this system to account once and for all, and expose it for what it really is. The 'nuclear option' is the best way to go.
I happen to agree with you but it's not my checkbook and I just don't see Kraft going that direction. He'll choose diplomacy for better or worse. It's served him well over the years and people tend to go with their strength. Maybe Jonathan is Churchill to Bob's Chamberlain. If it was me I would have gone nuclear in 07.
It seems that virtually everybody has offered his or take in response to the publication of The Wells Report in Context Thursday, written by Daniel Goldberg, an attorney for the New England Patriots, but perhaps the most interesting that I read yesterday was that of former Cleveland Browns general manager Joe Banner.
Banner suggests that the nature of the Patriots’ response—a full-on information dump in the form of a near point-by-point rebuttal of the Ted Wells investigation’s findings—indicates that the organization does not have the intention of pursuing legal recourse in the matter.
In other words, they are currently in the process of throwing haymakers in the hopes of perhaps saving face, or at least presenting the consistent position of maintaining their innocence, whether they believe in their own innocence or not.
Banner reasons that “if they were” planning on pursuing legal action, “they would not have wanted to lay out their arguemant [sic]”. And that is precisely what the document penned by Goldberg is, virtually on a line-by-line scale.
Mind you, this is of no substance to the obviously related by separate matter of Tom Brady’s suspension, which, as of yesterday, he has formally appealed via the NFLPA. While obviously supported by the Patriots, this is a matter involving the player, and not the organization.
Any recourse that the Patriots would hypothetically pursue with regards to their own institutional punishments, namely a fine of $1 million—the most in league history—and the forfeiture of a 2016 first-round draft pick and a 2017 fourth-round draft pick, would come as an alternative process outside of Brady’s arbitration.
It certainly is a very interesting idea that Banner presents, and one that appears to have some credence. After all, there is a good deal of sense to what he says. Presenting the seeming entirety of your defense to the plaintiffs in advance of any type of legal action is objectively terrible and counter-productive practice.
In light of that, then, the repeated public defiance from Patriots president Robert Kraft, Brady, and Brady’s agent, Don Yee, culminating in the coup de grâce that is the data bomb of The Wells Report in Context, seems to be, at its nucleus, a point of pride.
Kraft and his organization is under attack, its reputation badly tarnished, with public perception rapidly escalating, perhaps to new highs of negativity. Assuming that he knows pursuing legal recourse will ultimately accomplish nothing of significant value, it is conceivable that the next-most favored course of action is righteous indignation.
And they have clearly gotten that down to a science, with perhaps my favorite example coming in Kraft’s statement in the wake of the announcement of discipline in which he states that the punishment “far exceeded any reasonable expectation” and “was based completely on circumstantial rather than hard or conclusive evidence”.
The cherry on top? “We recognize our fans’ concerns regarding the NFL’s penalties and share in their disappointment in how this one-sided investigation was handled”. That is some delicious outrage.
Things are different for the organization's punishment, so I wouldn't be surprised if these idiots were in the right ballpark. Aside from a pointless appeal to the commissioner, I have a hard time seeing the team get anywhere.
Brady, OTOH, has reason for optimism, since there is no proof that he knew of any funny business, and the process is more favorable to challenging player punishments vs. those that are organizational.
Obviously, it goes without saying that we're all hoping for the best.
I think this may be wishful thinking. The guy basically starts with the premise that Wells has a rock solid case then tries to understand the point of the rebuttal.
I know Jerry Jones did (and Snyder as well?) came out in support of Goodell. Can it be a coincidence that they are the other 2 of 3 most valuable franchises? If I'm the small market teams, I'd be considering what this can all mean. A very interesting owners meeting coming up.There is a slim chance that if Kraft is angry enough, that he has the necessary pieces to walk away from this as THE King maker - or even the King himself. Take away the anti-trust exemption when you own one of the three most valuable franchises in one of the largest markets and you increase your relative wealth and power in the league.
It's a magnificent chess game. I wonder how much poker is involved too - will the NFL offices call Kraft's bluff, or is it a bluff?
I think this may be wishful thinking. The guy basically starts with the premise that Wells has a rock solid case then tries to understand the point of the rebuttal.
Here's an alternate theory. Goodell could claim his decisions were based off his "independent" investigator. He made the decisions off the information available. Now Goodell has more information available so if he upholds the appeal and it gets overturned in court he can't use that excuse. If the court sees the evidence as bogus then Goody has no excuse why he was incapable of seeing it.
They could have just sent him an email (and they may have done that also), but he could claim he never read the email because he gets thousands a day.
Whatever the reason for the public rebuttal I would assume it's more than a PR stunt. We are past PR, and I would assume he's getting advised by lawyers for a reason. And the lawyers either advised or allowed the rebuttal because they think it serves some legal purpose.