Reiss expects Pats to be fined-deflategate? No farking way

RayClay · Mar 28, 2015

patman52 said:
my understanding was that they told the players not to address it with the medial

Again, this is ********, Al Davis could not sue the league and he did it multiple times and won. The league charter also has a provision where all teams will be treated equally i am sure. If the league breaks it contract with a club, the club can sue. Jones threatened to sue over serving pepsi and the league backed down.

Davis had damages. The Patriots would be suing based on the legal framework they agreed to, that the commissioner has the power to levy any punishment on a team [not on a player due to the union contract] and that there is no appeal.

They can't sue for the monetary damages, so do they sue for defamation of character, based on the commissioner enforcing the powers that they gave him?

How could they win a lawsuit? What damages are there that they didn't agree to forego?

Ross12 · Mar 28, 2015

Chiuba E. Obele said:
Whether Kraft concedes or fights probably depends on the severity of the fine. But do you think Kraft should refuse to pay a fine, on the pure basis of principle?

Keep in mind, we just won the Super Bowl. Deflategate should've ended there. And I really don't want it to carry over into next season. I'm sure Kraft feels the same way, to some degree

RayClay said:
With a majority of the ownership jealous and or losers, there really isn't anything he could do while their commissioner is still in office. I guess they could raise a stink, but goodell could probably have them arrested Putin style and be within his legal rights [meaning the right to do anything if it involves a team].

I imagine vladimir is jealous of the power the stupid owners have given goodell, that's why he stole one of our rings.

Yeah, I think if there's any penalty at all Kraft shouldn't just sit idly by.

I know he can't do anything directly necessarily, but like I said, if he were to obtain the truth and leak it to the media, he wouldn't have done anything wrong himself, but the League would be exposed, and may have to retract the fine, ultimately.

supafly · Mar 28, 2015

PatSunday said:
When there has been no scandal about this for 40 years in any major sport in the history of television, and you've got nothing to hide, there is no shame or guilt in going to the bathroom on the way to the your destination. If you're credible, the main concern is not letting the objects out of your sight to ruin your credibility and job, not mistrusting your own self. I'd rather think Wells will look into the credibility of the ball person, than a statement like "he was out of reach of any cameras for 90 seconds."

In fact, with the NFL firing an employee for purposely removing game balls in order to steal them in the same game, the league themselves actually set a very low standard. The fact he had done it before is even worse for the NFL. A guy who was out of camera's eye for 90 seconds for a valid reason -- in the bathroom -- is completely sane. He can't leave the balls outside, he has to watch them. Maybe a two-person rule could be enacted, but ball boys go to the bathroom all the time. This is not the first or last time a person in charge of securely transporting an object from point A to point B peed themselves out of nervousness and used the restroom.

I don't dispute your opinion for a second, but remember that we are discussing possibilities for why there would be a fine.

Should Goodell wish to find an excuse, he won't have to look very far. Hopefully it doesn't come down to that, but there's obviously a chance, and Reiss' opinion is why we are discussing it to begin with.

supafly · Mar 28, 2015

unoriginal said:
This is a PR-driven league, we've seen before how punishments are decided primarily by PR impact (Spygate, Ray Rice, Adrian Peterson), and Deflategate was bad PR.

So the penalty is probably going to be pretty bad. And the League Office isn't going to penalize itself.

Pretty much my point, as understandably unpopular as that will be.

Your explanation has certainly has been my fear since day one.

VectorPrime · Mar 28, 2015

Some people need to stop being so damn pessimistic about this.

supafly · Mar 28, 2015

VectorPrime said:
Some people need to stop being so damn pessimistic about this.

I think "realistic" is a more appropriate term, and that's going to differ based on personal opinion.

If the thought that there's a chance to receive a fine is just too much for you to handle, then I'd suggest loosening up a bit, or just staying out of the thread altogether. I would have to consider Mike Reiss a fairly optimistic guy and he stated that he believes a fine is probably the outcome.

Discussing various scenarios doesn't make anyone any less of a fan. Everyone here wishes for a full exoneration, but we also need to consider the alternatives.

supafly · Mar 28, 2015

VectorPrime said:
Actually remember that the game was delayed 15ish minutes because the NFCCG went to OT, meaning the ball attendent's window wasn't just 2-5 minutes. Because he had already left the refs room with the balls BEFORE the game got delayed he had to hold onto them for perhaps up to 20 minutes in the tunnel waiting for the players to come out. So there he is just standing around killing time with the bags of balls. So it makes perfect sense he decided to use the time to take a piss.

On top of that, I would bet some good money that it is his specific responsibility that he remain with the balls at ALL times. Meaning he cannot leave them outside if he goes into the bathroom. So he followed the rules bringing them in with him.

Your defense is a valid point in my opinion, and the delay of the start of the game is something that hopefully will be considered.

In the meantime, we'll have to wait to see what Wells and Goodell think, as any other opinion on the matter will be 100 percent irrelevant.

Tunescribe · Mar 28, 2015

bartscott said:
Have any of you ever heard of Occam's Razor?

A really odd-looking Jets fan once told me he cut the end of his nose off trying to shave with one.

Joker · Mar 28, 2015

then there was the moron Rat fan that tried to eat an Occam's Razor Clam...of course the nitwit threw away the meat inside and ate the shell. Try "OG J-T-S-E!!!!!" with your tongue sliced to ribbons....not a pretty sight

OhExaulted1 · Mar 28, 2015

VectorPrime said:
Some people need to stop being so damn pessimistic about this.

We're going to lose all our draft picks this year and Kraft will be forced to sell the team and by this time next year we'll all be talking about the Los Angelas Patriots, but I'm not catastrophizing or anything.

flasox27 · Mar 28, 2015

Let me reiterate, biased or unbiased, right or wrong, Goodell has the authority interpret rules and punish as he sees fit thanks to the owners. IMO, regardless of the conclusion of the Wells Report, Goodell is not going to make himself or the NFL look foolish by creating a witch hunt and not finding a witch .I also think by the support for him voiced by Kraft that the Pats will accept any punishment. I still don't think Kraft fully understands how the League works as exhibited by his remark that "this is no way to treat a partner". The reality is that on the playing field he or the Pats have no partners just competitors who are jealous and will do anything to beat the Pats including fully supporting a corrupt and incompetent NFL office.

Galeb · Mar 28, 2015

VectorPrime said:
Some people need to stop being so damn pessimistic about this.

It's hard not to be when even MMQB reporters are starting to openly comment on the Patriots hatred that infects much of the league, coaches, GMs and players. The fact that this pettiness is shared by the several of the highest officials in the NFL offices is very disheartening. I'm genuinely not sure if I'll still watch football after BB and TB retire, and would fully support the removal of the league's antitrust exemption.

patman52 · Mar 28, 2015

RayClay said:
Davis had damages. The Patriots would be suing based on the legal framework they agreed to, that the commissioner has the power to levy any punishment on a team [not on a player due to the union contract] and that there is no appeal.

They can't sue for the monetary damages, so do they sue for defamation of character, based on the commissioner enforcing the powers that they gave him?

How could they win a lawsuit? What damages are there that they didn't agree to forego?

The team's good name. You can not defame the team, it will hurt his marketing, attracting players, corporate sponsorships. They gave him powers but those powers are to be used fairly and equally among all 32 teams. When that is not the case, the courts can decide. if he acted as he should. You sound as if a court never overruled an arbitrator before. Which in this case in what he is.

The Gr8est · Mar 28, 2015

Galeb said:
It's hard not to be when even MMQB reporters are starting to openly comment on the Patriots hatred that infects much of the league, coaches, GMs and players. The fact that this pettiness is shared by the several of the highest officials in the NFL offices is very disheartening. I'm genuinely not sure if I'll still watch football after BB and TB retire, and would fully support the removal of the league's antitrust exemption.

Agreed on being unsure if I will watch football after BB and TFB are done. I took about a three year hiatus from posting here until recently and my disapproval of the direction that the NFL has been trending along with how the media deals with the Pats were part of the equation.

I love the Pats and the excellence that they have given us over the years, but I am moving towards hating the NFL.

I no longer watch the Superbowl unless the Pats are in it, and it isn't sour grapes, I just am not inclined to support the NFL otherwise.

As Pats fans, if the haters and opposing forces finally succeed in influencing BB and TFB to leave, or to legislate and officiate the Pats out of their dominance, we can leave knowing that no other team was relentlessly hounded out of their excellence, and this incarnation of the Pats, and the sports world, will likely never see their equal again, and I will be always be thankful for having been a part of it.

RayClay · Mar 28, 2015

patman52 said:
The team's good name. You can not defame the team, it will hurt his marketing, attracting players, corporate sponsorships. They gave him powers but those powers are to be used fairly and equally among all 32 teams. When that is not the case, the courts can decide. if he acted as he should. You sound as if a court never overruled an arbitrator before. Which in this case in what he is.

So, by using the enforcement powers Kraft gave him, they are legally liable for defaming his name?

I wish you luck, counselor.

I haven't heard Goodell say one bad thing about the Patriots or Kraft, by the way, and i think you'll need some of that for your case.

billdog3484 · Mar 28, 2015

How about this. If we did anything wrong we will be punished accordingly. If we did nothing we will not be fined. Let's hear what wells' report says. Hopefully it says there's no proof we did anything.

Then let's hope we swap or take one of the jets draft picks. That's would be great

flasox27 · Mar 28, 2015

RayClay said:
So, by using the enforcement powers Kraft gave him, they are legally liable for defaming his name?

I wish you luck, counselor.

I haven't heard Goodell say one bad thing about the Patriots or Kraft, by the way, and i think you'll need some of that for your case.

Goodell does not need to directly defame the Pasts or Kraft. He can stand in the background and let the well placed leaks do the work instead. In reality, regardless of the outcome of this fiasco, the reputation of the Pats was damaged beyond repair by Goodell's action in the camera placement case which has labeled the Pats as cheaters regardless of the actual reason for the penalty. Too bad Kraft didn't have the courage to stand up for BB and his team then maybe the Pats wouldn't the universal fall guy for Goodell.

billdog3484 · Mar 28, 2015

flasox27 said:
Goodell does not need to directly defame the Pasts or Kraft. He can stand in the background and let the well placed leaks do the work instead. In reality, regardless of the outcome of this fiasco, the reputation of the Pats was damaged beyond repair by Goodell's action in the camera placement case which has labeled the Pats as cheaters regardless of the actual reason for the penalty. Too bad Kraft didn't have the courage to stand up for BB and his team then maybe the Pats wouldn't the universal fall guy for Goodell.

So your position is even If goodell said or wrote nothing about the pats he can be guilty of defamation? Based on unnamed leaks? Haha. ? Basically, for not responding to what somebody else said. I don't know what form of defamation that would be

Plus defamation on a public figure… Not very easy towin

patman52 · Mar 28, 2015

RayClay said:
So, by using the enforcement powers Kraft gave him, they are legally liable for defaming his name?

I wish you luck, counselor.

I haven't heard Goodell say one bad thing about the Patriots or Kraft, by the way, and i think you'll need some of that for your case.

What i am referring to is the possibility that some posters raised that Goodell will ignore the scientific evidence and in their view bow to the clamour of the mob and punish the pats. The powers were not awarded in a vacuum, if he ignores the evidence and punishes the pats regardless yes IMO there is a basis for court action. He can not allow a violation of the Balls being manipulated on camera during the Vikings/Panthers game to go unpunished and then punish the pats where there is no evidence.

patman52 · Mar 28, 2015

RayClay said:
So, by using the enforcement powers Kraft gave him, they are legally liable for defaming his name?

I wish you luck, counselor.

I haven't heard Goodell say one bad thing about the Patriots or Kraft, by the way, and i think you'll need some of that for your case.

What i am referring to is the possibility that some posters raised that Goodell will ignore the scientific evidence and in their view bow to the clamour of the mob and punish the pats. The powers were not awarded in a vacuum, if he ignores the evidence and punishes the pats regardless yes IMO there is a basis for court action. He can not allow a violation of the Balls being manipulated on camera during the Vikings/Panthers game to go unpunished and then punish the pats where there is no evidence.

billdog3484 said:
So your position is even If goodell said or wrote nothing about the pats he can be guilty of defamation? Based on unnamed leaks? Haha. ? Basically, for not responding to what somebody else said. I don't know what form of defamation that would be

Plus defamation on a public figure… Not very easy towin

What do you mean damaged beyond repair, the just have to prove it was damaged and I am not talking about a suit to recover damages but to overturn a league punishment.

Reiss expects Pats to be fined-deflategate? No farking way

Hall of Fame Poster

Moderator

Eff you, Shula

Eff you, Shula

Pro Bowl Player

Eff you, Shula

Eff you, Shula

PatsFans.com Supporter

PatsFans.com Supporter

Experienced Starter w/First Big Contract

In the Starting Line-Up

Experienced Starter w/First Big Contract

Rotational Player and Threatening Starter's Job

Veteran Starter w/Big Long Term Deal

Hall of Fame Poster

PatsFans.com Supporter

In the Starting Line-Up

PatsFans.com Supporter

Rotational Player and Threatening Starter's Job

Rotational Player and Threatening Starter's Job

Similar threads