Brady2Moss
2nd Team Getting Their First Start
- Joined
- Nov 30, 2009
- Messages
- 1,710
- Reaction score
- 977
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.At least flip the points. First say that corruption is terrible. Then, if you must, draw the analogy to other kinds of bad acts.
The way it reads now, it looks at first like it's about domestic violence, and then the reader has to scramble and reset his expectations to keep up.
Show me how you would chose to make the comparison, and I'll consider what kinds of revisions to make.
As it stands right now, I really feel it makes a powerful statement. The impression that I'm getting is that I'm exaggerating the seriousness of corruption or somehow being insensitive. I disagree.
See I don't read it that way. However, write it up how you think it would be better and we can look at it. I'm all for people's input. It's the only way we will get this done.
STATEMENT OF GRIEVANCE ( + Online Petition )
For over a year now, the National Football League has been embroiled in scandals involving child abuse and domestic violence. There can be no middle ground when it comes to violence against woman and children. Yet the same must also be true when the NFL maliciously targets one of its own teams. In the past few months, allegations of corruption have been brought to light that suggest that League may have violated its neutrality and fabricated evidence against the New England Patriots.
All football fans who spend their hard earned money on tickets, memorabilia, and memories, should be outraged by these allegations. Our trust in the sport has been has been seriously undermined, and despite reassurances from Roger Goodell, we are not convinced that the NFL has acted with neutrality. Therefore as fans, it is urgent we use our voices to demand an immediate change.
When the leaders of the NFL abuse their power to spread lies and defame the actions of a team, it violates the public conscience and goes against our basic moral principles. As fans, we want our elected officials to remind the NFL that this kind of behavior will not be tolerated.
Absolutely true. Didn't they also claim that the ball in Indy was at like 10.5 PSI? Since it was in a dome that would have been where it had started, meaning if it was deflated it would have been deflected down to that level. But in the ACFCG the balls, at minimum, were 12.0 PSI at the start of the game and decreased due to the weather. So why would the pre-game deflating be done at vastly different levels?
Do not want to rain on anyone's parade, but this does not read like a grievance, but more of a statement of the facts as perceived by a Pats fan..
There is too much mixing of information in this "statement" would shy away from domestic/child abuse and elected officials and try to compare this to somewhat similar situations.. i.e. Brett Favre not giving up his cell phone, use of stickum towels in Sand Diego, warming of footballs in Minnesota.. people will get confused with all these scenarios.. you do not want politicians involved in any of this.
"Moral principles" are difficult to define and vague as is "public conscience"... you might want to consider reframing the issues and how pats fans are aggrieved.. I was involved in several arbitrations in the past and the first thing that happens is "framing the issues" that you ask someone to act upon.
At this point, I want any ****ing thing that causes Goodell pain over this.Do we really want our "elected officials" involved? Remember when Senator Specter tried to stick his nose into Spygate? We just want justice.
@JoeSixPat and @Fencer Can you review the ten questions I have selected, and check them for factual accuracy and relevance.
Chiuba's Ten Most Important Questions to Task About Deflategate (I relied heavily on your comments and and made liberal use of paraphrasing - this is only a first draft of a document I intend to compose later on)
1. Why did official NFL statements knowingly affirm false information in a 1/19 letter issued by NFL Senior VP David Gardi to the Patriots? What was the chain of events leading to the distorted information presented to the Patriots? And when the actual psi of the Patriots footballs was known at halftime, why did the NFL choose to hide that information through the Super Bowl and only disclose after the Wells was published in May?
2. Why did the NFL head of officiating, Dean Blandino, lie about being told before the game about allegations of football tampering and the halftime game inspection which followed? Do the actions which took place prior to the AFC game point to an attempt to disrupt Brady's performance on the field, or at worse, an organized effort to accuse the Patriots of wrongdoing?
3. Once the game starts, neither team is allowed to gauge the footballs or pump them That is solely the province of the referee, who is to be the “sole judge” of whether footballs comply with League standard. Why then the Colts, with advance concerns about psi, not report the issue to the referee. Why did they take matters into their own hands and instruct an intern to gauge the football.
4. Why did the league insist on leaving the public with a seriously wrong impression about the measurement of footballs used in the AFC Championship Game? Once false information was being leaked to the media by League sources, why did the NFL choose not to immediately correct this information?
5. Walt Anderson, a respected referee of 25 year of experience, states that it was his "best recollection" that he used one partcilar gauge to determine that the Patriots footballs at halftime, were not unusually deflated. In the Ted Wells investigation, the NFL accepted all of his "best recollections" concerning multiple aspects of that game. Why then did they reject the only part of his testimony that might have cleared the Patriots of wrongdoing?
6. Once the NFL learned about the natural effects of the Ideal Gas Law and the correct measures of balls measured by the gauge Anderson said he used , why did they still decide to open a multi-million dollar investigation?
7. To date, no other elite quarterbacks has been privately polled to discuss this whole subject of preparing footballs. So why did the NFL refuse to inquire about football preparation protocols for every other NFL team, much in the same way that the New York Times did with the Giants in 2013?
8. Why did the NFL accept the findings of the research firm, Exponent, knowing the type of work that it has done in the past, to suggest that (a) secondhand smoke does not cause cancer (b) that asbestos does not harm the health of workers and (b) there is not environmental harm in dumping toxic waste in the Amazon rain forest.
9. It was reported by the NY Times on January 26 that the Wells investigation contacted Columbia University to do the scientific analysis. What did Columbia say? Who else was contacted and what were their responses? And why was this information not included in the Wells report?
10. Why did the Wells Report conveniently ignore the statements, testimony and evidence presented to them, as outlined in the "Wells Report in Context" which, when combined with all the above information, prove that not only was that there was no deliberate deflation of footballs, but that there may have been a conspiracy at the highest levels of the NFL Headquarters to fabricate evidence against the Patriots?
This feels a bit off/backwards to me. It seems their take was the only way to convict the Patriots of wrongdoing with the Exponent data. The gauge and other variables can be added to the science that would say no deflation took place. The one worst case scenario is the only one that points towards something unnatural occurring.5. Walt Anderson, a respected referee of 25 year of experience, states that it was his "best recollection" that he used one partcilar gauge to determine that the Patriots footballs at halftime, were not unusually deflated. In the Ted Wells investigation, the NFL accepted all of his "best recollections" concerning multiple aspects of that game. Why then did they reject the only part of his testimony that might have cleared the Patriots of wrongdoing?