Excellent NY Times article on Defamegate

Satchboogie3 · Jan 23, 2016

The whole spygate thing still pisses me off. People ignore the prior coaches who admit that it was a common practice and they did it, ignore John Madden talking about it during a game broadcast, and the fact that the rules themselves were very vague and cling to the stupid and tired arguments: "Then why did the media and league make it a big deal?" Stupid, the media try to make everything a big deal because it sells. The media don't give 2 ****s about the truth, they are selling a product. These idiots also can't believe that the new commissioner was making a power-play, despite the fact that we've seen him blow things out of proportion for the last 8 years (and because no one has ever had a parent, teacher, etc go wayyyyy overboard with a punishment just because they wanted to and could). ugh...

NashuaPats · Jan 23, 2016

Satchboogie3 said:
The whole spygate thing still pisses me off. People ignore the prior coaches who admit that it was a common practice and they did it, ignore John Madden talking about it during a game broadcast, and the fact that the rules themselves were very vague and cling to the stupid and tired arguments: "Then why did the media and league make it a big deal?" Stupid, the media try to make everything a big deal because it sells. The media don't give 2 ****s about the truth, they are selling a product. These idiots also can't believe that the new commissioner was making a power-play, despite the fact that we've seen him blow things out of proportion for the last 8 years (and because no one has ever had a parent, teacher, etc go wayyyyy overboard with a punishment just because they wanted to and could). ugh...

It still pisses me off too. It actually pisses me off more now than it did then because people won't let it go. Even calling it "spy"gate is ridiculous. There was no spying. It was done right out in the open. Every referee, league official, opposing player, opposing coach, and fan in attendance could see him. They didn't hide anything. It should have resulted in a warning, that's it. The only advantage it gave was in post game analysis and even that was barely significant. Jimmy Johnson said he did it for a while, but found it to be a waste of time and effort. But the rest of the league was so petty and envious, they demanded blood just like they are doing now. The media blew that too. They reported that it allowed the Pats to know the defensive play calls during the game. The fact that retired coaches clarified that that wasn't true didn't matter. Only the original story mattered. Not even the undefeated season that followed and offensive records they set mattered. Jealous people had the story they liked and stopped listening and ESPN and others kep that as the narrative. It's such b.s.

RelocatedPatFan · Jan 23, 2016

Can't call it hard hitting journalism if it's 12 months too late. Plus, you would need to put the hard questions to the people who made it all "into such a big deal" to begin with (Mort, Kensil, Goodell, ...). i.e. Tell me something I don't already know or get some new information...DYDJ!!!!!

turkeyneck · Jan 23, 2016

Tony2046 said:
In the case of spygate Belichick taped them from an illegal location...

It wasn't even that. Bellichick was reading the actual rule which prohibited making tapes from that location for use during the game. Since the tapes weren't for use during a game but for off season study there was no violation per the plain language of the rule. Bill's mis-step was in ignoring the Goodell memo that, circumventing established rule-making procedure, spun the rule according to NYJ front office desires.

borg · Jan 23, 2016

In my view, the only way the league would feel the pressure to reverse course and drop the penalties is if the judge in the next appeal goes off the reservation and puts Roger and his paid guns on the stand and directly questions them about case facts that got the league to this point. What we need is the right buckaroo.

memento · Jan 23, 2016

MagicMarker said:
The second scandal we don't hear about is ESPN.

Chris Mortenson reports false information and doesn't remove the tweet. When he's scheduled to appear on WEEI, he suddenly cancels as if ESPN tells him not to talk.

John Clayton continues to this day to claim "Mortenson had a scoop".

Mortenson said he cancelled after WEEI advertisements claimed he would reveal his source. WEEI still went on to reveal the source as Mike Kensil.

Rhodey · Jan 23, 2016

fgssand said:
They can stick their freaking apology right wherever they want too and simply return our picks, period.

Perhaps, the league should return the NEP picks AND present the same ADDITIONAL PICKS to the team for their unethical behaviour and treachery?

Steve102 · Jan 23, 2016

Rhodey said:
Perhaps, the league should return the NEP picks AND present the same ADDITIONAL PICKS to the team for their unethical behaviour and treachery?

wheresmosi · Jan 23, 2016

Patsfanin Philly said:
There is one more chance to right this wrong ( not likely though). The NFL owners meeting is Mar 23-26. Hopefully by then we will have a decision by the 2nd Circuit exonerating Brady. If that is the case, a strategic move would be for Bob Kraft ( or if he doesn't want to make waves let Jonathan do it) make a motion and ask for a vote by all 32 owners, even if not binding a sense of the owners that science has proven there was no malfeasance on the part of Brady or the Patriots. In addition, all appeals should be withdrawn and the Patriots should be given back their wrongfully seized draft picks. There won't be much sympathy for the Patriots but get it on the record who votes which way.

Note- I assume the comment was yours and not old rovers

Right, I messed up trying to quote him and was too tired to fix it. :/

PatsWickedPissah · Jan 23, 2016

Patsfanin Philly said:
There is one more chance to right this wrong ( not likely though). The NFL owners meeting is Mar 23-26. Hopefully by then we will have a decision by the 2nd Circuit exonerating Brady. If that is the case, a strategic move would be for Bob Kraft ( or if he doesn't want to make waves let Jonathan do it) make a motion and ask for a vote by all 32 owners, even if not binding a sense of the owners that science has proven there was no malfeasance on the part of Brady or the Patriots. In addition, all appeals should be withdrawn and the Patriots should be given back their wrongfully seized draft picks. There won't be much sympathy for the Patriots but get it on the record who votes which way.

Your post is realistic about the vote outcome but in what alternate universe would Bob Kraft antagonize his butt buddies by requesting a vote? He already KNOWS as cited in this NYT article that they seethe with resentment against him, yet he meekly accepts whatever punishment they see fit to inflict.

The worst thing about this is, what now prevents these unbridled envious frustrated billionaires from coming up with yet something else again to damage the Patriots franchise? Not that Bob even cares as long as the revenue keeps growing. We care, because we're emotionally involved but the incessant jihad against the Pats is taking an emotional toll and has decreased interest in the league for at least some of us.

mb6592 · Jan 23, 2016

IcyPatriot said:
Can we do a class action lawsuit against the NFL ...

The loss of the draft pick is not only a loss to the team ... it's a loss to us fans...they screwed the Patriot's fans.

I've seen several posters ask this question and receiving only funny or no responses. I don't understand why this isn't being discussed more on this site. Don't we have a few lawyers among us that can answer a simple question - as it is now universally understood that the NFL perpetuated a fraud, is a class action suit viable? If it is I say we take up a collection and let a professional take up the fight. I'm in for $500. I'm sure the press alone (not to mention if Gooddick has to answer interrogatories) would be worth it.

RobertWeathers · Jan 23, 2016

borg said:
In my view, the only way the league would feel the pressure to reverse course and drop the penalties is if the judge in the next appeal goes off the reservation and puts Roger and his paid guns on the stand and directly questions them about case facts that got the league to this point. What we need is the right buckaroo.

I want to live in Montana.

Joker · Jan 23, 2016

Can I sue the NFL for "general insulting of one's intelligence"?

QuantumMechanic · Jan 23, 2016

Patsfanin Philly said:
Hopefully by then we will have a decision by the 2nd Circuit exonerating Brady.

There is zero chance of any 2nd Circuit decision "exonerating Brady" because that's not something even Brady's side is asking for as the courts have no power to do it.

At a high level there are only three possible decisions the 2nd Circuit can make:

"We agree with Berman that the CBA does not give Goodell the power to suspend Brady for what Brady is accused of. The vacatur of the suspension is upheld."
"We agree with the NFL that none of the grounds Berman considered are sufficient to strip Goodell of the power to suspend Brady for what Brady is accused of. However, we remand to Berman to now consider the things he didn't previously consider. We enjoin the suspension pending the conclusion of the remanded case."
"We agree with the NFL that none of the grounds the NFLPA brings up, whether or not Berman considered them, are sufficient to strip Goodell of the power to suspend Brady for what Brady is accused of. The vacatur of the suspension is overturned and Brady is suspended for the first four games of the 2016 season."

Jackson 2 · Jan 23, 2016

Tony2046 said:
I read an article a few years ago that said Jay Glazer still has the tapes.

Kevin ClarkVerified account‏@KevinClarkWSJ
Fox leads into Glazer saying he "was the only one who had the Spygate videos." Glazer corrects said he still HAS Spygate videos.

EDIT: Funny thing about spygate is that it is still legal to tape opposing team signals the problem is where you tape them from. In the case of spygate Belichick taped them from an illegal location although the Jets were legally taping Patriot signals from a legal location. Because of the design of the stadium the Jets could tape legally but the Pats could not.

For crissakes this crap about who has them and who has seen them is complete BS. Those freaking tapes were shown on national television when Goodell came down with his ruling. I remember it as if it were yesterday. There was a continuous loop over and over again. Jay Glazer showing them to his pals at his home parties is such horseshit, as if it was some secret porno tape showing where he charges an admission fee. Talk about urban legend lies...

Ken Canin · Jan 23, 2016

mb6592 said:
I've seen several posters ask this question and receiving only funny or no responses. I don't understand why this isn't being discussed more on this site. Don't we have a few lawyers among us that can answer a simple question - as it is now universally understood that the NFL perpetuated a fraud, is a class action suit viable? If it is I say we take up a collection and let a professional take up the fight. I'm in for $500. I'm sure the press alone (not to mention if Gooddick has to answer interrogatories) would be worth it.

The key issue here is standing: is there some particularized harm that the class members suffer that gives them a right to sue at all? Now as for fraud, it's hard to argue that there has been fraud on the fans themselves, rather on the team. A fan of a team has no standing to sue for every fraud perpetrated on the team. I seem to remember there have been isolated incidents of fans trying to sue sports teams and they've all been dismissed for lack of standing. Without standing, a suit doesn't benefit anyone because there's no discovery of facts - noone is put on the stand and no documents are produced.

Briefly, in this type of lawsuit, there are 4 main hurdles:

- A. Is there standing: do the plaintiffs even have some specific harm done to them that lets them sue?

- B. Stating a claim: are the plaintiffs alleging a harm of the kind for which the law provides a remedy?

- C. Discovery: This is of course what the fans want, to get internal NFL documents and to depose the main NFL actors.

- D. Decision: do the plaintiffs actually win in the view of the judge or jury.

In this case, D would likely be a slam dunk, but A is a big hurdle, and B also is a big one. Until you reach those hurdles, you aren't getting any specific legal information.

Disclaimer: I am not familiar with the specifics here, the above omits many important nuances and causes of action (for example, perhaps an antitrust avenue might be more promising than straight tort). These are just brief thoughts and may be incomplete and inaccurate.

QuantumMechanic · Jan 23, 2016

Jackson 2 said:
For crissakes this crap about who has them and who has seen them is complete BS. Those freaking tapes were shown on national television when Goodell came down with his ruling. I remember it as if it were yesterday. There was a continuous loop over and over again. Jay Glazer showing them to his pals at his home parties is such horseshit, as if it was some secret porno tape showing where he charges an admission fee. Talk about urban legend lies...

I believe those tapes (which IIRC were originally shown on FOX) were Glasers's tapes.

Jackson 2 · Jan 23, 2016

QuantumMechanic said:
I believe those tapes (which IIRC were originally shown on FOX) were Glasers's tapes.

I don't give a f### whose tapes they were. They were shown to everyone with Goodell commenting about his ruling while the tapes ran. The idea that Glazer has some exclusive stash of Pats tapes is complete crap and always has been.

mb6592 · Jan 23, 2016

Ken Canin said:
The key issue here is standing: is there some particularized harm that the class members suffer that gives them a right to sue at all? Now as for fraud, it's hard to argue that there has been fraud on the fans themselves, rather on the team. A fan of a team has no standing to sue for every fraud perpetrated on the team. I seem to remember there have been isolated incidents of fans trying to sue sports teams and they've all been dismissed for lack of standing. Without standing, a suit doesn't benefit anyone because there's no discovery of facts - noone is put on the stand and no documents are produced.

Briefly, in this type of lawsuit, there are 4 main hurdles:

- A. Is there standing: do the plaintiffs even have some specific harm done to them that lets them sue?

- B. Stating a claim: are the plaintiffs alleging a harm of the kind for which the law provides a remedy?

- C. Discovery: This is of course what the fans want, to get internal NFL documents and to depose the main NFL actors.

- D. Decision: do the plaintiffs actually win in the view of the judge or jury.

In this case, D would likely be a slam dunk, but A is a big hurdle, and B also is a big one. Until you reach those hurdles, you aren't getting any specific legal information.

Disclaimer: I am not familiar with the specifics here, the above omits many important nuances and causes of action (for example, perhaps an antitrust avenue might be more promising than straight tort). These are just brief thoughts and may be incomplete and inaccurate.

Thanks for the info. It would appear as a fan one stands no chance of even moving forward, let alone of success. Does being a season ticket holder - with all the financial investment that entails - give one standing? Would the suit have to come from season ticket holders only?

QuantumMechanic · Jan 23, 2016

Ken Canin said:
The key issue here is standing: is there some particularized harm that the class members suffer that gives them a right to sue at all? Now as for fraud, it's hard to argue that there has been fraud on the fans themselves, rather on the team. A fan of a team has no standing to sue for every fraud perpetrated on the team. I seem to remember there have been isolated incidents of fans trying to sue sports teams and they've all been dismissed for lack of standing.

The suit that Jets fan filed against NE and the NFL in the wake of Cameragateplace is instructive.

The judge (and then the 3rd Circuit on appeal) pointed out that buying a ticket only gives you a right to see the game specified on the ticket. And since the plaintiff was allowed into the stadium and saw the NE/NYJ game he had no recourse in the courts to claim fraud, etc.

https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/USCOURTS-ca3-09-02237/pdf/USCOURTS-ca3-09-02237-0.pdf

Excellent NY Times article on Defamegate

In the Starting Line-Up

In the Starting Line-Up

Experienced Starter w/First Big Contract

In the Starting Line-Up

Pro Bowl Player

Third String But Playing on Special Teams

Third String But Playing on Special Teams

Any Man Who Must Say I Am The King Is No True King

Practice Squad Player

PatsFans.com Supporter

Rotational Player and Threatening Starter's Job

Member of the Seattle 7 & Roadie for Metallica

PatsFans.com Supporter

Burn it all down!

PatsFans.com Supporter

Practice Squad Player

Burn it all down!

PatsFans.com Supporter

Rotational Player and Threatening Starter's Job

Burn it all down!

Similar threads