Bob Kraft releases statement

Palm Beach Pats Fan said:

full text

"While I was disappointed with the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals' decision not to rehear Tom Brady’s case, I am most frustrated that Tom was denied his right to a fair and impartial process. The League's investigation into a football pressure matter was flawed and biased from the start, and has been discredited nearly unanimously by accredited academics and scientists.

"The penalty imposed by the NFL was unprecedented, unjust and unreasonable, especially given that no empirical or direct evidence of any kind showed Tom did anything to violate League rules prior to, during or after the 2015 AFC Championship Game. What Tom has had to endure throughout this 18-month ordeal has been, in my opinion, as far removed from due process as you could ever expect in this country.

"From day one, I have believed in Tom and given him my unwavering support in his pursuit to rightfully clear his name of any wrongdoing. That support extends throughout our organization and has only grown more steadfast as the preponderance of scientific evidence has exonerated Tom. Unfortunately, this stopped being about air pressure a long time ago.

"This entire process has indelibly taken a toll on our organization, our fans and most importantly, Tom Brady. His reluctant decision to stop pursuing further action and to put this situation behind him is what he feels is best for the team in preparation for this season and is fully supported by me and our entire organization.

"To our devoted fans, your unwavering support for Tom and our organization have only reinforced our longstanding belief that we have the greatest fans in all of sports. We will continue to unequivocally support Tom and know our fans will rally around him and the rest of the team like never before. Our full focus now is on making the upcoming season a memorable one for all of our fans."

Click to expand...

That's all well and good Robert, but why don't you tell us what the owners were after?

Kontra, I do apologize if I think these things through. Your last post shows the unmistakable marks of emotional personal animus, this time not randomly spewed about an owner who we all know damn well will never read it, but against your imaginary enemy, vis., me - because I'm not on the "POS" bandwagon.

This guy isn't some serial killer who hangs his victim's body parts from his belt. He's an NFL owner. His interests could always diverge from mine or converge with them. In these two cases, is interests diverged from mine. In the former case, he made no attempt to take on the subject of the ridiculously selective enforcement. In his eyes I think the team "did it," and he was not going to split hairs.

As a fan I compare the Pats' actions in 07 with previous and concurrent actions by other teams, and conclude that a double-standard applied. It is fairly clear to me.

As an NFL owner, there might have been a league* interest at work, but certainly his employees - in his view - put his position and everything he worked to build (or acquire) at risk.

As far as the recent entrapment affair, another dynamic pertained: He publicly campaigned on the subject of the innocence of his guys. There was no "shmuck" talk. If anything, BB could be described as flipping on Brady. Kraft did not take action; he did however consistently maintain that the Pats weren't shown to do anything wrong, and bankrolled a good deal of outreach on that subject.

Is it possible for Kraft to have handled this one better? Yes.

Is it possible for him to have handled this one worse - from my fan point of view? Also yes.

Were he the cardboard cutout you would like him to be, he would simply have said from day one until the present "Oooo you're right, that's twice in just a few years, I have to agree about the preponderance of evidence, etc." You want cardboard Quislings? That's how he's got to behave to earn the kind of vitriol you see here.

To me he's shown himself to be a representative of his cadre - he's an owner. He's not "the best one" in some personal way. He's good at his job, as you and I agree (although I think you believe it nearly all consists of staying hands off, and I'm not quite there - it also consists of establishing and monitoring vertical integration of the real team culture as opposed to these media depictions.) He is not the locker-room leader, duh. That's the bottom-up aspect of corporate culture... but I do think that culture's established and articulated at the top, and comes top-down too.

But when it comes to his interests versus the fan's interests, his play is for his own interests. Most of the time these are dictated by the good of the team, period, and there is no problem.

He is at present put in the position of representing the league* and representing the team at the same time, a time when the league* is nakedly trying to dismantle one of its own franchises.

You're so addicted to your talking points - i.e., he's Goodell's biggest knob-polisher or whatever - that you're unable to consider opinions other than your own without appointing new enemies.

In any event, it seems that we both agree that he's a good owner, not an owner to be replaced (unless it was you who recently said his best years are behind him and he should turn things over to Jonathan).

If we do agree that he's the best owner we could want for results on the field, this is moot.

After all, what have you got but words, just like Kraft? I think someone mentioned not picking up a 15 dollar nick-nack... well, that's something.

You're local up there... a lot of posters in this thread are talking about their season tickets. Anybody selling them?

Your interest is in enjoying this product on the field, and not only because it's performing well. I'm the same way. There are a lot of long-time fans here, and that's brand loyalty for a product. Even in the bad years somehow I saw value in the product.

For me, yes, I have been illogical and will continue to be illogical. I will root for a team in a certain uniform with certain colors and be happy or unhappy depending on how they perform. Probably I subconsciously feel more powerful when they hoist a Lombardi, and personally frustrated when they lose - even (or, especially) when they lose a Super Bowl. That's illogical. I don't know them, they don't know me. They don't really give a damn about me, yet I am concerned with the details of their contracts - and to add insult to injury, what I make every year is decimal dust to them. Even more so for Kraft.

So yes, that's completely illogical. The League* is founded on our illogical loyalty.

So are you going to be logical and stop watching the Patriots?

I bring it up because it is disillusioning to realize that you don't really know the motivations of the team owner. This does not establish that he's just a POS, but it does establish that you can't count on his motivations to align with yours. This is a no-brainer in retrospect, but most of the time it doesn't come up.

Most of the time your interests align by the (illogical) desire of the fan for the team to do well, and the rational desire of the owner for the team to do well.

Knock off the haterade and think about it. It's the inherent nature of our relationship to Kraft. It's just usually not unveiled in this way. Additionally it's the nature of our relationship to the franchise and the League*. We consume their product and make them rich. They give us a harmless simulation of meaning and drama. It's the entertainment business.

Hell, actors unload with anti-Semitic or racist statements, or (e.g. Woody Allen), sleep with then marry their stepdaughters. Their fans seem to stick by them. Hell, we have a guy on this board that still runs around with Mel Gibson for his icon.

I'm not even "sticking by" Kraft. I'm just acknowledging that he does his job well, but I'm not a "fan" of him as a person (Actually I still appreciate the success of the team. I get good entertainment value there. I just assume he's generally like all other owners in these "loyalty" matters.)

So go ahead with your *****fest, you don't need to direct it at everybody who disagrees with you.

You have much more succinctly whined some more, congratulations. Grow up, kid. Bob's not your uncle. He's a billionaire who doesn't give a crap about you. But that didn't happen in 2007 or 2014.

archstanton543 said:

[QUOTE="KontradictioN, post: 4668536, member: 5752"
1. Spygate: Called the greatest coach in NFL history a "schmuck" instead of outwardly supporting him.

Click to expand...

There's nothing do defend. Even BB didn't defend himself publicly. He admitted to misinterpreting the memo and took the punishment. There's nothing Kraft could have done there.[/QUOTE]
BB wouldn't have defended himself publicly. That was up to Kraft. And, yes, there was plenty to defend.

PatsFanInVa said:

For me, yes, I have been illogical and will continue to be illogical.

Click to expand...

Thanks for another word salad. You could have just left that entire post out, sans this, and moved on with your day. The rest of your post was a hodge podge of ad hominem, straw men, and various incoherent thoughts on the matter. At least you also admit that Kraft could have handled this better on top of the above snippet from your post. And I'm not *****ing about anything. I admitted earlier in this thread and in another thread on Kraft that the whining does no good because people are still going to line his pockets anyway. I'm simply responding to the people who would still support the guy even if he marched a father of four out to the 50 yard line and unloaded a .357 round into his skull as the halftime show.

KontradictioN said:

Thanks for another word salad. You could have just left that entire post out, sans this, and moved on with your day. The rest of your post was a hodge podge of ad hominem, straw men, and various incoherent thoughts on the matter. At least you also admit that Kraft could have handled this better on top of the above snippet from your post. And I'm not *****ing about anything. I admitted earlier in this thread and in another thread on Kraft that the whining does no good because people are still going to line his pockets anyway. I'm simply responding to the people who would still support the guy even if he marched a father of four out to the 50 yard line and unloaded a .357 round into his skull as the halftime show.

Click to expand...

Whenever PFV issues one of those boorish bloviations aimed at setting us all straight, I picture a chain-smoking fat guy half in the bag bellying up to a computer and starting with a self-congratulatory wink in the mirror.

flasox27 said:

Wrong as usual. I have enjoyed rooting for the team and its fans since 1960 and will continue to do so. Just because you can't differentiate between rooting for a team and kissing the owner's rear even when he is wrong, doesn't mean others can't. If you don't appreciate my posts ignore me or get the f*ck out and complain elsewhere. One last point, you should reconsider your picture since thanks to Bob's best buddy the QB is not going to be number 12 until game five.

Click to expand...

LOL......I will continue to point out the obvious with you and your posts.......

I'm not the one with the 'problem' ...... nobody's kissing the owners ass, what an idiotic statement.

Continue on with your whining, *****ing, hating ways........it is who you are

Tunescribe said:

Whenever PFV issues one of those boorish bloviations aimed at setting us all straight, I picture a chain-smoking fat guy half in the bag bellying up to a computer and starting with a self-congratulatory wink in the mirror.

Click to expand...

Oh please. I don't have a mirror here.

Chiuba E. Obele said:

www.patriots.com/news/2016/07/15/statement-new-england-patriots-chairman-and-ceo-robert-kraft

Last person I want to hear from quite frankly But whatever....

Click to expand...

Kraft endorsed this prick. He continued to endorse this prick after it was clear that he was a prick, a liar, and favored and disfavored certain teams (and it was clear that the Patriots were on the disfavored list).

Empty platitudes doesn't make this travesty any easier to cope with.

Tunescribe said:

Whenever PFV issues one of those boorish bloviations aimed at setting us all straight, I picture a chain-smoking fat guy half in the bag bellying up to a computer and starting with a self-congratulatory wink in the mirror.

Click to expand...

You know you've been posting here for a long time when you can successfully scan one of his posts for the important parts while not having to spend 10 minutes reading the entire thing. I feel like the hovercraft in the new "Captain America" movie that scans the building for both threats and the type of gas that was employed by the thieves.

KontradictioN said:

Thanks for another word salad. You could have just left that entire post out, sans this, and moved on with your day. The rest of your post was a hodge podge of ad hominem, straw men, and various incoherent thoughts on the matter. At least you also admit that Kraft could have handled this better on top of the above snippet from your post. And I'm not *****ing about anything. I admitted earlier in this thread and in another thread on Kraft that the whining does no good because people are still going to line his pockets anyway. I'm simply responding to the people who would still support the guy even if he marched a father of four out to the 50 yard line and unloaded a .357 round into his skull as the halftime show.

Click to expand...

Yay! An out-of-context quote of your "opponent."

As I "bloviated" previously, I am illogical insofar as I was ever a fan of the team. It's a purely emotional exercise, and one I intend to continue in.

The team is an NFL* franchise. NFL* owners behave in their own interests, which, under such pressures, do not align precisely with my own. It takes the mask off the relationship.

Now since you're logical, I suppose, are you that far up Goodell's butt that you insist on purchasing his evil product? Why are you on Patsfans at all? Isn't being a fan of the Patriots being a fan of an NFL* franchise?

Use Kraft as your psychological device to square that circle if you like. Hell, use me as a surrogate if you like.

All I see is "Mr. Logic" descending into a string of profanities and hyperboles, this time hypothesizing Kraft as mass shooter, to find someone to hate.

In my own case, you find it necessary to quote out of context significantly altering the meaning of the quote.

If it's all "word salad" for you, Spock, why is it so difficult for you to address any of the points I've raised? Is it just easier to resort to these fourth-grade tactics? Or is that all you can manage?

You say you're responding to these hyperbolic characters who would defend Kraft "if" he were a mass murderer. Clearly, these people don't exist.

Taking away the hyperbole, you are responding to people who like Kraft.

You don't like Kraft, that's clear.

I am legitimately in the dark as to the range of self-interested action he could have taken, having never owned an NFL* team.

I see 2 possibilities:
1) He could have taken, and could still take, concrete action; or
2) He could not. The ultimate outcome is he's not going to win this one, doesn't have the ammo to take down the league*, and that's that.

Those 2 possibilities include "could have handled it better." I still would like to see a big front-page story, "Kraft sues Goodell and NFL* for defamation" or "Kraft appeals to Congress to Revoke Anti-Trust Exemption" (on the grounds that they have used it to empower owner collusion that removes competition from the league*). Yay great, that would be doing something. Then I could believe in Kraft. Whoopee.

My world could be a beautiful place where we all burp rainbows and crap cupcakes. I don't think it's gonna happen.

My observation of his responses to these events is that he rhetorically condemned the league* a number of ways through a number of channels. From evidence to date he considers this the range of his possible actions. To be fair, I cannot remember seeing stronger words against the League* since Al Davis.

His "Shoulda woulda coulda" statement, as you say, is not proof that he would have acted differently "if he had only known."

If it's true, he had a range of action he did not exercise.

If it's false, he simply did not have a path to victory and it's all points for style.

If he does not have a path of action to satisfy fan interest while maintaining his ownership interest, as seems most likely, it's simply a case of... welp, he's an NFL* owner. He's not anything to me. He never did give a crap - now, do I buy his product?

Answer = yes. Same for the rest of Patriots fans.

Now, are you a Patriots fan? If so you are tacitly supporting Goodell. They are part of the NFL.* Is that logical?

Your response to Kraft's responses reads as if he had fired Belichick, benched Brady, and moved on to Garopolo for the future.

My response is that it was stupid to ever think an NFL* owner is a "class act" who "has your back" and has these great values and is a real fan blah blah blah.

An NFL* owner is an NFL* owner, and that's all you're seeing here.

PatsFanInVa said:

Yay! An out-of-context quote of your "opponent."

As I "bloviated" previously, I am illogical insofar as I was ever a fan of the team. It's a purely emotional exercise, and one I intend to continue in.

The team is an NFL* franchise. NFL* owners behave in their own interests, which, under such pressures, do not align precisely with my own. It takes the mask off the relationship.

Now since you're logical, I suppose, are you that far up Goodell's butt that you insist on purchasing his evil product? Why are you on Patsfans at all? Isn't being a fan of the Patriots being a fan of an NFL* franchise?

Use Kraft as your psychological device to square that circle if you like. Hell, use me as a surrogate if you like.

All I see is "Mr. Logic" descending into a string of profanities and hyperboles, this time hypothesizing Kraft as mass shooter, to find someone to hate.

In my own case, you find it necessary to quote out of context significantly altering the meaning of the quote.

If it's all "word salad" for you, Spock, why is it so difficult for you to address any of the points I've raised? Is it just easier to resort to these fourth-grade tactics? Or is that all you can manage?

You say you're responding to these hyperbolic characters who would defend Kraft "if" he were a mass murderer. Clearly, these people don't exist.

Taking away the hyperbole, you are responding to people who like Kraft.

You don't like Kraft, that's clear.

I am legitimately in the dark as to the range of self-interested action he could have taken, having never owned an NFL* team.

I see 2 possibilities:
1) He could have taken, and could still take, concrete action; or
2) He could not. The ultimate outcome is he's not going to win this one, doesn't have the ammo to take down the league*, and that's that.

Those 2 possibilities include "could have handled it better." I still would like to see a big front-page story, "Kraft sues Goodell and NFL* for defamation" or "Kraft appeals to Congress to Revoke Anti-Trust Exemption" (on the grounds that they have used it to empower owner collusion that removes competition from the league*). Yay great, that would be doing something. Then I could believe in Kraft. Whoopee.

My world could be a beautiful place where we all burp rainbows and crap cupcakes. I don't think it's gonna happen.

My observation of his responses to these events is that he rhetorically condemned the league* a number of ways through a number of channels. From evidence to date he considers this the range of his possible actions. To be fair, I cannot remember seeing stronger words against the League* since Al Davis.

His "Shoulda woulda coulda" statement, as you say, is not proof that he would have acted differently "if he had only known."

If it's true, he had a range of action he did not exercise.

If it's false, he simply did not have a path to victory and it's all points for style.

If he does not have a path of action to satisfy fan interest while maintaining his ownership interest, as seems most likely, it's simply a case of... welp, he's an NFL* owner. He's not anything to me. He never did give a crap - now, do I buy his product?

Answer = yes. Same for the rest of Patriots fans.

Now, are you a Patriots fan? If so you are tacitly supporting Goodell. They are part of the NFL.* Is that logical?

Your response to Kraft's responses reads as if he had fired Belichick, benched Brady, and moved on to Garopolo for the future.

My response is that it was stupid to ever think an NFL* owner is a "class act" who "has your back" and has these great values and is a real fan blah blah blah.

An NFL* owner is an NFL* owner, and that's all you're seeing here.

Click to expand...

More nonsense. That quote was not out of context. You admitted to being illogical and that you know it, but don't care because you're a homer. Out of fairness, here is the entire quote...

For me, yes, I have been illogical and will continue to be illogical. I will root for a team in a certain uniform with certain colors and be happy or unhappy depending on how they perform. Probably I subconsciously feel more powerful when they hoist a Lombardi, and personally frustrated when they lose - even (or, especially) when they lose a Super Bowl. That's illogical. I don't know them, they don't know me. They don't really give a damn about me, yet I am concerned with the details of their contracts - and to add insult to injury, what I make every year is decimal dust to them. Even more so for Kraft.

Click to expand...

In the end, you're wasting valuable minutes of your time and energy supporting a man who openly hugs and appears to be good friends with an "azzclown" (your words) and openly backed him when that "azzclown's" back was against the wall. You should try separating the good that Kraft has done (and there is a lot of it) with some of the bad he's done (his reactions, or lack thereof, to Spygate and Deflategate). After all, I read your posts in another sub-forum and you don't have a problem doing that throughout other arenas in life. But you know this. That's why your best defense here is that Kraft is not a "class act" who "has our backs" because he's an NFL owner, which is bunch of nonsense as well. As I said at the outset of this thread, you're smarter than this. That's why I'm coming to the conclusion that you're being willfully obtuse.

I call 'em as I see 'em. He's one Robert Kraft. He's not a "good Kraft" and a "bad Kraft." All of his actions stem from one set of motivations. Peculiar circumstances provide the opportunity for the fan to see how those motivations rank. Were his "fan" sensibilities the foremost consideration, we would not be having this conversation. That leaves the financial dimension of team ownership.

This model leaves Kraft and me alienated, as I am not an NFL* owner. I previously thought that there was some difference in Kraft - a blinders-on construct that is just fine in the absence of such circumstances.

However, there are precious few owners who could be painted as going against the league*. I've seen Al Davis take legal action against the league*. Maybe there were others, I don't know. In those very rare cases you could say that it is possible for owners to behave otherwise.

It is not typical of NFL owners. Kraft is a representative of the type.

Their interests are not yours, or mine.

I get the feeling there is an Aesop type morale lesson somewhere in this thread.

"Don't judge the Scorpion for murdering the Frogs that helped build his legacy......because after all he is just a Billionaire Scorpion who lacks the character to do otherwise."


"Hey aren't you going to kill that mosquito sucking your blood out of your arm?"

"Why should I?" "It is only a mosquito and that's what they do"

I hate to interrupt the pissing contest, but does anyone think that the Patriots will do anything, however subtle, to express their displeasure at the games this year.... ?

Maybe instead of having a flyover at the home opener they could just have a bunch of hot air balloons?

A guy at my work got a bus trip together for the opener so I bought tickets (go ahead, bash me for giving money to the NFL*, somebody was going to buy them....). I would just love it if they did something to stick it to that douche Goodell. I know it wouldn't matter in the grand scheme of things, but it would matter to me...

Maybe if they have a substantial lead in the 4th qtr we could get a chant going that is heard on TV... "F you Roger!... F you Roger!"

IllegalContact said:

LOL......I will continue to point out the obvious with you and your posts.......

I'm not the one with the 'problem' ...... nobody's kissing the owners ass, what an idiotic statement.

Continue on with your whining, *****ing, hating ways........it is who you are

Click to expand...

Boy the truth really hurts doesn't it. Continue with your unthinking blindly obedient ways... it is who you are.

Tony2046 said:

I get the feeling there is an Aesop type morale lesson somewhere in this thread.

"Don't judge the Scorpion for murdering the Frogs that helped build his legacy......because after all he is just a Billionaire Scorpion who lacks the character to do otherwise."


"Hey aren't you going to kill that mosquito sucking your blood out of your arm?"

"Why should I?" "It is only a mosquito and that's what they do"

Click to expand...

Unfortunately that is exactly the position we are in economically. You commie.

What I haven't heard anybody here say is that any of the other current owners would do otherwise. Would Jim Irsay be the noble scorpion? Would he have gathered his frogs together and lovingly nurtured them in similar circumstances? Would he have said "F you Roger" if the shoe were on the other hoof and back it up with a lawsuit?

Did he sue the league* when they fined him a half mill and suspended him when he drove drunk? (Even though he already had been penalized in the real courts?)

When 7 Saints including Brees swore under oath that Goodell (and his court of public opinion) railroaded their players on Bountygate, to no effect, and their coach and several players were suspended, where was the Saints owner? What action did he ever take, other than throwing the team under the bus, in this case, according to the Google, Bus Cook (Favre's agent)? I think he resigned from some league* committees because the penalties were excessive? That's it. I'm not a Bountygate expert, but the legal dynamic was the same... whatever the judge thought about the evidence or lack thereof, it wasn't a "did they do it" case, it was a case about Goodell's latitude in the League* via the arbitration process.

New Orleans Saints linebacker Jonathan Vilma does not receive restraining order, still hopeful for favorable ruling

"Coming in, Jonathan Vilma was facing an uphill battle," Tulane Sports Law Program Director Gabe Feldman said. "Clearly the judge, by her questions, indicated she thinks Goodell overstepped his authority, and this case was always going to be about if he executed his power fairly.

Click to expand...

Hey I'm not a Bountygate expert. All I'm saying is that Benson didn't take effective action, but googling around about Bountygate, it looks like he did do some stuff that had only symbolic value, resigned from some committees. Serious question: Did he ever sue the league*? If not, does that make him not a scorpion or just a sad sack who passive-aggressively resigns instead of fights, perhaps a ****ycat?

Hell, at the beginning, he acted as a direct conduit of the NFL*, going after the players and coaches himself, telling them to break up the bounty-hunting system. Trouble is that the players say it never existed.

I never questioned that those evil Saints had done exactly what they were accused of until Goodell went for a double-dip of Patriots' draft picks. Well, triple-dip, counting just the PSI issue, quadruple dip counting the camera thing.

Goodell was fine to the Colts until they won something. He was hunky-dory with the Saints until they won something. And of course the big target is the Patriots, because we win everything.

And yes, all the owners bend over. Wonder how the average Saints fan feels about Bountygate. Hey I'm not here to say the players are right and the League* was wrong. I'm saying I didn't see Benson suing the league*. Did I miss it? The search engine just sends me to stories about relatives suing him for shares of the Saints and Hornets.

So yeah. There's a moral there. Don't look to your team owner for love. He's an NFL* franchisee.

What people on here seem to want is the equivalent of your local McDonalds taking the CEO to court because their fans want them to sell the McRib year-round or something.

Robert. Kraft. Is. Not. Your. Buddy.

Never was.

You want it to be personal so you can hate on Kraft. I'm actually somewhat encouraged that he's actually voicing the team's case, if not acting on it. I don't feel anything about Kraft. Too bad, I used to, but it was delusional.

I'd love to have him act on his words, and then I could think lovely deluded thoughts about what a stand-up owner the Pats have, proving him to be the mythical reformed scorpion.

Not holding my breath.

And by the way, you think a McDonald's franchisee gets to keep the store if he makes this public statement, in relation to the CEO's decisions?

"While I was disappointed with the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals' decision not to rehear Tom Brady's case, I am most frustrated that Tom was denied his right to a fair and impartial process. The League's investigation into a football pressure matter was flawed and biased from the start, and has been discredited nearly unanimously by accredited academics and scientists.

"The penalty imposed by the NFL was unprecedented, unjust and unreasonable, especially given that no empirical or direct evidence of any kind showed Tom did anything to violate League rules prior to, during or after the 2015 AFC Championship Game. What Tom has had to endure throughout this 18-month ordeal has been, in my opinion, as far removed from due process as you could ever expect in this country.

Click to expand...

Like I said, it's words. It's calculated to make us feel okay with ourselves and our team. And for all we know he ran the statement by the League*.

Kontra's whole argument is "OMG but he hugged Goodell and somebody said they behaved amicably. He is the incarnation of evil."

Apparently Mythbusters is going off the air because the two main guys, it turns out, can't stand each other.

But I just saw them laughing and horsing around. How can this be?

I say honestly that I'll await any action that establishes Kraft's motivations to align with mine, beyond what is known (i.e., within the bounds, fair or unfair, set by the league, he wants to win. I emotionally wish that he would take effective action to right a wrong... I'm not a lawyer so I don't know whether an avenue is open to him.)

So that's the extent of what I want or think I'll get out of Kraft. I don't care if him and Roger are secret lovers or on the verge of throttling each other. He's supposed to handle the ownership responsibilities for a winning team, whatever those are. We seem to agree he's done that.

All of this crap is over whether he's this "POS" and hate-target, hell, you guys think/do what you want. Hate Kraft, hate other Pats fans, blah blah blah.

He is what he is. If you sleep better thinking he's the devil, fine.

KontradictioN said:

You know you've been posting here for a long time when you can successfully scan one of his posts for the important parts while not having to spend 10 minutes reading the entire thing. I feel like the hovercraft in the new "Captain America" movie that scans the building for both threats and the type of gas that was employed by the thieves.

Click to expand...

Cool, im going @KontradictioN you after each of his posts for the cliffnotes

PatsFanInVa said:

Unfortunately that is exactly the position we are in economically. You commie.

What I haven't heard anybody here say is that any of the other current owners would do otherwise. Would Jim Irsay be the noble scorpion? Would he have gathered his frogs together and lovingly nurtured them in similar circumstances? Would he have said "F you Roger" if the shoe were on the other hoof and back it up with a lawsuit?

Did he sue the league* when they fined him a half mill and suspended him when he drove drunk? (Even though he already had been penalized in the real courts?)

When 7 Saints including Brees swore under oath that Goodell (and his court of public opinion) railroaded their players on Bountygate, to no effect, and their coach and several players were suspended, where was the Saints owner? What action did he ever take, other than throwing the team under the bus, in this case, according to the Google, Bus Cook (Favre's agent)? I think he resigned from some league* committees because the penalties were excessive? That's it. I'm not a Bountygate expert, but the legal dynamic was the same... whatever the judge thought about the evidence or lack thereof, it wasn't a "did they do it" case, it was a case about Goodell's latitude in the League* via the arbitration process.

New Orleans Saints linebacker Jonathan Vilma does not receive restraining order, still hopeful for favorable ruling



Hey I'm not a Bountygate expert. All I'm saying is that Benson didn't take effective action, but googling around about Bountygate, it looks like he did do some stuff that had only symbolic value, resigned from some committees. Serious question: Did he ever sue the league*? If not, does that make him not a scorpion or just a sad sack who passive-aggressively resigns instead of fights, perhaps a ****ycat?

Hell, at the beginning, he acted as a direct conduit of the NFL*, going after the players and coaches himself, telling them to break up the bounty-hunting system. Trouble is that the players say it never existed.

I never questioned that those evil Saints had done exactly what they were accused of until Goodell went for a double-dip of Patriots' draft picks. Well, triple-dip, counting just the PSI issue, quadruple dip counting the camera thing.

Goodell was fine to the Colts until they won something. He was hunky-dory with the Saints until they won something. And of course the big target is the Patriots, because we win everything.

And yes, all the owners bend over. Wonder how the average Saints fan feels about Bountygate. Hey I'm not here to say the players are right and the League* was wrong. I'm saying I didn't see Benson suing the league*. Did I miss it? The search engine just sends me to stories about relatives suing him for shares of the Saints and Hornets.

So yeah. There's a moral there. Don't look to your team owner for love. He's an NFL* franchisee.

What people on here seem to want is the equivalent of your local McDonalds taking the CEO to court because their fans want them to sell the McRib year-round or something.

Robert. Kraft. Is. Not. Your. Buddy.

Never was.

You want it to be personal so you can hate on Kraft. I'm actually somewhat encouraged that he's actually voicing the team's case, if not acting on it. I don't feel anything about Kraft. Too bad, I used to, but it was delusional.

I'd love to have him act on his words, and then I could think lovely deluded thoughts about what a stand-up owner the Pats have, proving him to be the mythical reformed scorpion.

Not holding my breath.

Click to expand...

I dont think you meant to quote ddaryll in your reply

Tony2046 said:

I get the feeling there is an Aesop type morale lesson somewhere in this thread.

"Don't judge the Scorpion for murdering the Frogs that helped build his legacy......because after all he is just a Billionaire Scorpion who lacks the character to do otherwise."


"Hey aren't you going to kill that mosquito sucking your blood out of your arm?"

"Why should I?" "It is only a mosquito and that's what they do"

Click to expand...

Here's Joe Kerr's "moral of the story"...

RUN! IT'S the SQUIRREL!