VectorPrime
Pro Bowl Player
- Joined
- Aug 10, 2010
- Messages
- 15,033
- Reaction score
- 19,871
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.All depends on what Bob Kraft we get...the one who came out guns blazin' the Monday of the Super Bowl, or the one who recently backed Goodell and said he has a very difficult job to do.
If he's 2007 'take one for the team in Spygate' Kraft then he may roll over...I hope that's not the guy we get, but he didn't become the most powerful owner in the most powerful league in the US by making corporate waves.
4) As you say, this is not a court of law. There is no punishment for withholding anything.
All depends on what Bob Kraft we get...the one who came out guns blazin' the Monday of the Super Bowl, or the one who recently backed Goodell and said he has a very difficult job to do.
If he's 2007 'take one for the team in Spygate' Kraft then he may roll over...I hope that's not the guy we get, but he didn't become the most powerful owner in the most powerful league in the US by making corporate waves.
Robert Kraft is one of those actually paying for the investigation and report, Roger Goodell and Mike Kensil are not paying a dime for it.
That should never be the reason.
Justice should be the reason.
In this case, you don't have to sink to the "money pays" rationale. With every new revelation it becomes obvious that the truth is on the Patriots side
That is the conundrum. An attorney (Wells) has an obligation to zealously represent his client (NFL). What happens if the investigation he was hired to do ends up with a result that harms ( the reputation at least) of his client if it finds wrong doing on Park Ave. Does he report it or is it buried????
Wells is not going to ruin his well established reputation in his field or wreck his firm by burying or ignoring evidence. He's here to act as an impartial party and he will do so. Simple as that.
That's really what it comes down to - which path will he take?
The thing is, we've seen this type of thing before where a firm like Well's will assert a strict definition of what they were hired to investigate
They might assert that they were hired to investigate the on field activities and refrain from investigating the NFL itself - and simply provide specific but limited findings directed towards ball security alone, for example
Wells might suggest that he completed his mandate and be done with it.
I'm not holding my breath expecting more - but the length of this investigation does give me some hope that they are more focused on the NFL than the Patriots, so one never knows