J. Kraft: Jones told us to "take your medicine"

[shmessy]

I never claimed Kraft was the root of Brady's suffering. My argument was Brady's legal battle cost him far more than legal fees. Try really understanding what people are trying to say before trying to prove them wrong. You've argued against things other didn't say a few times in this thread, which is why I jumped in in the first place.

In that case, I am sorry. I thought you, like others here, were talking about the subject of the thread title. My bad.

The sentence "I don't believe the stance that Kraft had nothing to gain from fighting more than he did is invalid." had three negatives in it and threw me.

.

 

[Simpelton]

This has it backwards, though. Kraft threw in the towel way before Brady did, and lack of support from his owner (along with other personal stuff going on) may have influenced Brady to give up the fight.

I doubt it. If I had to guess, Brady "gave in" when the federal appeals court ruled against him and his legal team doubted the Supreme Court would take the case. He carried that legal battle just about exactly as far as it was reasonable to suggest that he take it.

If Kraft had no support whatsoever amongst other owners to take on Goodell and his fraudulent conduct towards Tom Brady, I guess I understand a little better why he was such a wimp, but he WAS a wimp in my opinion, and that is never going to change (my opinion, that is). It doesn't mean I hate Kraft, but it also doesn't mean I think he handled things right. It's all water under the bridge at this point, obviously, and it's amusing to see Jerrah get a bitter taste of his own medicine. I still hate Goodell, though, and if Jones could get rid of him, great. If not, we're on to Miami!

I doubt Jones is in a position to do anything about Goodell. He's just making noise for noise's own sake, exactly so that he won't appear to just be lying down and taking it. Jones is playing to the media. I doubt any actual action will take place. It's all pandering to Cowboys fans who demand defiance. I'm not surprised Kraft didn't go there, When he's appeared in public he seemed softspoken and preferred to let his franchise do the talking for him.

I doubt Kraft has one single problem with the way this thing turned out, even with the lost picks, because at the end of the day, Robert Kraft won Deflategate. By responding with meekness he made a victim of himself and the Patriots, and made Goodell's overreaching become obvious to the world.

The initial gut check reaction against the Patriots would have been magnified if Kraft had raised the rebel flag, by responding softly, Kraft deflected that potential negative attention back on Goodell -- even most Patriot haters admit that Goodell really didn't have a leg to stand on in Deflategate and most of the football world knows that the whole scandal was a bad joke.

I know there's an inborn American cultural reaction that says that injustice must be defied from the rooftops but as the Good Book says, "a soft answer turneth away wrath." If Kraft was looking to get past Deflategate and play to the broader strategic vision of the New England Patriots, then as much as it feels unsatisfying for the fans (who are the smallest and least significant factor in Kraft's strategic view at that point), bowing meekly and letting Roger Goodell trip all over himself was the correct call.

In the battle of Agincourt, facing a French army that outnumbered them 5 to 1 and an infantry force that outnumbered their infantry by something like 20 to 1, the English infantry stood their ground while the French charged across the muddy field then, just as the exhausted French were preparing to join battle, English infantry took a step backwards, unbalancing their enemy and allowing the outnumbered English infantry to make quick work of the first line of Frenchmen. That's what Kraft did. He took a measured step backwards with the broader strategic picture in mind. Deflategate at the end of the day was a single event in the long history of the franchise, and it's perpetuating that history that is the major strategic aim of Robert Kraft and the New England Patriots. Not winning or losing any individual battle.

That's what "we're on to Cincinatti" means in the broader strategic picture of a franchise. Do not obsess about winning any particular battle or play. Focus on the main goal and marshal your strategic resources towards that ultimate end rather than squandering them on distractions and minor objectives. Understand what it takes to fully achieve that ultimate objective, and then, do the job you have to do to contribute your bit towards that goal. That's the Patriots Way, and in the meta-struggle in the owner's room, that means being willing to lose battles to win wars.

Which is ultimately the story of Deflategate -- a lost battle in a victorious war, no more significant to the broader history of the franchise than Operation Market Garden was to WWII. Does refighting that battle over and over again in our comfortable armchairs change the outcome of the war? No, and we certainly hope it doesn't. But that doesn't stop us from refighting the battles, does it?

 

[shmessy]

I doubt it. If I had to guess, Brady "gave in" when the federal appeals court ruled against him and his legal team doubted the Supreme Court would take the case. He carried that legal battle just about exactly as far as it was reasonable to suggest that he take it.



I doubt Jones is in a position to do anything about Goodell. He's just making noise for noise's own sake, exactly so that he won't appear to just be lying down and taking it. Jones is playing to the media. I doubt any actual action will take place. It's all pandering to Cowboys fans who demand defiance. I'm not surprised Kraft didn't go there, When he's appeared in public he seemed softspoken and preferred to let his franchise do the talking for him.

I doubt Kraft has one single problem with the way this thing turned out, even with the lost picks, because at the end of the day, Robert Kraft won Deflategate. By responding with meekness he made a victim of himself and the Patriots, and made Goodell's overreaching become obvious to the world.

The initial gut check reaction against the Patriots would have been magnified if Kraft had raised the rebel flag, by responding softly, Kraft deflected that potential negative attention back on Goodell -- even most Patriot haters admit that Goodell really didn't have a leg to stand on in Deflategate and most of the football world knows that the whole scandal was a bad joke.

I know there's an inborn American cultural reaction that says that injustice must be defied from the rooftops but as the Good Book says, "a soft answer turneth away wrath." If Kraft was looking to get past Deflategate and play to the broader strategic vision of the New England Patriots, then as much as it feels unsatisfying for the fans (who are the smallest and least significant factor in Kraft's strategic view at that point), bowing meekly and letting Roger Goodell trip all over himself was the correct call.

In the battle of Agincourt, facing a French army that outnumbered them 5 to 1 and an infantry force that outnumbered their infantry by something like 20 to 1, the English infantry stood their ground while the French charged across the muddy field then, just as the exhausted French were preparing to join battle, English infantry took a step backwards, unbalancing their enemy and allowing the outnumbered English infantry to make quick work of the first line of Frenchmen. That's what Kraft did. He took a measured step backwards with the broader strategic picture in mind. Deflategate at the end of the day was a single event in the long history of the franchise, and it's perpetuating that history that is the major strategic aim of Robert Kraft and the New England Patriots. Not winning or losing any individual battle.

That's what "we're on to Cincinatti" means in the broader strategic picture of a franchise. Do not obsess about winning any particular battle or play. Focus on the main goal and marshal your strategic resources towards that ultimate end rather than squandering them on distractions and minor objectives. Understand what it takes to fully achieve that ultimate objective, and then, do the job you have to do to contribute your bit towards that goal. That's the Patriots Way, and in the meta-struggle in the owner's room, that means being willing to lose battles to win wars.

Which is ultimately the story of Deflategate -- a lost battle in a victorious war, no more significant to the broader history of the franchise than Operation Market Garden was to WWII. Does refighting that battle over and over again in our comfortable armchairs change the outcome of the war? No, and we certainly hope it doesn't. But that doesn't stop us from refighting the battles, does it?

Can I get the Cliff's Notes to this?

Actually, that 2nd to last paragraph was a great summary about the Belichick way. I'm not sure Kraft would have handled Defamegate the way he ultimately did without that influence.

.

.

 

[Simpelton]

Can I get the Cliff's Notes to this?

Heh. Once i get going, it's hard to stop me

Actually, that 2nd to last paragraph was a great summary about the Belichick way. I'm not sure Kraft would have handled Defamegate the way he ultimately did without that influence.

.

.

Preciate hearing you say that.

 

[shmessy]

Heh. Once i get going, it's hard to stop me


Preciate hearing you say that.

Well it does bring up the broader question of whether "Belichickian Theory" is what truly influenced Kraft's handling of Defamegate in the end.

I'm not fully sure. I think a large part of it, of course, is Kraft's desire to be liked by the boys in the billionaires club, but this also does seems to be a very Belichick influence of just going ahead and focusing on the next fundamental.

Probably a mixture of both.

.

 

[Simpelton]

Well it does bring up the broader question of whether "Belichickian Theory" is what truly influenced Kraft's handling of Defamegate in the end.

I'm not fully sure. I think a large part of it, of course, is Kraft's desire to be liked by the boys in the billionaires club, but this also does seems to be a very Belichick influence of just going ahead and focusing on the next fundamental.

Probably a mixture of both.

.

Being liked by the boys in the billionaires club is its own strategic consideration with its own pros and cons. One of the pros is, you aren't as likely to be in the line of fire for hackneyed plots by the Commissioner among others.

Being liked in the billionaires club has enough positive considerations behind it that it could actually be considered to be Robert Kraft's "job," and keeping the franchise out of the line of fire of petty, vindictive plots by angry owners is part of Kraft's role in protecting the legacy of the Patriots.

Sometimes, any player on the Patriots runs into a situation where they want to do one job, but the needs of the team force them to do another. A good example of that was Chris Long last year. A Patriot's ability to do the job he needs to do rather than the one he wants to do or the one that makes him look good is the mark of a true Patriot.

In my opinion the events of Deflategate mark Robert Kraft as a true Patriot who eschewed the sexy role for the practical one and kept the franchise moving forward rather than getting lost in the drama. And it's a very large part of why the franchise went on to win the Superbowl.

By the same token, JJ's decision to GET lost in the drama, to turn the billionaires club against him and play to the media, and to be the source of a national distraction to his own franchise, makes Jerruh as a true Cowboy.

As for meekly accepting the lost picks, etc. those picks were gone. Nothing Kraft could have done would have avoided Deflategate. The only decision he could make was how he and his organization would respond to it. And instead of getting hung up on it, the top-down decision was to accept it, move past Deflategate, and let their game do the talking. That started at the top with Kraft, and it was the message throughout a season in which the Patriots went on to win the Superbowl.

I dunno about the patriots, but if any other franchise was offered to win a Superbowl on exchange for 2 firsts and a 4th they'd probably take it. We sacrificed smaller battles to stay on message, and the result was victory. I see nothing to criticize here.

 

[shmessy]

Being liked by the boys in the billionaires club is its own strategic consideration with its own pros and cons. One of the pros is, you aren't as likely to be in the line of fire for hackneyed plots by the Commissioner among others.
.

Well, that one backfired.

.

 

[Simpelton]

Well, that one backfired.

.

Yes it did. But strategically it's still the right ecision.

There are no certainties in this world. Only a game of chance where you play the odds and hope things work in your favor. Kraft has been very good at playing good angles, but you never win them all.

 

[PatsDeb]

I doubt it. If I had to guess, Brady "gave in" when the federal appeals court ruled against him and his legal team doubted the Supreme Court would take the case. He carried that legal battle just about exactly as far as it was reasonable to suggest that he take it.



I doubt Jones is in a position to do anything about Goodell. He's just making noise for noise's own sake, exactly so that he won't appear to just be lying down and taking it. Jones is playing to the media. I doubt any actual action will take place. It's all pandering to Cowboys fans who demand defiance. I'm not surprised Kraft didn't go there, When he's appeared in public he seemed softspoken and preferred to let his franchise do the talking for him.

I doubt Kraft has one single problem with the way this thing turned out, even with the lost picks, because at the end of the day, Robert Kraft won Deflategate. By responding with meekness he made a victim of himself and the Patriots, and made Goodell's overreaching become obvious to the world.

The initial gut check reaction against the Patriots would have been magnified if Kraft had raised the rebel flag, by responding softly, Kraft deflected that potential negative attention back on Goodell -- even most Patriot haters admit that Goodell really didn't have a leg to stand on in Deflategate and most of the football world knows that the whole scandal was a bad joke.

I know there's an inborn American cultural reaction that says that injustice must be defied from the rooftops but as the Good Book says, "a soft answer turneth away wrath." If Kraft was looking to get past Deflategate and play to the broader strategic vision of the New England Patriots, then as much as it feels unsatisfying for the fans (who are the smallest and least significant factor in Kraft's strategic view at that point), bowing meekly and letting Roger Goodell trip all over himself was the correct call.

In the battle of Agincourt, facing a French army that outnumbered them 5 to 1 and an infantry force that outnumbered their infantry by something like 20 to 1, the English infantry stood their ground while the French charged across the muddy field then, just as the exhausted French were preparing to join battle, English infantry took a step backwards, unbalancing their enemy and allowing the outnumbered English infantry to make quick work of the first line of Frenchmen. That's what Kraft did. He took a measured step backwards with the broader strategic picture in mind. Deflategate at the end of the day was a single event in the long history of the franchise, and it's perpetuating that history that is the major strategic aim of Robert Kraft and the New England Patriots. Not winning or losing any individual battle.

That's what "we're on to Cincinatti" means in the broader strategic picture of a franchise. Do not obsess about winning any particular battle or play. Focus on the main goal and marshal your strategic resources towards that ultimate end rather than squandering them on distractions and minor objectives. Understand what it takes to fully achieve that ultimate objective, and then, do the job you have to do to contribute your bit towards that goal. That's the Patriots Way, and in the meta-struggle in the owner's room, that means being willing to lose battles to win wars.

Which is ultimately the story of Deflategate -- a lost battle in a victorious war, no more significant to the broader history of the franchise than Operation Market Garden was to WWII. Does refighting that battle over and over again in our comfortable armchairs change the outcome of the war? No, and we certainly hope it doesn't. But that doesn't stop us from refighting the battles, does it?

LOL, I think you give Kraft way too much credit for being a strategist. He acted the way he did because it's more important to him that he maintain his standing & status in the "32" rather than protecting his own star player's wrongfully tarnished reputation. The continued hugging of Goodell, Mara, et al shows that. Brady either forgives him or understands that it's every man for himself in this business and doesn't hold a grudge. The "fact" that the Pats and Brady appear to be the "victims" in some circles (in most circles, by the way (i.e. other fan bases) they appear to be "guilty as charged") is a coincidence, not some long thought out strategy by Kraft.

I agree, however, we lost the battle but won the war (for now, but there's still no check on Goodell pulling these shenanigans on us or any other team out there going forward). Kraft should actually take this opportunity to fix that, but he won't, for the reasons stated above.

 

[Joker]

I love when history majors expound on a Patriots fan football site.

I would say, in my humble opinion, that the Pats lost a battle to win a bigger battle. The war is far ,far,far from over. Hitlerdell still sits atop his throne.

 

[Simpelton]

LOL, I think you give Kraft way too much credit for being a strategist.

Every owner is a strategist. Every rich man either is a strategist or has strategists work for him. If you don't identify both your goal, and the steps you need to take to reach your goal, you don't get rich, and you probably don't stay rich even if you started rich.

Strategy isn't some esoteric thing that only a few deep geniuses ever do. Everybody strategizes, even if your only objective is to find the best way to get into your girlfriend's pants.

He acted the way he did because it's more important to him that he maintain his standing & status in the "32" rather than protecting his own star player's wrongfully tarnished reputation. The continued hugging of Goodell, Mara, et al shows that.

And yet you ignore the underlying strategic reasons that might have driven an obviously intelligent individual to prioritize those things. You make it sound like an ulterior motive rather than a strategy, as if the two are different things.

Isn't it more illuminating to ask WHY that might be his priority over protecting his star player that has put millions if not billions in his pocket over his long career?

Brady either forgives him or understands that it's every man for himself in this business and doesn't hold a grudge. The "fact" that the Pats and Brady appear to be the "victims" in some circles (in most circles, by the way (i.e. other fan bases) they appear to be "guilty as charged") is a coincidence, not some long thought out strategy by Kraft.

I doubt it. kraft strikes me as a person who carefully weighs the pros and cons before doing things.

I agree, however, we lost the battle but won the war (for now, but there's still no check on Goodell pulling these shenanigans on us or any other team out there going forward). Kraft should actually take this opportunity to fix that, but he won't, for the reasons stated above.

How does Kraft fix that? By gaining the votes of other owners? Perhaps by building coalitions in the room? By finding allies among those who damaged us in the last affair? More or less exactly what he is doing, in other words?

Or don't you think that rallying enough votes to make changes and prevent another Deflategate might mean cozying up to people we fans don't like very much at the moment, and who don't luke us very much right now either?

 

[PatsDeb]

Every owner is a strategist. Every rich man either is a strategist or has strategists work for him. If you don't identify both your goal, and the steps you need to take to reach your goal, you don't get rich, and you probably don't stay rich even if you started rich.

Strategy isn't some esoteric thing that only a few deep geniuses ever do. Everybody strategizes, even if your only objective is to find the best way to get into your girlfriend's pants.



And yet you ignore the underlying strategic reasons that might have driven an obviously intelligent individual to prioritize those things. You make it sound like an ulterior motive rather than a strategy, as if the two are different things.

Isn't it more illuminating to ask WHY that might be his priority over protecting his star player that has put millions if not billions in his pocket over his long career?



I doubt it. kraft strikes me as a person who carefully weighs the pros and cons before doing things.



How does Kraft fix that? By gaining the votes of other owners? Perhaps by building coalitions in the room? By finding allies among those who damaged us in the last affair? More or less exactly what he is doing, in other words?

Or don't you think that rallying enough votes to make changes and prevent another Deflategate might mean cozying up to people we fans don't like very much at the moment, and who don't luke us very much right now either?

Oy, for a Simpleton you have complex answers. Also, I see no evidence that Kraft is building coalitions in the room. I hope he is, but he seems just to be trying to shut Jones down and give Roger the farm. If it comes out otherwise, I will come back and happily eat some crow.

 

[voluntarysaftey]

No fan of Kraft for the way he acted in Deflategate.
Question now is, why is Kraft voting for Goodell's pay package instead of championing the idea of getting someone else on board, and having a non-commissioner (and probably better, a 3 person committee) in charge of player punishments.
Why is Kraft still in Goodell's corner when this is the time to fix an obvious issue.

 

[Simpelton]

Because replacing the Commissioner is the last thing on Kraft's mind.

Think about it. Burnt hand shuns the fire. Kraft taught Goodell not to mess with the Patriots franchise. He knows that there are consequences if he pushes a vendetta against the Pats too far.

Replace him, and you run the risk of having to "educate" the new guy all over again to not give in to butthurt owners and impose vindictive penalties. Goodell has learned his lesson. With a new sherriff in town you have no idea what he'll do.

Besides, I really doubt that Goodell is the problem right now. The issue with the Commissioner's Office is structural, and Kraft can't fix it on his own. It needs to wait for the next CBA, then they can either deal with Rule 46 in exchange for some other concession or restructure the system in some other way. Between 28 and 30 teams see this situation as a non-emergency right now, and showing weakness in the owner's room will embolden the union and increase the chance of a strike.

It's simply not the right time for a revolution in the Commissioner's office.

 

[PatsDeb]

Because replacing the Commissioner is the last thing on Kraft's mind.

Think about it. Burnt hand shuns the fire. Kraft taught Goodell not to mess with the Patriots franchise. He knows that there are consequences if he pushes a vendetta against the Pats too far.

Huh? What burnt hand? What consequences? Whatcha smokin? Right now there would be no consequences if Roger Badell announced that the balls in Mexico City were deflated, and Tom Brady is to blame again, and because this is a repeat offense his suspension this time is 10 games.

Your arguments are flawed because you suppose way too much.

 

[IllegalContact]

Don't forget the people *****ing about people *****ing about Kraft.

as well as the people *****ing about others *****ing about anti-Kraft *****es

 

[Former Fan]

LOL at Goodell being afraid of messing with Kraft. What's he going to do, give him an uncomfortably long hug?

 

[Galeb]

as well as the people *****ing about others *****ing about anti-Kraft *****es

Musn't forget them either.

 

[flasox27]

People are saying Kraft acted weak and I disagree. He put himself in an impossible position. From the little I hear, he goes around and tell other owners to drop their protest and accept stupid penalties for the "good" of the league. He has created the monster that Goodell seems to have become. So it was all about saving face and maintaining his leadership role in his owners club.

Are you kidding? He is lucky to have a seat in the kid's table in the ownership meetings. The power brokers in the league are Rooney and Mara. Kraft is couldn't influence a light bulb into a socket there,

 

[Dr Pain]

Are you kidding? He is lucky to have a seat in the kid's table in the ownership meetings. The power brokers in the league are Rooney and Mara. Kraft is couldn't influence a light bulb into a socket there,

Kraft brought this on in part by being the assistant commissioner and playing it too cute. The NFL should be working on the next labor agreement now. The issue of Goodell being the judge Jury and Executioner was a smart move because the NFL gives this up and it seems like they are giving up a great deal when it is nothing.