Kraft admits he sold the team out

[Ring 6]

people just want to hate the guy......to the point of nearly insisting he had nothing to do with their success though without him they would not even exist

misguided anger since nothing was ruined and nobody lost a damned thing in the process

Brady lost 4 games and his reputation.
The patriots lost a 1st and a 4th.

Not sure why your world requires that to disagree with someone or evaluate them poorly requires hate, but it says a lot.

 

[Simpelton]

Leave it alone Andy. You're basically arguing with two jackasses that believe you can only Love Kraft or Hate Kraft. No middle ground. It's an all or nothing argument that has strayed into a Young v Montana tangent. Yay.

Here are your choices:

1. Love Kraft = Cannot criticize or mention that he acted like a coward.

2. Criticize his deflategate stance = Hate = Ungrateful = You must dismiss anything Kraft has done for this franchise or state or region.

3. Like Kraft = Great owner but acted weak and cowardly during both scandals. The first capitulation arguably led to the second.

Unfortunately #3 and other middling positions are not possible or permittable in this ridiculous argument.

Oh btw, If your kid gets punished in school by the Principle in a deflategate like manner ..... hug, praise, kiss and support the principle in public and in front of your kid. Because it's good to teach our sons that if you're going to lose a righteous battle it's better to capitulate like a coward. Holy **** Batman.

This is the height of irony considering the number of people who are retroactively declaring Kraft a "terrible" or "weak" owner due to this one thing, and trying to downplay his accomplishments towards building this Dynasty which are both significant and fundamental.

you make a play for Nuance, and I respect that but those pissed at kraft are showing a complete and utter lack of nuance themselves, far more than his defenders.

This is one of those situations where the mean and the median are not the same. One cannot solve this dilemma with the wisdom of Solomon. The so-called "betrayal" is so far LESS significant than Kraft's positive accomplishments for the Patriots and New England sports, that one can acknowledge the blemish in character without indulging in the ridiculous overbearing anger of Kraft's critics.

He's been a great owner for us AND he's not interested in rocking the boat in the owner's room. He's made a lot of good decisions for this franchise AND he's not interested in fighting hopeless battles where there's plenty to lose and nothing to gain. He's a guy with eyes on the prize who has made a lot of very good strategic decisions to the benefit of this franchise and its fans, and once made an unpopular decision to keep his powder dry in a fight there was no actual way to win.

If you want absolutes look elsewhere, if you want heroes look elsewhere. If you want scapegoats to vent your anger for Deflategate, kindly go die in a fire. Robert Kraft is an owner. He's a softspoken, diplomatic individual who has a good strategic mind but makes mistakes and is about the last person I would expect to "go down swinging." He's a human being with the same contradictory impulses we have, and it led him to make a mistake once that was very unpopular -- although I still think there's nothing he could have done anyway.

If that mistake is enough for you to throw in the towel on Robert Kraft I have several words to say to you, and "ungrateful" is probably the kindnest. That's the end of the story.

 

[Tony2046]

Tickets aren’t refundable for first round KOs. You can take the popcorn home with you, though.

Don't worry. I got my money's worth. That was a masterpiece.

 

[Ring 6]

This is the height of irony considering the number of people who are retroactively declaring Kraft a "terrible" or "weak" owner due to this one thing, and trying to downplay his accomplishments towards building this Dynasty which are both significant and fundamental.

I believe I am the one using those words, but only in the absence of him hiring belichick.
In other words, his success is primarily because of belichick.
Besides that he has mishandled 2 issues where his franchise was inappropriately attached. I don’t care about building stadiums every team has one or shopping malls.
His contribution to the dynasty was hiring belichick, but his other contributions made bbs job harder.

you make a play for Nuance, and I respect that but those pissed at kraft are showing a complete and utter lack of nuance themselves, far more than his defenders.

Nuance being I give him credit for what he did well and criticism for what he did poorly and say he is a net positive of you include the belichick hire but a net negative otherwise?
Is that what you mean by nuance?

This is one of those situations where the mean and the median are not the same. One cannot solve this dilemma with the wisdom of Solomon. The so-called "betrayal" is so far LESS significant than Kraft's positive accomplishments for the Patriots and New England sports, that one can acknowledge the blemish in character without indulging in the ridiculous overbearing anger of Kraft's critics.

Overall. Positive
Hiring BB. Genius
Everything other than hiring BB. Negative

He's been a great owner for us AND he's not interested in rocking the boat in the owner's room. He's made a lot of good decisions for this franchise

He hired belichick. Please list his other good decisions for the franchise.

AND he's not interested in fighting hopeless battles where there's plenty to lose and nothing to gain.

That is not what he said. He said what’s good for the 31 is what matters. Why do you insist on giving him a different reason than the one he actually based this on?

He's a guy with eyes on the prize who has made a lot of very good strategic decisions to the benefit of this franchise and its fans, and once made an unpopular decision to keep his powder dry in a fight there was no actual way to win. That's the end of the story.

This is just more of what you said above .
Again I’d love to hear all of these strategic decisions that benefited me as a fan.
And I’d love to know why you think he did the right thing if you can’t accept his tradin and have to make one up to defend him.

 

[Soliel]

For me, when I declare an owner a weak or spineless worm. Certain criteria is needed.
I’m willing to cede the point that kraft has done some good ok? But if you fumble the ball on fourth and inches I may bench you

Meaning this, when the chips were down, he screwed the pooch. When leadership was needed by integral parts of the team during obviously false smear campaigns the man spoke out of his own mouth that he put the others first. This is not something I can let go of, the entire thing makes me crazy because of the polarity and our side against them mentality in that I either have to stomach kraft at all cost, which I can’t do no matter what good he has done.

No matter what good you do, it doesn’t take many shady and or spineless acts of cowardice to swing the pendulum the other way.

 

[Tony2046]

This is the height of irony considering the number of people who are retroactively declaring Kraft a "terrible" or "weak" owner due to this one thing, and trying to downplay his accomplishments towards building this Dynasty which are both significant and fundamental.

you make a play for Nuance, and I respect that but those pissed at kraft are showing a complete and utter lack of nuance themselves, far more than his defenders.

This is one of those situations where the mean and the median are not the same. One cannot solve this dilemma with the wisdom of Solomon. The so-called "betrayal" is so far LESS significant than Kraft's positive accomplishments for the Patriots and New England sports, that one can acknowledge the blemish in character without indulging in the ridiculous overbearing anger of Kraft's critics.

He's been a great owner for us AND he's not interested in rocking the boat in the owner's room. He's made a lot of good decisions for this franchise AND he's not interested in fighting hopeless battles where there's plenty to lose and nothing to gain. He's a guy with eyes on the prize who has made a lot of very good strategic decisions to the benefit of this franchise and its fans, and once made an unpopular decision to keep his powder dry in a fight there was no actual way to win. That's the end of the story.

First, you haven't responded to my last reply regarding your spastic outburst. So, who were you attributing those opinions to and what does an autistic child act like? They weren't my opinions and I don't know what "acting like an autistic child" means.

To this post: I've always maintained that Kraft is a HOF worthy owner, seemingly a good guy and that I appreciate what he has done for this organization and the region but that he also acted like a coward during both gates.

So where's the irony? It has been my posts with those thoughts that were replied to by you and lancy.

The argument that he would have lost anyways is ridiculous. If he had continued to fight and had the fines basically shoved down his throat he would have won the respect of his fan base (I know he doesn't care) and more importantly he would have let the other 31 know he's not going to lie down and take it up the ass every time they feel the Pats are too successful. Capitulation begets capitulation.

Now before you turn that statement into some kind of "scorched earth approach" bull **** it doesn't mean Kraft had to sue the league, knock anyone out, spit in anyone's face or burn the house down. It just means he should have simply said that he will not accept a punishment for something that did not happen.

If he lost he lost. What were they going to do if he simply stood by the truth? Take another pick? Fine him more money? Nope. But what he did do is possibly open the door for another bs scandal if the Pats continue to tear through the league.

None of the other 31 are saying "don't f**k with Bob" that's for sure.

What does "for the good the league" even mean? That the Pats are handicapped so that other teams have a better chance of winning?

 

[lancerman]

Leave it alone Andy. You're basically arguing with two jackasses that believe you can only Love Kraft or Hate Kraft. No middle ground. It's an all or nothing argument that has strayed into a Young v Montana tangent. Yay.

Here are your choices:

1. Love Kraft = Cannot criticize or mention that he acted like a coward.

2. Criticize his deflategate stance = Hate = Ungrateful = You must dismiss anything Kraft has done for this franchise or state or region.

3. Like Kraft = Great owner but acted weak and cowardly during both scandals. The first capitulation arguably led to the second.

Unfortunately #3 and other middling positions are not possible or permittable in this ridiculous argument.

Oh btw, If your kid gets punished in school by the Principle in a deflategate like manner ..... hug, praise, kiss and support the principle in public and in front of your kid. Because it's good to teach our sons that if you're going to lose a righteous battle it's better to capitulate like a coward. Holy **** Batman.

Sorry but you are responding to someone who literally said among other things....

-the only good thing Kraft ever did was hire Belichick.
-Aside from hiring Belichick, Kraft has been a net negative on the franchise.
-Everything Kraft has done besides the hire has made Belichick's job harder.

Sorry you don't get to join up with a bunch of extremists who are literally twisting themselves in the wind to criticize him in the face of the extremely likely prospects of complete and utter failure and then call out the people who disagree with you by pointing out that your side has taken an extreme position.

So this entire post you made was non applicable. So if you want to divorce yourself from Andy's stance and declare a more moderate stance for yourself , feel free. But the cats out of the bag on this one.

 

[Tony2046]

Since you edited your post after I replied to the original I have to reply to this nugget.

If that mistake is enough for you to throw in the towel on Robert Kraft I have several words to say to you, and "ungrateful" is probably the kindnest. That's the end of the story.

Where did I say I was throwing in the towel on Kraft ass hat??

I have complimented him for everything he has done well and I criticized his "mistake".

You have nothing to say to me unless you mischaracterize my position first.

 

[Tony2046]

Sorry but you are responding to someone who literally said among other things....

-the only good thing Kraft ever did was hire Belichick.
-Aside from hiring Belichick, Kraft has been a net negative on the franchise.
-Everything Kraft has done besides the hire has made Belichick's job harder.

Sorry you don't get to join up with a bunch of extremists who are literally twisting themselves in the wind to criticize him in the face of the extremely likely prospects of complete and utter failure and then call out the people who disagree with you by pointing out that your side has taken an extreme position.

So this entire post you made was non applicable. So if you want to divorce yourself from Andy's stance and declare a more moderate stance for yourself , feel free. But the cats out of the bag on this one.

Sorry but I simply informed Andy that my middling position was unacceptable to the two jackasses he was arguing with and that the simpletons could only see two verdicts. You either love or hate Kraft. All or nothing.

Oh and I also passed on your brilliant "Hug the Principle" philosophy.

 

[lancerman]

Brady lost 4 games and his reputation.
The patriots lost a 1st and a 4th.

Not sure why your world requires that to disagree with someone or evaluate them poorly requires hate, but it says a lot.

Brady's rep took a hit from the first report on. In case you forgot, remember Brunel crying, remember ESPN skewering Brady for not admitting anything? That was after his first press conference on the subject literally days after the first story broke. People are going to believe what they want to. Believe it or not a lot of fans outside NE think we got it easy during Spygate and that Goodall did is a solid by destroying the tapes. Despite all the evidence to the contrary. Same with the Rams walkthrough story which was retracted many times. People believe what they want to believe. Nothing was changing what it did to his rep.

Btw the near universal consensus on his reputation is that he's the GOAT. So take that for what you will.

The 4 games... we won 3 and won the division, number one seed in the AFC, and Super Bowl. So side from some stats and maybe another win, didn't really matter.

The draft picks probably hurt. Despite what you keep saying about how we don't know what would have happened if Kraft appealed, the majority opinion is that we never were getting them back. And smarter people than you think that.

 

[lancerman]

Sorry but I simply informed Andy that my middling position was unacceptable to the two jackasses he was arguing with and that the simpletons could only see two verdicts. You either love or hate Kraft. All or nothing.

Oh and I also passed on your brilliant "Hug the Principle" philosophy.

And sorry but Andy took an all or nothing position that was anything but middling. And the responses everyone else had were in response to his position. So when you tried to defend him because we all appropriately reacted to his extremist position by treating him like an extremist, it came off bad.

No one said to hug the principle. I don't like that Kraft has done that. But his personal relationship with Goodell isn't my business. That said the point was that if you knew were going to lose and that fighting a losing battle was only going to make your sons school life harder, you're only really being a prideful fool who cares more about the optics of puffing your chest out than the real world effects it would have on the people involved. If that's your thing fine. But I'd rather not have my son be the kid whose embarrassed by their pompous father who decided making a scene for no reason but for show was more important than dealing with the situation the most effective way possible so everyone can move on. But I get it, optics and looking tough are more important than reality and pragmatism.

 

[supafly]

The draft picks probably hurt.

Ya think?

(And that’s my contribution to this thread, aside from some Pootie Tang quotes)

 

[lancerman]

Ya think?

(And that’s my contribution to this thread, aside from some Pootie Tang quotes)

I see you

 

[Tony2046]

And sorry but Andy took an all or nothing position that was anything but middling. And the responses everyone else had were in response to his position. So when you tried to defend him because we all appropriately reacted to his extremist position by treating him like an extremist, it came off bad.

No one said to hug the principle. I don't like that Kraft has done that. But his personal relationship with Goodell isn't my business. That said the point was that if you knew were going to lose and that fighting a losing battle was only going to make your sons school life harder, you're only really being a prideful fool who cares more about the optics of puffing your chest out than the real world effects it would have on the people involved. If that's your thing fine. But I'd rather not have my son be the kid whose embarrassed by their pompous father who decided making a scene for no reason but for show was more important than dealing with the situation the most effective way possible so everyone can move on. But I get it, optics and looking tough are more important than reality and pragmatism.

You're amazing. You can't argue a point without elaborating on or creating something I posted.

Did I defend Andy? I simply told him to leave it alone because he was in an all or nothing argument. I've made my opinion clear. But that doesn't mean I haven't noticed that you and the simpleton have hung your hat on debating his opinions because you feel it somehow eases your attempt to validate yours. It doesn't.

Your "hug the principle" explanation is another example of the "all or nothing approach". I guess it's understandable if that has been your approach to life. Standing your ground does not mean you have to "puff out your chest", punch someone in the face, spew a bunch of curse words in an insane manner or anything like that. It just means you stand on your principles and defend the truth.. Sure you may lose but you lose more if you fold like a coward.

Btw: Hug the principle was based off your analogy. Kraft hugs Roger. The Parent hugs the Principle. But you knew that.


Question: What does "for the good of the 32" or "being a good partner" mean? It sounds like it means that handicapping the Patriots is good for parity?

 

[Simpelton]

Ya think?

(And that’s my contribution to this thread, aside from some Pootie Tang quotes)

They hurt, but there's a lot of other franchises they would have hurt worse. At the end of the day the draft picks were the only real injury from Deflategate, and given that the team is pretty loaded at the moment, and is likely to be a playoff contender for as long as we have TB12, to me it reads more like a black eye than a broken neck, if you take my meaning. Even in the worst case scenario I expect BB to have no problem keeping the franchise going until the end of TB12's run, whenever that happens to be. It's a PITA but not something worth going around looking for a hill to die on. At least not with the big picture in mind. For fans it's easier to get lost in the minutae and see molehills as mountains I suppose.

Other damage includes damage to Brady's reputation that would have happened no matter how the rulings were handled, those prepared to listen know that the whole allegation was a total joke, no one else was going to be convinced by anything anyway.

And as for the 4 games -- heh. Consider this -- in 2014 we went 2-2 in the first 4 games, in 2017 we went 2-2 as well. Only in 2015 did we run the table in the first 4 weeks. On the whole, a 3-1 performance in 2016 above average compared to what we normally accomplish while Belichick is still putting the pieces together early in the year -- and Brady was fresher at the end of the season than he might have otherwise been.

The bulletin board material and some solid performances from Garoppolo and Brissett erased the wound almost entirely and allowed us to use the suspension to our own advantage.

From my perspective, Deflategate was nothing but a horrible nuisance, more significant in the taproom than the boardroom, if you take my meaning. I'm not really surprised that Kraft made the decision to shrug it off. From his perspective it wasn't ever that big a thing, not likely to put a huge hole in franchise valuation as long as the team kept winning. If his strategic consideration was to minimize the distraction to make sure that happened, I have a hard time faulting that

 

[Ring 6]

Brady's rep took a hit from the first report on. In case you forgot, remember Brunel crying, remember ESPN skewering Brady for not admitting anything? That was after his first press conference on the subject literally days after the first story broke.

That’s an odd reason to not fight it.

People are going to believe what they want to. Believe it or not a lot of fans outside NE think we got it easy during Spygate

Kraft didn’t fight that either.

and that Goodall did is a solid by destroying the tapes. Despite all the evidence to the contrary. Same with the Rams walkthrough story which was retracted many times. People believe what they want to believe. Nothing was changing what it did to his rep.

All the more reason to fight to protect your name, legacy and image. I think those things are important.

Btw the near universal consensus on his reputation is that he's the GOAT. So take that for what you will.

That’s because he is. The consensus is also that he cheated which he didn’t but his owner wouldn’t challenge.

The 4 games... we won 3 and won the division, number one seed in the AFC, and Super Bowl. So side from some stats and maybe another win, didn't really matter.

When he chose to lie down he didn’t know that did he? Those games are absent from Brady’s career.

The draft picks probably hurt. Despite what you keep saying about how we don't know what would have happened if Kraft appealed, the majority opinion is that we never were getting them back. And smarter people than you think that.

I wasn’t aware that there was a vote and it was determined what the majority of people think. That’s probably because there wasn’t and it wouldn’t matter any way.
The only way to know is to try. Kraft chose not to try. Kraft has never said it was because he couldn’t win. Kraft publicly praises the man who would be hearing the appeal, he embraces him, he fights for him. See when goodell attacked brady kraft chose to not fight. When jones attached goodell kraft jumped in to defend him.
Why am I the only one who sees that is wrong?

 

[Simpelton]

First, you haven't responded to my last reply regarding your spastic outburst. So, who were you attributing those opinions to and what does an autistic child act like? They weren't my opinions and I don't know what "acting like an autistic child" means.

You're right, I missed that reply in the mass of posts on the topic.

re: acting like an autistic child -- I don't know if I mentioned this, but I have direct personal experience with autistic children, and am autism-spectrum myself. One of the areas those with autism-spectrum conditions struggle with most is a sense of perspective. They tend to get locked into things in a way that makes momentary inconveniences into the worst thing in the world at the moment. I know. I've been in that state before, and being that out of control is a helpless and overwhelming feeling that I don't want to experience again.

It was basically a rather insulting way of saying you're taking the Deflategate thing far too seriously and personally, like an autistic child who's experiencing that kind of emotional feedback loop and can't break out of it without help.

To this post: I've always maintained that Kraft is a HOF worthy owner, seemingly a good guy and that I appreciate what he has done for this organization and the region but that he also acted like a coward during both gates.

So where's the irony? It has been my posts with those thoughts that were replied to by you and lancy.

The argument that he would have lost anyways is ridiculous. If he had continued to fight and had the fines basically shoved down his throat he would have won the respect of his fan base (I know he doesn't care) and more importantly he would have let the other 31 know he's not going to lie down and take it up the ass every time they feel the Pats are too successful. Capitulation begets capitulation.

Now before you turn that statement into some kind of "scorched earth approach" bull **** it doesn't mean Kraft had to sue the league, knock anyone out, spit in anyone's face or burn the house down. It just means he should have simply said that he will not accept a punishment for something that did not happen.

If he lost he lost. What were they going to do if he simply stood by the truth? Take another pick? Fine him more money? Nope. But what he did do is possibly open the door for another bs scandal if the Pats continue to tear through the league.

None of the other 31 are saying "don't f**k with Bob" that's for sure.

What does "for the good the league" even mean? That the Pats are handicapped so that other teams have a better chance of winning?

The problem here is that you're you're associating your argument with Andy Johnson, who is his usual rigid all-or-nothing self in this argument. By aligning with him and supporting his points several times, you seem to be teaming up with him, and people (myself included) are responding to you on that basis. If you'd like to counter that association, feel free to note the areas in which you disagree with Andy Johnson. It's the lack of this in previous pages that is the lion's share of the image problem.

"for the good of the league" BTW means "I'm already a bit unpopular in the room due to my team's unprecedented success on the football field, I don't want to risk making that worse by throwing a tantrum or otherwise endangering the ownership's bargaining position in the upcoming CBA."

 

[Simpelton]

That’s an odd reason to not fight it.

How should Kraft have fought it? He should fight any attack on the reputation of the NEP, but concerns about individual players are only tangentially related to Kraft. He can weigh in, but he won't bend the scales much if he does.

Kraft didn’t fight that either.

How should Kraft have fought Spygate IYHO?

All the more reason to fight to protect your name, legacy and image. I think those things are important.

You keep saying "fight." To win a fight you need two things above all else. Something to fight for, and something to fight with. We have a cause, fine. What are Kraft's weapons to fight this stuff? And please don't mention a useless press conference or an appeal to the same guy who decided to issue the ridiculous penalty in the first place. That's not fighting, that's showboating.

Is there a method Kraft could have used that had a puncher's chance of actually working? Because I haven't seen someone suggest one yet.

As far as I can see Kraft's only option to prevent this from happening again is to make sure of his alliances in the owner's room so idiots like Irsay can't railroad the process against him without being stopped by Kraft's own allies -- stop the avalanche at the top rather than the bottom in other words. If that means buttering up the other owners instead of doing his best Sylvester Stallone impersonation, so be it.

That’s because he is. The consensus is also that he cheated which he didn’t but his owner wouldn’t challenge.

Challenge how? It's easy and lazy to simply say he should have done something. WHAT should he have done?

When he chose to lie down he didn’t know that did he? Those games are absent from Brady’s career.

What were his alternatives to lying down? Please list some, because I don't like the ones I know about so far.

I wasn’t aware that there was a vote and it was determined what the majority of people think. That’s probably because there wasn’t and it wouldn’t matter any way.

Sorry Andy, but it's pretty clear to the casual observer that you're very much in the minority here.

The only way to know is to try. Kraft chose not to try.

Try what?

Kraft has never said it was because he couldn’t win.

You expected him to? Because multibillionaires so often speak off the cuff without carefully nuancing their words for maximum impact?

Kraft publicly praises the man who would be hearing the appeal, he embraces him, he fights for him. See when goodell attacked brady kraft chose to not fight. When jones attached goodell kraft jumped in to defend him.
Why am I the only one who sees that is wrong?

Because you're the one of the few who are in this discussion honestly believing that Kraft's #1 priority after Deflategate should be revenge. Getting bogged down in grudge matches isn't the way to run a successful multibillion dollar business. Move on and make the best decision for your team from where you are right now.

I don't know if Kraft is right or wrong, but it's pretty clear that his priority was kissing up to the league. Unlike you and a few others in this forum I don't see that as betrayal. Gaining influence in the owner's room and building alliances there is the only option Kraft has that actually gives him some ability to prevent this stuff from happening in the future. If it fails it fails. It's still the only option with even a small chance of working to make sure we're not back here in another 8 years with the exact same soap opera.

 

[Ring 6]

How should Kraft have fought it? He should fight any attack on the reputation of the NEP, but concerns about individual players are only tangentially related to Kraft. He can weigh in, but he won't bend the scales much if he does.

Is it really necessary that I repeat this so many times? I have posted and reposted in the last few weeks 11 examples of things he could have done. No one refutes thrm (other than the famous “oh that wouldn’t work”) and people keep saying no one says what h should have done.
Short story: he had the right to appeal the punishment and challenge and rip apart the wells report. There is simply no reason for him not to do that other than the one he stated (31 are more important) that I consider negligent to protecting his franchise.

How should Kraft have fought Spygate IYHO?

Again there is an appeal process. He simply laid down and took an egregious penalty that was undeserved.

You keep saying "fight." To win a fight you need two things above all else. Something to fight for, and something to fight with. We have a cause, fine. What are Kraft's weapons to fight this stuff?

He had the right to appeal the penalties and challenge the wells report. He actually had a lot of the work done but chose to post it to a wr site instead of using it to get justice for his franchise.

And please don't mention a useless press conference or an appeal to the same guy who decided to issue the ridiculous penalty in the first place. That's not fighting, that's showboating.

No idea what you are talking about here.

[quite]Is there a method Kraft could have used that had a puncher's chance of actually working? Because I haven't seen someone suggest one yet.[/quote]
Appeal and rip the wells report to shreds.
Put aside your feelings about goodell for a second and realize wells was hired to investigate. That’s the process. Goodell accepts the findings of the hatchet job grade school level investigation. That’s the process. He literally hired wells to decide what happened. The next step in the process is the “defense”. Where the patriots appeal and present their side. At this point kraft said what is good for 31 is more important so HE CHOSE NOT TO PUT ON A DEFENSE. That is an egregious failure on his part, unless you agree that since 31 wanted the innocent patriots punished the owner of the patriots should just allow it to happen despite total innocence. I don’t.

As far as I can see Kraft's only option to prevent this from happening again is to make sure of his alliances in the owner's room so idiots like Irsay can't railroad the process against him without being stopped by Kraft's own allies -- stop the avalanche at the top rather than the bottom in other words. If that means buttering up the other owners instead of doing his best Sylvester Stallone impersonation, so be it.

So your plan is when you get screwed once do nothing. Then when you get screwed twice do nothing. Then say you did nothing to make friends?
As I have asked before if the punishment was him personally being suspended do you think he would appeal? Of course he would. So, including his own words, the issue here is that this wasn’t important enough to him. I disagree that it shouldn’t have been.

Challenge how? It's easy and lazy to simply say he should have done something. WHAT should he have done?

We aren’t going to get anywhere if I respond to every post with exact answers and you keep asking the same question. As I said I have given 11 potential things he could have done and I think it was directly in response to you.
But I have now said he should have appealed the penalty and the wells findings about 100 times. Please stop ignorantly asking this question.

What were his alternatives to lying down? Please list some, because I don't like the ones I know about so far.

Ibid

Sorry Andy, but it's pretty clear to the casual observer that you're very much in the minority here.

I seem to be getting a hell of a lot of agrees and 2-3 people who blindly make up things to support krafts acruons. I’m not sure what minority you are talking about.
In fact kraft agrees with me, by his own words.

Try what?

A P P E A L T H E P U N I S H M E N T
C O N T E S T T H E W E L L S R E P O R T

Did you read it that time? Does it need to be in color?

You expected him to? Because multibillionaires so often speak off the cuff without carefully nuancing their words for maximum impact?

So now he is lying? When he says why he did it he is lying? Still 2 years later he forgot to say he could t win. He just keeps making up this phony story that he did it because it was best for the 31? It’s all a lie? Jesus.

Because you're the one of the few who are in this discussion honestly believing that Kraft's #1 priority after Deflategate should be revenge.

I have NEVER said a thing about revenge.

Getting bogged down in grudge matches isn't the way to run a successful multibillion dollar business. Move on and make the best decision for your team from where you are right now.

So when a business is sued it shouldn’t show up for the trial to on a defense? The best decision is to accept guilt for something you didn’t do without even raising an objection.

Understand what you are saying.
Wells said and goodell accepted that the patriots, engineered by Tom Brady convicted a scheme to deflate footballs to gain an advantage and cheat to win football games. Further when they investigated they lied to the investigators and exhibited a culture of cheating which received a larger penalty because it was the second violation.
Think about that for a second. That is what the NFL said about Robert krafts franchise, which we know they were innocent.
Robert krafts response to these accusations was “we accept the penalties and will not appeal. We choose to end the rhetoric.” Then he hugs goodell.
It’s like someone calling your wife a whore on national tv and you saying “no comment” and then hugging the person who said it.
How can you possibly think the right thing to do is just accept a punishment when you are 100% innocent?

I don't know if Kraft is right or wrong, but it's pretty clear that his priority was kissing up to the league.

That is why he is wrong.

Unlike you and a few others in this forum I don't see that as betrayal.

Putting what the other 31 teams want over what is best for the team he is the only one who can defend is obviously a betrayal.

Gaining influence in the owner's room and building alliances there is the only option Kraft has that actually gives him some ability to prevent this stuff from happening in the future.

Why didn’t he do that after spygate?
He hasn’t gained anythjng except a reputation as a guy who will give in every time.

If it fails it fails. It's still the only option with even a small chance of working to make sure we're not back here in another 8 years with the exact same soap opera.

Taking it without objection is what guarantees when a target is needed he will be it.
Do you teach your kids to thank the bully for the beating?

 

[Tony2046]

You're right, I missed that reply in the mass of posts on the topic.

re: acting like an autistic child -- I don't know if I mentioned this, but I have direct personal experience with autistic children, and am autism-spectrum myself. One of the areas those with autism-spectrum conditions struggle with most is a sense of perspective. They tend to get locked into things in a way that makes momentary inconveniences into the worst thing in the world at the moment. I know. I've been in that state before, and being that out of control is a helpless and overwhelming feeling that I don't want to experience again.

It was basically a rather insulting way of saying you're taking the Deflategate thing far too seriously and personally, like an autistic child who's experiencing that kind of emotional feedback loop and can't break out of it without help.



The problem here is that you're you're associating your argument with Andy Johnson, who is his usual rigid all-or-nothing self in this argument. By aligning with him and supporting his points several times, you seem to be teaming up with him, and people (myself included) are responding to you on that basis. If you'd like to counter that association, feel free to note the areas in which you disagree with Andy Johnson. It's the lack of this in previous pages that is the lion's share of the image problem.

"for the good of the league" BTW means "I'm already a bit unpopular in the room due to my team's unprecedented success on the football field, I don't want to risk making that worse by throwing a tantrum or otherwise endangering the ownership's bargaining position in the upcoming CBA."

This is a very poor attempt at explaining your elaborations and mischaracterizations of my posts. I see you've tried to hitch a ride on Lancers side swiping logic. You're being disingenuous if not dishonest. I'm not sure what to make of your "acting like an autistic child" insult because my position has been consistent.

My position and my posts were clear. You and Lancer seem to have a problem arguing them head on and therefore have elaborated or added in details. Now you both have attempt to add "my association with Andy" malarkey. It's humorous and ironically weak.

Btw: both of you have argued Andy's opinions using the same approach. You have attacked his "extreme" position while avoiding the basis of his opinion. IOW, you both are looking for something to be right about to conclude a pseudo victory.

"for the good of the league" BTW means "I'm already a bit unpopular in the room due to my team's unprecedented success on the football field, I don't want to risk making that worse by throwing a tantrum or otherwise endangering the ownership's bargaining position in the upcoming CBA."

This is what I think as well and is at the heart of why I criticize Bob. They handicapped the Patriots for the sake of Parity. They rigged the system against the Pats. You're implying that Bob went along with it? Holy **** man how does that not bother you?

Again with the elaborations by the way.. Why would Kraft have to throw a "tantrum"? Why does fighting an accusation with truth and science on your side have to include "extreme" measures?