SilverSeven
Practice Squad Player
- Joined
- Jun 6, 2016
- Messages
- 162
- Reaction score
- 151
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.Unfortunately, Kraft's greatness is in the past. It ended when he stopped putting his team and its fans first and became for whatever reason the dupe who thought his function was to be the defender of the shield and the POS commissioner. The new Kraft has sure dropped a lot of balls since then but he receives a lot of hugs so that is all that matters.It's the fact that Kraft is such a great owner that makes him dropping the ball on cameraplacement-gate and framegate so disappointing. I still wouldn't rather have any other owner in the league, but he massively screwed up on these two occasions.
Link:In the end, the only person fighting on principle here, even if you are a Jets fan who is the biggest Patriots hater in the world, was Brady.
Are you kidding? Just wait until after the POS and the other 31 owners finish their victory lap.
It's like when someone is celebrating getting a loan for a boat they can barely afford at 11%.Are you kidding? Just wait until after the POS and the other 31 owners finish their victory lap.
The only thing is that these a-holes can pay cash for any boat and the man responsible for getting them the money is the cabin boy.It's like when someone is celebrating getting a loan for a boat they can barely afford at 11%.
Winner winner chicken dinner. BB and more generally, the Patriots franchise. Anything that looks like the Pats must be guilty, because they've been penalized so heavily.
This, and the earlier camera thing, are outsized penalties being used as off-field leveling attempts. Pretty much like the plot of the original Rollerball, but the target's not just one player, it's a whole team. No one team can be that dominant.
Goodell's motivations...
1) JEST history?
2) The vision of "parity" whereby a team that puts together sustained excellence cannot be tolerated?
3) Personal animus?
2 seems most likely, as it's most tied into the idea of league* profits.
I don't want to get too deep into the conspiracy theory rabbit hole, but I can't see the thinking as divorced from the business side. I think he knows controversy is great for the league*. Drama is great for the league*. There might have been some fear that trumping up cameragate would turn off all fanbases.... but when he saw how it worked as a channel for the envy/hate in 31 out of 32 fanbases, the lightbulb went on.
The WWE model, with the Pats cast in the role of the Russian bad guy pro wrestler, is money. Drama sells.
It might also scratch the itch he still has as a JEST partisan.
Well, for one, you're combining judgement for Kraft the owner for the product on the field (excellent) with how he's handled what's happened to his star quarterback and coach off the field (awful).
For another, you're failing to weigh each individual situation on it's own merits. Both are illogical.
Let me ask you: what are your thoughts on Roger Goodell as a commissioner?
I treat "how he's handled what's happened to his star QB and coach off the field" as awful from my point of view but likely unimportant. He says now (to fans) that he wished he did not trust the League* when he did. He says now (to fans) that the Pats have been treated unfairly.
He did not, however, take any action to oppose the League*.
I do not know what the odds of success were in Kraft's mind in framegate or in cameragate if he pursued action rather than words. (see below for my guess at his weighing of the two events, which is what counts, when we are guessing at his motivations).
There is one set of possibilities in which what we like about him about an owner and what is making everybody very angry or disappointed would be unified. That set of possibilities is that all actions are he ones that he believed presented the highest likelihood for his personal success. This would square with how self-interest drives most people's motivations.
His personal success is simple up to 2007, consisting of those actions (and inactions) most likely to produce victories... including his own input, whatever it has been, into what came to be called "the Patriot way." His interests were almost perfectly aligned with ours, leaving aside any gripes about the cost of concessions and the like.
Even early in the Kraft tenure, you have to realize he took actions that we would not allow him to take, were such decisions made by referendum. For example, he didn't say a word about the hijinks on the so-called "competition committee," including ignoring the Colts' piped-in fan noise, "emphasizing" rules to change the way the game was played at the time in such a way as to disadvantage his team specifically, etc. But we either don't count these antecedent (in)actions as heavily, or time has dulled any edge.
But let's say these instances don't "rise to the level," and since 2007 his personal success has relied not only on his team's performance on the field, but also on his response to off-the-field issues, in a way that did not apply before.
Fan support is not inelastic, but my guess is that it responds much more to winning than to apparent loyalty/disloyalty displayed by the owner. That's thing one.
Thing two is that he believes that the Patriots' success - now we're talking about financial success - is dependent on the League*'s success. No league, no cash. His own position in the League* is lampooned here, but as I understand it, he has heavy influence regarding broadcast contracts. Believe me, not having lived in the area since childhood, I have noticed how often the Pats are televised in a given season. Growing up it used to be twice a year, because in the Washington area we also got Baltimore games and they played the Colts. Now the Pats are on national television several times per regular season. It's about as likely as not that the Pats game will be available to me via normal cable (not DirectTV Sunday Ticket).
Success on the field does that I guess. I don't know whether the Pats get a sweet deal, all else being equal, based on his position within the league as regards broadcast contracts.
If so, this would be another example of outcomes that would be in Kraft's interests via our interests as fans (well, not yours, but mine, since I am not local). But this example would only be possible via his position within the League*. I went through all of this trouble to establish that Kraft might get something for all of this bending over. That something might be beneficial to the franchise, even if it doesn't matter to you personally.
So that's a complicating factor too. The unifying factor is that I do think Kraft does what is "good for the team," but this is calculated by what he thinks is most likely to result in the financial health of the team, because he owns it.
This allows the possibility that he would be okay with a team with the Russian Bad Guy WWE personality, if it still results in coverage, fans, merchandise sales, etc. He doesn't care that fans like you and me have to have arguments with people calling us the "Cheatriots." Again, that could even be fuel for financial success. The Russian Bad Guy Wrestler gets paid too.
Cameragate: I think he believed we were in the wrong - and that overwhelmed any concern about the excessiveness of the punishment. We were caught with our hand in the cookie jar in his eyes. But let me know if you feel otherwise.
"Framegate": I think he believes we were in the right. He has consistently said this. But he takes no actions backing up what he says, other than putting up a website that says it some more, putting out statements, etc. In other words, he has not acted in a way contrary to his league* interests. (For example, suing the league*).
I think he's been an utterly inconsistent clown. I also think that under Goodell's tenure the League* has succeeded financially. Remember that WWE has had periods of success (though I don't know whether that product has grown or declined in popularity.)
I think that under Goodell, we have moved to a model of direct League* interference with individual franchises' chances in a given year. This has been to the detriment of the Pats more than anybody, but also to the detriment of the Saints.
What's interesting is that Parity by process is easily as influential and is a form of disadvantaging successful teams. That's the pre-Goodell model. But it's not aimed specifically at any team so it's generally accepted.
Goodell is simply trying to fix games with a thin veneer of "justice" overlaid on his agenda. That's my opinion after going through two of these national-news witch-hunts.
The question is, what Kraft thinks of Goodell.
The answer to that question, if Kraft is a rational actor who treats his team as a business, is whether he is making more or less money.
Unfortunately, this motivation might be consistent with the Patriots being cast in any role.
To clarify: I don't think he wants this role. I take him at his word that he feels the Pats have been treated unfairly. I do think he has a personal, emotional fan side to his personality. It might also be rational to speculate that the team itself cannot be assumed to treat such injustice as fuel for on-field performance in every instance.
But the bottom line is that I know what I don't know, namely, how he weighs each event from a business point of view.
I also assume that his interest is different from mine. I feel foolish for ever thinking otherwise.
I will re-assess my present thoughts on Kraft's motivations if he takes actions which jeopardize business relationships but satisfy notions of justice, honor, etc. (e.g., suing the league*).
You make some valid points. As I have said before Kraft was a great owner prior to 2007 for the team and its fans because he put them first. Since then he has been detrimental to the team and its fans because he has for whatever reason financial or otherwise has decided the Shield and the POS are more important than his team and its fans. Every action he has taken supports this position meaningless PR statements to the contrary geared to appease the fan base. Now I am not saying that Kraft wouldn't like to see the team win but it is just not as important as pleasing the POS and his fellow owners. I would venture to say that his position is a miniscule minority since most other owners put their team and fans first. The bottom line is that Kraft is the right owner if you want to see the Pats become the whipping boy of the NFL while he doesn't nothing substantive to stop it. I can hope than Jonathan is more like the old Kraft who puts his te3am and its fans first.
Unfortunately, Kraft's greatness is in the past. It ended when he stopped putting his team and its fans first and became for whatever reason the dupe who thought his function was to be the defender of the shield and the POS commissioner. The new Kraft has sure dropped a lot of balls since then but he receives a lot of hugs so that is all that matters.
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.
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.then get the f*ck out and find something else to do..........it is obvious this team makes you miserable so why continue?
There is no sense debating with him. He doesn't realize BB was under a gag order by the POS as agreed to by Kraft.Plenty to defend. Spying vs Camera placement. It was legal to videotape signals and as far as I know still is. Ironically the Jets could have legally videotaped the Patriots signals during the game the Pats got busted for.
So it's another nuclear penalty for jaywalking.