Robert Kraft talks to Peter King

[reflexblue]

This, for me, is probably the most painful thing to get my head around. Though I had a fair interest in science, it was never my focus growing up, yet I honestly cannot recall ever having known of air pressure without also knowing the influence of environmental factors on it. I don't remember when I learned this, or what I thought of it at that age, but the two just seemed to go together so naturally I don't think it ever occurred to me to believe otherwise.

Placing tongue halfway in cheek, can I go on living knowing that such levels of ignorance and/or stupidity (in this and other matters) are so deeply ingrained and widespread?

I knew that air would condense when the tempature dropped, but i had never heard of the Ideal gas law. For the last couple of weeks i have wondered why its called the 'ideal' gas law. I'm just to lazy to look it up, besides by now the reason for the name has been buried by deflate gate.

 

[Wax Frog]

I knew that air would condense the tempature dropped, but i had never heard of the Ideal gas law. For the last couple of weeks i have wondered why its called the 'ideal' gas law. I'm just to lazy to look it up, besides by now the reason for the name has been buried by deflate gate.

As you might guess the IGL is new to me, and I also haven't read up on it, as it seems pointless in context. I just want to witness restitution, or, failing that, for the league to BURN*!

*how does IGL impact combustibility?

 

[Ring 6]

Besides Florio's argument -- people have multiple motivations. McNally had multiple motivations for picking the nickname "Deflator". Brady had multiple motivations for talking on the phone with Jastremski rather than waiting to see him face-to-face. And Wells had multiple motivations for setting his integrity aside.

I just think it is instructive to recognize that there is no need to be paranoid and claim conspiracy theory to show that Wells was wrong.

As soon as you start the Goodell is out to get us, or Wells had an agenda talk, people stop listening and you come off as trying to escape on a technicality.

 

[The Gr8est]

It was not discredited until the Patriots introduced contradictory and additional data. Patriot fans would have believed it was a crock if Brady signed the bottom saying I did it. The facts came out last week.
Goodell actually looks wise to take a step back and say that he relied on the Wells report to levy his punishment but the Patriots brought information to light that brings some of the investigation, evidence and conclusion into question.
I think you are blinded by the assumption that Goodell is complicit in the findings of the Wells report, or directed him to find that way. Of course, if Goodell is acted underhandedly, that changes everything, but we can't really assume that.
In Goodell's place, what would you do, after trusting Wells to do a quality and thorough report, then having it publicly shown that he did not? You are suggesting you would double down on it because admitting it was wrong looks bad.


Not yet he hasn't. He did when it purportedly was accurate and had all the evidence in it.
He hitched his wagon to Wells and his conclusion. He has NOT hitched his wagon to dismissing the ripping to shreds of the report.

Of course its not. He has the perfect chance, he can cite the contradictory and new evidence introduced by the Patriots.

No. He hired Wells and accepted the conclusions of his report. You are suggesting that anyone who hires someone who does a bad job cannot admit that once it is discovered.


That is speculation that will be determined.

There are 2 different ways Goodell can go with this. Yours is not 'the only thing he can do' just because you think it.
Soon we will know the answer.

I hope you are right and allow for the possibility that Goodell might do the right thing.

But based on Goodell's history of hammering the Pats while slapping others on the wrist that isn't the smart bet.

 

[PatsFanSince74]

This was as well timed and well scripted a use of a major writer's Soap Box to make your points as I have ever seen. I'm actually a little surprised that King let himself be used like this a day before the Owners' meeting begin...but it couldn't happen to a nicer guy.

Aside from Kraft's loud silence during the interview on the subject of litigation, this is his other comment that got my attention: "...this is something that can happen to all 32 teams...in this report, every inference went against us … inferences from ambiguous, circumstantial evidence all went against us. That’s the thing that really bothers me." So, part of his strategy is to align other owners against Goodell.

I'm trying to think of other examples of bungled mismanagement in the business world that got as badly out of control as this appears to be getting. Windows Vista and "New Coke" come to mind. Both were self-inflicted wounds by managements that either took their eyes off the ball (Vista) or just completely misunderstood the implications of their actions (Coke II). You can argue that Goodell has made both mistakes in spades in this case.

Kraft has pretty clearly decided to go scorched earth, or at least make the NFL owners deal with the prospect of his doing so.

Kraft talks in the interview of investing his whole life in the team. King says he's not "just any owner" (or words to that effect). He's 73 years old. He's worth a fortune. The absolute (highly unlikely) downside is that the NFL forces him to sell the team if he litigates and his family walks away with $4.5 billion or so...the sale would have to be an arms-length, open market transaction, so he would not be shortchanged.

 

[Rob0729]

It was not discredited until the Patriots introduced contradictory and additional data. Patriot fans would have believed it was a crock if Brady signed the bottom saying I did it. The facts came out last week.
Goodell actually looks wise to take a step back and say that he relied on the Wells report to levy his punishment but the Patriots brought information to light that brings some of the investigation, evidence and conclusion into question.
I think you are blinded by the assumption that Goodell is complicit in the findings of the Wells report, or directed him to find that way. Of course, if Goodell is acted underhandedly, that changes everything, but we can't really assume that.
In Goodell's place, what would you do, after trusting Wells to do a quality and thorough report, then having it publicly shown that he did not? You are suggesting you would double down on it because admitting it was wrong looks bad.


Not yet he hasn't. He did when it purportedly was accurate and had all the evidence in it.
He hitched his wagon to Wells and his conclusion. He has NOT hitched his wagon to dismissing the ripping to shreds of the report.

Of course its not. He has the perfect chance, he can cite the contradictory and new evidence introduced by the Patriots.

No. He hired Wells and accepted the conclusions of his report. You are suggesting that anyone who hires someone who does a bad job cannot admit that once it is discovered.


That is speculation that will be determined.

There are 2 different ways Goodell can go with this. Yours is not 'the only thing he can do' just because you think it.
Soon we will know the answer.

It was discredited multiple times before the Wells Report in Context site came out. Florio had articles about how they disregarded Anderson's recollection of the gauge he used and how that gauge supports the ideal gas laws. Other major media people also were questioning a lot about the report. There was a lot of doubt on this report before the Wells Report in Context or even before the punishments were handed down.

And yes, Goodell can admit that the Wells report was wrong or biased or whatever, but not without consequences. This isn't a small thing. If he admits the Wells report is wrong, he is admitting he is forever tarnishing Brady's and the Patriots' reputation based on a mistake or an over zealous investigator. He will take a major hit for that. He hired Wells. He is the head of the NFL. If the NFL holds the Patriots organization accountable for who they think a gameday employee did, Goodell is held responsible for Wells. Especially since he is the one who hired him. The Wells report is Goodell's.

I am done with this.

 

[Fencer]

I knew that air would condense when the tempature dropped, but i had never heard of the Ideal gas law. For the last couple of weeks i have wondered why its called the 'ideal' gas law. I'm just to lazy to look it up, besides by now the reason for the name has been buried by deflate gate.

I don't think the name is common; I don't recall having heard it before, and I was a physics major for most of college.

And it's easy to forget -- the first cold day this winter, when I got a warning light for low pressure in my tires, I worried that something might be wrong with them.

But really -- once people are reminded of it, it should ring a bell with what they heard in school ...

 

[Fencer]

More than likely, Brady's motivation for talking to Jastremski on the phone is that he was on I-95 driving that sweet Audi of his from downtown Boston to Foxboro the morning after a playoff game.

Usually he doesn't bother -- and by the way, it might be illegal for him to use his cell phone in the car like that. But before a Super Bowl, things are different even without accusations flying around ...

 

[Soul_Survivor88]

The absolute (highly unlikely) downside is that the NFL forces him to sell the team if he litigates

What?!

 

[Huckleberry1]

And the owners will now try to figure out if they can appease Kraft while not throwing Goodell/Wells under the bus.

Can't be done. The league office hitched their wagon to The Wells Report when they allowed Vincent to issue the absurd sanctions, now they have to choose sides. I think there will be efforts by owners to broker a deal but short of reinstating Brady, reducing the fine to a tenth of the original fine, and reinstating the first round I don't see Kraft backing down.

On the other hand I have been wrong so often about this matter I really don't know what the outcome will be.

 

[Ring 6]

It was discredited multiple times before the Wells Report in Context site came out. Florio had articles about how they disregarded Anderson's recollection of the gauge he used and how that gauge supports the ideal gas laws. Other major media people also were questioning a lot about the report. There was a lot of doubt on this report before the Wells Report in Context or even before the punishments were handed down.

Surely there was doubt, but not enough that any nonPatriot fan believed it was wrong. 73% of America believed Brady AND the Patriots cheated before the rebuttal.

And yes, Goodell can admit that the Wells report was wrong or biased or whatever, but not without consequences. This isn't a small thing. If he admits the Wells report is wrong, he is admitting he is forever tarnishing Brady's and the Patriots' reputation based on a mistake or an over zealous investigator.

No he isn't, he is correcting that.
Your way says he does it but doesn't admit it, my way says he clears Brady and the Patriots.
Again, you seem to think staying wrong is better than correcting yourself when proven wrong.

He will take a major hit for that. He hired Wells. He is the head of the NFL.

Why would that mean he has to accept a bad report? Again, your approach says that any boss should accept bad work from an employee because they look bad if they admit they hired the wrong person.

If the NFL holds the Patriots organization accountable for who they think a gameday employee did, Goodell is held responsible for Wells. Especially since he is the one who hired him. The Wells report is Goodell's.

Not if he corrects it.

I am done with this.

No need to be angry.
Perhaps you are coming off differently than you intend, but you sound as if you think your idea of how Goodell thinks is the only possible thing that could be correct.

 

[Ring 6]

I hope you are right and allow for the possibility that Goodell might do the right thing.

But based on Goodell's history of hammering the Pats while slapping others on the wrist that isn't the smart bet.

A smart man would look at this and realize he has no chance of Brady's suspension being upheld in court. None at all.
If you are Goodell, what is a better move?
Ignoring that the Patriots have turned the Wells report into a joke, and upholding the punishment so that you look even more ignorant when the court overturns it,and probably chastises you along the way.
Or actually analyzing the facts, and admitting that Wells did a poor job?

If there was no chance of going to court, perhaps Goodell would be too image conscious to admit wells was wrong and change course, but to do so now is just to delay the inevitable and make it worse.

Tom Brady is simply not going to be denied the right to work in court based upon the evidence in that report. Its as much a nobrainer as their is.

 

[Rob0729]

Surely there was doubt, but not enough that any nonPatriot fan believed it was wrong. 73% of America believed Brady AND the Patriots cheated before the rebuttal.

No he isn't, he is correcting that.
Your way says he does it but doesn't admit it, my way says he clears Brady and the Patriots.
Again, you seem to think staying wrong is better than correcting yourself when proven wrong.




Why would that mean he has to accept a bad report? Again, your approach says that any boss should accept bad work from an employee because they look bad if they admit they hired the wrong person.


Not if he corrects it.


No need to be angry.
Perhaps you are coming off differently than you intend, but you sound as if you think your idea of how Goodell thinks is the only possible thing that could be correct.

One more. I absolutely am saying that for Goodell staying wrong is worlds better than correcting himself. And to most of the country, he hasn't been proven wrong. Most of the country think the best rebuttal the Pats had was the ridiculous story that the Deflator is because he was losing weight (the general consensus, not my feelings).

There is zero chance Goodell ever admitting the Wells Report was wrong. The best we can hope for (without going to court) is Goodell, Kraft, and Brady cut a back room deal that will satisfy everyone. Unlikely to happen, but you are kidding yourself if you think Goodell is ever going to admit that the Wells report is wrong unless most of the country turns on it which doesn't seem to be happening any time soon.

 

[Rob0729]

A smart man would look at this and realize he has no chance of Brady's suspension being upheld in court. None at all.
If you are Goodell, what is a better move?
Ignoring that the Patriots have turned the Wells report into a joke, and upholding the punishment so that you look even more ignorant when the court overturns it,and probably chastises you along the way.
Or actually analyzing the facts, and admitting that Wells did a poor job?

If there was no chance of going to court, perhaps Goodell would be too image conscious to admit wells was wrong and change course, but to do so now is just to delay the inevitable and make it worse.

Tom Brady is simply not going to be denied the right to work in court based upon the evidence in that report. Its as much a nobrainer as their is.

That isn't true. Brady has a decent shot in court, but on the procedural stuff like there is no precedence for his punishment (how Peterson got his suspension overturned) or that Troy Vincent had no right under the CBA to hand out the suspension. But even then, it will likely be handed to another arbitrator who may or may not side with Brady.

And the fact of the matter is that most of the country do not think the Wells report is a job. Listen to national radio and you may have some hosts and callers thinking that, but most people think the Pats are 100% guilty and the Wells report proves it and no matter how many ridiculous excuses of why they called McNally the deflator won't change that.

Goodell isn't going to reverse his decision unless the public cry turns against him and the Wells report. Unlikely to happen.

 

[Sfpat]

Can't be done. The league office hitched their wagon to The Wells Report when they allowed Vincent to issue the absurd sanctions, now they have to choose sides. I think there will be efforts by owners to broker a deal but short of reinstating Brady, reducing the fine to a tenth of the original fine, and reinstating the first round I don't see Kraft backing down.

On the other hand I have been wrong so often about this matter I really don't know what the outcome will be.

I agree with this except the only deal has to be the complete exoneration of the Pats and Brady. The only negotiations will be over the damages that are due.

 

[Huckleberry1]

This was as well timed and well scripted a use of a major writer's Soap Box to make your points as I have ever seen. I'm actually a little surprised that King let himself be used like this a day before the Owners' meeting begin...but it couldn't happen to a nicer guy.

Aside from Kraft's loud silence during the interview on the subject of litigation, this is his other comment that got my attention: "...this is something that can happen to all 32 teams...in this report, every inference went against us … inferences from ambiguous, circumstantial evidence all went against us. That’s the thing that really bothers me." So, part of his strategy is to align other owners against Goodell.

I'm trying to think of other examples of bungled mismanagement in the business world that got as badly out of control as this appears to be getting. Windows Vista and "New Coke" come to mind. Both were self-inflicted wounds by managements that either took their eyes off the ball (Vista) or just completely misunderstood the implications of their actions (Coke II). You can argue that Goodell has made both mistakes in spades in this case.

Kraft has pretty clearly decided to go scorched earth, or at least make the NFL owners deal with the prospect of his doing so.

Kraft talks in the interview of investing his whole life in the team. King says he's not "just any owner" (or words to that effect). He's 73 years old. He's worth a fortune. The absolute (highly unlikely) downside is that the NFL forces him to sell the team if he litigates and his family walks away with $4.5 billion or so...the sale would have to be an arms-length, open market transaction, so he would not be shortchanged.

This is getting really interesting. The owners have to be wondering how all of this got so far out of control, in which case they have to be wondering whether they have the right person running their league. We could be much closer to the end of Goodell than we realized?

 

[Huckleberry1]

I agree with this except the only deal has to be the complete exoneration of the Pats and Brady. They only negotiations will be over the damages that are due.

I would love to see that but was coming up with the only compromises I could see Kraft agreeing to. Now it is looking like the owners are in an either/or decision, in which case Goodell is in deep sh.t.

 

[Nunchucks]

This is getting really interesting. The owners have to be wondering how all of this got so far out of control, in which case they have to be wondering whether they have the right person running their league. We could be much closer to the end of Goodell than we realized?

I hope you are right. This is a mess.

 

[Ring 6]

One more. I absolutely am saying that for Goodell staying wrong is worlds better than correcting himself. And to most of the country, he hasn't been proven wrong. Most of the country think the best rebuttal the Pats had was the ridiculous story that the Deflator is because he was losing weight (the general consensus, not my feelings).

But this assumes it doesn't end up in court. I get that if his word were finally, he could attempt to sweep it under the rug, but it is not final.

There is zero chance Goodell ever admitting the Wells Report was wrong. The best we can hope for (without going to court) is Goodell, Kraft, and Brady cut a back room deal that will satisfy everyone. Unlikely to happen, but you are kidding yourself if you think Goodell is ever going to admit that the Wells report is wrong unless most of the country turns on it which doesn't seem to be happening any time soon.

Well of course its going to court. Thats the entire point that I have been making. Goodells choice is not siding with Wells or turning on Wells and no one will ever know the truth.
His choice is CHOOSING Wells over the Patriots rebuttal then getting eviscerated in court, or admitting that the rebuttal destroys the Wells report and saving face.
The looming court battle is 99% of what Goodell needs to be concerned with, not public opinion.

 

[Huckleberry1]

Goodell isn't going to reverse his decision unless the public cry turns against him and the Wells report. Unlikely to happen.

Quite a pickle Goodell has gotten himself into.