A Houston fan eviscerates Deflategate

[Yankee Traveler]

No Evidence of Ball Tampering. No evidence exists that Tom Brady or anyone from the Patriots wanted balls deflated outside of the ranges dictated by the rules.

Wasn't the guy in charge of the game balls for the Patriots actually refereed to as "The Deflator"?

And that is what kind of evidence?

 

[Fencer]

Right. The Pats organization was so sure of their innocence that their owner accepted (without a fight) a million dollar fine and losing two draft picks. Then, because they were innocent of course, they fired two equipment guys. Why fire the equipment guys if you are saying they did nothing wrong?!? And since he was completley innocent Tom Brady smashed into pieces the cell phone he was being asked to turn over to the investigator. Yup, nothing fishy about any of that.

1. Nothing you said contradicts anything Stradley said.

2. Your claim that the Pats fired the guys on their own is beyond stupid. The league directed the suspensions (not firings). The league said it was controlling what roles the guys could be rehired into when.

3. Tom Brady expected, correctly, that things on his cell phone would leak that were completely unrelated to PSIgate.

4. Kraft had no legal alternative to what he did. Kraft did have the PR alternative of shaking his fist and yelling more loudly at the league than he did, and I'm among the Pats fans who thinks he should have done so.

 

[Fencer]

And that is what kind of evidence?

Circumstantial.

Stradley's stated opinion is that it's meager and crappy as circumstantial evidence goes. Given the timing of the single Deflator text, anybody fair-minded should agree.

 

[Fencer]

This guy is a lawyer and he said this:
"there is plenty of evidence that no ball tampering occurred"
How does one prove something didn't happen??? Let me guess,,,the weather argument? An argument that something else MAY have occurred does not prove in anyway whatsoever that another independent action did not also occur...

She's not a guy.

Also, she's right and you're wrong, unless you were joking. If you were, then your argument is a much inferior version of a classic Stephen Wright line:

"While I was gone, somebody rearranged on the furniture in my bedroom. They put it back in exactly the same place it was."

 

[Manster7588]

1. Nothing you said contradicts anything Stradley said.

2. Your claim that the Pats fired the guys on their own is beyond stupid. The league directed the suspensions (not firings). The league said it was controlling what roles the guys could be rehired into when.

3. Tom Brady expected, correctly, that things on his cell phone would leak that were completely unrelated to PSIgate.

4. Kraft had no legal alternative to what he did. Kraft did have the PR alternative of shaking his fist and yelling more loudly at the league than he did, and I'm among the Pats fans who thinks he should have done so.

1.
2. Initial reports were the Patriots fired them.
3. How in hell, do you know anything would have been leaked. You are stating something as fact, that you have no way of knowing.
4. Kraft could have stood pat and let the case run its course before giving in, hinting that he knew Brady was in trouble. If the league had absolutely no evidence, do you really believe Kraft would have caved that easily?

 

[Fencer]

Why suspend them at all if Kraft was convinced his organization did absolutley nothing wrong?

Because the league fucking ordered them to!!!!

(Yeah, the league has denied that. But the league admits that they were involved in the suspension and that the Pats needed permission to hire the guys back, so whatever they mean by their denial is either a total lie or else a hair-splitting technicality.)

 

[Fencer]

1.
2. Initial reports were the Patriots fired them.
3. How in hell, do you know anything would have been leaked. You are stating something as fact, that you have no way of knowing.
4. Kraft could have stood pat and let the case run its course before giving in, hinting that he knew Brady was in trouble. If the league had absolutely no evidence, do you really believe Kraft would have caved that easily?

2. I don't recall such reports. They were described as suspensions from the getgo.

3. The stuff DID fucking leak, as was inevitable.

4. That's total nonsense. Perhaps you're forgetting some details of the timing. Kraft had to either appeal or not appeal in a very short time frame, and if he appealed the appeal would be heard by Goodell, and unlike Brady he had no realistic recourse to sue after the appeal.

 

[HammerDown]

Robert Kraft didn't go to the media and bitch about it.

 

[Manster7588]

2. I don't recall such reports. They were described as suspensions from the getgo.

3. The stuff DID fucking leak, as was inevitable.

4. That's total nonsense. Perhaps you're forgetting some details of the timing. Kraft had to either appeal or not appeal in a very short time frame, and if he appealed the appeal would be heard by Goodell, and unlike Brady he had no realistic recourse to sue after the appeal.

2. Brady and/or Kraft could fuck you in the ass, deny they are doing it as they are doing it, and you'd believe them.

3. What was leaked?

4. Do you have any idea how the process works? Kraft's goal is to protect his business. Had there been no evidence, don't you think he'd have told Goodell to pound sand, and if Goodell did anything he'd take him to court?

 

[CreepCreep2014]

Jesus...stfu about this. We are not getting these picks back!! Kraft guaranteed that when he tucked his balls into his ass and accepted the penalty. Single biggest mistake you can make. NO matter what, if NE did it or not, he made it seem like they did. Period....it's over move on. Fuckin A....no wonder people can't stand Patriots fans.....bunch of whinny, spoiled brats....

 

[Fencer]

4. Do you have any idea how the process works? Kraft's goal is to protect his business. Had there been no evidence, don't you think he'd have told Goodell to pound sand, and if Goodell did anything he'd take him to court?

I have a lot better idea than you do, evidently.

The teams have signed away their rights to sue the league, and the consequences for suing the league in the face of that are drastic. There's only one confirmed loophole to the waiver -- you can sue the league for anti-trust or whatever in the hope that the courts will determine that, even though you signed the waiver, it shouldn't be binding.

Otherwise, the closest thing you can do is help somebody ELSE who's suing the league. But that wouldn't have anything to do with getting the picks back.

 

[Fencer]

2. Brady and/or Kraft could fuck you in the ass, deny they are doing it as they are doing it, and you'd believe them.

Hardly. And you're an idiot for saying so.

 

[Manster7588]

I have a lot better idea than you do, evidently.

The teams have signed away their rights to sue the league, and the consequences for suing the league in the face of that are drastic. There's only one confirmed loophole to the waiver -- you can sue the league for anti-trust or whatever in the hope that the courts will determine that, even though you signed the waiver, it shouldn't be binding.

Otherwise, the closest thing you can do is help somebody ELSE who's suing the league. But that wouldn't have anything to do with getting the picks back.

Teams have NOT signed away their rights to sue, they haven't sued, because they don't want to start tearing the league down. Before Kraft excepted the team penalty he was talking about suing the league. In 2012 Dallas and Washington talked about suing the league, but chose not to in best interest of the league.
It's not that teams CANNOT sue, it's that they dont.

 

[jarntt]

Hardly. And you're an idiot for saying so.

OK, they could fuck you in the ass hard(ly)

 

[Psych-Ward]

 

[Psych-Ward]

 

[Psych-Ward]

 

[Psych-Ward]

 

[Psych-Ward]

 

[Psych-Ward]