Off Topic Lounge

[skinsdad62]

only spy gate sty and rumors of more but only spygate as fact

 

[Stymietee]

Agree with dad for the reasons he said for harsness of the punishment...Especially #2

My question though is....Sean Peyton got a yr ban becasue as the commish said....ignornace of what is happening to your team is NOT a viable excuse...he was in charge of the entire team......

So.....Why is it that Belacheat didn't get the same punishment??? Even though he had no knowledge (which I seriously doubt) it happened on hsi team and as coach (like Peyton) he is responsible....

A very interesting question Lonewate. I've said all along that this is about protecting the shield. It has absolutely nothing to do with fairness nor consistency and entirely about damage control.

 

[redskinsfan]

this is the defense a child makes when he is caught doing something wrong . well peggy sue did it too blah blah blah .

as a lawyer its your job to uphold laws and rules isnt it counselor ? and yet you justify one persons bad behavior by pointing to someones else's . ? is that how you do your job in real life ? i doubt it , i bet you are a good lawyer

if you didnt get an advantage doing it then why have the damn rule ? why worry about it ? there is no way to know how that game was impacted (although i doubt much ) but that isnt the point . the point is they broke the rules on purpose to gain an advantage whether actual or perceived

people the penalty isnt being dished out for the crime . that could be covered with the $25000 fine .

3 things had a bearing on the punishment and its harshness. 1) brady , the pats organization and the ball boys didnt cooperate and werent forth coming in the investigation 2) the history of the organization cheating 3) the closeness of the kraft family and goodell . if the other teams believe you favor one guy over the other it hurts the integrity of the game

i predict the fine will stay , the loss of draft picks will stay , and the suspension will be whittled down to perhaps 2 games on appeal

if a baseball pithcher gets caught doctoring a ball he is tossed , fined and even suspended brady got caught

Setting aside what I do for a living, let me be clear on my stance. First, I agree that there was a violation. But that's not the dispute I've got here. It's with the punishment. A lot of the issues you raise above (should) have nothing to do with whether he violated the rule. But they do when it comes to the punishment he gets. Much like the distinction between the guilt and sentencing phases in a criminal trial, the evidence that’s relevant in both can be far different. In the sentencing or punishment phase, issues such as frequency of commission, severity of the offense, impact on competition, etc. all become important. That’s why you can get convictions on some otherwise serious offenses but come out with relatively lenient punishment for them.

Like the George Brett pine tar incident, it was clear that Brett violated a rule. But MLB actually reversed the ump’s ruling that he was out due to the ticky-tack impact of the violation on the competitive aspect of the game and actually replayed it. Same thing here. If Brady didn’t violate the rule, would it have changed anything? Clearly not. And because it would not, despite the fact that there was a (technical) rule violation, the punishment was far too excessive.

 

[redskinsfan]

So if the 4 games are upheld, TB is out for
1) Steelers
2) Bills
3) Jags
4) Cowboys

Another reason to reduce the suspension (by at least one game).

 

[Lonewate44]

Setting aside what I do for a living, let me be clear on my stance. First, I agree that there was a violation. But that's not the dispute I've got here. It's with the punishment. A lot of the issues you raise above (should) have nothing to do with whether he violated the rule. But they do when it comes to the punishment he gets. Much like the distinction between the guilt and sentencing phases in a criminal trial, the evidence that’s relevant in both can be far different. In the sentencing or punishment phase, issues such as frequency of commission, severity of the offense, impact on competition, etc. all become important. That’s why you can get convictions on some otherwise serious offenses but come out with relatively lenient punishment for them.

Like the George Brett pine tar incident, it was clear that Brett violated a rule. But MLB actually reversed the ump’s ruling that he was out due to the ticky-tack impact of the violation on the competitive aspect of the game and actually replayed it. Same thing here. If Brady didn’t violate the rule, would it have changed anything? Clearly not. And because it would not, despite the fact that there was a (technical) rule violation, the punishment was far too excessive.

I see what your saying here...but let me say this.....this deflating wasn't a 1 time experience...Obviously, based on the texts, the guy called himself the Deflagator...so...it is easy to assume he had done this on many occasions.....Ok...he didnt need it against the colts...But what about that narrow victory over baltimore a week earlier?..Who is to say it wasnt done then, and in that game, the extra deflating could have helped win that game...or the games leading up to the playoffs.......you can see back in 2007 or so......his stats suddenly got better...could it be then is when he realized he needed the help?????


As far as the Pats losing the picks and the big fine...as was pointed out by Vincent in his letter.....it is becasue they are REPEAT cheaters!!!!

 

[skinsdad62]

Setting aside what I do for a living, let me be clear on my stance. First, I agree that there was a violation. But that's not the dispute I've got here. It's with the punishment. A lot of the issues you raise above (should) have nothing to do with whether he violated the rule. But they do when it comes to the punishment he gets. Much like the distinction between the guilt and sentencing phases in a criminal trial, the evidence that’s relevant in both can be far different. In the sentencing or punishment phase, issues such as frequency of commission, severity of the offense, impact on competition, etc. all become important. That’s why you can get convictions on some otherwise serious offenses but come out with relatively lenient punishment for them.

Like the George Brett pine tar incident, it was clear that Brett violated a rule. But MLB actually reversed the ump’s ruling that he was out due to the ticky-tack impact of the violation on the competitive aspect of the game and actually replayed it. Same thing here. If Brady didn’t violate the rule, would it have changed anything? Clearly not. And because it would not, despite the fact that there was a (technical) rule violation, the punishment was far too excessive.

well not cooperating with the investigation is a part of the crime . and again there is no way to know how under inflated balls affected rbs and turnovers etc .

fact is he got caught and just as there is a penalty for doctoring baseballs in MLB there is a penalty for doctoring footballs

if he came clean perhaps we are talking about a slap on the wrist but you cant have discipline if your employees just "do what they want to " when being investigated. he obstructed the investigation and if you read troy vincents statement it tells you why the penalty was so hard and its because they obstructed the investigation


the NFL took it hard because the integrity of the game was in question

 

[redskinsfan]

I see what your saying here...but let me say this.....this deflating wasn't a 1 time experience...Obviously, based on the texts, the guy called himself the Deflagator...so...it is easy to assume he had done this on many occasions.....Ok...he didnt need it against the colts...But what about that narrow victory of baltimore..Who is to say it wasnt done then, and in that game, the extra deflating could have helped win that game...or the games leading up to the playoffs.......you can see back in 2007 or so......his stats suddenly got better...could it be then is when he realized he needed the help?????


As far as the Pats losing the picks and the big fine...as was pointed out by Vincent in his letter.....it is becasue they are REPEAT cheaters!!!!

I'm only talking about the Colts game and not any other punishment other than Brady's. I do understand the repeat offender point, and that must be taken into account when meting out punishment against the Pats.

As for the other games, everyone else doctors balls in one way or another. Have you ever tried to throw a brand new Duke football? And I'm not talking about the fake leather ones you can buy for less than $20 but the ones used in games that cost upwards of $90 to $100. Go to a local sports shop and feel how slick it is. Because of the texture of the balls, every team does something to make it grip better. Some teams actually put extra tack on it. Did you watch Hard Knocks last year with the Falcons? You could see some low level staffers taking out brand new balls and putting tack on the ball so Ryan and other camp QBs could grip the ball better. The issue, again, isn't whether this happened. It did. But it does for everyone else. The issue then is if this was any different from what others do to grip the ball better. And, again, this isn't an issue of whether a rule was violated, but one of punishment. If you can't show that there was some appreciable competitive advantage, the punishment was excessive. I'd reduce the punishment by at least one game so Brady could come back against the Cowboys in Week 4.

 

[redskinsfan]

well not cooperating with the investigation is a part of the crime . and again there is no way to know how under inflated balls affected rbs and turnovers etc .

fact is he got caught and just as there is a penalty for doctoring baseballs in MLB there is a penalty for doctoring footballs

if he came clean perhaps we are talking about a slap on the wrist but you cant have discipline if your employees just "do what they want to " when being investigated. he obstructed the investigation and if you read troy vincents statement it tells you why the penalty was so hard and its because they obstructed the investigation


the NFL took it hard because the integrity of the game was in question

There is a HUGE difference between doctoring footballs and baseballs, and you should know that. If you spit, scuff, vaseline or otherwise put some foreign substance on a ball, that gives a pitcher a massive competitive edge in producing more dramatic movement on the ball. And I realize that Brady got dinged for obstructing the investigation, but even with that, four games is huge. You're basically costing him and the Pats a quarter of the season for basically not cooperating and committing a technical rule violation.

And not to be a homer, but that affects us too because Brady won't be playing against the Cowboys.

 

[skinsdad62]

I'm only talking about the Colts game and not any other punishment other than Brady's. I do understand the repeat offender point, and that must be taken into account when meting out punishment against the Pats.

As for the other games, everyone else doctors balls in one way or another. Have you ever tried to throw a brand new Duke football? And I'm not talking about the fake leather ones you can buy for less than $20 but the ones used in games that cost upwards of $90 to $100. Go to a local sports shop and feel how slick it is. Because of the texture of the balls, every team does something to make it grip better. Some teams actually put extra tack on it. Did you watch Hard Knocks last year with the Falcons? You could see some low level staffers taking out brand new balls and putting tack on the ball so Ryan and other camp QBs could grip the ball better. The issue, again, isn't whether this happened. It did. But it does for everyone else. The issue then is if this was any different from what others do to grip the ball better. And, again, this isn't an issue of whether a rule was violated, but one of punishment. If you can't show that there was some appreciable competitive advantage, the punishment was excessive. I'd reduce the punishment by at least one game so Brady could come back against the Cowboys in Week 4.

pointing to bad behavior of others isnt a defense . every team gets the same slick balls and there are rules to provide you guidance as to what to do .

brady is getting slammed because he obstructed justice as he should . most likely an appeal will knock the suspension down and that is how the system is designed

enough of "other teams do it " . he got caught , they didnt and if they get caught then the punishment should fit the crime

 

[redskinsfan]

pointing to bad behavior of others isnt a defense . every team gets the same slick balls and there are rules to provide you guidance as to what to do .

brady is getting slammed because he obstructed justice as he should . most likely an appeal will knock the suspension down and that is how the system is designed

enough of "other teams do it " . he got caught , they didnt and if they get caught then the punishment should fit the crime

You may dislike it all you want, but the fact that "others do it," while not a defense to a claim that rule was violated, is certainly relevant in terms of punishment. That reason, along with others I've cited (e.g,. the lack of any evidence that he got any appreciable competitive advantage), is more than sufficient to show that a quarter-season suspension is far too excessive for what otherwise is turning out to be a technical rule violation and an obstruction charge.

In sum, while Brady was guilty, the crime he committed wasn't a big deal. The punishment therefore should fit that "crime." It doesn't.

 

[skinsdad62]

There is a HUGE difference between doctoring footballs and baseballs, and you should know that. If you spit, scuff, vaseline or otherwise put some foreign substance on a ball, that gives a pitcher a massive competitive edge in producing more dramatic movement on the ball. And I realize that Brady got dinged for obstructing the investigation, but even with that, four games is huge. You're basically costing him and the Pats a quarter of the season for basically not cooperating and committing a technical rule violation.

And not to be a homer, but that affects us too because Brady won't be playing against the Cowboys.

there is NO difference cheating is cheating period , no ifs ands or but's .

under inflated balls allow him to get a better grip , allows receivers to grip the ball better , and rbs to hold the ball better reducing fumbles , so dont tell me about competitive advantage because there is and the rule is in place for a reason

and we arent talking about one game here , this could have been going on since 2007 so there are some games this could have affected the outcome in

whether he plays vs dallas or not is not an NFL concern . he is lucky he didnt get hit for 8 or more games and how belichek escapes unscathed is beyond me ?. 1 year should be his punishment

 

[redskinsfan]

there is NO difference cheating is cheating period , no ifs ands or but's .

under inflated balls allow him to get a better grip , allows receivers to grip the ball better , and rbs to hold the ball better reducing fumbles , so dont tell me about competitive advantage because there is and the rule is in place for a reason

and we arent talking about one game here , this could have been going on since 2007 so there are some games this could have affected the outcome in

whether he plays vs dallas or not is not an NFL concern . he is lucky he didnt get hit for 8 or more games and how belichek escapes unscathed is beyond me ?. 1 year should be his punishment

We are going around in circles here. Yes, he cheated. But there are degrees of cheating like there are degrees of murder. What your ultimate punishment will be if convicted of murder will depend on your conduct (and thus degree of murder) and what aggravating/mitigating factors come out at sentencing. Again, while he may have gotten a better grip on the ball, how much of advantage did he really get? Another way to view this is whether his play would've been the same if he didn't delate the balls, which is a major factor in terms of determining his punishment. And you're completely discounting the issue of others doing the same thing. In that Colt game we're all talking about, even the Colts had a few deflated balls.

 

[skinsdad62]

You may dislike it all you want, but the fact that "others do it," while not a defense to a claim that rule was violated, is certainly relevant in terms of punishment. That reason, along with others I've cited (e.g,. the lack of any evidence that he got any appreciable competitive advantage), is more than sufficient to show that a quarter-season suspension is far too excessive for what otherwise is turning out to be a technical rule violation and an obstruction charge.

In sum, while Brady was guilty, the crime he committed wasn't a big deal. The punishment therefore should fit that "crime." It doesn't.

it is not relevant . not one team was caught doing anything wrong brady and the pats were .

if the other teams do get caught then the penalty should be applied to them

i cant go into a court of law and say my speeding fine should be reduced because others guys speed all the time . i get caught and i must pay the piper speeding isnt that big a deal either on an interstate everyone speeds but that doesnt mean i can get a fine reduced based on the fact others do it too

the punishment DOES fit the crime . the obstruction alone is worth 4 games and it sends the message that cooperation in investigations are a must

 

[Darrell Green Fan]

i dont want to hear about potential, upside and any other excuse about the previous regimes blah blah blah

show me on the field period . he hasnt and until then he is joe webb / kordell stewart /tavaris jackson and there is no sense in trying to change my mind . show me on the field redskinsfan and DGF dont blow smoke up my ass

by the way SM thought alex smith was better then rodgers , just saying he isnt perfect

as for stats

RW 48 starts 36-12 record 2 superbowls 1 win 63.4% 9950 yds 72 tds 26 ints

RG3 35 starts 14-21 record no playoff wins 63.9% 8097 yds 40 tds 23 ints

Do you really need me to trot out Joe Webb's passing stats when compared to Griffin post 2012?

 

[skinsdad62]

We are going around in circles here. Yes, he cheated. But there are degrees of cheating like there are degrees of murder. What your ultimate punishment will be if convicted of murder will depend on your conduct (and thus degree of murder) and what aggravating/mitigating factors come out at sentencing. Again, while he may have gotten a better grip on the ball, how much of advantage did he really get? Another way to view this is whether his play would've been the same if he didn't delate the balls, which is a major factor in terms of determining his punishment. And you're completely discounting the issue of others doing the same thing. In that Colt game we're all talking about, even the Colts had a few deflated balls.

your conduct ? say like obstructing justice could have an effect on punishment ? or how many times you have violated the law ?

if his play wasnt affected by the balls being deflated , then why do it ? because it does affect it and since 2007 it could have very well been the difference in many games

and how did under inflated balls help wrs hold onto ball when they are walloped . how did it reduce fumbles in RBS ?

i dont buy it doesnt affect the outcome or doesnt give an advantage . its poppycock , why do it if it doesnt help ?

that is the main question and why the rule is in place

 

[Darrell Green Fan]

How in the world did this thread morph from a thread asking about who the Pats might trade for if Brady is suspended (assuming it was referring to Cousins) to a thread pretty much devoted to RG3? Jeez - don't we have enough of those threads? LOL. You gotta love it.

Maybe because the entire premise that the thread was based on was silly. Why in the world would the Pats trade a pick for Cousins when they have a 2nd rounder invested in their backup already not to mention the picks they will now have to surrender as posted earlier?

 

[redskinsfan]

Interesting question, Sty, but in reality, who the hell knows. I agree with some others on here that Wilson has done well primarily due to the team he is on and the system he is in. Take away their running game, and he may struggle mightily. But what he has done is learn the system and learn his role in the offense. RG3 has never done that. He has resisted all coaching to date in the NFL. Maybe he just needed to hit rock bottom before he realized that he needed to change. As fro your comment about Shanahan's offense tearing him to shreds, that's just not accurate. RG3's bravado that first year tore him to shreds. I don't think it would have mattered what offense he was running. He refused to slide. He refused to throw the ball away. Thats what got him hurt. Not the scheme he was running.

As far as pure skill sets, I put Robert ahead of Wilson. As far as willingness to learn and do what is asked, Wilson is ahead of RG3. My concern is that RG3 has still shown no sign, outwardly, that he is part of the problem and that he needs to change. His success in the NFL does not lie in him being the best athlete on the field. It will only come by him realizing that he must be the best prepared on the field. At his position, that is much more mental than physical.

RGIII has far better physical and mental skillsets than does Wilson. He is bigger, stronger, faster, has a stronger arm, better deep touch, smarter, more educated and better football IQ. The things Wilson has over RGIII are his humility, willingness to learn and adapt to a system, and much better ability to move in the pocket. The main reasons why Wilson has seen better team results is because he's been blessed by championship caliber defense, special teams, running games and front office staff. Because he's got that nearly unprecedentedly superior supporting cast, he doesn't have to do much despite his shortcomings (e.g,. can't read defenses, throw the ball between the hash marks). Indeed, anyone ever ask why they think he's so good when Seattle ranked 27th overall in passing offense? I think that's exactly what the Seahawks have on the front burner in their contract talks with Wilson right now. As noted by SI's Doug Farrar (who is based in Seattle and has followed Wilson's entire career), if Wilson was playing in Indy he wouldn't be a .500 QB there.

If RGIII had simply listened and learned like Wilson did, he might've been close to what Luck is doing now, though not in the same way. He would've been gradually transitioning from being a 50-series QB to one learning the pocket passing game. Hopefully he can do that now and, in turn, Gruden will do the same in terms of bringing him along instead of force feeding him an offense he can't run right now and probably not for the next few years.

 

[redskinsfan]

it is not relevant . not one team was caught doing anything wrong brady and the pats were .

if the other teams do get caught then the penalty should be applied to them

i cant go into a court of law and say my speeding fine should be reduced because others guys speed all the time . i get caught and i must pay the piper speeding isnt that big a deal either on an interstate everyone speeds but that doesnt mean i can get a fine reduced based on the fact others do it too

the punishment DOES fit the crime . the obstruction alone is worth 4 games and it sends the message that cooperation in investigations are a must

First off, speeding is an infraction and is much different type of offense that's not on par with this one (since the penalty is usually fixed by a pre-determined fine). A more appropriate type of offense is something like insider trading or assault. While you're correct in stating that it's irrelevant in showing that others do the same thing vis-a-vis the issue of whether committed the offense, that same reason in addition to severity is important when it comes down to punishment. It happens everyday. Not sure why you can't see that. On this same line of thinking, because there's been too much consideration of factors like the ones I've been citing, some legislatures (like Congress) have taken away a judge's discretion in meting out punishment and have prescribed mandatory sentencing guidelines for criminal offenses. But where, as here, organizations like the NFL have discretion in crafting a punishment, those other reasons do matter.

So, tell me, why is a quarter season punishment one that really fits? Why not two? Or why not more?

 

[skinsdad62]

Do you really need me to trot out Joe Webb's passing stats when compared to Griffin post 2012? You may want to quit right now because even without looking them up I'm pretty sure you will lose this argument.

if you dont understand the joe webb comparison i cant help you

yes DGF its a harsh reach , ok it is used to disparage Rg3's play .

right now he is about as effective a qb as webb /jackson/stewart .

that is his level of play , CRAP

you know its CRAP , I know its CRAP , ITS CRAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAP

the fact is joe webb couldnt play the position , jackson cant play the position , and stewart wasnt a pocket guy and at this point Rg3 cant play the position

do i need to trot out Rg3's game tapes to show you he cant play the position ? do you need to see they multitude of missed reads , poor passes un-needed sacks taken , confused drop backs staring at wrs who are open but not throwing it ?

the guy is playing like hot garbage .

if trotting out joe webb stats makes you feel better that Rg3 is a better passer then him then have at it , yeah Rg3 is a better passer then joe webb and tavaris jackson woohooo boy i feel better !!!

too bad he is, so far, a failure just like him

so let RG3 prove it on the field he is better then anyone because so far he is a colossal failure as a pro qb .

i will continue to bash him until he shows up on the field and PROVES otherwise

potential , upside, are for losers in year 4 . we should be talking about mastering the position not "gee i really really hope he learns how to drop back and throw correctly read defenses , studies film "

he is a bust

 

[skinsdad62]

First off, speeding is an infraction and is much different type of offense that's not on par with this one (since the penalty is usually fixed by a pre-determined fine). A more appropriate type of offense is something like insider trading or assault. While you're correct in stating that it's irrelevant in showing that others do the same thing vis-a-vis the issue of whether committed the offense, that same reason in addition to severity is important when it comes down to punishment. It happens everyday. Not sure why you can't see that. On this same line of thinking, because there's been too much consideration of factors like the ones I've been citing, some legislatures (like Congress) have taken away a judge's discretion in meting out punishment and have prescribed mandatory sentencing guidelines for criminal offenses. But where, as here, organizations like the NFL have discretion in crafting a punishment, those other reasons do matter.

So, tell me, why is a quarter season punishment one that really fits? Why not two? Or why not more?

i am not going to parcel out which offense in society are this or that . the point is pointing out the offense of others arent defense for you

he should have gotten 4 games because he obstructed justice . the colts game wasnt the first time he pulled that and it wasnt the 1st time the pats have cheated .

they didnt learn from the first time so the next punishment was a lot harsher

the offense itself was minor but the rest of the stuff magnified it

i feel 4 games is about right as is the fine and the loss of draft picks . what should have happened is belichek needed to serve some time as well

i dont give a damn if an offense happens everyday or not if you are caught , you are caught period end of story nothing else to see . you pay the piper

so that is my stance and you are wasting your time trying to get me to change my stance because i will not

if it is reduced on appeal then fine i am ok with it but i am never ever going to accept the other people do it defense , or its a minor one , or it really really didnt hurt anything because if it didnt we wouldnt be here at this point would we

the rules are in place for a reason , if you break them you do so at your own risk