Report: Patriots used deflated balls

[PatsFan2003]

I didn't have any problem with those formations. They were legal and within the rules even if Harbaugh was confused by them. This ball thing though is different if its true. Even if someone believes it had no effect or is a stupid rule the fact is (if proven) that someone on the Pats staff intentionally set out to knowingly, sneakily, break the rules in a premeditated way.

Listen I agree. I think in the games played they probably didn't matter much at all but in another game they could have. It doesn't make it right and at this point Bellichick should know better.

 

[NEPatsfan]

I didn't have any problem with those formations. They were legal and within the rules even if Harbaugh was confused by them. This ball thing though is different if its true. Even if someone believes it had no effect or is a stupid rule the fact is (if proven) that someone on the Pats staff intentionally set out to knowingly, sneakily, break the rules in a premeditated way.

And with that said DK, if proven true, what should the punishment be? Where does it rank in the list of offenses? Since it's commonly agreed it really has no effect on the outcome of a game where do you place it?

I think, if proven true, the league minimum of 25 large, and another 100 large for being defiant. Anything beyond that would be rediculous.

 

[PatsFan2003]

So what did you mean by "they didn't work anymore"?

Actually the refs were fully prepared for it. You should probably read up on it a bit more. The refs were so ready for it they had to actually coach the Ravens on it, "don't cover #34, he is not eligible"


Any way you can't come up with a factual case to defend your position.

In some ways it's similar to teams snapping the football quickly so a potentially controversial play can't be challenged. Bending the rules or gamesmanship?

 

[Dolemite censored]

I originally thought this was not as serious as the discussion has turned out to be.

Its Brady.
He had know the ball felt different, and it was consistently underinflated throughout the season.

This means no underinflated balls for Brady ( that he's thrown all season ) in the SB.

He'll have a whole different feeling for the ball for that one game.

Advantage Seahawks.

 

[dkmightyhammer]

And with that said DK, if proven true, what should the punishment be? Where does it rank in the list of offenses? Since it's commonly agreed it really has no effect on the outcome of a game where do you place it?

I think, if proven true, the league minimum of 25 large, and another 100 large for being defiant. Anything beyond that would be rediculous.

Like I said before, that is up to Goodell. Who, by all accounts is no friend of BB apparently.

Honestly, if you are going by precedent, I think you need to consider the fact that they suspended Sean Payton for an entire year for something he claims he had no knowledge of going on. I believe Goodell said in that ruling that if he didn't know he ought to of known.

I kind of doubt they go that far, but part of me isn't sure. Honestly if this was almost any team but the Pats they might get their wrists slapped. But there is a bit of history of mischief with BB and the Pats. That won't do them any favors in any rulings that are made.

My best guess, and what I think is appropriate is losing draft picks or cutting the Pats salary cap. It's harsh but it needs to be to send the message that shenanigans (no matter how trite) will not be tolerated.

 

[NEPatsfan]

I originally thought this was not as serious as the discussion has turned out to be.

Its Brady.
He had know the ball felt different, and it was consistently underinflated throughout the season.

This means no underinflated balls for Brady ( that he's thrown all season ) in the SB.

He'll have a whole different feeling for the ball for that one game.

Advantage Seahawks.

Dole I disagree.

 

[Dolemite censored]

Dole I disagree.

I disagree that you disagree.

 

[NEPatsfan]

Like I said before, that is up to Goodell. Who, by all accounts is no friend of BB apparently.

Honestly, if you are going by precedent, I think you need to consider the fact that they suspended Sean Payton for an entire year for something he claims he had no knowledge of going on. I believe Goodell said in that ruling that if he didn't know he ought to of known.

I kind of doubt they go that far, but part of me isn't sure. Honestly if this was almost any team but the Pats they might get their wrists slapped. But there is a bit of history of mischief with BB and the Pats. That won't do them any favors in any rulings that are made.

My best guess, and what I think is appropriate is losing draft picks or cutting the Pats salary cap. It's harsh but it needs to be to send the message that shenanigans (no matter how trite) will not be tolerated.

And putting this story to the side for a second, doesn't all that lend to the fact the Commish has no credibility and will only make it worse regardless if it's true or not, and regardless what he decides?

This situation is a mess no matter whether the Pats are guilty or not, because of the mess Goodell has made over the years with his all over the map rulings.

 

[dkmightyhammer]

In some ways it's similar to teams snapping the football quickly so a potentially controversial play can't be challenged. Bending the rules or gamesmanship?

In that example no one is breaking any rule. There is no rule for snapping the ball quickly. As long as the ref has set the ball correctly you are free to get on with the game. It is up to the team who may want to challenge the play to call a timeout or throw the challenge flag. But that is judgement call for the coach. Not a rule violation at all.

 

[Dolemite censored]

And putting this story to the side for a second, doesn't all that lend to the fact the Commish has no credibility and will only make it worse regardless if it's true or not, and regardless what he decides?

This situation is a mess no matter whether the Pats are guilty or not, because of the mess Goodell has made over the years with his all over the map rulings.

How in the fuck can you deflect this to Goodell ?

Yo must be Tom Brady or Bill Belichick...

 

[dkmightyhammer]

And putting this story to the side for a second, doesn't all that lend to the fact the Commish has no credibility and will only make it worse regardless if it's true or not, and regardless what he decides?

This situation is a mess no matter whether the Pats are guilty or not, because of the mess Goodell has made over the years with his all over the map rulings.

I personally think Goodell has been a terrible Commish. Maybe the worst ever. None the less that does not dissuade me from thinking that if this is proven the Pats and BB deserve to be dealt with very harshly. You can't have rogue Coaches arrogantly deciding which rules to obey and which to bend/break. And like I said it's not like he's a first time offender is it? I think you mentioned that you are lawyer? Well what happens in court to repeat offenders? Do they get the same or more punishment the second time they are caught breaking the law?

 

[NEPatsfan]

How in the fuck can you deflect this to Goodell ?

Yo must be Tom Brady or Bill Belichick...

Dole, did you not see where I said put that part aside for a second? It's not a deflection, it's an observation on the entire situation. There can be more than one part to it, no?

 

[Dolemite censored]

Dole, did you not see where I said put that part aside for a second? It's not a deflection, it's an observation on the entire situation. There can be more than one part to it, no?

Another part of it ?
Yes.

Now you want to play the victim of the evil commissioner.

You're focused on Goodell because you know he has to come down hard on the Patriots organization.

 

[NEPatsfan]

Another part of it ?
Yes.

Now you want to play the victim of the evil commissioner.

You're focused on Goodell because you know he has to come down hard on the Patriots organization.

Not at all, just fascinated with this particular situation.

It's a no win for anyone involved regardless of guilt.

 

[Dolemite censored]

Listen I agree. I think in the games played they probably didn't matter much at all but in another game they could have. It doesn't make it right and at this point Bellichick should know better.

This time I don't think it was Belichick, I think it was Brady.

 

[GNG]

I disagree that you disagree.

You can disagree without being disagreeable.

 

[Dolemite censored]

You can disagree without being disagreeable.

I disagree.

 

[GNG]

I disagree.

 

[Rams4ever]

No Big Deal...

Just the Cheatriots being the Cheatriots....

 

[NEPatsfan]

You can disagree without being disagreeable.

I concur.