Are YOU ready for some FOOTBALL!


Off-Topic Discussions

1,201 to 1,250 of 1,621 << first < prev | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 | next > last >>

NobodysHome wrote:
Muad'Dib wrote:
Quote:
The NFL has suspended Super Bowl MVP Tom Brady without pay for the first four games of the season, fined the New England Patriots $1 million and taken away two draft picks as punishment
Oooff, that is brutal.

It was a dumb decision by Goodell. As many columnists have pointed out, it's far in excess of similar violations (PEDs being the foremost) and the evidence isn't solid enough to merit it.

So Brady will appeal and the whole thing's going to get tossed.

I still like the 2-game suspension, $500k fine, but that's now off the table, as the Pats have a very solid claim of bias against them. I'll be surprised if this wraps up with any suspension at all now.

I'm fine with a 2 game suspension so long as it is the next 2 of AFC championship games or Super Bowls he would otherwise be in.


I kinda agree with NH, however...my Saints had a similar atom bomb dropped on their season with "Bountygate" with similar evidence...and the appeals (to reinstate the Head Coach) were denied. This might be different because Brady is a player and so has the NFLPA to back him.


Greg Williams admitted his role in bountygate. The NFL actually had quite a few details, dates, amounts, players, targets, etc. They also recovered e-mails from Michael Ornstein, sent to Sean Payton, that included his donation to the bounty pool.

Players from the Washington, DC team also came forward and described how Williams ran a similar program in 2004-2007 on that team. Matt Bowen, former player and now a journalist, corroborated the story and gave details.

Players from the Buffalo Bills also gave details of a similar program from Williams tenure there from 2001-2003.

Several people contradicted those stories, but the details are consistent enough that they seem pretty credible to me. Combined with e-mails and ledgers that the NFL discovered, the case in favor of it being made up seems pretty weak and relies entirely on witness accounts (while the case for the bounty's existence has both witnesses AND evidence).

I think the case against Brady isn't air-tight. It's pretty good though, those texts and phone call logs support the case well, though not perfectly. It probably happened and Brady probably knew about it. 4 games is harsh, but not ludicrous, I still think 2 would have been more appropriate.

I mean, Ray Rice only got a 2 game suspension.


Guess the NFL means "Now For Litigation"


1 person marked this as a favorite.
captain yesterday wrote:
Guess the NFL means "Now For Litigation"

LOL. Don't forget that *most* of the referees are either "bankers" or "lawyers" as their "real jobs". The NFL Player's Association has some of the best lawyers in the country working for it. Those who don't work for the NFLPA work for the NFL.

So yeah, guess what? An industry with BILLIONS in annual revenue is plagued by lawyers, litigation, and nonsense. (All synonymous in my book.)

Who would've guessed?

And the sad, sad thing is, you could put out a book entitled, "Punishments for cheating", list every rule in the (massive) NFL rulebook, think of every possible violation and come up with an appropriate punishment, and YOU'D STILL MISS THINGS.

Irontruth is very correct in one thing he keeps saying: More than anything else, the NFL is a for-profit entertainment franchise. Everything else is there for show. The rules? The uniforms? The players? The quotes? All there to make a profit. So rules violations are basically, "How much money are we going to lose if our fans believe we are corrupt, vs. how much money are we going to lose if we enforce reasonable penalties here?"

It's one of the reasons I refuse to spend a dime on the NFL, and one of the reasons they have no reason to listen to me at all.

Rules violations are entirely a monetary decision, not an ethical one.


One wonders when they'll take the plunge to becoming the NFEL (National Football Entertainment League). They're at least half-way there already ... ;)


That won't happen, the last thing they want to do is pay taxes:-D


captain yesterday wrote:
That won't happen, the last thing they want to do is pay taxes:-D

Well they just gave up their non-profit status a few weeks ago.


If the NFL had any sense, they would just have declared the Patriots losers of the game against the Colts, and advanced the Colts to the Superbowl. No worries about who was cheating on the team, just that the cheating occurred.


Muad'Dib wrote:
captain yesterday wrote:
That won't happen, the last thing they want to do is pay taxes:-D
Well they just gave up their non-profit status a few weeks ago.

Really now? That's news to me. I'm surprised that it didn't pop up on my usual news spew faucets.


Vod Canockers wrote:
If the NFL had any sense, they would just have declared the Patriots losers of the game against the Colts, and advanced the Colts to the Superbowl. No worries about who was cheating on the team, just that the cheating occurred.

That would really have been the best way to prevent this kind of behavior in the future. If there were a real consequence to the team and fans for cheating, people wouldn't do it. As it stands, the Patriots have a history of benefitting from cheating with basically no consequence.


Vod Canockers wrote:
If the NFL had any sense, they would just have declared the Patriots losers of the game against the Colts, and advanced the Colts to the Superbowl. No worries about who was cheating on the team, just that the cheating occurred.

Can you prove that no one on the Colts was cheating?

PED usage is considered cheating. Odds are, someone on every team is using something at some point. I'm not saying that cheating should be tolerated, but rather that punishments should be targeted at offending individuals.

Also, what scale does the cheating have to be for the team to get the loss? Are you suggesting ANY level of cheating? For example, should the league get rid of in game penalties and just go to automatic forfeiture?


Irontruth wrote:
Vod Canockers wrote:
If the NFL had any sense, they would just have declared the Patriots losers of the game against the Colts, and advanced the Colts to the Superbowl. No worries about who was cheating on the team, just that the cheating occurred.

Can you prove that no one on the Colts was cheating?

PED usage is considered cheating. Odds are, someone on every team is using something at some point. I'm not saying that cheating should be tolerated, but rather that punishments should be targeted at offending individuals.

Also, what scale does the cheating have to be for the team to get the loss? Are you suggesting ANY level of cheating? For example, should the league get rid of in game penalties and just go to automatic forfeiture?

So in the face of known and documented cheating, your response us to demand that the colts prove a negative?

As for scale, let's start with equipment tampering and work our way up. Gameplay infractions happen because 22 humans are involved in executing opposed, timed, choreography. Tampering with equipment to gain an edge (even a mental one) is actually cheating and the patriots should have been charged a loss for the game.

As a side note, I think that having the teams manage neutral game equipment is a dumb plan.


BigDTBone wrote:
Vod Canockers wrote:
If the NFL had any sense, they would just have declared the Patriots losers of the game against the Colts, and advanced the Colts to the Superbowl. No worries about who was cheating on the team, just that the cheating occurred.
That would really have been the best way to prevent this kind of behavior in the future. If there were a real consequence to the team and fans for cheating, people wouldn't do it. As it stands, the Patriots have a history of benefitting from cheating with basically no consequence.

I suspect you're referencing Spygate. People really blow this out of proportion. To make it absolutely clear, if the Patriots had done the filming from a different location, it would have been completely legal.

I'm not sure if the rule has changed, but in 2006-2007, there were no rules against taping coaches during the game. The only rules were about locations of where cameras could be. The Patriots didn't violate the rule by filming coaches. They violated the rules because the camera was on the field.

It should also be noted that the Jets were caught doing the exact same thing the year prior during a playoff game.

There's a reason that coaches cover their mouths while calling plays. They can be, and are, filmed the whole time. Every coach does it (both covering their mouths AND filming their opponents).

In fact, teams are required by rule to share film. It's actually required that they film the game first though, otherwise it can't be shared.

Something else to consider, especially regarding the recording of the Rams practice allegations (which has been shown to be false), teams preparing for the Super Bowl are given a practice space that is completely riddled with recording devices. As an example, ESPN leaked part of a Bills practice prior to a Super Bowl against the Cowboys, because they kept their cameras rolling and broadcast the footage.

For reference, George Halas (owner/coach of the Chicago Bears) is known to have bugged locker rooms, phones and coaching booths. Yet I don't hear any one calling for all Bears titles during his tenure to be vacated.


BigDTBone wrote:
Irontruth wrote:
Vod Canockers wrote:
If the NFL had any sense, they would just have declared the Patriots losers of the game against the Colts, and advanced the Colts to the Superbowl. No worries about who was cheating on the team, just that the cheating occurred.

Can you prove that no one on the Colts was cheating?

PED usage is considered cheating. Odds are, someone on every team is using something at some point. I'm not saying that cheating should be tolerated, but rather that punishments should be targeted at offending individuals.

Also, what scale does the cheating have to be for the team to get the loss? Are you suggesting ANY level of cheating? For example, should the league get rid of in game penalties and just go to automatic forfeiture?

So in the face of known and documented cheating, your response us to demand that the colts prove a negative?

As for scale, let's start with equipment tampering and work our way up. Gameplay infractions happen because 22 humans are involved in executing opposed, timed, choreography. Tampering with equipment to gain an edge (even a mental one) is actually cheating and the patriots should have been charged a loss for the game.

As a side note, I think that having the teams manage neutral game equipment is a dumb plan.

You don't address the PED point. That's cheating too. Are you suggesting that all teams with a known PED user have all of their wins vacated?

BTW, the Colt's can't claim to have zero PED users, seeing as Robert Mathis incurred a 4 game suspension for his violation of the PED rules in 2014. LaRon Landry was suspended early in the year for PED violations. He was released in February 11, 2015 (after the Super Bowl) and has been suspended AGAIN in 2015 for another 10 games (meaning he was benefiting from PED's during the Colts-Pats game).

PED's are cheating, the NFL rule book says so.


GO SPORTS TEAM, SCORE THOSE GOAL UNITS.


Are players still drinking Deer piss because of.... reasons or have they moved on to Goat seamen....


Irontruth wrote:
Vod Canockers wrote:
If the NFL had any sense, they would just have declared the Patriots losers of the game against the Colts, and advanced the Colts to the Superbowl. No worries about who was cheating on the team, just that the cheating occurred.

Can you prove that no one on the Colts was cheating?

PED usage is considered cheating. Odds are, someone on every team is using something at some point. I'm not saying that cheating should be tolerated, but rather that punishments should be targeted at offending individuals.

Also, what scale does the cheating have to be for the team to get the loss? Are you suggesting ANY level of cheating? For example, should the league get rid of in game penalties and just go to automatic forfeiture?

Nope can't prove a negative.

As for penalties, I suppose that they could have just kicked all the offensive players (minus the guards and tackles) out of the game for the Patriots.

This isn't a case of one player using a PED or stickum, or taping his uniform down, effectively the entire offense of the Patriots were cheating.

Penalties and other forms of cheating have defined punishments (yards, downs, even scoring a TD for the other team can be awarded). Most penalties are only semi-intential or even accidental, but in some cases where it is intentional or flagrant, the player is ejected (and usually fined). In this case the entire offensive team is cheating, so I suppose the refs could have ejected the entire offense.

While the NFL hasn't forfeited a game, MLB has forfeited games for various forms of cheating, including one game where the home team banned one of the umpires from entering the stadium, and others for deliberately delaying the game, or failing to leave the field. (Most MLB forfeits were the fans fault though.)


The problem I see is that, in the perception of most, there's cheating ... and then there's cheating cheating.

We're as a people almost certain the Patriots engage in type one, as does just about everyone else. We're just not at all agreed on whether they engage in type two, largely because the line of what constitutes serious cheating differs for each of us. How many of us jaywalk every day, for example? How many of us pirate software or entertainment? How about snagging a box of pens from the office? How many are married yet secretly look at porn? How many think none of those things are a big deal?

I happen to think the Patriots do cheat seriously enough to lose respect for them (but even I don't care much about my opinion on the subject, so why should anyone else?). I don't see that there's ever been any incontrovertible proof of that, though, so ... disdaining them must suffice for me. I'm not really interested in punishments for those I dislike, but who have never been truly and properly shown as criminal.

Meh. This whole "tarnished legacy" thing is wholly in the eye of the beholder. Brady's a demigod in New England, and nothing outside of his commission of multiple homicides or something equally heinous would change that.

Hell, in my opinion, Brady's greatest "crime" is one of taste in breaking up with Bridget Moynahan, who I think is far hotter than Gisele ... but I'm also extremely weird, with highly questionable taste.

Honestly, I don't think the suspension holds up, either, at least not one of four games.


I think what people are missing from posts, is that I don't care if it is Patriots, Packers, Steelers, Rams, Seahawks, or if it is Brady, Rogers, Manning (either). Even if it were my favorite team, I would want the NFL to do the same thing.


captain yesterday wrote:
Are players still drinking ... Goat seamen

What? Who? ... How? I don't understand.


Vod Canockers wrote:
Irontruth wrote:
Vod Canockers wrote:
If the NFL had any sense, they would just have declared the Patriots losers of the game against the Colts, and advanced the Colts to the Superbowl. No worries about who was cheating on the team, just that the cheating occurred.

Can you prove that no one on the Colts was cheating?

PED usage is considered cheating. Odds are, someone on every team is using something at some point. I'm not saying that cheating should be tolerated, but rather that punishments should be targeted at offending individuals.

Also, what scale does the cheating have to be for the team to get the loss? Are you suggesting ANY level of cheating? For example, should the league get rid of in game penalties and just go to automatic forfeiture?

Nope can't prove a negative.

You must have missed the part that a Colt player got popped on PED's on Feb 11th of this year. So, we know they can't prove it, because there's proof that it happened.

I can post some numbers for some defensive players if you like, you see it a lot with them. Particularly linebackers who get lots of sacks. If they test positive for PED's and get suspended, often times the next year their numbers drop off dramatically. Two high profile ones that come to mind are Shawn Merriman and Von Miller. Both saw roughly a 30% drop in their sacks and their forced fumbles basically disappeared. Both players were significant pieces of their team's defense, drastically influencing games.

The Seahawks led the league in PED suspensions the past few years. They often drop those players later on, who go to other teams and perform significantly worse.

While not football, we know PED's can greatly improve performance capability, Lance Armstrong being the poster boy.

Dollars to doughnuts, with increased scrutiny on the air pressure in the Brady's footballs, his completion % stays within 3 points this season.


Irontruth wrote:
Vod Canockers wrote:
Irontruth wrote:
Vod Canockers wrote:
If the NFL had any sense, they would just have declared the Patriots losers of the game against the Colts, and advanced the Colts to the Superbowl. No worries about who was cheating on the team, just that the cheating occurred.

Can you prove that no one on the Colts was cheating?

PED usage is considered cheating. Odds are, someone on every team is using something at some point. I'm not saying that cheating should be tolerated, but rather that punishments should be targeted at offending individuals.

Also, what scale does the cheating have to be for the team to get the loss? Are you suggesting ANY level of cheating? For example, should the league get rid of in game penalties and just go to automatic forfeiture?

Nope can't prove a negative.

You must have missed the part that a Colt player got popped on PED's on Feb 11th of this year. So, we know they can't prove it, because there's proof that it happened.

I can post some numbers for some defensive players if you like, you see it a lot with them. Particularly linebackers who get lots of sacks. If they test positive for PED's and get suspended, often times the next year their numbers drop off dramatically. Two high profile ones that come to mind are Shawn Merriman and Von Miller. Both saw roughly a 30% drop in their sacks and their forced fumbles basically disappeared. Both players were significant pieces of their team's defense, drastically influencing games.

The Seahawks led the league in PED suspensions the past few years. They often drop those players later on, who go to other teams and perform significantly worse.

While not football, we know PED's can greatly improve performance capability, Lance Armstrong being the poster boy.

Dollars to doughnuts, with increased scrutiny on the air pressure in the Brady's footballs, his completion % stays within 3 points this season.

He got "popped" on Feb 11, doesn't prove he was using on Jan 18. (He likely was, but that doesn't prove it.)

Whether the deflated balls gave him an advantage or not, it is still cheating. If I copy wrong answers off a classmate while taking a test, I am still cheating.

Calling Lance Armstrong the poster boy is kind of funny, since as near as I can tell all the pro cyclists cheat, usually by using some sort of PED. (The first Tour de France was in 1903, the first people caught cheating were in 1904.)


His suspension was announced Feb 11th, so he was tested prior to that. It also isn't his first suspension, he's a repeat offender. It wasn't even his first suspension in the last 365 days. He also wasn't the only Colt player suspended this year.

Still, my primary point... if you're going to take a moral outrage stance on the under inflated ball purely because it's cheating (regardless of it's actual effect) you better apply your moral outrage to ALL cheating, which includes PEDs.

Since you keep coming up with defenses for the PEDs, you clearly are not applying your moral outrage to ALL cheating, making your moral outrage bereft of any real substance.

Lastly, in an individual sport, such as boxing, cycling (technically there are teams, but teams aren't awarded victories, individuals are), punishing the individual by removing victories makes sense. In team sports, unless the cheating is systemic and organized by the team as a whole, it's more effective to punish individuals. If you punish the team for individual cheating, then when an individual on each team cheats, you HAVE to make the determination of which cheating was more severe. Individual punishments mean you can mete out penalties on a per case basis allowing you to hit both offenders equally hard if necessary.

If you want to make the claim that your moral outrage is without bias, you need to apply it more evenly in your comments. So far, you are not.


Irontruth wrote:

His suspension was announced Feb 11th, so he was tested prior to that. It also isn't his first suspension, he's a repeat offender. It wasn't even his first suspension in the last 365 days. He also wasn't the only Colt player suspended this year.

Still, my primary point... if you're going to take a moral outrage stance on the under inflated ball purely because it's cheating (regardless of it's actual effect) you better apply your moral outrage to ALL cheating, which includes PEDs.

Since you keep coming up with defenses for the PEDs, you clearly are not applying your moral outrage to ALL cheating, making your moral outrage bereft of any real substance.

Lastly, in an individual sport, such as boxing, cycling (technically there are teams, but teams aren't awarded victories, individuals are), punishing the individual by removing victories makes sense. In team sports, unless the cheating is systemic and organized by the team as a whole, it's more effective to punish individuals. If you punish the team for individual cheating, then when an individual on each team cheats, you HAVE to make the determination of which cheating was more severe. Individual punishments mean you can mete out penalties on a per case basis allowing you to hit both offenders equally hard if necessary.

If you want to make the claim that your moral outrage is without bias, you need to apply it more evenly in your comments. So far, you are not.

Extreme disagree. The number one most effective way to keep an individual from cheating is to take away the accomplishments of their peers. The social pressure to play by the rules is far stronger when your peers reputation is on the line, not just your own. People are willing to gamble on getting caught if it is just them who will be punished. People are far less likely to take that risk if they know getting caught will cause their team to be harmed.

Basically, individual punishments set up a system where cheating is the norm because if an individual gets caught then it's because they weren't good enough at hiding it, and the next cheater is right inline to step up and take their place. (See USPS bicycling team) If getting caught meant your team loses the game then you would see much less.

Also, PED testing needs to be ramped up. The lab tests don't take that long (and could be done on site) so in reality every player should be getting tested 6 hours in front of every game they play and then be monitored by proctors until game time.


BigDTBone wrote:
Irontruth wrote:

His suspension was announced Feb 11th, so he was tested prior to that. It also isn't his first suspension, he's a repeat offender. It wasn't even his first suspension in the last 365 days. He also wasn't the only Colt player suspended this year.

Still, my primary point... if you're going to take a moral outrage stance on the under inflated ball purely because it's cheating (regardless of it's actual effect) you better apply your moral outrage to ALL cheating, which includes PEDs.

Since you keep coming up with defenses for the PEDs, you clearly are not applying your moral outrage to ALL cheating, making your moral outrage bereft of any real substance.

Lastly, in an individual sport, such as boxing, cycling (technically there are teams, but teams aren't awarded victories, individuals are), punishing the individual by removing victories makes sense. In team sports, unless the cheating is systemic and organized by the team as a whole, it's more effective to punish individuals. If you punish the team for individual cheating, then when an individual on each team cheats, you HAVE to make the determination of which cheating was more severe. Individual punishments mean you can mete out penalties on a per case basis allowing you to hit both offenders equally hard if necessary.

If you want to make the claim that your moral outrage is without bias, you need to apply it more evenly in your comments. So far, you are not.

Extreme disagree. The number one most effective way to keep an individual from cheating is to take away the accomplishments of their peers. The social pressure to play by the rules is far stronger when your peers reputation is on the line, not just your own. People are willing to gamble on getting caught if it is just them who will be punished. People are far less likely to take that risk if they know getting caught will cause their team to be harmed.

Basically, individual punishments set up a system where cheating is the norm because if an individual...

Except individuals will still gamble on not getting caught. Remember, 97% of the players in the NFL do NOT win the championship each year. Probably 50% of them don't really even have a shot at winning. They play because they're paid to and as long as the pay checks are big, people will take big risks to get those pay checks, damn the consequences.

In addition, I'm specifically addressing game forfeiture, it's impractical in the NFL. Replaying games, or scheduling extra games just isn't practical, nor would it be desired, unless absolutely necessary. Remember, this year the AFC Championship, BOTH teams cheated (one under inflated their footballs, the other had confirmed PED users). That means either canceling the Super Bowl, or playing a second AFC Championship (with the teams that lost in the prior round of playoffs).

The Ravens have had 5 (including one this year) PED suspensions the past 5 years.

Oh, and the Broncos had 2 suspensions for PED use this year, plus one last year too.

So, in the AFC, the top 4 teams in the playoffs ALL had some form of cheating happen this year. ALL OF THEM.

I'm not saying this to excuse the cheating. I'm just pointing out that with 53 players per team (46 allowed to dress for the game) and with the stakes being so high for making it onto those teams, players are going to take risks, that includes breaking the rules. It's in their own interests to do it because they'll potentially earn millions of dollars before they're caught.

The best method really is to fine/suspend them and move on. If a problem is endemic to a team, the team gets fined and loses draft picks.

This isn't life or death. It's entertainment. While I think efforts should continue to make it as moral and ethical as possible, the consequences of moral and ethical violations are pretty trivial in the grand scheme of things. Sometimes they're even trivial within the context of football.

I'm just tired of people acting like Tom Brady is some kind of heinous sinner, while a safety they've never heard of doesn't even deserve to be talked about. Either you hate cheaters, or you don't and you're just pretending to because it suits your purposes.


Irontruth wrote:

His suspension was announced Feb 11th, so he was tested prior to that. It also isn't his first suspension, he's a repeat offender. It wasn't even his first suspension in the last 365 days. He also wasn't the only Colt player suspended this year.

Still, my primary point... if you're going to take a moral outrage stance on the under inflated ball purely because it's cheating (regardless of it's actual effect) you better apply your moral outrage to ALL cheating, which includes PEDs.

Since you keep coming up with defenses for the PEDs, you clearly are not applying your moral outrage to ALL cheating, making your moral outrage bereft of any real substance.

Lastly, in an individual sport, such as boxing, cycling (technically there are teams, but teams aren't awarded victories, individuals are), punishing the individual by removing victories makes sense. In team sports, unless the cheating is systemic and organized by the team as a whole, it's more effective to punish individuals. If you punish the team for individual cheating, then when an individual on each team cheats, you HAVE to make the determination of which cheating was more severe. Individual punishments mean you can mete out penalties on a per case basis allowing you to hit both offenders equally hard if necessary.

If you want to make the claim that your moral outrage is without bias, you need to apply it more evenly in your comments. So far, you are not.

Actually he was cut by the Colts on Feb 11, his suspension was announced on Mar 6. http://www.indystar.com/story/sports/nfl/colts/2015/03/06/former-colt-laron -landry-suspended-10-games-for-ped-violation/24528217/

The NFL, MLB, and other sports have defined penalties for PEDs, and Mr, Landry is learning about them (his next penalty is 2 years, if he ever plays again). I am not making excuses for their use, in fact the penalties are too light. Since I doubt a lifetime ban for a first penalty would fly, I would find acceptable 8 games for the first, 16 games for the second, and out of the league for a third. I also believe that all pro and college sports should test all players regularly.

You must have missed my earlier suggestion that the referee kick the entire offense out of the game. Since the underinflated balls presumably aided them all.

Systemic - 11 of 12 balls seems systemic
Penalty - all of the offensive ball carriers, and anyone else that would be handling the ball should have been kicked out of the game. Or the team forfeit.

Cheating doesn't need to be systemic, it just has to happen once to be punished. Sammy Sosa was caught using a corked once, he was ejected from the game, and suspended for 7 more games. All 76 of his other bats were clean. He said it was a bat he used in batting practice. One equipment violation, and he was ejected and then suspended.


@irontruth

The issue with PED is why I suggest implementing testing of each player before each game. If a player is caught using you can eliminate them from the game and because they didn't play on PED then the team doesn't need to be punished.


Something more interesting than deflategate:

The US Military pays NFL teams to feature service members.

The Atlanta Falcons got a little over $1 million over the course of 4 years, for doing things like giving free tickets, featuring service members on the jumbotron and making announcements that thanked service members for their service.

Dark Archive

Hurrah I can now watch me some Tom Brady play some football and I can enjoy the games. What a waste of time but at least he is free to play this season.


Yeah that was stupid, Roger Goodell needs to go, he isn't helping the NFL at all. :-)


The best part for a Pats fan is that this rebuke comes from the NFL's hand picked venue.

Scarab Sages

Although I dislike Tom Brady the person, I'm glad to see Goodell lose.


Aberzombie wrote:
Although I dislike Tom Brady the person, I'm glad to see Goodell lose.

I might be biased, but even if you really hate Brady I see many, many more problems with Goodell in this, starting with all the 'leaks' during the investigation, some of which were revealed to be outright lies. All the way up to his 'independent' investigator invoking attorney/client privilege to avoid testifying.

Brady has taken some serious missteps of his own in all this, but nothing to the level Roger has.


Goodell seems to be either the owners' yes-man, or worth less than the flesh he is printed upon as NFL Commish, or both. The NFL desperately needs a new Commish after this circus.


He's a straw man, set up to distract from the real issues of pain killer dependency and concussions, which he's done splendidly.

Scarab Sages

Grey Lensman wrote:
Aberzombie wrote:
Although I dislike Tom Brady the person, I'm glad to see Goodell lose.

I might be biased, but even if you really hate Brady I see many, many more problems with Goodell in this, starting with all the 'leaks' during the investigation, some of which were revealed to be outright lies. All the way up to his 'independent' investigator invoking attorney/client privilege to avoid testifying.

Brady has taken some serious missteps of his own in all this, but nothing to the level Roger has.

Indeed, and hence my joy at his loss.

Scarab Sages

Turin the Mad wrote:
Goodell seems to be either the owners' yes-man, or worth less than the flesh he is printed upon as NFL Commish, or both. The NFL desperately needs a new Commish after this circus.

Agreed. I'd love to see him replaced.

Dark Archive

1 person marked this as a favorite.

While I am looking forward to seeing the game played tonight. I am also dreading it. After my sons death in March there are things here and there that come up holidays and the like which bring up the pain of missing him. As he was older when he passed away 29, we were able to spend a lot of time watching the Patriots together or at least texting one another about the ups and downs. I will always treasure the final moments of this last years Super Bowl quiet anticipation followed by rejoicing when Malcolm Butler intercepted the pass and won the Patriots fourth Super Bowl. The fact I was able to share that with him before he passed was special at the time and doubly so now.

Football bringing people together in this case a step father and son and making those bonding moments easier to happen. This season will be tough but I will look forward to it remembering my son and hoisting a Rolling Rock beer to him this evening. To everyone else out there cherish those moments with your children you never know when they maybe over.

Dark Archive

Going to miss having a game to watch Sunday with the Patriots bye week. It has been a pretty good year so far offensively, I am concerned though about the defense. The recent additions they made should be interesting to watch and see if they make a difference. I did like the Hoo man (Michael Hoomanawanui) though.

Aberzombie you should enjoy seeing him play a big bodied TE decent hands and a pretty good blocker a serviceable TE. He just got lost on the depth chart for us. I think I see this as a good move for the Saints.

Anything good to say About Akiem Hicks?

Liberty's Edge

This has been a pretty crazy season so far. Some of the perennial favorites are floundering, and some of the also-rans are running away with it.

Any thoughts going into Week 9? Any fearless predictions of which of the last four unbeatens will fall?


And why the f$!! did ESPN shut down Grantland! I'd become dependant on my Bill Barnwell fix, especially since they canned TMQ after last season.

The Mothership seems to be listing slightly....


@Gruumash Akiem Hicks was an underperformer. Maybe Belichick and the Pats D Coordinator can get more from him but he only showed flashes of talent for the Saints. He was never all that consistent imho.

Week 9 Denver loses, Carolina loses

Pats will prolly be 13-0 then just tank the last three games resting everyone.


I don't think Indy's up to the task that Green Bay failed at. It'll be interesting to see how that game plays out.


captain yesterday wrote:

And why the f&#@ did ESPN shut down Grantland! I'd become dependant on my Bill Barnwell fix, especially since they canned TMQ after last season.

The Mothership seems to be listing slightly....

Because the person in charge of, and advocate for, Grantland got fired. With Bill Simmons gone, I doubt there was anyone higher up fighting to keep the site going. The site had fairly well known low traffic numbers. It wasn't monetized well. It was an expensive trophy grabber.

I love Grantland, will be sad to see it go. I think it'd be great if Bill develops something similar for HBO.

Liberty's Edge

....and the Carolina Panthers are 8-0! Keep Pounding, Panthers!


Pay for Patriotism is back in the news again. A couple senators are involved now.


Well played game, Indy, well played. :)


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Oh, additional news for Grantland enthusiasts. Bill Simmons has so far hired 4 of the editors from the website.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

That's great news!

I hope he writes a 20,000 word diatribe against ESPN (and the Lakers) first thing:-D

1,201 to 1,250 of 1,621 << first < prev | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Gamer Life / Off-Topic Discussions / Are YOU ready for some FOOTBALL! All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.