2015 NFL Football Thread

[Jakester23]

Defense will suck..

15th yards per game last year and 13th in points per game. They will probably be about the same this year which is more than good enough with Aaron.

[saevel25]

Without a doubt.  I was just referring to the penalties in terms of overall team discipline (or lack thereof).  Yeah, head coaches don't keep their jobs by going 1-15 but having minimal penalties, that's not much to hang your hat on!

(BTW, in case it wasn't clear, that response wasn't directed at you.  I quoted Duff (who brought up Seattle) and was responding to him, but left your content in there just to retain context.  Sorry if it created confusion.)

I remember a quote from Calipari on how he wants Kentucky to have a certain number of turnovers because too little and his team plays to cautious and too many they play too careless. He felt like his team tried to be too perfect instead of just being assertive on the court.

Yeah, I'm sure that Philbin told all of his players to leave Martin alone AND probably also recommended to the GM that he be traded.  To that I say:

"Why the two orders?  Coach??"

(I'd keep going, but I think you all get the gist. ;))

Don't worry I got your reference. One of the few Tom Cruise movies I'll actually watch multiple times. Though I could just skip forward till that scene :) That man is crazy intense when he wants to be.

[saevel25]

http://espn.go.com/boston/nfl/story/_/id/13570716/tom-brady-new-england-patriots-wins-appeal-nfl-deflategate

I guess Tom Brady and the Patriots win again

[saevel25]

Quote:

Judge Berman's decision is one that states that the procedure by which Brady's appeal was conducted was unfair (due to the previously mentioned issues of notice, denial of the opportunity to interview key witnesses and denial of access to investigative files), but it does not appear to go as far as saying that the actual appeal process (i.e. Goodell acting as arbitrator) itself is unfair.

http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/eye-on-football/25288935/report-judge-richard-m-berman-rules-for-brady-overturns-suspension

Sounds like the NFL did a piss poor job in the arbitration process.

Quote:

The commissioner said he concluded Brady "knew about, approved of, consented to, and provided inducements and rewards" to ensure balls were deflated.

Berman attacked the league while questioning one of its lawyers at two hearings, citing a lack of proof against Brady and asking how Goodell settled on a four-game suspension instead of other discipline.

He warned the league that he had the authority to overturn its punishment of Brady if he found the NFL acted unfairly by refusing to deliver NFL Executive Vice President Jeff Pash as a witness even though he worked on the NFL investigation.

Berman had repeatedly urged both sides to settle and tone down their rhetoric. At a hearing Monday attended by Brady and Goodell, the judge announced that both sides had "tried quite hard" to reach a deal in morning talks. But the case was left for him to decide.

http://espn.go.com/boston/nfl/story/_/id/13570716/tom-brady-new-england-patriots-wins-appeal-nfl-deflategate

[Shindig]

Sounds like the NFL did a piss poor job in the arbitration process.

That's been a running theme to this whole mess. Anyone who has followed just about any discipline process by the NFL knew this already, as I suspect you did. Don't get me wrong; I'm happy Brady won, because a loss would have meant I'd have no hope of ever seeing Daryl Washington on the field again. As best I can tell, he (D-Wash) applied for reinstatement when he could and has been ignored. Maybe now his agent can make some moves about this. Other B.S. penalties in recent years for those paying attention include the Cowboys and Redskins being penalized for violating the cap in an "uncapped" year (John Mara petitioned the league for the penalty and was allowed to impose it, despite the obvious conflict of interest, not to mention leading everyone to wonder how one can violate a salary cap in a year in which it didn't exist) ; the thing with the Saints a few years ago (those who followed beyond the TMZesque ESPN headlines got to discover that the NFL's evidence was primarily a confession from an assistant coach who they suspended indefinitely and allowed back after he provided this) ; the other Wells report (this one against Miami) ; anything involving James Harrison being suspended or fined. In any case, the real thing we've learned is that anything bad for Goodell and the league office is probably good for football. Call me old fashioned, but you should actually have to violate a rule to be penalized for a rules violation (I'm aware that, of all the ones I mentioned, my team's guy actually did violate two rules, but an indefinite suspension seems very high).

[Golfingdad]

That's been a running theme to this whole mess. Anyone who has followed just about any discipline process by the NFL knew this already, as I suspect you did. Don't get me wrong; I'm happy Brady won, because a loss would have meant I'd have no hope of ever seeing Daryl Washington on the field again. As best I can tell, he (D-Wash) applied for reinstatement when he could and has been ignored. Maybe now his agent can make some moves about this.

Other B.S. penalties in recent years for those paying attention include the Cowboys and Redskins being penalized for violating the cap in an "uncapped" year (John Mara petitioned the league for the penalty and was allowed to impose it, despite the obvious conflict of interest, not to mention leading everyone to wonder how one can violate a salary cap in a year in which it didn't exist) ; the thing with the Saints a few years ago (those who followed beyond the TMZesque ESPN headlines got to discover that the NFL's evidence was primarily a confession from an assistant coach who they suspended indefinitely and allowed back after he provided this) ; the other Wells report (this one against Miami) ; anything involving James Harrison being suspended or fined.

In any case, the real thing we've learned is that anything bad for Goodell and the league office is probably good for football. Call me old fashioned, but you should actually have to violate a rule to be penalized for a rules violation (I'm aware that, of all the ones I mentioned, my team's guy actually did violate two rules, but an indefinite suspension seems very high).

The only constant in all of this is the keystone kops buffoonery of Roger Goodell.

[Mac62]

The only constant in all of this is the keystone kops buffoonery of Roger Goodell.

He sure does continue to demonstrate incompetence.  It's hard to believe he continues to keep his job after all the screw-ups.

The Ray Rice fiasco was another example of him screwing the pooch.  After the initial investigation he suspended him for two games.  Rice served his suspension, then the NFL then came out with a policy stating that the mandated suspension for a first offense of domestic violence was six games.  Then the video of Rice hitting his girlfriend in the elevator became public and Goodell turned around and suspended Rice indefinitely - despite the fact that a) he had already served his imposed suspension after the initial investigation and b) the league's mandated first offense suspension was six games.  Translating it to the public sector, this would be akin to being sentenced to 2 days in jail for shoplifting - then after you got out of jail, the store released the video of you shoplifting and the judge turns around and sentences you to a year in prison for the same offense you've already been sentenced and served your time for.  Not condoning what Rice did in any way, but the way Goodell and his cronies handled it was completely incompetent.  He obviously bowed to outside pressure and was scrambling to appease the angry mob.

The Brady case (along with "Bountygate" and others) shows that the NFL needs to hire some investigators who understand the difference between "evidence" and "rumor/hearsay".  If Goodell can't learn the difference between "beyond a reasonable doubt" and "we think this may have happened", he needs to step aside and delegate disciplinary issues to somebody who's a little sharper.

[Shindig]

He sure does continue to demonstrate incompetence.  It's hard to believe he continues to keep his job after all the screw-ups.

A big part of Goodell's job is to perform the actions that the owners, as a whole, want him to perform, and to take the public blame for it. I suspect he stays for a bit; he has enough that like him. Even with this loss, I bet he has Irsay's vote in perpetuity. [quote name="Mac62" url="/t/80501/2015-nfl-football-thread/360#post_1194219"] The Ray Rice fiasco was another example of him screwing the pooch.  After the initial investigation he suspended him for two games.  Rice served his suspension, then the NFL then came out with a policy stating that the mandated suspension for a first offense of domestic violence was six games.  Then the video of Rice hitting his girlfriend in the elevator became public and Goodell turned around and suspended Rice indefinitely - despite the fact that a) he had already served his imposed suspension after the initial investigation and b) the league's mandated first offense suspension was six games.  Translating it to the public sector, this would be akin to being sentenced to 2 days in jail for shoplifting - then after you got out of jail, the store released the video of you shoplifting and the judge turns around and sentences you to a year in prison for the same offense you've already been sentenced and served your time for.  Not condoning what Rice did in any way, but the way Goodell and his cronies handled it was completely incompetent.  He obviously bowed to outside pressure and was scrambling to appease the angry mob.  [/quote] So the other issue is that a lot of the players he went after in this power-grab did bad things; Rice, Hardy, and Washington were all accused of domestic violence -- something (I hope) none of us like. The PR stunts during the anti-Saints witch hunt caused anyone defending them to be labeled as defending deliberate injuries (even though it's clear to anyone following it that this isn't what happened). He docked the Steelers for not interviewing a minority candidate for their HC position a few years ago -- who wants to be in favor of leaving out minorities? That excuse, of course, falls apart when you remember who they hired. Then he went after the Patriots and Tom Brady; people hate success if they aren't part of it (this is also why various despicable political systems have been popular). For you and me, it's hard to think someone's bad because they kind of sort of maybe knew about something we learned about in high school chemistry. But listening to various NFL spokesmen (which is all BSPN is reduced to), you'd think he's been reducing footballs to frisbees. [quote name="Mac62" url="/t/80501/2015-nfl-football-thread/360#post_1194219"] The Brady case (along with "Bountygate" and others) shows that the NFL needs to hire some investigators who understand the difference between "evidence" and "rumor/hearsay".  If Goodell can't learn the difference between "beyond a reasonable doubt" and "we think this may have happened", he needs to step aside and delegate disciplinary issues to somebody who's a little sharper. [/quote] Keep in mind "beyond a reasonable doubt" isn't the standard the NFL (or most employers) is bound to; they do have to follow labor law in general (hence the standards of fairness in this case -- defense must be able to cross-examine witnesses, the Jets fan in the league office who was allowed to edit the prosecutor's (Wells) report before it was released, judge cannot give his authority to another non-agreed-upon party etc), but the "more probable than not" part is okay.

[acetoolguy]

Goodell has said they will appeal, of course, anyone giving odds on them winning that? The judge ridiculed the Wells report in open court. They lost in a court that they hand picked. They came across as arrogant and closed minded, so sure they were going to win that they did not need to be fair or compromise.

I would not be surprised if they do indeed file an appeal. I would also not be surprised if it just fades away. Just about everybody wants this done, the owners that Goodell answers to may just tell him its over, we lost, again, move on. By the way, we are going to look at how you handle issues involving players going forward. I doubt his job is in jeopardy any time soon, but I also doubt he is in the chair in two years.

[Golfingdad]

Goodell has said they will appeal, of course, anyone giving odds on them winning that? The judge ridiculed the Wells report in open court. They lost in a court that they hand picked. They came across as arrogant and closed minded, so sure they were going to win that they did not need to be fair or compromise.

I would not be surprised if they do indeed file an appeal. I would also not be surprised if it just fades away. Just about everybody wants this done, the owners that Goodell answers to may just tell him its over, we lost, again, move on. By the way, we are going to look at how you handle issues involving players going forward. I doubt his job is in jeopardy any time soon, but I also doubt he is in the chair in two years.

Goodell needs to take a lesson from George Costanza and start "doing the opposite" because every instinct he has seems to be wrong.

(I'm being funny obviously, but I'm not joking.  I think in these last few years in regards to this case and the Rice case and others, things probably would have worked out for the better if he did the opposite of his instincts.)

[newtogolf]

Goodell has said they will appeal, of course, anyone giving odds on them winning that? The judge ridiculed the Wells report in open court. They lost in a court that they hand picked. They came across as arrogant and closed minded, so sure they were going to win that they did not need to be fair or compromise.

I would not be surprised if they do indeed file an appeal. I would also not be surprised if it just fades away. Just about everybody wants this done, the owners that Goodell answers to may just tell him its over, we lost, again, move on. By the way, we are going to look at how you handle issues involving players going forward. I doubt his job is in jeopardy any time soon, but I also doubt he is in the chair in two years.

Goodell and the NFL owners thought the CBA was iron clad.  If the judge based his decision on the T's & C's of the CBA he'd have had no choice but to rule in favor of Goodell.  I also believe the reason Kraft chose not to challenge the team penalty ($1M and 1st and 4th round draft picks) is that he didn't want to risk winning and thus having the CBA weakened.  Instead Berman decided the CBA was worthless and ruled on the case based on real laws and evidence.   This is the 3rd time Goodells rulings have been challenged and overturned, Saints bounty penalty, Adrian Peterson and now Brady.

The NFL has to appeal and hope that they win, otherwise the key part of the CBA that makes Goodell ruler and king is meaningless and all that power they fought for during negotiations is lost.

[Aflighter]

Kraft must have bribed a federal judge.I guess the guilty do as they like.

[acetoolguy]

Kraft must have bribed a federal judge.I guess the guilty do as they like.

Well that's just stupid. Why would he bribe a judge after he paid a million dollar fine and lost a first and fourth round pick?

But in a simple minded world accused is the same as convicted, it saves so much brain power that way.

[acetoolguy]

Goodell and the NFL owners thought the CBA was iron clad.  If the judge based his decision on the T's & C's of the CBA he'd have had no choice but to rule in favor of Goodell.  I also believe the reason Kraft chose not to challenge the team penalty ($1M and 1st and 4th round draft picks) is that he didn't want to risk winning and thus having the CBA weakened.  Instead Berman decided the CBA was worthless and ruled on the case based on real laws and evidence.   This is the 3rd time Goodells rulings have been challenged and overturned, Saints bounty penalty, Adrian Peterson and now Brady.

The NFL has to appeal and hope that they win, otherwise the key part of the CBA that makes Goodell ruler and king is meaningless and all that power they fought for during negotiations is lost.

I'm not sure he threw the baby out with the bath water here. Berman knows he would be overturned on appeal if he just ruled the CBA had no standing.

He took issue with Brady not being told the penalty would be the same as getting caught with PED's, Brady's lawyers not being able to question the #2 investigator and not having access to his files or notes.

Funny thing is, he told the NFL these things all through the hearing, they were just too arrogant to listen.

[Aflighter]

Well that's just stupid. Why would he bribe a judge after he paid a million dollar fine and lost a first and fourth round pick? But in a simple minded world accused is the same as convicted, it saves so much brain power that way.

Everyone knows the pats are dirty.They been caught before and nothing done as usual.

[newtogolf]

I keep hearing how Tebow is working on his throwing motion and release but every time I see him it looks the same as it always did.  I just watched him throw a pick that he telegraphed so badly I could have picked it off.  He's a good leader, but a horrible QB, I wish he'd give TE a shot.

[flopster]

Well that's just stupid. Why would he bribe a judge after he paid a million dollar fine and lost a first and fourth round pick?

But in a simple minded world accused is the same as convicted, it saves so much brain power that way.

Wasn't Brady for the most part uncooperative and reluctant to allow access to his cell phone and in fact had it destroyed but his previous 2 were still with him? I know public opinion should not have weight in a legal matter but his behavior didn't look at all like someone not hiding something.

[Shindig]

Wasn't Brady for the most part uncooperative and reluctant to allow access to his cell phone and in fact had it destroyed but his previous 2 were still with him? I know public opinion should not have weight in a legal matter but his behavior didn't look at all like someone not hiding something.

It absolutely looks bad from PR, but it also has several... let's be polite and call them misinterpretations in there. Not by you; what you say was reported and later shown to be false (a recurring pattern in this story). There was a conveniently timed leak claiming Tom did destroy his phone. We later found out that he didn't, and also that Wells had told him the phone wasn't needed, that Wells had told him that not turning over his phone [i]would not be interpreted as uncooperative[/i]. This, of course, doesn't stop Kensil (or whoever it was, but we can bet dollars to donuts it was Kensil) from telling the press that Brady destroyed his phone in order to conceal evidence. Next, with everything in every phone that was turned over becoming public, can you blame him? Remember the pool cover story when it was leaked? If you were a public figure, wouldn't you be reluctant to allow access to your phone? Look at what's currently in your phone -- pick a few random text messages and try to take them out of context for a TMZ-style headline. Lastly, get this notion that guilty and uncooperative are linked out of your head; if you're ever questioned by police in connection with a crime, be sure to have a lawyer present. You'll appear uncooperative. You'll also be more likely to stay out of trouble this way, especially if you aren't guilty.