Going to rain and be in the 40s on draft day Thursday, as well as rainy all day and mid 50s on Saturday.

 

yeah definitely not getting that beautiful weather we had last year.

Kind of like only Notre Dame fans think Kelly being responsible for killing a kid was a "misunderstanding"?

 

Lots of ND fans don't believe that. Most that I know don't believe that. I don't believe it was a misunderstanding. I do believe that the AD should have been held mostly responsible though, since he was the "highest ranking" person on site that day.

Then everyone is wrong. No way Brady should be suspended.

 

Great, let's just let everybody cheat without punishment. Bears should plant cameras in the visitors locker room so they can know what the other team is saying before the game and at halftime. Bug the headsets too. Anything goes.

 

But I do agree that Brady shouldn't have been suspended. What really should have happened was their entire 2014 season vacated, but a 4-game suspension is at least something.

Edited April 25, 20169 yr by HickoryHuskers

Just to clarify, I don't think Brady should have been suspended but I also didn't buy the first judges reasoning.

Just to clarify, I don't think Brady should have been suspended but I also didn't buy the first judges reasoning.

Correct. Godell followed the procedure the NFLPA agreed to. If they don't like it, change it in the next CBA, but be ready to give up something substantial.

Great, let's just let everybody cheat without punishment. Bears should plant cameras in the visitors locker room so they can know what the other team is saying before the game and at halftime. Bug the headsets too. Anything goes.

 

But I do agree that Brady shouldn't have been suspended. What really should have happened was their entire 2014 season vacated, but a 4-game suspension is at least something.

 

 

Wins vacated? LOL. This post is absurd.

Great, let's just let everybody cheat without punishment. Bears should plant cameras in the visitors locker room so they can know what the other team is saying before the game and at halftime. Bug the headsets too. Anything goes.

 

But I do agree that Brady shouldn't have been suspended. What really should have happened was their entire 2014 season vacated, but a 4-game suspension is at least something.

 

You have to have evidence of you're going to make a team vacate an entire season. You don't seem to get that at all. The NFL has nothing. They are suspending him based on speculation.

If he did it, I agree the suspension should have been way more severe. Something like a full season. I love Brady but no room for that at all.

I'm a fan of neither and I don't think he should be suspended.

+1

You have to have evidence of you're going to make a team vacate an entire season. You don't seem to get that at all. The NFL has nothing. They are suspending him based on speculation.

 

They had evidence of using illegal footballs in a playoff game. That's enough to vacate their playoff win.

They had evidence of using illegal footballs in a playoff game. That's enough to vacate their playoff win.

 

It's been scientifically proven that those footballs were "illegal" due to natural temperature change. The Colts' footballs were "illegal" as well.

 

I'm a fan of neither and I don't think he should be suspended.

 

It's been scientifically proven that those footballs were "illegal" due to natural temperature change. The Colts' footballs were "illegal" as well.

The whole initial report has been pretty thoroughly picked apart.

 

And even if they did have evidence, the rules for equipment tampering call for some light fines, not suspending the qb for a fourth of a season or vacating wins (lol, the least meaningful thing ever)

 

Edit doesn't the NFL not even know what guage was used for measuring the different balls?

Edited April 26, 20169 yr by StrangeSox

It's been scientifically proven that those footballs were "illegal" due to natural temperature change. The Colts' footballs were "illegal" as well.

 

I've never seen anything of the sort. That also doesn't explain the employees who admitted to underinflating balls.

 

Vacate that season!

 

Vacate that season!

 

Those other things are not cheating in the game, so I don't see how taking away wins is applicable, but all of them should have been and should still be locked up in prison.

I've never seen anything of the sort. That also doesn't explain the employees who admitted to underinflating balls.

The NFLs crack team appeared unaware that pressure changes with temperature and had no standardized procedure for performing and recording the tests they did.

Those other things are not cheating in the game, so I don't see how taking away wins is applicable, but all of them should have been and should still be locked up in prison.

 

An entire season of cheating has not been proven. In fact, no cheating has been proven, only questioned. But keep on pounding your drum

The NFLs crack team appeared unaware that pressure changes with temperature and had no standardized procedure for performing and recording the tests they did.

 

Balls were tested at halftime inside a heated room. Were found to be significantly less inflated than Colts balls.

The NFLs crack team appeared unaware that pressure changes with temperature and had no standardized procedure for performing and recording the tests they did.

So procedural rules are always more important than the facts. They have employees admitting they underinflated the balls. All of the Patriot footballs were underinflated yet all of the others were not. Someone on the Patiots didn't follow the rules.

 

This is just like the Ryan Braun not getting suspended for PEDs because the technician didn't follow the "procedure" yet followed common practice even though it was a valid positive test.

 

This reasoning is why there is still rampant cheating in sports.

Which balls were tested first? Were all balls at equilibrium temperature before starting measurements? What gauges were used? Were they properly calibrated by a certified lab? How many measurements of each ball were taken?

So procedural rules are always more important than the facts. They have employees admitting they underinflated the balls. All of the Patriot footballs were underinflated yet all of the others were not. Someone on the Patiots didn't follow the rules.

 

This is just like the Ryan Braun not getting suspended for PEDs because the technician didn't follow the "procedure" yet followed common practice even though it was a valid positive test.

 

This reasoning is why there is still rampant cheating in sports.

If you want to prove cheating actually happened, you need to follow good procedures.

 

Cheating exists because people want to win and want more money or prestige or whatever. Happens outside of sports too.

 

Edit another way of saying that is that without good procedure, you can't establish the facts conclusively.

Edited April 26, 20169 yr by StrangeSox

If you want to prove cheating actually happened, you need to follow good procedures.

 

Cheating exists because people want to win and want more money or prestige or whatever. Happens outside of sports too.

 

Edit another way of saying that is that without good procedure, you can't establish the facts conclusively.

You can establish facts. Fact 1: empoyees admitted to purposely underinflating the balls. Fact 2: All of the Patriot footballs were underinflated, the Colts were not. These are not disputed facts. The procedure is how to interpret the facts. This is where it fails.

 

In the case of the Braun drug test, there was no disputing that he failed a drug test. It was a fact. He didn't get suspended because proper procedure to send the sample to the lab immediately wasn't followed.

 

i agree that there needs to be good procedures and rules to follow. However, sometimes there are unforseen circumstances that the procedure didn't take into account and common sense needs to over rule it.

You can't establish 2 without good procedures. That's the whole point.

 

Eta with Braun chain of custody was broken, right? So you can't actually guarantee he conclusively failed the test. I'm sure we're all 99.9% that he did, but the authorities need to be able to actually prove it and they can't if the right procedures aren't followed.

Edited April 26, 20169 yr by StrangeSox

I've never seen anything of the sort. That also doesn't explain the employees who admitted to underinflating balls.