Jump to content
Meathead

Tom Brady Sr.: You can't prove he did it, then he's innocent

Recommended Posts

"I don't have any doubt about my son's integrity — not one bit," Tom Brady Sr. told USA TODAY Sports on Wednesday after the investigation's publication.

 

"In this country, you're innocent until proven guilty. It just seems Tommy is now guilty until proven innocent.

 

"This thing is so convoluted. ... They say that possibly — possibly — he was aware of this. The reality is if you can't prove he did it, then he's innocent, and lay off him. That's the bottom line."

 

http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/nfl/patriots/2015/05/06/tom-brady-sr-senior-defends-son-framegate-deflategate-colts/70900374/

 

defending a loved one is fine, dad, but theres a line

 

apparently a douche doesnt fall far from the ... err ... tree


One set of rules for all in the beloved community

"The word racism is like ketchup. It can be put on practically anything, and demanding evidence makes you a 'racist' " - Thomas Sowell

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
"I don't have any doubt about my son's integrity — not one bit," Tom Brady Sr. told USA TODAY Sports on Wednesday after the investigation's publication.

 

"In this country, you're innocent until proven guilty. It just seems Tommy is now guilty until proven innocent.

 

"This thing is so convoluted. ... They say that possibly — possibly — he was aware of this. The reality is if you can't prove he did it, then he's innocent, and lay off him. That's the bottom line."

 

http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/nfl/patriots/2015/05/06/tom-brady-sr-senior-defends-son-framegate-deflategate-colts/70900374/

 

defending a loved one is fine, dad, but theres a line

 

apparently a douche doesnt fall far from the ... err ... tree

 

 

All through the report it say's probable. Probable will get you off from everything from a parking ticket right up to Murder 1.

 

As for Brady, he can handle this as he will handle the Colts on October 18th. This game will be marked on their calendar.

 

Last year he beat the Colts twice by a combined score of 87 - 27, good luck meeting a pissed off Brady this year.

 

I'm a Buffalo fan, but when it comes to Belichick and Brady, I'm not stupid.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Then...let's hear from Mr. Tom Brady himself. He's awfully quiet today. And if the rumors that he didn't offer his cell/records, then why?

 

The Pats are a slippery bunch. Add in the Red Sox and their juicing during their first of the recent World Series wins.

 

Screw Boston.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Fuck both Brady's Honestly. Remember the press conference Mr. Brady ???

 

Your "innocent" son was asked point blank at what PSI he liked his footballs infaltede and he was very specific about it. 2 minutes later during that same PC he said he couldn't tell the difference if a ball was under or over inflated.

 

 

Say what ?

 

 

Busted

 

 

How can you said you are very strict about those football and their inflation and then say you can't distinguish between different PSI's ???

 

As usual Tommy you just like everything NE related are full of shit.

 

 

Sadly since Goodell is Kraft's bitch the punishment will be as usual a slap on the wrist.


Bills fan for life!! ................

I love beer, rum, scotch and women !! :rockon:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

According to Florio at PFT, "more probable than not" has deeper meaning than one would assume..

 

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2015/05/06/more-probable-than-not-carries-important-legal-meaning/

 

A few excerpts...

 

To the non-lawyer, the money quotes from the Ted Wells report suggest a mere probability that cheating occurred. But the specific terminology used by Wells actually indicates a belief that the evidence satisfies one of the most common standards used in a court of law. “More probable than not” equates to a “preponderance of the evidence,” the standard that applies in most civil lawsuits.

 

...

 

Regardless, it’s enough proof on which the NFL can base punishment of a team.

 

...

 

Although there was nothing easy about the Wells investigation, his decision that a preponderance of the evidence points to a deliberate effort to circumvent the rules gives Goodell the green light to impose discipline.

 

...

 

When it comes to issues of this nature, hard evidence isn’t needed to justify a stringent punishment.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Exactly, this isn't a criminal law trial where you have to have proof beyond a reasonable doubt.

 

Just like in a civil law trial they only require a preponderance of the evidence. In laymans terms, this means that whoever has the simple majority of evidence on their side wins. It figures the football idiots of billion dollar franchises don't understand simple things like this. My father always said life was unfair, what he failed to tell me was you have to be unethical/cheater to be a winner. Assholes! (Yes I am also talking to you Carlos Irwin Estévez!)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
All through the report it say's probable. Probable will get you off from everything from a parking ticket right up to Murder 1.

 

As for Brady, he can handle this as he will handle the Colts on October 18th. This game will be marked on their calendar.

 

Last year he beat the Colts twice by a combined score of 87 - 27, good luck meeting a pissed off Brady this year.

 

I'm a Buffalo fan, but when it comes to Belichick and Brady, I'm not stupid.

 

Someone "probably " being responsible is what it takes to lose a civil lawsuit. The report says it's more likely than not that he knew. That is exactly the standard in civil court.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Someone "probably " being responsible is what it takes to lose a civil lawsuit. The report says it's more likely than not that he knew. That is exactly the standard in civil court.

 

I just visited some Pats message boards and they refuse to believe this.

 

They truly feel they are the victims here and Goodell is making all of this up to stick it to the Pats.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Let's see what Goodell does. They are a repeat offender so if there is to be any credibility it should not just be a slap on the wrist, but Goodell has shown no willingness thusfar to take on his buddy Kraft.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey, to be honest, an NFL official was caught stealing post tested footballs which doesn't say much about what the NFL itself felt about the integrity of positively checked footballs.

Not a word in the report about the NFL wrongdoing in the affair.

New England played 6 flawless quarters, after the incident, with balls properly inflated.

This is another cheap excuse to beat up the best football team in the last 15 years, while ignoring the leagues responsibility in the matter.

 

Want to be a better team than New England? Play better football than them and stop acting like adolescents over this stuff.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hey, to be honest, an NFL official was caught stealing post tested footballs which doesn't say much about what the NFL itself felt about the integrity of positively checked footballs.

Not a word in the report about the NFL wrongdoing in the affair.

New England played 6 flawless quarters, after the incident, with balls properly inflated.

This is another cheap excuse to beat up the best football team in the last 15 years, while ignoring the leagues responsibility in the matter.

 

Want to be a better team than New England? Play better football than them and stop acting like adolescents over this stuff.

 

Did the air pressure get changed by Pats employees at the instructions of Brady?

 

Did Brady lie and not cooperate with the investigation?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

First Spygate, now this....I wonder what else is going on that they got away without being caught?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It'll be hard for Goodell to lose this report since it's all over the internet. He'll have to do something.


My Retired AAB is Kyle Williams...

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

 

U.S.Navy, Retired 1986-2015

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I strongly dislike the Pats, but the logic in here seems confusing, at best. So from reading this thread, am I to assume that in the NFL rule book it is stated that for penalties to be imposed it only has to be more likely than not that something happened? How often does a player get suspended based on likelihood? Is Jerry Hughes likely to get suspended, or even Marcell for that matter? Is Ray Lewis at least banned from the HOF? Of course those are matters of actual importance to society, nothing the NFL should waste time thinking about.

 

If this logic carried onto the field, refs could throw flags for a penalty they didn't see, but thought likely happened. I'd love to see the Pats get punished if they did something, but at the same time folks might be wise to examine their own logical thought processes...especially if based on the preponderance of evidence. If the rule book clearly states that punishments can be levied without hard proof, then I will retract part of what I said.


"I don't think I'm easy to talk about. I've got a very irregular head. And I'm not anything that you think I am anyway".

-Syd Barrett, founder of Pink Floyd. Rolling Stone, December 1971

 

https://oathkeepers.org/about/

 

Europa: The last Battle is possibly the most useful documentary in existence in terms of understanding how society came to be like it currently is: https://search.bitchute.com/renderer?use=bitchute-json&name=Search&login=bcadmin&key=7ea2d72b62aa4f762cc5a348ef6642b8&query=Europa+The+Last+Battle

 

https://nativeamericanchurches.org/

 

My Adopt A Bill is Stefon Diggs

My 2nd Adopt A Bill is Christian Wade(he gets an exemption and doesn't require a spot) :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If the rule book clearly states that punishments can be levied without hard proof, then I will retract part of what I said.

 

I wish the report had worded it differently than "more likely than not" but from the articles that I have read it means something similar to beyond a reasonable doubt.

 

I don't know what more evidence people need than those texts and the video of the equipment guy bringing the balls into the bathroom. Obviously it doesn't show them letting the air out but any reasonable person sees what they were doing.

 

Not allowing the guy to get interviewed the last time is important too. If this was following them getting their hands on the text messages it is obvious that he didn't want to try to explain what those texts mean. He was caught red handed.

 

Without the texts there isn't much of a case. I hope the ball boy writes a book about this right before Brady goes up for the Hall of Fame.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
but any reasonable person sees what they were doing.

 

I agree with you in spirit, but we're not talking about a reasonable person, or even a person at all. This is the NFL, a tax-exempt monster that tried to get the Jills' lawsuit for being paid less than minimum wage thrown out of court. This entity cares little about ethics, unless it effects the bottom line. Witness the evolution of the Ray Rice ordeal. This beast is a chameleon that only shifts colors when it senses its bottom line is threatened. Apparently Brady and the Pats help the bottom line enough for some on here to form wild conspiracy theories with absolutely no factual basis(and I tend to believe theories more than the typical person). I may read the report later, but the text messages could be explained away by any lawyer worth his salt, and im not familiar with the bathroom deal. Maybe the guy was being diligent while he took a dump? Maybe he was the one who liked saying "(bleep) Tom", and in his own way was trying to get as close as he could to literally doing so with Tom's balls?

 

I haven't cared enough to follow this as closely as some. I'm a hardcore Bills fan and would like them to be able to beat the Pats without help from the NFL. I'm just saying it's a matter of how the rules are worded, along with the wording you disliked in the report. Has anyone reported a timeline on the NFL's decision?


"I don't think I'm easy to talk about. I've got a very irregular head. And I'm not anything that you think I am anyway".

-Syd Barrett, founder of Pink Floyd. Rolling Stone, December 1971

 

https://oathkeepers.org/about/

 

Europa: The last Battle is possibly the most useful documentary in existence in terms of understanding how society came to be like it currently is: https://search.bitchute.com/renderer?use=bitchute-json&name=Search&login=bcadmin&key=7ea2d72b62aa4f762cc5a348ef6642b8&query=Europa+The+Last+Battle

 

https://nativeamericanchurches.org/

 

My Adopt A Bill is Stefon Diggs

My 2nd Adopt A Bill is Christian Wade(he gets an exemption and doesn't require a spot) :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I strongly dislike the Pats, but the logic in here seems confusing, at best. So from reading this thread, am I to assume that in the NFL rule book it is stated that for penalties to be imposed it only has to be more likely than not that something happened? How often does a player get suspended based on likelihood? Is Jerry Hughes likely to get suspended, or even Marcell for that matter? Is Ray Lewis at least banned from the HOF? Of course those are matters of actual importance to society, nothing the NFL should waste time thinking about.

 

If this logic carried onto the field, refs could throw flags for a penalty they didn't see, but thought likely happened. I'd love to see the Pats get punished if they did something, but at the same time folks might be wise to examine their own logical thought processes...especially if based on the preponderance of evidence. If the rule book clearly states that punishments can be levied without hard proof, then I will retract part of what I said.

 

The NFL suspends guys without having indisputable proof that they did wrong all the time, and yes, I think most people suspect that Dareus will be suspended.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

StraightJ the NFL doesn't need evidence from a criminal trial to make their penalties or sanctions but since there is actually a legal investigation for those criminal cases, they can very well wait to see what comes out of that criminal investigation. I mean I think the authorities can handle it and has more resources and won't allow NFL to interfere anyways. I am pretty sure that players have been penalized even when getting off from legal troubles. Besides, I bet you the fans will sue and could very well win based on the same preponderance of evidence that you are questioning. You have never seen a phantom foul in football? It would hold up unless another ref saw what really happened and that is pretty hard to do when nothing happened to begin with. Civil Law in not innocent until proven guilty by the way as that is only criminal law that you have the presumption of innocence.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

nobody mentions the fumble stats but they are huge too imo


One set of rules for all in the beloved community

"The word racism is like ketchup. It can be put on practically anything, and demanding evidence makes you a 'racist' " - Thomas Sowell

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Stop giggling and try to keep up with what's going on, Goodell is not going to determine the punishment.

 

It has been reported a hundred times, Troy Vincent, the NFL Executive Vice President of Football Operations is making that decision.

 

If Brady gets suspended for the season, New England is still capable of 11- 5.

Brady was out for 15 games in the 2008 season and they went 11-5 for the season.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
StraightJ the NFL doesn't need evidence from a criminal trial to make their penalties or sanctions but since there is actually a legal investigation for those criminal cases, they can very well wait to see what comes out of that criminal investigation. I mean I think the authorities can handle it and has more resources and won't allow NFL to interfere anyways. I am pretty sure that players have been penalized even when getting off from legal troubles. Besides, I bet you the fans will sue and could very well win based on the same preponderance of evidence that you are questioning. You have never seen a phantom foul in football? It would hold up unless another ref saw what really happened and that is pretty hard to do when nothing happened to begin with. Civil Law in not innocent until proven guilty by the way as that is only criminal law that you have the presumption of innocence.

 

My question to you all still has not been answered. I can even name a Bills case as a glaring example that I understand the difference between legal vs civil outcomes in government courts: OJ not guilty of murder, but guilty in wrongful death lawsuit. The NFL is not bound by government laws in matters like this. My question remains, what precisely is the NFL forced to do per THEIR written rules. This has nothing to do with how we feel, unless you intend to find a slimy lawyer and sue the NFL representing a class action lawsuit, and if I were to bring the case it'd have nothing to do with whatever happens in terms of punishment. I'm serious, if anyone knows of such a lawyer, I'd be happy to do it the same way they are against Pacquaio. Again though, what do the NFL written rules FORCE them to do in this situation? I eagerly await that answer.


"I don't think I'm easy to talk about. I've got a very irregular head. And I'm not anything that you think I am anyway".

-Syd Barrett, founder of Pink Floyd. Rolling Stone, December 1971

 

https://oathkeepers.org/about/

 

Europa: The last Battle is possibly the most useful documentary in existence in terms of understanding how society came to be like it currently is: https://search.bitchute.com/renderer?use=bitchute-json&name=Search&login=bcadmin&key=7ea2d72b62aa4f762cc5a348ef6642b8&query=Europa+The+Last+Battle

 

https://nativeamericanchurches.org/

 

My Adopt A Bill is Stefon Diggs

My 2nd Adopt A Bill is Christian Wade(he gets an exemption and doesn't require a spot) :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
My question to you all still has not been answered. I can even name a Bills case as a glaring example that I understand the difference between legal vs civil outcomes in government courts: OJ not guilty of murder, but guilty in wrongful death lawsuit. The NFL is not bound by government laws in matters like this. My question remains, what precisely is the NFL forced to do per THEIR written rules. This has nothing to do with how we feel, unless you intend to find a slimy lawyer and sue the NFL representing a class action lawsuit, and if I were to bring the case it'd have nothing to do with whatever happens in terms of punishment. I'm serious, if anyone knows of such a lawyer, I'd be happy to do it the same way they are against Pacquaio. Again though, what do the NFL written rules FORCE them to do in this situation? I eagerly await that answer.

 

Section 2 Extraordinarily Unfair Acts

COMMISSIONER AUTHORITY

Article 1

The Commissioner has the sole authority to investigate and take appropriate disciplinary and/or corrective

measures if any club action, non-participant interference, or calamity occurs in an NFL game which he deems so

extraordinarily unfair or outside the accepted tactics encountered in professional football that such action has a major

effect on the result of the game.

NO CLUB PROTESTS

Article 2

The authority and measures provided for in this entire Section 2 do not constitute a protest machinery for NFL

clubs to avail themselves of in the event a dispute arises over the result of a game. The investigation called for in this

Section 2 will be conducted solely on the Co

mmissioner’s initiative to review an act or occurrence that he deems so

extraordinary or unfair that the result of the game in question would be inequitable to one of the participating teams. The

Commissioner will not apply his authority in cases of complaints by clubs concerning judgmental errors or routine errors of

omission by game officials. Games involving such complaints will continue to stand as completed.

PENALTIES FOR UNFAIR ACTS

Article 3

The Commissioner’s powers under this Section 2 include the

imposition of monetary fines and draft-choice

forfeitures, suspension of persons involved in unfair acts, and, if appropriate, the reversal of a game’s result or the

rescheduling of a game, either from the beginning or from the point at which the extraordinary act occurred. In the event of

rescheduling a game, the Commissioner will be guided by the procedures specified in Rule 17, Section 1, Articles 5

through 11, above. In all cases, the Commissioner will conduct a full investigation, including the opportunity for hearings,

use of game video, and any other procedure he deems appropriate.

 

 

 

NFL Personal Conduct Policy

4/15/2010

 

 

 

All persons associated with the NFL are required to avoid “conduct detrimental to the integrity of and public confidence in the National Football League.” This requirement applies to players, coaches, other team employees, owners, game officials and all others privileged to work in the National Football League.

 

For many years, it has been well understood that rules promoting lawful, ethical, and responsible conduct serve the interests of the League, its players, and fans. Illegal or irresponsible conduct does more than simply tarnish the offender. It puts innocent people at risk, sullies the reputation of others involved in the game, and undermines public respect and support for the NFL.

 

STANDARD OF CONDUCT

 

While criminal activity is clearly outside the scope of permissible conduct, and persons who engage in criminal activity will be subject to discipline, the standard of conduct for persons employed in the NFL is considerably higher. It is not enough simply to avoid being found guilty of a crime. Instead, as an employee of the NFL or a member club, you are held to a higher standard and expected to conduct yourself in a way that is responsible, promotes the values upon which the League is based, and is lawful. Persons who fail to live up to this standard of conduct are guilty of conduct detrimental and subject to discipline, even where the conduct itself does not result in conviction of a crime. Discipline may be imposed in any of the following circumstances:

 

http://espn.go.com/blog/nflnation/post/_/id/21598/nfl-personal-conduct-policy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks. If I were to go solely by that, it looks like it says Goodell has the power to do whatever he wants, and no threshold of required evidence is outlined at all. Without that, I am still not compelled that he MUST do any of the things that some here and elsewhere have demanded. Hell, it says it's his sole authority, yet supposedly Troy Vincent is the one doing it, or for some odd reason delivering it? I wonder why that is?

 

I read today that Tom Brady was joking about the whole thing, and there was speculation he'd use his massive wealth to put together one heck of an appeal and fight to the hilt if any penalty he deemed obsessive were delivered. Anyhow, I still leave the open question to all: is there a threshold of evidence required written anywhere, and is there anything Goodell MUST do? He's already proven he's quite capable of making unpopular choices. Sure he knows the scrutiny is high, but if the conspiracy that many on here allege of his favoritism is true, it would seem logical he would go as light on Brady and the Pats as he personally possible. I hope he proves the conspiracy theory to not be true and gives a fair ruling. For Brady, all of the evidence is circumstantial and no outcome would shock me, so I'm not going to invest my emotions into the outcome as much as some are.


"I don't think I'm easy to talk about. I've got a very irregular head. And I'm not anything that you think I am anyway".

-Syd Barrett, founder of Pink Floyd. Rolling Stone, December 1971

 

https://oathkeepers.org/about/

 

Europa: The last Battle is possibly the most useful documentary in existence in terms of understanding how society came to be like it currently is: https://search.bitchute.com/renderer?use=bitchute-json&name=Search&login=bcadmin&key=7ea2d72b62aa4f762cc5a348ef6642b8&query=Europa+The+Last+Battle

 

https://nativeamericanchurches.org/

 

My Adopt A Bill is Stefon Diggs

My 2nd Adopt A Bill is Christian Wade(he gets an exemption and doesn't require a spot) :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Thanks. If I were to go solely by that, it looks like it says Goodell has the power to do whatever he wants, and no threshold of required evidence is outlined at all. Without that, I am still not compelled that he MUST do any of the things that some here and elsewhere have demanded. Hell, it says it's his sole authority, yet supposedly Troy Vincent is the one doing it, or for some odd reason delivering it? I wonder why that is?

 

I read today that Tom Brady was joking about the whole thing, and there was speculation he'd use his massive wealth to put together one heck of an appeal and fight to the hilt if any penalty he deemed obsessive were delivered. Anyhow, I still leave the open question to all: is there a threshold of evidence required written anywhere, and is there anything Goodell MUST do? He's already proven he's quite capable of making unpopular choices. Sure he knows the scrutiny is high, but if the conspiracy that many on here allege of his favoritism is true, it would seem logical he would go as light on Brady and the Pats as he personally possible. I hope he proves the conspiracy theory to not be true and gives a fair ruling. For Brady, all of the evidence is circumstantial and no outcome would shock me, so I'm not going to invest my emotions into the outcome as much as some are.

 

Sorry I was trying to locate it directly but it's getting late. His memo in 2008 said he wanted to lower the standard of proof when it comes to cheating. It says it was going to the competition committee back then but then says he can pass administrative stuff on his own anyways. Whether it made it to the competition committee rule book or the Collective bargaining agreement I am not sure as I have to go. But this was the start of it.

 

 

NFL's Goodell Proposes Crackdown on Cheating

Roger Goodell wants the NFL to conduct unannounced inspections and lower the standard of proof needed for him to impose penalties. (By Dennis Cook -- Associated Press)

 

By Mark Maske

Washington Post Staff Writer

Friday, March 7, 2008

 

NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell wants the league to conduct unannounced inspections of locker rooms, stadium press boxes and in-game communications equipment, and to lower the standard of proof needed for him to impose penalties on a team or person for cheating, according to a memo obtained by The Washington Post.

 

The proposals were among a series of changes Goodell wants implemented before next season "to preserve the competitive integrity of the game" and "maintain public confidence" in the sport, according to the memo, which he sent to the league's competition committee yesterday. The memo represents Goodell's strongest response to the controversy stemming from the videotaping scandal involving the New England Patriots this past season and the league's handling of it.

 

"As the Commissioner and Competition Committee, we must take every appropriate step to safeguard the integrity of the NFL," Goodell wrote in the memo. "We have already taken some positive and significant actions this past season, but we must go further to ensure fair competition amongst our 32 teams and maintain public confidence in our game."

 

Goodell pledged to impose more severe penalties on teams and employees who violate rules governing competition. He also proposed a measure requiring team employees to report "actual or suspected" violations and another that would require each team's principal owner, top football executive and head coach to stipulate annually, under the threat of league discipline, that they complied with the rules and reported violations.

 

In addition, Goodell endorsed a proposal to connect one defensive player per team with a coach on the sideline via a wireless device during games, and urged the committee to conduct "a thorough review" of all competitive rules and policies.

 

"I think there are a number of steps that should be taken in advance of the start of the 2008 season to improve and strengthen the enforcement procedures designed to preserve the competitive integrity of the game," Goodell wrote.

 

The competition committee, which is the NFL's primary rule-making body, will convene for a week of meetings in Naples, Fla., beginning Wednesday. Ray Anderson, the NFL's executive vice president of football operations, said that Goodell's proposals will be considered at those meetings.

 

"All of these are things we are going to explore more fully," Anderson said by telephone from the league offices in New York.

 

Said New York Giants co-owner John Mara, a member of the competition committee: "We're all concerned about the integrity of the game. My interpretation is, the commissioner is asking us to look at different ways to enforce the rules to make sure everyone is on a level playing field and our fans can be confident in the integrity of our game. I don't think there's widespread cheating going on, but when you're in such a competitive industry, sometimes there are suspicions out there."

 

Goodell wrote in his memo that the competition committee should not feel bound by his proposals. Any recommendations by the committee could be presented to owners at the annual league meeting that begins March 30 in Palm Beach, Fla. A proposed rule change must be approved by at least three-fourths of the owners. But Goodell could enact some of the administrative proposals in his memo unilaterally, and several people familiar with the issue said they don't foresee him encountering much opposition to any measure he deems necessary.

 

Goodell received widespread praise for his crackdown last year on player misconduct. However, he has received criticism for his handling of the New England scandal. In September, Goodell fined the Patriots $250,000 and Coach Bill Belichick $500,000 and stripped the team of a first-round draft pick after it was caught videotaping the defensive play signals of the New York Jets' coaches, in violation of league rules, during the opening game of the season. Sen. Arlen Specter (R-Pa.) has been highly critical of the league's handling of the case and has threatened to reexamine the NFL's exemption from federal antitrust laws.

 

League officials said that after that incident, the NFL informed teams that they would be monitored more closely for violations of the rules governing fair play. Anderson said yesterday that included checks of the wireless communication equipment in stadiums used by teams during games. Goodell wrote in his memo that the previously undisclosed program will continue.

 

Goodell wrote: "This will include spot checks of club facilities, including team locker rooms; press boxes and coaches booths; coach-to-quarterback and other in-stadium communication systems . . . and enhanced monitoring of team practices. Many of these checks will be virtually unannounced and clubs would be expected fully to cooperate with this effort."

 

One person familiar with Goodell's proposals said the new threshold for imposing punishment for a rule violation would be closer to a preponderance of the evidence than beyond a reasonable doubt.

 

"Too often, competitive violations have gone unpunished because conclusive proof of the violation was lacking," Goodell wrote. "I believe we should reconsider the standard of proof to be applied in such cases, and make it easier for a competitive violation to be established. And where a violation is shown, I intend to impose more stringent penalties on both the club and the responsible individual(s). I will also be prepared to make greater use of draft choice forfeiture in appropriate cases. I believe this will have the effect of deterring violations and making people more willing to report violations on a timely basis."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...