[News] Late For Work 5/7: NFL World Reacts To Legend Ed Reed's Retirement

[MaineRavenFan]

Thanks, Ed for all the memories, one-of-a-kind plays, effort, and humor that you brought to the game for our team, THE Baltimore Ravens. So proud to have your jersey and so proud to have been able to watch you play your entire career. Wish I could be there on Nov. 22, but I will be listening on my radio and flying the colors up here instead. #20 for life man!

[January J]

I know none of us like the Patriots, but if you honestly don't think this deflate gate thing is stupid then come on bruh. The Pats still punished the Colts in that game. If it was a close game then yeah I could see why it would be a big deal, but the Pats completely out played them, and I think people forget that. The Pats vs Ravens was the REAL AFC Championship game. Sleazy as they may be, Belichick and Brady are great. We hate them because they win, and because the way they win isn't "honorable." Yeah I understand it was cheating, and they should be punished in someway, but anything more than a fine would be an overreaction. Do we really want Brady suspended? Thats like suspending Michael Jordan for posterizing you with a slightly deflated basketball. Plus, the Pats play the Steelers in week one. Do we really want the Steelers to get a Bradyless Pats team? Just fine the Pats and Brady, and let us all get over this blown out of proportion "scandal."

the outcome of the game and Brady's performance with or without regulated balls is completely irrelevant. If anything that just shows his stupidity bc it was absolutely unnecessary for him to cheat to perform at a high level. Cheating is cheating. And come on bro- do you honestly think that was the only game they did that ? Yeah they blew out the colts but what about the week before against the ravens when they only beat us by 4? Very possible it could have been done in that game- and that very well could have been the difference in those 4 points. Maybe if our balls were a little deflated that ball doesn't bounce off Owen Daniels hands in the back of the endzone ? There's endless possibilities - if it's not a level playing feild for each team it really hurts the integrity of the game. I'm not one of these crazy heads that think Brady needs to be suspended for 8 games - but a fairly harsh punishment is due. Now back to the greatest safety of all time ! Edited May 8, 2015 by January J

[rmcjacket23]

the outcome of the game and Brady's performance with or without regulated balls is completely irrelevant. If anything that just shows his stupidity bc it was absolutely unnecessary for him to cheat to perform at a high level. Cheating is cheating. And come on bro- do you honestly think that was the only game they did that ? Yeah they blew out the colts but what about the week before against the ravens when they only beat us by 4? Very possible it could have been done in that game- and that very well could have been the difference in those 4 points. Maybe if our balls were a little deflated that ball doesn't bounce off Owen Daniels hands in the back of the endzone ? There's endless possibilities - if it's not a level playing feild for each team it really hurts the integrity of the game. I'm not one of these crazy heads that think Brady needs to be suspended for 8 games - but a fairly harsh punishment is due. Now back to the greatest safety of all time !

1. But the idea that "it doesn't matter if they won or how well they did" is purely theoretical, mostly because it does matter. Do you honestly believe that the public reaction and fake outrage is the exact same regarding this situation if the Patriots lost the football game? Is it the exact same if Brady throws 4 INTs while using deflated footballs? Of course not.

 

2. Whether or not anybody believes that its the first time its happened or not is by far the most irrelevant discussion of the process, because its impossible to know and impossible to punish. If you're going to attempt to prove that they did it more than once, you better make sure you've got at least some evidence regarding that. Simply saying "well obviously they didn't do it just once" isn't evidence... its theory.

 

I can guarantee that the NFL won't even remotely consider making the punishment "harsher" because of the theory that "well they must have done it a bunch of times". They're 100% interested in a single, isolated incident, because its the only thing they have evidence regarding.

[MTRavensFan]

1. But the idea that "it doesn't matter if they won or how well they did" is purely theoretical, mostly because it does matter. Do you honestly believe that the public reaction and fake outrage is the exact same regarding this situation if the Patriots lost the football game? Is it the exact same if Brady throws 4 INTs while using deflated footballs? Of course not.

 

2. Whether or not anybody believes that its the first time its happened or not is by far the most irrelevant discussion of the process, because its impossible to know and impossible to punish. If you're going to attempt to prove that they did it more than once, you better make sure you've got at least some evidence regarding that. Simply saying "well obviously they didn't do it just once" isn't evidence... its theory.

 

I can guarantee that the NFL won't even remotely consider making the punishment "harsher" because of the theory that "well they must have done it a bunch of times". They're 100% interested in a single, isolated incident, because its the only thing they have evidence regarding.

Absolutely not. The reason the report is 243 pages is to establish a long-term pattern of probable illegal behavior culminating in one provable act. That is totally relevant.

 

And while that may not lead to harsher punishment, the league has a long history of giving out harsher penalties for lying and refusing to cooperate than for the original offense. That's where Br*dy's arrogance will be his downfall.

[rmcjacket23]

Absolutely not. The reason the report is 243 pages is to establish a long-term pattern of probable illegal behavior culminating in one provable act. That is totally relevant.

 

And while that may not lead to harsher punishment, the league has a long history of giving out harsher penalties for lying and refusing to cooperate than for the original offense. That's where Br*dy's arrogance will be his downfall.

1. No, actually, that's NOT what the report establishes. I read the report, and at no point in time did I even get a vague perception that the point of it was to establish a long-pattern of rules violations. If that's what you think the report intended to do, then the report failed and failed miserably in doing so. It was done to provide a timeline and basis for the evidence regarding that incident, and any other incidents that were brought to their attention, for much they essentially concluded were none.

 

2. You are right, they do go harsher on people who don't cooperate and lie. But they also have zero history of going harsher on people because they "might have" done this many times before. They aren't nearly that reckless.

Edited May 8, 2015 by rmcjacket23

[gooftroop]

Kraft is Goodell's boss. I'd be more concerned with Goodell upsetting Kraft than the other way around.

I'm aware of who's boss- that's not the point. I'm sure Roger was okay with playing the good soldier but still wanted to play commissioner, at least for public consumption, and Bob wasn't letting him have his moment. After all, Goodell must still think he has a reputation to preserve...

Edited May 9, 2015 by gooftroop

[January J]

1. But the idea that "it doesn't matter if they won or how well they did" is purely theoretical, mostly because it does matter. Do you honestly believe that the public reaction and fake outrage is the exact same regarding this situation if the Patriots lost the football game? Is it the exact same if Brady throws 4 INTs while using deflated footballs? Of course not.

2. Whether or not anybody believes that its the first time its happened or not is by far the most irrelevant discussion of the process, because its impossible to know and impossible to punish. If you're going to attempt to prove that they did it more than once, you better make sure you've got at least some evidence regarding that. Simply saying "well obviously they didn't do it just once" isn't evidence... its theory.

I can guarantee that the NFL won't even remotely consider making the punishment "harsher" because of the theory that "well they must have done it a bunch of times". They're 100% interested in a single, isolated incident, because its the only thing they have evidence regarding.

. 1) your right- in the court of public opinion. But I don't really care about the publics reaction. I care about the integrity of the game- which he violated . Doesn't matter if he threw for 500 yards or threw 5 picks. And although we have a incompetent commissioner that has been on the chopping block lately and will probably Take public opinion into consideration doesn't mean that's right. Problem is nothing like this has ever really happened before so there's no general baseline to follow. However I think Vincent Jackson will look at this thing with open eyes and give a fair unbiased punishment- and my hope would be that "public opinion" plays no role in that. Bc that's how it should be. 2) it's not impossible to know when there are texts from earlier on in the year implicating him. If I'm not mistaken there were texts after a jets game earlier in the season on a rainy night in foxborough where Brady was complaining about the footballs. Sounds like evidence to me. If it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck it's a freakin duck. Edited May 9, 2015 by January J