RealGM

Higga wrote:Maybe a fine. I just don't think it's that big of a deal.

LAKESHOW wrote:Paying Money? Paying with Merchandise? The question is, for what? The answer? To win the game. That is deep. The integrity of the game is at stake when you pay, to cheat, to win the game.

TankShow wrote:He should be banned for life:

truth18 wrote:

LAKESHOW wrote:Paying Money? Paying with Merchandise? The question is, for what? The answer? To win the game. That is deep. The integrity of the game is at stake when you pay, to cheat, to win the game.

Meh, idk man. Andre Agassi is still considered an all time great and he was on PEDs and meth during games by his own admission. This seems like much less of a big deal in comparison to something like that. Should definitely still be punished though.

Slava wrote:

truth18 wrote:

LAKESHOW wrote:Paying Money? Paying with Merchandise? The question is, for what? The answer? To win the game. That is deep. The integrity of the game is at stake when you pay, to cheat, to win the game.

Meh, idk man. Andre Agassi is still considered an all time great and he was on PEDs and meth during games by his own admission. This seems like much less of a big deal in comparison to something like that. Should definitely still be punished though.

Not sure of PEDs, I only read he took meth and ate taco bell for like 2 years.

truth18 wrote:

Slava wrote:

truth18 wrote:
Meh, idk man. Andre Agassi is still considered an all time great and he was on PEDs and meth during games by his own admission. This seems like much less of a big deal in comparison to something like that. Should definitely still be punished though.

Not sure of PEDs, I only read he took meth and ate taco bell for like 2 years.

Adderall is considered a PED in tennis (and many other sports). Sorry I didn't mean he was on hgh or steroids (though his mullet was on something)

Quick-hit thoughts around the New England Patriots:

1. ESPN NFL Insider Adam Schefter tweeted something Saturday morning that resonated with me; it was advice on journalism and social media from Margaret Sullivan, public editor of the New York Times. Three points I highlighted were: Think more about fairness than objectivity; think about how close you can get to the truth; put yourself in the place of the people who will be affected by your work (that doesn't mean to pull your punches). I think those can apply in more areas than journalism, and in fact, they are three reasons that highlight why I think commissioner Roger Goodell has erred badly from the start with the league's handling of the Patriots and underinflated footballs, making this into a much bigger deal than it is. Over the last three days, I've digested the 243-page Wells report reading it multiple times, and with its bias and lack of fairness in certain areas, I truly can't believe what the commissioner has done to the legacy and reputation of one of the greatest quarterbacks and ambassadors in the history of the game -- all over air pressure in a football and without definitive proof he had anything to do with it.

2. Why do I think this has been made to be a bigger deal than it is? I go back to the Vikings-Panthers game from November, with teams illegally heating footballs on the sideline and simply getting a warning from the NFL, and wonder how we got to this point with the Patriots and underinflated footballs. I go back to the Chargers using an illegal sticky substance on towels in 2012 and getting fined $25,000, and likewise wonder how we got to this point with the Patriots and underinflated footballs. Put the three situations together and only one requires a full-fledged investigation that will cost owners millions of dollars? In the interest of fairness, what am I missing? Add in comments from Packers quarterback Aaron Rodgers about his preference for overinflated footballs, and this New York Times story on Eli Manning and his football preparation, and it just seems we've gone off the rails here.

3. I hope my viewpoint on Goodell's poor handling of the situation isn't interpreted as letting the Patriots off the hook. From the moment the story broke, my opinion was that the team should be held accountable if all football air-pressure measurements were done correctly and science wasn't a factor. The Wells report brought to light some important details, as it naturally raises suspicions that locker room attendant Jim McNally, who at one point in 2014 referred to himself as the “deflator” in a text message, took the footballs without consent before the game and had them in a locked bathroom for 1 minute and 40 seconds. That can't happen. If we're focusing on fairness, I think even Patriots followers would acknowledge that action alone leaves the team vulnerable to some level of punishment. But how we got from there to the possibility that Brady himself will be suspended is still hard for me to grasp.

Pressure gauge discrepancies undermine Wells report