Nihilist25

Yeah, you will take the punishment, Mr. Kraft. You aren't going to argue against the texts, the video of your employee inexplicably taking the balls into the bathroom, the autographed footballs and shoes, the refusal to fully cooperate, and the neutral scientific analysis.

Kraft already stated NE isn't going to fight the team punishment.

Also, seems like a big issue the NFL had with NE was that NE didn't cooperate with the investigation by making McNally available a second time. The Wells report stated again and again that NE didn't make McNally available a second time or even ask McNally. Maybe Wells and NE thought McNally would break during a second interview. Therefore, NE didn't make McNally available and the NFL punishes harder.

So just 31 picks in the first round 2016?

So what happens with the picks NE loses?

Yeah, the innocent players and employees should blame Tom and his crew and/or chalk it up to the risk they take when playing/working for a team like the Patriots. As for Kraft, he won't fire Brady although he could.

Isn't Kraft still holding onto the theory the atmosphere caused deflation? Faced with investigation findings, even Biscotti accepted responsibility and embarrassment. Also, even though the report found no knowledge on the part of Kraft and Billichick, aren't they responsible for everything their organization does, especially when it's game related, regardless of their knowledge? If they're responsible, shouldn't they be embarrassed? How is a Brady suspension unfair to the Patriots in this situation? Also, if Brady was just a numbnut who tarnished the Patriots' reputation, shouldn't Kraft want to make an example of him? If anything, a Brady suspension is light on a team whose members have been caught cheating before.

Further, I find it kind of telling that Lee's first criticism is that the situation was a "sting operation" because the Patriots weren't notified of a complaint that they were deflating balls. http://www.twitlonger.com/show/n_1sm3i1u. It's like saying a drug dealer is innocent because the police didn't notify him that they had recieved a tip that he was selling.

Exactly. The standard used is explained in fn 1 on p. 1 of the report. The standard is common in civil litigation including employment law. You don't have to be found guilty beyond a reasonable doubt as with a crime in civil litigation because the stakes are lower (i.e., you don't take the risk of going to jail in civil litigation) and because it allows for greater efficiency. Applying a standard of beyond a reasonable doubt in civil litigation would be ridiculously ornerous on any employer making it impossible to fire dirtbags. The folks who wrote the report are experienced attorneys and are accustomed to the preponderance of the evidence standard which is taught to all first year law students.

I'll bet that whoever does read the fan boards reports to someone who does sit at the table. It would be ridiculous to think that a business wouldn't consider its consumer's reaction when making a change.

Kiko was a risk. Not only weak knees, but off-field. I always thought the circumstances he provided regarding his most recent ACL injury were sketchy.

SJ - not a good idea.

So what's the reason for his success in 2013? Can it be repeated?

Yes.

If RI can keep his nose clean, mouth shut, and motor running - great. If not, cut him.