Jump to content
[[Template core/front/custom/_customHeader is throwing an error. This theme may be out of date. Run the support tool in the AdminCP to restore the default theme.]]

Tom Brady transformation


ImNotSoIgnorant
 Share

Recommended Posts

I guess it all goes back to defining proof. Were they paid off to shut up? The Wells Report all but proved the ballboy and the equipment guy was in on it. I mean when one guy says he's going to the media unless he gets some signed memorabilia, and then you have proof that Brady and one of these guys talked several times a day for a few days after all this came out - and Brady to ask are you ok, how are you holding up, etc - THAT to me is the smoking gun. Someone's f'ng lying - and more people know about it than what we're supposed to believe

 

It is still not proof and not a smoking gun ... it is conjecture and speculation. If you allow people to be convicted based on conjecture and speculation now when you STRONGLY suspect that the rule was broken .... then you have no basis do deny the conviction in the future based on conjecture and speculation when you MILDLY suspect the rule was broken. There is no way to objectively quantify how strong or mild your suspicions are and to allow or disallow punishment based on how strong or mild your suspicions.

 

Here is another question for you. Ask any professional football player and he will tell you there is holding on every single play (and breaking this rule does indeed give an unfair advantage). Obviously holding is NOT called on every single play. So when a player holds and isn't penalized technically he is cheating, right? Heck, we could even review video evidence and SEE players that cheated (held and were not penalized). if the league is so concerned with cheaters ... why isn't this addressed?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

Here is another question for you. Ask any professional football player and he will tell you there is holding on every single play (and breaking this rule does indeed give an unfair advantage). Obviously holding is NOT called on every single play. So when a player holds and isn't penalized technically he is cheating, right? Heck, we could even review video evidence and SEE players that cheated (held and were not penalized). if the league is so concerned with cheaters ... why isn't this addressed?

Seriously that is weak. Rule violations during a game that are not caught are not the same as cheating, not even close.

 

Also nobody is being convicted of anything, this isn't a court of law (where proor would be a stornger requirement).

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Didn't the NFLPA give the NFL this kind of power and authority in the last CBA? If so why are they fighting it and why are people defending them against the evil empire (NFL).

Yep - no different than the NFLPA agreeing in the CBA to let Goodell be the judge for any appeals should he wish to be. He exercised that right and the NFLPA is calling foul?? Why agree to it if you're going to fight about it afterwards?

 

Kind of getting off topic here, but I feel the same way about a player who is on the last year of his rookie deal, signs a nice extension paying him $5-$6M per year as opposed to the $750K he was making the past few years. Only to play 1 year on that new deal and then hold out cause you want more $$. This is where I would never succeed as a GM - I'd tell you to f' off and get bent. You put your name to a piece of paper agreeing to these terms, only to come back a year later and wanting to renege.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Didn't the NFLPA give the NFL this kind of power and authority in the last CBA? If so why are they fighting it and why are people defending them against the evil empire (NFL).

 

I have heard over and over that Goodell and the NFL are operating within the bounds of the CBA, Brady was suspended for "conduct detrimental to the integrity of the NFL" ... this seems pretty open ended to me. I am not familiar with the CBA, does it define behaviors determined to be detrimental to the integrity of the NFL or is it left up to Goodell to decide what those behaviors are on a case by base basis? If Goodell gets to decide when a player had behaved in a manner that is detrimental to the integrity of the NFL without offering any solid evidence to support his decision ... that is a ton of power, too much power.

 

I think the NFL is convinced they are operating within the bounds of the CBA, and they may be right. That doesn't mean I have to like it or agree with it. In fact, I believe allowing the NFL/Goodell to operate with such broad and open-ended power is detrimental to the league as a whole.

 

Tom is obviously arguing that he has not behaved in a manner that violated the integrity of the league and Goodell has no proof otherwise.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Seriously that is weak. Rule violations during a game that are not caught are not the same as cheating, not even close.

 

Also nobody is being convicted of anything, this isn't a court of law (where proor would be a stornger requirement).

 

Wait? Rules violations that are not caught are not cheating? So, assuming Tom is guilty, if he was never caught then his behavior is not cheating? Is that what you are saying? It is only cheating if you get caught?

 

Please explain to me, what is cheating? Isn't the whole idea of cheating based on getting an unfair advantage? You deny that when a player holds another and gets away with it that he got an unfair advantage? Isn't it BY DEFINITION against the rules to hold? Would you feel differently if it is a clear hold that allowed a team to score the winning TD against your home team in the superbowl (the hold was instrumental in allowing the play to break free)?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wait? Rules violations that are not caught are not cheating? So, assuming Tom is guilty, if he was never caught then his behavior is not cheating? Is that what you are saying? It is only cheating if you get caught?

 

Please explain to me, what is cheating? Isn't the whole idea of cheating based on getting an unfair advantage? You deny that when a player holds another and gets away with it that he got an unfair advantage? Isn't it BY DEFINITION against the rules to hold? Would you feel differently if it is a clear hold that allowed a team to score the winning TD against your home team in the superbowl (the hold was instrumental in allowing the play to break free)?

I think you’re trying to compare apples to oranges here. While you are defining cheating – it all comes back to the integrity of the game. To the best of my knowledge, I don’t know that holds are actually allowed but they’re rarely called so long as your elbows are in and you’re in-between the shoulder pads. It’s not a blatant action where you need to have other people helping you do something you know is wrong and then try to cover it up afterwards.

 

No one is going to get suspended for any amount of games for holding. Messing with equipment on the other hand – now you’re blatantly trying to gain an unfair advantage.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think you’re trying to compare apples to oranges here. While you are defining cheating – it all comes back to the integrity of the game. To the best of my knowledge, I don’t know that holds are actually allowed but they’re rarely called so long as your elbows are in and you’re in-between the shoulder pads. It’s not a blatant action where you need to have other people helping you do something you know is wrong and then try to cover it up afterwards.

 

No one is going to get suspended for any amount of games for holding. Messing with equipment on the other hand – now you’re blatantly trying to gain an unfair advantage.

 

Nothing is more "blatant" than the advantage you try to gain when you hold your opponent. You would argue otherwise?

 

Not sure I follow apples and oranges? You are saying some rules are okay to break and others are not okay to break?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nothing is more "blatant" than the advantage you try to gain when you hold your opponent. You would argue otherwise?

 

Not sure I follow apples and oranges? You are saying some rules are okay to break and others are not okay to break?

What I consider a hold is when you as an offensive lineman are beat. Your defender breaks free of your block and you lock your arm inside his. You grab his jersey from behind - you do what's necessary to not let him get to the QB or the ball carrier. If I as the offensive lineman have a grasp of my defenders pads while my elbows are in and I'm still engaged with him in front of me, I don't consider that a hold. I was an o-lineman for 4 years in HS - and this was actually taught. To the best of my knowledge, this is taught in college too. "Get under the pads, get a handful of jersey and keep your elbows in" - I remember hearing it all the time.

 

NFL - obviously I don't have any firsthand knowledge or coaching, but I'm pretty sure it's taught there too. Not really in the mood to go digging - but if I get a wild hair up my ass - I'll see what I can find..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What I consider a hold is when you as an offensive lineman are beat. Your defender breaks free of your block and you lock your arm inside his. You grab his jersey from behind - you do what's necessary to not let him get to the QB or the ball carrier. If I as the offensive lineman have a grasp of my defenders pads while my elbows are in and I'm still engaged with him in front of me, I don't consider that a hold. I was an o-lineman for 4 years in HS - and this was actually taught. To the best of my knowledge, this is taught in college too. "Get under the pads, get a handful of jersey and keep your elbows in" - I remember hearing it all the time.

 

NFL - obviously I don't have any firsthand knowledge or coaching, but I'm pretty sure it's taught there too. Not really in the mood to go digging - but if I get a wild hair up my ass - I'll see what I can find..

 

You don't consider it a hold if the RB is breaking out to one flank or another and a WR or TE holds his player to allow the RB to break free?

 

But I am not sure why it is relevant "what a hold is" ... my questions (above) remain, regardless of how holding is defined.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But I am not sure why it is relevant "what a hold is" ... my questions (above) remain, regardless of how holding is defined.

Because you're painting it as a blatant act of cheating when there's a gray area there. There's holding and then there's blocking. Sometimes there can be holding in a legal block.

 

Tampering with equipment, there's no gray area..

Edited by Shorttynaz
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Because you're painting it as a blatant act of cheating when there's a gray area there. There's holding and then there's blocking. Sometimes there can be holding in a legal block.

 

Tampering with equipment, there's no gray area..

 

Correct me if I am wrong ... but teams are allowed to deflate/inflate balls to a desired PSI within the allowable range, correct? So the act of sticking a needle in the ball is not tampering with equipment illegally ... it becomes illegal when the resulting PSI is outside the allowable range. So in this case if the ball had been deflated to the legal minimum there would be no issues.

 

Either way, you haven't answered me ... if a player holds another player blatantly and is not called for holding, isn't this cheating? And if it is cheating why does the league do nothing about it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Correct me if I am wrong ... but teams are allowed to deflate/inflate balls to a desired PSI within the allowable range, correct? So the act of sticking a needle in the ball is not tampering with equipment illegally ... it becomes illegal when the resulting PSI is outside the allowable range. So in this case if the ball had been deflated to the legal minimum there would be no issues.

 

Either way, you haven't answered me ... if a player holds another player blatantly and is not called for holding, isn't this cheating? And if it is cheating why does the league do nothing about it?

You're asking a question you know I don't know the answer to - and this is going down "IDONTCARE Ave." just as the other Tom Brady thread did. I'm not a referee - I'm not on the competition committee - I don't make or enforce the rules. Sticking a needle in a ball and deflating it to a legal PSI is within the rules, deflating it to an illegal PSI is outside of the rules. Holding while maintaining a legal block is within the rules, holding while beat is outside the rules. One penalty is administered during the course of a game as the violation occurs, one is administered after an investigation has been completed.

 

I don't know what answer you're looking for. Would I support players getting suspended for holding? No - that's stupid. It's part of the game, but it's a violation - and it happens in the heat of battle if you will. Deflating a football to an illegal PSI is also a violation, but it's one that was pre-determined - it could have been checked prior to being introduced to the game. It's not like I as the offensive lineman am pre-determined that I will hold the DE this play regardless if he has me beat or not.

 

Circling all the way back around to me saying you're trying to compare two different kinds of fruit - apples to oranges. Cheating / Violations are to fruit as holding / tampering with equipment is to apples and oranges.

Edited by Shorttynaz
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Wait? Rules violations that are not caught are not cheating? So, assuming Tom is guilty, if he was never caught then his behavior is not cheating? Is that what you are saying? It is only cheating if you get caught?

 

Please explain to me, what is cheating? Isn't the whole idea of cheating based on getting an unfair advantage? You deny that when a player holds another and gets away with it that he got an unfair advantage? Isn't it BY DEFINITION against the rules to hold? Would you feel differently if it is a clear hold that allowed a team to score the winning TD against your home team in the superbowl (the hold was instrumental in allowing the play to break free)?

 

Yes it is weak, I won't try explaining it a second time. I see shorttynaz is already doing that. I've had this debate before with other people, you either get it or you don't (most who don't just don't want to get it).

 

I've been around long enough to know that some people argue just to argue, I can be like that at times. I don't have the time or energy to go back and forth with you.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
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.

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information