home

Thursday Open Thread

By Big Tent Democrat, Section Blog Related
Posted on Thu Jan 22, 2015 at 01:41:37 PM EST
Tags: (all tags)
Share This: Digg! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

So you can discuss the appropriate punishment for the Patriots and/or Sheldon Silver.

Open Thread.

< 2016: Hillary Leads Potential GOP Opponents by Double Digits | Jane Doe #3 Strikes Back at Dershowitz >

  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


    • Display: Sort:
    Thursday Open Thread | 202 comments (202 topical)
    Brady pleads ignoramus (5.00 / 1) (#37)
    by Uncle Chip on Thu Jan 22, 2015 at 04:33:39 PM EST
    Brady says he knows nothing

    and couldn't tell the difference between the balls in the first half, which was reportedly under-inflated, and the balls in the second half, which reportedly were the backup balls that were supposedly within the league rules for air pressure.

    After Brady's remarks, former NFL quarterback Mark Brunell of ESPN flatly and with a touch of anger said he didn't believe what Brady said.

    "I did not believe what Tom had to say," Brunell said on ESPN right after Brady was done. "Those balls were deflated, somebody had to do it, and I don't believe there's an equipment manager in the NFL that would on his own initiative deflate a ball without the starting quarterback's approval. I just didn't believe what Tom Brady had to say."

    The equipment guy (5.00 / 1) (#38)
    by Dadler on Thu Jan 22, 2015 at 04:41:54 PM EST
    I selfishly and, sure, kind of cruelly, want that drama to play out. Somebody needs to pay him off under the table, so we can find the deposit slips and Brady can cry on 60 Minutes with a supermodel- Giselle-at-his-side confessional. Please, Lord, please!

    ;-)

    (And, again, Brady doesn't know he's throwing a balled up pair of panty-hose around the field? Sure. It's so funny to watch it all.)

    Parent

    It is funny . . . (5.00 / 3) (#40)
    by nycstray on Thu Jan 22, 2015 at 04:59:56 PM EST
    as he carefully picks out his balls before the game (he likes them @ 12.5) and nobody should touch or alter them after he does that. Oddly, he didn't notice they were different when he played . . .? I kinda thought he was smarter than that, but I guess not . . . And surely he's heard of the internet where his comments are going to be picked apart . . .  lol!~

    Parent
    Well, I think it's all Giselle's fault. (5.00 / 1) (#49)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Thu Jan 22, 2015 at 07:00:15 PM EST
    The obvious punchline here is probably best left unsaid, this being a family-friendly site and all.

    Parent
    Tom Brady's perfect football is like obscenity (none / 0) (#51)
    by Dadler on Thu Jan 22, 2015 at 07:46:25 PM EST
    He can't feel it, but he knows it when he sees it.

    Come on, a football has spent more time in his hands than his own balls, he knew what he was throwing.

    Where art thou, oh ballmaster? Grant us a true display of thine skilled pump. And expose foul breakers of law's air.

    I love you folks, anyone here from Jersey?

    Parent

    The fall guy is coming (none / 0) (#60)
    by Uncle Chip on Thu Jan 22, 2015 at 11:36:49 PM EST
    I can see it clearly now. Two shoes have dropped and shortly will come the third.

    With Beli and Tommy now in full denial within the next couple of days a fall guy will step forward on his own and to take the blame for the whole thing.

    It will be someone with no future going forward with the Patriots who will claim to have overheard Tom talking about how he liked his balls and then decided on his own to oblige him by deflating them on the sly without anybody's knowledge or permission of course.

    The next question will then have to be directed to Giselle by the ladies on the View or the Talk as to whether she thinks that someone could have been messing with Tom's balls and he not know it.

    Parent

    Brady's problem right now is that ... (5.00 / 1) (#63)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Fri Jan 23, 2015 at 01:17:48 AM EST
    ... he came across as fairly disingenuous in that presser, which particularly irked veterans such as Jerome Bettis and Mark Brunnell. They flat out said publicly that they didn't believe him. As for Coach Belichick, he made every effort to try to distance himself from this train wreck.

    The NFL has a potential public relations calamity on its hands. League officials need to be thoughtful how they handle this from this point forward, because with the Patriots' credibility practically shot, their own is now on the line.

    Aloha.

    Parent

    Here's where Brady gets hoist on (5.00 / 2) (#66)
    by Anne on Fri Jan 23, 2015 at 06:31:56 AM EST
    his own petard: he's already said that he's very particular about the balls he uses.  Once they are to his satisfaction, no one touches them.  This flies in the face of his "I didn't really notice - I didn't really think about it" nonsense from the presser.  As many years as Brady has been throwing or handing off footballs, I bet he can tell within seconds that the ball he's holding is "off."  

    Is it believable that someone else - an equipment guy, for example - would have taken it upon himself to mess with this?  I don't think so.  And apparently, a number of QB's don't believe Brady, either.

    People seem to be shocked that the league hasn't even talked to Brady yet.  I'm not.  They're dragging their feet to ensure that they won't have to impose any punishment before the big game, or at least long enough that there's no way the appeal Brady'd be entitled to can happen before the game (although they somehow managed to hear Suh's appeal in time for him to be able to play in the post-season, didn't they?).  This way, they look like they're on top of it, but not to where they might be affecting the game.

    Parent

    No one believes Brady (none / 0) (#71)
    by CST on Fri Jan 23, 2015 at 08:09:33 AM EST
    There is no way he didn't know.  He wasn't even really trying to be a convincing liar.  Belichek had plausible deniability.  Plus - he sounded more convincing.

    I think a bigger problem for the NFL is proof.  Do they have it and can they get it?  And what do they do if the answer is no?  They could punish the team - but I doubt the union would let them punish an individual player.

    Parent

    With respect to proof, here's (5.00 / 1) (#73)
    by Anne on Fri Jan 23, 2015 at 08:41:43 AM EST
    Peter King at MMQB (my bold):

    If the Patriots are found guilty this time, I don't think that will be an issue, considering Goodell made it clear in 2008 that conclusive proof shouldn't be the burden on cases involving competition.

    "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."

    Now the NFL world waits for the league's investigation to conclude, and to see if Goodell puts his money where his mouth is.

    Do I have much confidence the league - and Goodell - will handle this appropriately, fairly and timely?  Not really.  I think there's more pressure on to get it right, given the debacle of the Ray Rice matter, but there's also the money pressure of the biggest football game of the year.  

    I really do think this all could have been handled, decisions made, punishments meted out and appeals heard and decided in the almost-week since the Pats/Colts game.  Actually, given that the league was apparently aware there were some "irregularities" even before the Pats/Colts game, there's even less excuse for the foot-dragging, and less reason to be confident they'll get this right.

    Whatever does or doesn't happen, one thing's for sure: this is a cloud that's going to hang over the team for a long time.

    Parent

    that's why (none / 0) (#74)
    by CST on Fri Jan 23, 2015 at 08:46:26 AM EST
    I think they can punish the team - but not necessarily an individual player.

    Parent
    If the link I posted below is true (none / 0) (#76)
    by Slado on Fri Jan 23, 2015 at 08:56:32 AM EST
    That the ravens also complained about deflated balls then of course Brady is lying.

    The only possible explanation is he asked his guys to deflate and inflate the balls until he likes the pressure. The balls are received within the correct pressure zone probably at the low end and Brady comes along and grips all the balls to make sure he likes them.  Then he tells his guys to make them a little looser because he likes the way they feel that day.  

    Nobody bothers to recheck them because Brady's got it the way he likes and off we go.

    Plausible deniability?

    Parent

    And that cloud will also hang ... (none / 0) (#133)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Fri Jan 23, 2015 at 02:49:31 PM EST
    ... over the NFL as well, particularly should an unpunished and full-strength Patriots team beat the Seahawks on February 1. Roger Goodell & Co. better realize that this incident has touched a very raw nerve with fans across the country, New England possibly excepted, and that the public's level of tolerance for such obvious machinations is ebbing rather sharply. They really need to do something, right here and now, to demonstrate that they're indeed taking this matter very seriously.

    I know that the public has demonstrated a high threshold for scandal in the past, and has further shown questionable judgment on such matters, but quite honestly, I think the NFL is playing with fire when it continues to play people for fools, the way it has been doing of late.

    It's really not lost on people that while league officials fell all over themselves last week in threatening to eject Seahawk RB Marshawn Lynch from the playoff game against the Packers, merely for wearing shoes with gold cleats, they're now giving us the ol' soft shoe regarding this far more serious and pressing issue. That Patriots' owner Robert Kraft is further well known to be one of Commissioner Goodell's staunchest allies, makes their perceived conduct even more egregious from a public standpoint.

    That's because regardless of whether or not such expectations are realistic, organized sport is one of the few venues in life where the general public demands that every participant play by the same set of rules and be further accountable for the same standards of conduct. When people start to suspect or determine for themselves that the deck's somehow been stacked in favor of a select few, the potential for serious damage to a team's and / or league's reputation and corresponding box office is almost incalculable.

    (Even L.A. Dodger fans -- who've long enjoyed a reputation as arguably some of the most loyal in professional sports -- finally grew exasperated with the former ownership's propensity for repeatedly treating them as chumps, and started staying away from the ballpark in droves a few years ago, which eventually forced the McCourts to sell the club.)

    Many of us here at TL who are in our fifties and older likely remember a time when sellouts at NFL games were once the exception, and not the general rule. When I was six years old, my grandfather took me to the very first Super Bowl ever played, between the Green Bay Packers and Kansas City Chiefs -- the tickets were only $5 and even with that markdown, the L.A. Coliseum stood one-third empty at kickoff.

    So, the NFL needs to remember here that we're really not all that far removed from that particular era, and should fans start to believe that the fix is in, which further results in them walking away from stadiums or turning off the TV, the league can just as easily see a reprise of an earlier time, when they were trying to convince people to watch their product. Only this time, the product's no longer new or unknown, but rather seriously tarnished.

    Aloha.

    Parent

    Belichick was very careful in his (5.00 / 1) (#118)
    by Zorba on Fri Jan 23, 2015 at 02:07:42 PM EST
    statement, saying that he has "never talked to any player or staff member about football air pressure."
    And Brady was careful, too, saying that he "didn't alter the ball in any way."
    It's almost as if they had lawyers and PR guys vetting their responses.   ;-)
    I would not be surprised at all if there is a low-level fall guy.


    Parent
    What I found telling (none / 0) (#119)
    by jbindc on Fri Jan 23, 2015 at 02:15:19 PM EST
    Is that they gave their statements hours apart.  Very coordinated - let bellivhevk give his, see how it plays, let Brady talk to PT people (and probably some lawyers), then give a statement.

    Parent
    Oh, I'm sure that was (5.00 / 1) (#159)
    by Zorba on Fri Jan 23, 2015 at 03:31:02 PM EST
    totally uncoordinated or vetted by PR guys and lawyers.
    {{Cough, cough}}

    Parent
    FWIW.... (none / 0) (#141)
    by kdog on Fri Jan 23, 2015 at 03:02:00 PM EST
    Boomer & Carton had a DHS profiler on their radio show this morning, not that I put much stock in profilers and human lie-detectors or anything, but this guy was convinced both Belicheck and Brady were straight up lying in their respective press conferences.  

    Again, fwiw which is probably very little.

    Parent

    So Mike Huckabee (5.00 / 1) (#48)
    by Ga6thDem on Thu Jan 22, 2015 at 06:54:41 PM EST
    thinks we are currently living in a "atheist theocracy". I guess he doesn't realize there is no such thing. I have to say if this guy runs, he pushes all the right buttons of the people who vote in the GOP primary. The powers that be are going to have a hard time taking him down.

    Romney and Jeb set to meet (none / 0) (#55)
    by Militarytracy on Thu Jan 22, 2015 at 08:28:53 PM EST
    I'm going to assume it is a plan to attack the crazies jointly and an agreement that they will produce a Romney/Bush ticket or a Bush/Romney ticket in the end if they beat the wackos back enough in the primary.

    Parent
    Oh, yeah (none / 0) (#57)
    by Ga6thDem on Thu Jan 22, 2015 at 08:59:44 PM EST
    it must be a meeting of the stupid brothers then. You know what is going to happen? If those two are going to tag team somebody like Hucakabee he's going to pull the Christian victim card out of the deck and play that trump card with them. Both of them have issues with evangelicals--Bush because his wife is Hispanic and he's Catholic and then Romney has the cult LDS thing going with them. So if the stupid brothers end up being the GOP ticket, expect a lot of Republicans to not manage to get out of bed on election day in 2016.  

    Parent
    I love you (5.00 / 1) (#59)
    by Militarytracy on Thu Jan 22, 2015 at 10:19:13 PM EST
    I love your Southern barometer.  Stuff I'd never see coming, but...oh yeah :)

    Parent
    The inflated plot thickens (5.00 / 1) (#61)
    by Slado on Fri Jan 23, 2015 at 12:24:23 AM EST
    Ravens may have tipped off Colts.

    If true this says two things.

    One Brady is a liar and as one would have guessed this was a practice of the Patriots thats probably been going on for a while.

    Two then it seems to show a culture in the NFL to keep certain things in house.   Why would the Ravens not go to the Leageg immediately?  Maybe there are other "rules" many teams bend and no one wants to be the team that made the NFL more involved in equipment and preface activities.

    Maybe He's Not Lying... (5.00 / 2) (#89)
    by ScottW714 on Fri Jan 23, 2015 at 10:18:00 AM EST
    ...in that the balls felt the same as they have in all games.

    That makes 3 games suspect.

    From your link:

    Glazer's story said the officials were planning to inspect the balls at halftime, based on the Ravens' tip. It was reported by other outlets that the Colts noticed the issue when linebacker D'Qwell Jackson caught an interception in the second quarter. It could be both.

    There was another story, from ESPN's Adam Schefter, that the Colts thought the Patriots had also under-inflated footballs during a regular-season meeting on Nov. 16. According to Schefter, Colts safety Mike Adams had two interceptions, and gave both balls to the Colts' equipment manager to save. Both times, sources told Schefter, there were concerns the balls were under-inflated.


    Parent
    I don't get it (none / 0) (#92)
    by NYShooter on Fri Jan 23, 2015 at 10:56:06 AM EST
    If the Colts had the balls in question in their possession why were there only "concerns" and not certain knowledge. I assume they tested the balls to see if their "concerns" were justified, no?

    Parent
    Because I think someone from the league (5.00 / 1) (#94)
    by Anne on Fri Jan 23, 2015 at 11:01:31 AM EST
    has to do the testing, not the team.  Plus, there's sort of a chain of custody thing going on to ensure that as few people as possible have access.

    Parent
    Whatever the protocol, (none / 0) (#98)
    by NYShooter on Fri Jan 23, 2015 at 11:45:28 AM EST
    I find it odd that we have a team that has (had) suspicions, and, has the evidence in their hands.
    Regardless of who does the testing, or chain of custody, why don't we know today if those suspicions were justified, or not?

    Look, I'm no Patriot's, or, Brady, fan. But, I also can see a hysterical bandwagon of guilt, without proof, when I see it. Not even a hint of innocent until proven guilty; not one comment, "let's wait and see." When I see so many comments about the Patriots, "Long history of cheating," when, to my knowledge, there's been only one proven case, Spygate, then I begin to wonder if I'm not witnessing a real lynchmob attitude forming.

    If, and when, the coach or the quarterback, are found to be guilty, then we can argue the appropriate punishment. Until then, I'm just sorry to see this almost universal rush to judgment that I'm witnessing. You don't even get the customary, "I think, in my opinion, if you ask me," no, they're guilty, period, end of sentence, end of subject. Brady or Belichick are guilty, and, no other explanation is possible, needed, or, even considered.

    You don't feel a little uneasy about any of that? If this were a criminal case, Jeralyn wouldn't allow 90% of the comments stated here because they're all just speculation. But, because it's only about sports, or rather, a particular sports team, it's "anything goes."

    Parent

    It's the Patriots... (5.00 / 2) (#99)
    by kdog on Fri Jan 23, 2015 at 12:01:10 PM EST
    of course they're guilty! ;)

    You're right of course...but it's not a criminal trial, nobody is going to jail.  So I don't see the harm of having fun at the Patriots expense.  I'd feel the same if the evil empire of MLB, the Yankees, were accused of cheating in the ALCS.

    If the NFL was rushing to judgement that would be one thing, but it's pretty clear the league is planning on dragging their feet on this "investigation" in the hopes of delaying a decision until after the big game.  

    Parent

    Guess what, old buddy, (5.00 / 1) (#105)
    by NYShooter on Fri Jan 23, 2015 at 12:26:33 PM EST
    You're right, you actually made me feel better about all this.

    Thanks, kid.

    Parent

    "Hysterical bandwagon of guilt?" (5.00 / 2) (#107)
    by Anne on Fri Jan 23, 2015 at 01:02:46 PM EST
    I think what has mostly been expressed is what is clearly obvious: something doesn't add up.

    Brady's remarks don't just not add up, they defy logic.  Does it make sense to you that someone who has been handling footballs probably since he could hold one, and who has been pretty clear that he's very particular about the footballs he uses, somehow didn't notice anything about the balls used in Sunday's game?  Please, that's just not believable.

    And the more we find out, the worse it gets.  We went from one ball to 11 of 12 (all of them NE's footballs, by the way), to other teams noticing and alerting the league.  

    The NFL has its own rules, and as I posted somewhere else in this thread, Roger Goodell himself is on the record stating that with respect to things that concern the competition itself, conclusive proof is not needed for action to be taken.

    As others have said here - and as many a parent, teacher, etc. has said when no one is stepping forward to take the blame, if the league can't determine which member of a team is responsible, but that it's clear someone associated with the team is, then there may be no other choice but to punish the entire team.  Large fines, loss of draft picks, etc.

    And the cloud they've earned courtesy of Spygate. (bold is mine)

    In 2007, the sports media couldn't stop talking about "Spygate," in which the New England Patriots were caught illegally taping sideline defensive signals from New York Jets coaches during the teams' opening week matchup. It soon became known that Patriots coach Bill Belichick had been engaging in such activity since 2000, and although the league had only expressly clarified the practice as forbidden in a September 2006 memo, the perception still lingers that New England gained an unfair advantage during the first seven seasons of Belichick's tenure with the team. That period happened to include three Super Bowl championships and five division titles.

    I don't know about you, but I'd call that a "long history of cheating," notwithstanding that they weren't caught at it until 2007.  It's so antithetical to the idea of sportsmanship, something a lot of athletes take very seriously.  Why do you think benches have been known to be cleared in baseball games when one team thinks the other team is stealing signals?  Because it attacks the integrity of the game itself.

    The Patriots have earned the public's skepticism, and I, for one, am not going to apologize for it.

    Anyway, that's enough ranting from me!

    Parent

    prior to 2007 (none / 0) (#110)
    by CST on Fri Jan 23, 2015 at 01:43:45 PM EST
    If it wasn't against the rules - and it's widely acknowledged that many teams were doing it - how exactly is it cheating?

    Hell - even if it wasn't widely acknowledged that other teams were doing it (and it is) - if it's not against the rules - how is it cheating?

    Parent

    2006 is when they should have stopped. (none / 0) (#115)
    by nycstray on Fri Jan 23, 2015 at 01:54:14 PM EST


    Parent
    yes I agree (none / 0) (#117)
    by CST on Fri Jan 23, 2015 at 01:56:52 PM EST
    I was taking issue with the "long history of cheating" based on things that happened before it was against the rules.

    Parent
    Oh, it absolutely was against the rules, (none / 0) (#123)
    by Anne on Fri Jan 23, 2015 at 02:21:58 PM EST
    and the league issued a memo in 2006 clarifying the rule against videotaping, but Belichick did what he does so well: he parsed the rule to the molecular level to justify the taping.

    This is the rule:

    No video recording devices of any kind are permitted to be in use in the coaches' booth, on the field, or in the locker room during the game.  All video shooting locations must be enclosed on all sides with a roof overhead.  Any use by any club at any time, from the start to the finish of any game in which such club is a participant, of any communications or information-gathering equipment, other than Polaroid-type cameras or field telephones, shall be prohibited, including without limitation videotape machines, telephone tapping, or bugging devices, or any other form of electronic devices that might aid a team during the playing of a game (ESPN.com and boston.com).

    Bill said he thought the rule meant he couldn't make use the tapes for that game.

    Here's a timeline of the whole sorry mess.

    Parent

    yes I know it was in 2006 (none / 0) (#125)
    by CST on Fri Jan 23, 2015 at 02:33:25 PM EST
    We all know about spygate.  I'm taking issue with the fact that you're claiming they were guilty of something before that.  You're quoting the 2006 memo.

    Parent
    The 2006 memo clarified an existing rule. (none / 0) (#132)
    by Anne on Fri Jan 23, 2015 at 02:48:56 PM EST
    At least, that's my understanding.

    Parent
    The definitive proof of wrongdoing is in ... (5.00 / 1) (#147)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Fri Jan 23, 2015 at 03:11:06 PM EST
    ... the footballs themselves -- 11 out of 12 of them, to be exact. Each ball didn't simply deflate 2 lbs. on its own along the Patriots sideline last Sunday, and the odds of all 11 balls doing so simultaneously without someone's intent or prompting are somewhere between very slim and absolutely none.

    If individuals like Bill Belichick and Tom Brady  refuse to accept personal responsibility for what happened here, and everyone is denying culpability even in the face of those 11 deflated footballs, then I have absolutely no problem at all with holding the entire organization accountable as a whole for this matter, and punishing them collectively. And it's not like the New England Patriots haven't tried to bend the rulebook before, you know.

    Therefore, there's really no rush to judgment here. We're not in a court of law, but rather in the court of public opinion. And what you're seeing here is simply and finally a long overdue public expression of exasperation with those self-anointed elites like Belichick and Brady who apparently think that those rules to which their fellow players and coaches are subject, somehow don't apply to them. Perhaps it's time they were taught a lesson.

    Aloha.

    Parent

    Obviously they didn't deflate themselves, but (none / 0) (#174)
    by Mr Natural on Fri Jan 23, 2015 at 04:15:06 PM EST
    given enough temperature differential between the area where they were inflated and the area where they were used, outside in 40-50 degree F weather, it is easily possible for them to have lost that pressure due to the fall in temperature.

    If they were inflated to 12.5psi at 90 F and moved outside to 50 F air, according to calculations you can perform yourself using the ideal gas law, the pressure inside those balls would eventually fall to about 10.5 psi.  To use the law convert gauge pressure to absolute pressure (add atmospheric pressure) and temperatures to Kelvin.  

    Courtesy of the Boston Herald, here's a physicist's explanation, without the details.

    Are there any restrictions on the temperature of air and the environment in which they're filled to prevent gaming the regulations?  When are the balls tested, retested?

    Parent

    the colts balls (5.00 / 1) (#176)
    by CST on Fri Jan 23, 2015 at 04:19:20 PM EST
    didn't deflate themselves and they were at the same temperature

    Neither did the backup balls

    Parent

    Exactly. (none / 0) (#181)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Fri Jan 23, 2015 at 04:25:41 PM EST
    The Colts weren't playing in Miami last Sunday, while the Patriots were in Foxboro -- though looking at the final score, one would be forgiven for thinking so.

    Parent
    As long as we're doing science... (none / 0) (#195)
    by unitron on Sat Jan 24, 2015 at 06:36:34 AM EST
    ...anybody happen to know what difference the change in air pressure makes in the actual "not squeezing it, just holding it in the palm of your hand" weight (i.e., mass acted on by gravity)of the ball?

    Could you tell a difference just from the weight or do you have to do a "squeeze test"?

    Parent

    Take It Up With the Commish... (none / 0) (#121)
    by ScottW714 on Fri Jan 23, 2015 at 02:16:10 PM EST
    ...from Anne's post, #73:

    Goodell:

    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.

    I think 11 or 24 game balls coming up short on air pressure all belonging to the same team qualifies under the commissioner's definition of proof.

    I think everyone is going a little nuts because everyone knows there isn't going to be any real punishment; dollars and maybe a draft pick.

    Belichick and Brady have no idea, pretty sure the ball boy doesn't know, and it will be a complete mystery as to how the balls were deflated.  

    The only way this doesn't play out like that is if a video happen to catch it, but my guess, they had some little tool to get the right pressure, no way they risk letting out too much air, and my guess is that tool is small and if the ball boy is under Belichick, the move was practice a million times to ensure it wasn't noticed.

    They won't pull Brady under 'he had to know' and Belachik is pretty safe in that they won't pull him assuming he should have known.

    The kicker would be if the balls the Pats used throughout the season were actually defective and they all let a little air out.  Doubtful, but not impossible.

    The people who should get the blame is the idiots that decided teams don't share game balls and that each team polices their own balls, they were practically begging for someone to tamper with them.

    Parent

    Mitt Romney (5.00 / 1) (#78)
    by CST on Fri Jan 23, 2015 at 09:09:58 AM EST
    I just...  It's so absurd.  I don't even know where to start.  Link

    Best quote from the article:

    "He's hoping everyone completely forgets about his failed campaign and allows his campaign to start from scratch. And that's just not going to happen,"

    Flip-flopper doesn't even begin to describe this man.

    Perhaps he is an alien life force... (5.00 / 1) (#80)
    by Anne on Fri Jan 23, 2015 at 09:36:15 AM EST
    programmed by alien computer specialists on the basis of American media and political pundit shows...

    Parent
    Wouldn't That Make Him... (none / 0) (#93)
    by ScottW714 on Fri Jan 23, 2015 at 11:00:42 AM EST
    ...a profit in the book of mormon ?

    He is, without a doubt, a glutton for punishment.  I can't imagine any sane person willing to put their family through a Presidential run without having any real chance of winning.

    It wouldn't be so bad if he actually stood for something, but it's getting pretty clear he stands for what he thinks will garner the most votes, and that is just plain sad.

    The good news, it looks like candidates might run on helping the middle class.  Whether they do is the question, but it's good to see candidates mentioning things like income inequality and tax benefits for people not filthy rich.  Even if they don't mean it, it's at least somewhat reassuring that it's once again chic to pretend to care about the middle class and that can not be a bad thing.

    Parent

    I was watching Rocky IV... (5.00 / 1) (#97)
    by kdog on Fri Jan 23, 2015 at 11:44:28 AM EST
    with some buddies getting stoned the other night, for some reason Mitt Romney came up and we imagined Mrs. Romney screaming at Mittens like Adrian was screaming at Rocky..."You Can't Win!"

    Ya had to be there...we were rolling on the floor.

    Parent

    Multiple Campaigns are people too, my friends. (none / 0) (#103)
    by Mr Natural on Fri Jan 23, 2015 at 12:06:03 PM EST


    Parent
    Perhaps the (none / 0) (#122)
    by Zorba on Fri Jan 23, 2015 at 02:21:07 PM EST
    planet Kolob sent him down here, for nefarious purposes of its own.

    Parent
    Or Remulac... (none / 0) (#175)
    by Mr Natural on Fri Jan 23, 2015 at 04:17:27 PM EST
    He's the kinda guy you wanna drink six beers with...

    Parent
    He's like the guy you already turned down (none / 0) (#104)
    by ruffian on Fri Jan 23, 2015 at 12:10:21 PM EST
    that mistakes your subsequent cordiality as a hint to try again. The GOP has been way too nice to him the last couple of years.

    Parent
    Honestly (none / 0) (#106)
    by Ga6thDem on Fri Jan 23, 2015 at 12:53:00 PM EST
    the only reason I can come up with for the Mitt thing is that they realize that Jeb Bush has a toxic name and there's nothing they can do about that and putting Romney in there might keep a crazy from getting the nomination. I guess some Republicans would rather lose with Mitch again than have a Ted Cruz at the top of the ticket.

    Parent
    Hilary! (none / 0) (#114)
    by Jim in St Louis on Fri Jan 23, 2015 at 01:51:28 PM EST
    Could you say the same thing about Hilary! Beaten by Obama by a slim margin, Romney was also only beaten by Obama by a slim margin.  So why is losing to Obama a disquailification for Romney,  but its  not for Hilary!

    Romney has probably the best resume as far as qualifications.  And I think the GOP will value that and not give him the Gore/Dukakis treatment.   I'll predict he tests the waters for a primary or two and drops out early, with a nice spot at the convention.  He doesn't have my vote- but an honorable man.  

    Parent

    could you define (5.00 / 1) (#116)
    by CST on Fri Jan 23, 2015 at 01:55:40 PM EST
    honor for me?

    And Hillary (two L's) came a lot closer to beating Obama than Romney ever did.

    Also - it's not the losing to Obama - it's the fact that he's running on the opposite platform and expects everyone to forget everything he said 4 years ago.

    Parent

    Of course you are right- Hillary! (none / 0) (#124)
    by Jim in St Louis on Fri Jan 23, 2015 at 02:25:07 PM EST
    My error.  And there is no excuse for me not knowing how to spell Hillary!

    I like Romeny (but not as a candidate). Honesty still matters to the voters and I've seen nothing yet that could be spun as a flip-flop.  I read the Boston Globe story-its long on quotes from long time dems- but not much from Romney himself.  If I was a headline writer I would put it this way: "People who hate Romeny are disapointed by recent statements"  


    Parent

    oh trust me (none / 0) (#127)
    by CST on Fri Jan 23, 2015 at 02:34:50 PM EST
    we aren't disappointed

    Parent
    Split screening Mittens (none / 0) (#129)
    by nycstray on Fri Jan 23, 2015 at 02:38:36 PM EST
    could be a fun game for a bit . . .  :P

    Parent
    but....? (none / 0) (#139)
    by Jim in St Louis on Fri Jan 23, 2015 at 02:57:51 PM EST
    ...it would only invite comparisons with the President's statements on:
    *Iran sanctions
    *Gay marriage
    *Amnesty for dreamers
    *the debt limit celing
    *shovel ready jobs
    *if you like your doctor you can keep your doctor
    *closing Gitmo
    *all bills posted online for comment
    *healthcare debated in the open
    *drone attacks are unconstitutional- until they aren't
    *no lobbists to work in the white house
    etc etc

    Do you really want to open the door of who is the bigger flip-flopper?
     

    Parent

    Hey, Jim - guess what? (5.00 / 2) (#153)
    by Anne on Fri Jan 23, 2015 at 03:25:03 PM EST
    Obama's not running.

    But since you seem so enamored of Mr. Romney, can you tell us what he's been doing for the last two years that would give anyone any indication that he has a sincere interest in public service?  Because I don't think being employed by his son's private equity firm qualifies.

    Here's a guy with oodles of wealth, who could be out there showing the public that he actually has some interest in the people, getting involved in public works, but no.

    Me?  I still can't get my head around the kind of guy who would put his dog in a crate and strap it to the hood of his car.  Cruelty to animals takes you out of the running for leading anything, in my opinion.

    Oh, and if you're looking for all your missing exclamation points, they seem to be attaching themselves to Hillary's name.

    Next time, could you do a little better than warmed-over right-wing talking points?  

    Parent

    talk about personal and trolling (none / 0) (#165)
    by Jim in St Louis on Fri Jan 23, 2015 at 03:53:02 PM EST
    Wow- the venom drips out of your every post doesn't it?  I am not a Romney booster- I just said that he was an honest man and that the flip-flop label does not fit.  Amazing how ugly the envy and covet of the leftist mentality is when on display.

    Nice to know that you have all sorts of ideas on how other people should spend their time and how to spend their money. It just tears you up doesn't it? All that money- and you can't get your claws into it. lol

    You use the phrase `warmed over right-wing talking points'  about twice a day.  Doesn't the overuse of an already overused phrase seem to you to be a little...well...warmed over?  


    Parent

    Oh (5.00 / 2) (#169)
    by Ga6thDem on Fri Jan 23, 2015 at 04:05:37 PM EST
    the flip flop label definitely fits him. He passed Obamacare in MA and then did a 180 about it. He said he wasn't pro-life and then he said he was. There's a whole host of things he said and did as Governor of MA that he all of a sudden pretended he didn't do or changed his stances from when he was governor.

    Parent
    Well, Jim! you haven't exactly been (5.00 / 2) (#186)
    by Anne on Fri Jan 23, 2015 at 04:47:22 PM EST
    shy about your contempt for liberals and leftists, so I don't know why you're getting yourself all indignant when it comes back the other way...

    I asked you to give us some examples of how Romney, over the last two-plus years has shown any indication of any interest in public service, not because I have wealth envy, or because I can't stand to see how other people spend their time, but because I think showing an interest in the country and the people you purport to want to govern is kind of important.  Are there any causes, organizations, issues he's been involved with?  I'm all ears.

    As for your original point, that Romney's an honest man and not a flip-flopper, please.  Here's a rather long list for your perusal.

    Parent

    Not to drag this out... (1.50 / 2) (#194)
    by Jim in St Louis on Sat Jan 24, 2015 at 05:41:49 AM EST
    ...but I pointed out that you have a tendency to be bossy and controlling of other people, and of telling them what to do with their time and money.
    And your response?....To assign me homework with instructions to report back to you!!?!!

    Lets just hashtag this with #yournotthebossofme, and #momdidnotputyouincharge or #bigsistersfirsttimeletsitgotoherhead

    Parent

    So...ya got nothin' I guess. (5.00 / 2) (#201)
    by Anne on Sat Jan 24, 2015 at 08:55:32 AM EST
    Can't give us even one example of what this honest man's been doing for the last couple years that shows any indication he's interested in public service, and nothing to say about the looooong list of flip-flops that this not-a-flip-flopper actually did.

    Probably explains the temper and the attempt at deflection.

    Here's the thing: I did the "homework" you never took the time to do.  You apparently thought you could just make these assertions about Romney and that would be, what, the last word?  That we'd all just say, "oh, okay, Jim! you're right - Romney is all you say he is?"

    Really?  I don't know how long you've been hanging out here, but if you haven't noticed that there's a fairly high standard for supporting one's opinions, you haven't really been paying attention.

    I notice that you haven't hesitated to post links to information that contradicts what others are saying, so why are you getting all mean and ugly when someone calls you out?

    Guess you're special, Jim!  Here are some hashtags for you:

    #dontinsultourintelligence, #putonyourbigboypants  
    #getoveryourself

    Have a special Jim! day.

    Parent

    Obama's not running again (none / 0) (#142)
    by CST on Fri Jan 23, 2015 at 03:02:04 PM EST
    So it really doesn't matter.

    And yes, I'd have that conversation every day of the week.

    Parent

    Obama will not be running. (none / 0) (#143)
    by nycstray on Fri Jan 23, 2015 at 03:04:00 PM EST
    Nobody will give a fig what he said.  Unless of course it's to say, 'why would we vote for that again in Mittens'?

    You might want to try a different argument . . .

    Parent

    Not an argument for you. (none / 0) (#151)
    by Jim in St Louis on Fri Jan 23, 2015 at 03:18:30 PM EST
    Pretty big fig leaf.  Of course Obama's lies will be part of the 2016 election.   Heck if Obama can still blame Bush in the SOTU 7 years into his term then it is sure that Obama's history will taint Hillary! in her campaign.

    Of course I don't know but I never really believed that Hillary! and Obama actually buried the hatchet.  It was a pretty ugly campaign between the two of them. And the Clinton's have a notoriously long memory for paybacks. So I wonder how many of the Obama campagin team or his policy team will end up with Hillary!

    Its got to be tough to distance herself, but still try to claim the good stuff.  But Hillary! does have a history of faking affection for men who have betrayed her so there is that.

    Parent

    Oh man (none / 0) (#157)
    by CST on Fri Jan 23, 2015 at 03:28:57 PM EST
    Republicans are gonna get creamed

    But please, continue making it personal

    Don't let me stop you

    Parent

    Fist pumping and going Hoo Hoo ... (none / 0) (#160)
    by Jim in St Louis on Fri Jan 23, 2015 at 03:35:01 PM EST
    is not a substitute for contributing to the conversation.


    Parent
    I think I just saw Mitt Romney... (5.00 / 2) (#163)
    by kdog on Fri Jan 23, 2015 at 03:37:57 PM EST
    in Williamsburg with skinny jeans and a hipster beard standing on a street corner with an Occupy Wall St. sign...and a donation cup.

    Parent
    Saying "lies" (none / 0) (#164)
    by jondee on Fri Jan 23, 2015 at 03:44:00 PM EST
    without being more specific doesn't contribute much either..

    And here's hoping "lies" isn't code for Benghazi! Benghazi! Benghazi!

    Parent

    See above (none / 0) (#166)
    by Jim in St Louis on Fri Jan 23, 2015 at 03:54:25 PM EST
    you will get there eventually.  I'll wait while you catch up with the rest of the class.

    Parent
    Can you guys (none / 0) (#167)
    by Ga6thDem on Fri Jan 23, 2015 at 03:59:11 PM EST
    decide? One minute she's Obama's twin and the next minute she's his arch enemy? The MO of the GOP is they just can't decide so they are sitting in baby bathtubs crying and flinging poo at the wall.

    A bunch of Obama's advisers have already gone over to Ready for Hillary. So unless you think they're going to join Ready for Hillary and work for that organization and then all of a sudden not work for Hillary the whole adviser thing you're shopping is crazy.

    Getting personal? I guess that's because the GOP has nothing to offer you seem to be saying. Or is it yet another example of the GOP cranking up the culture war the majority of voters are sick of?

    Parent

    Sorry I'm just one guy (none / 0) (#173)
    by Jim in St Louis on Fri Jan 23, 2015 at 04:14:49 PM EST
    who is not responsible for the entire GOP. (Heck I'm not even a member)  So its a little unfair of you to expect me to respond for the 1/2 of the electorate.

    I for one do not think Hillary! is an Obama twin. I think she shares his love of Wall Street money, and I think she is as rabid of a pro-choicer. But I do not think she would be as not-ready-for-prime-time as Obama. More polished and prepared.

    Hillary! is smarter than Obama- no question, but so very cautious.  I am reminded that she actually practiced law for years so maybe she has that lawyer wariness, and the desire to hold back.

    I confess I am a little unsure what Hillary! really wants- I know she wants to be Pres, but not sure what her big vision would be.

    The vindictivness of Hillary! does not need my examples- the bookstores are filled with former close Clinton people who were sandbagged.  I freely admit that I speculate but I can't belive that she would trust the same people who called her a racist.

    Parent

    Oh the bookstores (none / 0) (#179)
    by Ga6thDem on Fri Jan 23, 2015 at 04:22:52 PM EST
    with books written by conspiracy theorists? Haven't you learned your lesson from those people by now? I guess not. The same people that told you about the Romney landslide that was going to happen in 2012? Well, like PT Barnum said there's a sucker born every minute and those people have made fleecing the rubes a profitable operation for themselves and they'll keep doing it as long as conservatives are desperate enough or clueless enough to fork over their hard earned money to the jokers.

    Parent
    Speaking of tough ... (none / 0) (#188)
    by christinep on Fri Jan 23, 2015 at 05:08:02 PM EST
    it sure must be tough these days for you, jim.  Just think: Economy skyrocketing and projected to get even better;  the ACA (Obamacare)will reach the 9 million people projected to sign up (wouldn't be surprised if it hit 10 million enrollees this period); the historic start with China on greenhouse gases cap; the brilliant approach, via the time-honored Executive action, to providing relief to the Dreamers and now to millions more undocumented immigrants.  And so it goes ... and, now, the President's approval ratings climb to 50%.

    'Sure must be tough to sit on the sidelines and fume.  Too bad you and your fellow Repubs seem reduced to sputtering rather than trying to work with the Administration on the initiatives for the Middle Class announced during the SOTU ... you know those initiatives that have majority approval every time a poll has asked the question.  It is like the President said in Kansas (yes, Kansas) yesterday when addressing a loudly applauding crowd there: Instead of the Repub "no" to everything, it sure would be nice to try getting to "yes."  

    Guess what?  In two years, it is going to be tough for those who wasted the last 6+ years of their lives trying to knock down the legislative and practical realities ushered in by the Obama administration--trying in vain--only to find that he has progressed to the role of respected elder statesman.  AND, to top it off, the odds are that the present Repub stumbles at the start of this new Congress & the divisive putative Repub presidential candidates, you may well have to learn how to spell Hillary and the word "President" preceding that name.

    Parent

    Lot of material there (none / 0) (#193)
    by Jim in St Louis on Sat Jan 24, 2015 at 04:44:48 AM EST
    and I'm not trying to doge a response, but c'mon, if I was to address everyone of your statements it would be a 1000 word essay.  

    So if I can address your general point:
    Obama's first day of office he came in with long coat-tails and a house with 257 dems, and a senate with 57.  

    2014 now has 188 house members and 44 senators.  And that is not even getting into the number of state governors and state legislators that are in GOP hands.

    I have no doubt that the GOP will shoot itself in the foot many times- they always do, but the trend lines of progressive thought are not favorable.  The theories and ideas have not been successful with the voters, and those policies that have gone into practice (ACA) have been disasters.


    Parent

    BTW (none / 0) (#162)
    by Zorba on Fri Jan 23, 2015 at 03:36:19 PM EST
    Its "Romney," not "Romeny."

    Parent
    Thanks I've always been a sloppy speller (none / 0) (#168)
    by Jim in St Louis on Fri Jan 23, 2015 at 03:59:22 PM EST
    Its one of my faults. I should work on that more, but I think that in a blog comment section I usually manage to get my point across.  

    I wonder if with emoties and twitter shorthand if the art and disipline of spelling will dry up totally?

    Parent

    Between emoticons, (none / 0) (#172)
    by Zorba on Fri Jan 23, 2015 at 04:14:20 PM EST
    Twitter and texting shorthands, and spell checks that often substitute some other word than the one you intended, I'm pretty sure that the discipline of spelling is going the way of the Dodo.
    Do schools still even "teach" spelling as a separate subject, with weekly spelling tests any more?
    My kids are in their mid-30's, and when the younger one was still in fifth grade, the schools removed spelling books and spelling tests from the required curriculum, although his teacher still gave weekly spelling tests, and taught the old "spelling rules" and their exceptions.
    And, BTW, I seriously doubt if many schools are teaching "cursive handwriting" any more, either.  Makes you wonder how kids will learn how to sign their own names in cursive, as opposed to printing them.   ;-)

    Parent
    Beacuse Romney has run for President twice (none / 0) (#178)
    by ruffian on Fri Jan 23, 2015 at 04:21:05 PM EST
    Did not even bet McCain for the nomination the first time. And lost a Senate race too. He needs to just go away and enjoy his family and his money.

    Parent
    Oh, good grief (5.00 / 1) (#171)
    by Ga6thDem on Fri Jan 23, 2015 at 04:08:52 PM EST
    You had to know the GOP was going at it again.

    GOP rape controversy

    Can someone make them go away??? I'm sick of their stupid culture war crap as most Americans are.

    Personally (none / 0) (#1)
    by CST on Thu Jan 22, 2015 at 01:48:27 PM EST
    I think they should just cancel the Superbowl and hand the trophy to the Patriots.

    We all know they're gonna win anyway.

    Discuss.

    And the colts should be fined (none / 0) (#2)
    by CST on Thu Jan 22, 2015 at 01:52:27 PM EST
    For clearly deflating the patriots footballs.  As once they were fixed at halftime, the patriots played much better.

    Parent
    Think of all the NRG wasted (5.00 / 1) (#4)
    by sarcastic unnamed one on Thu Jan 22, 2015 at 02:16:03 PM EST
    in pumping the balls for inspection before the start of the game, and then just deflating them for the game.

    Anyone who cares about the planet must realize the effect this cheating must have on our ecology.

    I'll be rooting for the more energy efficient Seahawks.

    Parent

    I hope the air they let out of the balls (none / 0) (#180)
    by ruffian on Fri Jan 23, 2015 at 04:23:40 PM EST
    is not contributing to climate change!

    Parent
    The BS Coming out of Boston... (none / 0) (#182)
    by ScottW714 on Fri Jan 23, 2015 at 04:33:56 PM EST
    ...is surely putting methane into the atmosphere especially at the the super heated temperature all that hot air is creating.

    What is the opposite of a Polar Vortex ?

    Parent

    Hmmmm.... (none / 0) (#7)
    by kdog on Thu Jan 22, 2015 at 02:22:38 PM EST
    Peyton Manning still has Colts connections, maybe he did it because he couldn't stand Brady getting the best of him in one last playoff run.

    Sung to the tune of "Nationwide is on your side"...Deflate the balls F*ck you Tom

    Parent

    Interesting (5.00 / 1) (#8)
    by jbindc on Thu Jan 22, 2015 at 02:25:08 PM EST
    Since it was P. Manning and Brady who teamed up in 2006 to lobby the NFL to allow visiting teams to use their own balls instead of ones provided by the home teams.

    Parent
    The plot thickens... (none / 0) (#14)
    by kdog on Thu Jan 22, 2015 at 02:49:57 PM EST
    This could become a much bigger issue than steroids in baseball imo...aside from the rule changes making the passing records in the record book a joke, what if the two best QB's of a generation (and surely others) were also cheating by playing with non-regulation footballs?  

    Do they get banned for life a la Pete Rose?  Blacklisted from the HOF like Bonds & Clemens?  

    And why am I enjoying this so much?  ;)

    Parent

    Because as a jets fan (none / 0) (#16)
    by CST on Thu Jan 22, 2015 at 03:00:58 PM EST
    you've gotten nothing else going on

    Parent
    Sick Burn... (none / 0) (#19)
    by kdog on Thu Jan 22, 2015 at 03:04:34 PM EST
    but I got the...the...the Knicks?  Oh never mind.

    Parent
    When do catchers and pitchers report? (5.00 / 1) (#21)
    by nycstray on Thu Jan 22, 2015 at 03:06:11 PM EST


    Parent
    Whenever the probation officer tells them to. (none / 0) (#50)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Thu Jan 22, 2015 at 07:02:11 PM EST


    Parent
    I could definitely get on board (none / 0) (#17)
    by CST on Thu Jan 22, 2015 at 03:01:27 PM EST
    The blame Peyton Manning train :)

    Parent
    Because you're stoned on Aderall? (none / 0) (#18)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Thu Jan 22, 2015 at 03:01:40 PM EST
    ;-D

    Parent
    Ssshhh... (none / 0) (#20)
    by kdog on Thu Jan 22, 2015 at 03:05:45 PM EST
    my northwest connect has a big game in a week and a half...don't blow up the spot Don!

    Parent
    Because the 'Hawks always (none / 0) (#3)
    by nycstray on Thu Jan 22, 2015 at 02:11:43 PM EST
    just roll over and lose . . . .

    So you aren't the least upset that your team acted like jerks and this is now part of their history?

    Parent

    It totally sucks (none / 0) (#6)
    by CST on Thu Jan 22, 2015 at 02:19:40 PM EST
    And on an entirely selfish level - I STILL want Tom Brady and Belicheck in the Superbowl.  It will be a better game that way.  And yea - I still want the Patriots to win.  I was in Pittsburgh every other time they won.  It would be cool to see a parade.

    I dunno - it's not on the level of beating your wife or child sex abuse where I'd feel like a terrible person not caring that much.  Or even steroids where you are potentially harming yourself and others.

    Sure - bad sportsmanship is bad sportsmanship - and it's a bad example and all that.  But it doesn't rise to the level of evil.

    Parent

    It's a funny thing, but for me, the (5.00 / 1) (#22)
    by Anne on Thu Jan 22, 2015 at 03:10:25 PM EST
    whole Ray Rice situation turned what would ordinarily be one of my favorite things into something I was fairly indifferent about.  

    And what Rice did had nothing to do with the game. It was about people's lives, and it just made me feel a little sick that the priority seemed to be with the league and the money.  I just couldn't look at Ravens ownership and management with as much respect as I used to have for them - it's just not as much fun.  I decided that I couldn't blame the players for what Rice did, or for how management and the NFL handled it, but it still just wasn't the same.

    If they had made it to the Super Bowl, would I watch and would I cheer - yeah, I'm sure I would.  But as far as I know, they haven't been involved with cheating to win.

    I'm not a Seahawks fan, so I'm about as indifferent to the Super Bowl as I've ever been, but I sincerely hope we don't have to watch the Patriots hoist the trophy.

    Parent

    I certainly don't blame (none / 0) (#33)
    by Zorba on Thu Jan 22, 2015 at 04:12:12 PM EST
    the players for what Rice did, or how incompetently the management and the NFL handled that whole sh!t-storm from the beginning.
    But I would also have cheered them if they made the Super Bowl.  The Ravens are as close as I get to having an NFL team to root for, given where I live, and given that I have absolutely no ties whatsoever to the St. Louis Rams, who moved there well after I left St. Louis.
    The second closest NFL team that I would root for might be the San Francisco 49ers, just because my kids were born there, and Son Zorba is a die-hard 49ers' fan.

    Parent
    I'm with you Hon (none / 0) (#96)
    by Chuck0 on Fri Jan 23, 2015 at 11:36:35 AM EST


    Parent
    Let's Call It What It Is... (5.00 / 4) (#25)
    by ScottW714 on Thu Jan 22, 2015 at 03:35:39 PM EST
    ...cheating, it's not bad sportsmanship, or whatever non-sense Boston decides to call it, it's cheating and it most certainly puts every win they have had this season in question.

    For all anyone knows, the Pats should be at home because those two or three close games were games in which they may have cheated.  So while I understand your reluctance to deal with reality, the fact is it is a big deal.  Yeah, it's not wife beating, or child abuse, or evil, but is that the bar we are going to use when people get caught cheating, "Well at least they didn't commit a felony..."

    That Onion piece about Boston fans was so spot on.  I mean seriously, you can't even call it cheating in your posts, I think that is called denial.  Own up to it and quite acting like Pat fans rights to see a good game trumps every other team and fans right to watch a FAIR game and possibly still be playing.

    Your home team has been caught cheating, twice.  And while in the grand scheme of things, it's a pretty small thing, in the NFL it's a big deal, and they did it for one reason, to win football games, which coincidentally is why they are in the SB.  Remove one win, they play in Denver or Balitmore, remove two and they probably don't get a week off and no home field in the playoffs.

    It's like Armstrong, for every ill-gotten win, someone else, and in this case, some other team and their fans has something stolen from them, like a parade or whatever else that teams who play fair should have received, but because the Pats stacked the deck, they did not get.  It's a big deal and it goes far beyond sportsmanship.

    The real question, is do they deserve to be.  If this was the Olympics or high-school sports, the question would be how long would they be suspended, not if the coach or the QB going to play.  It's a damn shame that you are downplaying and defending cheating on the field of play and acting like it doesn't taint the entire season.

    It's the butterfly effect, you can never know what would have been and it's why they need to pull the people who knew, from the SB.  They don't deserve to walk onto the field with people who don't cheat to get where they are at.

    Parent

    of course it's cheating (none / 0) (#27)
    by CST on Thu Jan 22, 2015 at 03:45:22 PM EST
    I thought it was pretty clear from the tone of my posts today on this subject that I was playing the Stephen Colbert role - but whatever.

    I also recognize Schadenfreude when I see it.

    Like the blue Maserati parked outside my office that currently has a boot on it because SOMEONE was too important to pay their parking tickets.

    Given that I'm getting a ride in this particular Maserati - yea - selfishly I still want it to drive.

    And I think the whole thing rises to the level of something I feel extremely comfortable making light of/jokes about.

    Parent

    I Caught the Tone in the Other Posts... (5.00 / 1) (#28)
    by ScottW714 on Thu Jan 22, 2015 at 03:52:27 PM EST
    ...not a big deal, but I keep reading, elsewhere, and the Boston fans acting like there is nothing to see and it driving me nuts.  And I have no idea what any of this has to do with a booted car.

    Parent
    Shadenfreude (none / 0) (#31)
    by CST on Thu Jan 22, 2015 at 04:02:22 PM EST
    Because it's a Maserati not a beat up Corolla with a boot.

    In other words - if it were the Buffalo Bills people wouldn't be quite so happy about the fact that they were caught deflating balls.  Let's face it - people are not just "disappointed that the integrity of the game is questioned" - they are in fact happy that the Pats were caught cheating.

    And I get it.  And I'm also just being honest about the fact that yea, I still want them to win, because it's my Maserati, so to speak.

    Parent

    I, for one.. (5.00 / 1) (#30)
    by kdog on Thu Jan 22, 2015 at 03:54:52 PM EST
    am totally digging your sense of humor about the whole thing...the Boston transplant in my office is in total denial, making our ball-busting that much more fun and effective.  He's actually getting angry, like red in the face angry, and the angrier he gets the funnier it gets.  

    Parent
    I Want One. (none / 0) (#79)
    by ScottW714 on Fri Jan 23, 2015 at 09:21:48 AM EST


    Parent
    Feel free... (5.00 / 3) (#82)
    by kdog on Fri Jan 23, 2015 at 09:47:32 AM EST
    to feed me zingers!

    One of the guys put a deflated football on his desk this morning.  

    Parent

    Don't Know If I Can Top... (none / 0) (#95)
    by ScottW714 on Fri Jan 23, 2015 at 11:11:51 AM EST
    ...a deflated ball, that is funny.

    Conan has video proof.

    Parent

    And I just started to be a football fan....geez... (none / 0) (#101)
    by ZtoA on Fri Jan 23, 2015 at 12:05:20 PM EST
    My oldest niece and her BF have been honing me to be a Seahawks fan - and I am! Poor me, how am I going to understand the rules of the game now? If I wanted to make a friendly wager then does one bet on the 'real' score, or the 'cheat' score? And who is the arbitrator of those scores?

    I do like, however, all the talk about balls. It makes learning the game even more fun. Go Seahawks!

    And they told me last night that soon I will be a Blazers fan (or is it a Blazer fan?). More fun to look forward to. But have to say that the OT in the last Seahawks game was actually a lot of fun. Hope my yells did not disturb my neighbors.

    Parent

    ZtoA (none / 0) (#126)
    by ScottW714 on Fri Jan 23, 2015 at 02:33:27 PM EST
    As a new fan understand this, there will never be a week in which some 'major' ending bruhaha isn't going down.

    Either this guy shouldn't be playing, that call changed the game, something football fanatics can discuss for a week that isn't actually about the game.

    Last year is was Sherman's mouth.  Granted this is a little more serious, but the number of words and time devoted to non-field non-sense, is usually greater than the actual in field play.

    For example, the low pressure balls were pulled at half time, it was 17-7.  The final score, 45-7.  Whatever advantage low pressure balls have, the Pats did better w/o them, 11 points better.

    Don't get me wrong, the Pats should get hammered, but if we weren't talking about low pressure balls, there would be something controversial to discuss before the SB.

    I'm just glad this story took the Packers out of the discussion.

    Parent

    These pikers are nothing (none / 0) (#47)
    by FlJoe on Thu Jan 22, 2015 at 06:25:07 PM EST
    compared those NASCAR boys. Pretty much a part of the sport for a long time. When they do get caught the sanctions are reasonable (suspensions and loss of points), however there is no sense of shame laid upon the violators when they return.

    It does not surprise me that Belichick has the mind set of a NASCAR crew chief willing to break the rules to gain the slightest advantage. Baseball of course has had a long history of cheating with corked bats and spitballs.

    Cheating in football has been relatively rare for most of it's history making Belichick's actions, real or perceived seem even more evil. When most Americans hear the phrase "level the playing field" (a proven favorite of pols everywhere!) they envision the gridiron. Belinchick is standing on shaky ground messing with America's sense of fair play.

    ps: I know there are much more egregious injustices out there to get steamed at.

    pps: I am still po'd about the snow plow game

    Parent

    What was it that Jane Addams once said? (5.00 / 2) (#29)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Thu Jan 22, 2015 at 03:54:09 PM EST
    "The essence of immorality is the tendency to make an exception of myself."

    There's poor sportsmanship, and then there's cheating in sports. Speaking for myself only, I don't conflate the two as one and the same, for the simple reason that you can play by the rules and still be a poor sport.

    And while cheating in sports may not rise to the level of evil per se, I consider it part of the pavement on the off-ramp from the Yellow Brick Road to the Highway to Hell.

    I mean, if you prove yourself willing to cheat in order to gain an undue and unfair advantage over your competition in an athletic event, then what other rules might you be willing to flout, given the opportunity?

    As H.L. Mencken once noted, "Sports do not build character, they reveal it." And what we're presently seeing in Foxboro is actually quite revelatory, to say the very least.

    Aloha.

    Parent

    I'm also a soccer fan (none / 0) (#43)
    by CST on Thu Jan 22, 2015 at 05:33:47 PM EST
    First and foremost.  Its what I grew up playing and watching.  And one of the first rules I learned in soccer was if the ref didn't see it - it didn't happen.  Now the way I was taught that it wasn't an encouragement to cheat (although there are certainly people who take it that way) - but rather an acknowledgement that its part of the game - so quit my whining.  And maybe also a bit of a reminder that its just a game.

    Its also entirely probable that that's one of the reasons soccer hasn't really caught on in the states on a professional level.

    Anyway - just some context for my take on it.

    Parent

    I agree with you on the level part (none / 0) (#10)
    by nycstray on Thu Jan 22, 2015 at 02:32:10 PM EST
    but I would be p!ssed if one of my teams did it. I'm not a big fan of having obvious steroid users on my teams either . . .  just makes the whole thing messy, and really, these guys should be able to play on the up and up.

    I don't think they should play the SB if they pull the coach and/or QB. THAT would be a mess.

    Parades are fun. The SF Giants seem to like to have theirs in the rain even during the worst drought in history . . . ;)

    Parent

    I really don't know what you do at this point. (none / 0) (#65)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Fri Jan 23, 2015 at 02:10:02 AM EST
    The Patriots are AFC champions. The NFL can't strip them of the conference title and send the Colts to Phoenix in their stead. But then, if Tom Brady is shown to actually be the guilty party here, I don't think league officials can allow his presence on the field for the Super Bowl, because their own public credibility is at stake here. Somebody significant needs to pay a real price for this transgression.

    Parent
    And if Brady isn't on the Field... (5.00 / 1) (#81)
    by ScottW714 on Fri Jan 23, 2015 at 09:41:51 AM EST
    ...there are going to be a whole lot of folks watching golf.  Just kidding, but the game is going to be a dud if he doesn't play.  

    Unless they got video or Brady holding a gun to the ball boys head, demanding he let some air out, he's playing IMO.  Imagine being Jimmy Garoppolo, a rookie, who could start in the SB against Seattle D.

    The NFL hasn't talked with Brady yet, which means they are not interested in a fast outcome, and they sure as hell aren't going to have the investigation in Arizona, which I assume NE will be headed to over the weekend.

    Seattle is going to destroy NE, after last weeks chaos, I don't expect many errors on that side of the field and the ballgate non-sense has to be taking a toll on NE.  

    Seattle by 13.  37-24
    I may change that if circumstances change next week.

    And is it just me, or is anyone else feeling like Bevis and Butthead with all this talk about Tom's balls, and practice balls, and the feel of balls, and who like soft ones and hard one.  I can't help but laugh.

    Parent

    I've noticed that people seem to be (5.00 / 1) (#88)
    by Anne on Fri Jan 23, 2015 at 10:17:32 AM EST
    making an effort to refer to them as "footballs" and not just "balls," because I think people were having a hard time keeping a straight face with all the talk about my balls and his balls and hard balls and soft balls and breaking in balls and inflated and deflated balls.

    Surprised there has been no reference to "shrinkage" in all of this...

    Somewhere I read that all of this is just fueling the Pats' desire to beat the crap out of Seattle - that they thrive on this kind of negative energy - but I think a solid two weeks of the media wanting to talk about nothing except Tom Brady's balls and questioning the team's integrity is going to get in their heads, and not in a good way.  I almost wouldn't be surprised if some of the Patriot players aren't so pissed at what's going on that they won't be all that upset if the Seahawks put Brady on his butt more than once.  

    Can you imagine how it must stink to be playing in maybe your first - and possibly only - SB, and having this cloud forever hanging over it?  Because if there's anything these guys have to have figured out, going out and winning the game isn't going to erase all of this.

    Parent

    Shrinkage (none / 0) (#100)
    by jbindc on Fri Jan 23, 2015 at 12:05:13 PM EST
    Mike & Mike on ESPN did this two days ago.  It's one of the top trending hash tags on Twitter. #shrinkage

    Parent
    I think that everyone's gotten in touch with ... (5.00 / 1) (#102)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Fri Jan 23, 2015 at 12:05:35 PM EST
    ... their inner 12-year-old, and the punchlines are writing themselves.

    Parent
    The Boston Bruins.. (none / 0) (#11)
    by jondee on Thu Jan 22, 2015 at 02:36:14 PM EST
    now that's an example of pure unadulterated evil that can't be cauterized and rooted out too quickly..;-)  

    Parent
    Hey! Your team may catch a break soon . . . (none / 0) (#13)
    by nycstray on Thu Jan 22, 2015 at 02:47:10 PM EST
    talk should soon shift to the new Bud SB ad  :P

    Parent
    I'm interested to hear (none / 0) (#9)
    by jondee on Thu Jan 22, 2015 at 02:30:59 PM EST
    the smatterings of applause from the most ambivalent Patriot's cheering section in the history of the team..

    Do they allow fan signs and all that in the stands in the Super Bowl? That should be interesting as well.

    Parent

    While I have not weighed in here (none / 0) (#53)
    by christinep on Thu Jan 22, 2015 at 08:11:08 PM EST
    on this issue, it doesn't mean that myself & husband & family haven't had our own say about it.  Husband's mother's folks are from Chelsea and Lowell (among other Mass. locales) ... and husband's step-brother went to the Patriots-Colts game this past week. Other relatives are big Pats fans.  On my side of the family: Of course, being from Denver ... oh, sob, Peyton; and, turning to my other favorite, the Packers, double sob. Then, there is the Pittsburgh fan cousin--she who keeps up with all the ESPN gossip--who detests Belichick since the "stolen signals" days. Etc.

    I grew up in a football family (my dad having played sandlot and semi-pro back in the old coal mining PA days and me being first born daughter whom he taught to throw a spiral as well as kick a centered ball.)  Fans are central to this game and all sport; and, in this particular case, your disappointment radiates.  My husband's step-brother--Roger, the one who got to attend the game with his adult son, was so looking forward to that experience with his son as they travelled from Lowell for many reasons (as a primary caregiver on most days for his wife who has been suffering for several years with increasingly progressive ALS)--said yesterday that he felt so sad that no outcome would be settling.  The fans have got to be hurting.

    In my own off-way, I almost wish that either the Patriots win going away (tho, at this point, as Roger says, they won't escape suggestions of further cheating) OR that the game is such a boring, nothing, almost loss for both sides as to bring a "deflated" reason to the game as a whole.  The NFL has some real issues to tackle; this and other messes have been brewing for years.

    Parent

    Oh Shelly... (none / 0) (#5)
    by kdog on Thu Jan 22, 2015 at 02:17:45 PM EST
    he had a good run of corrupt as f*ck, all things must pass.

    I wonder who he pissed off to finally get arrested...because his shady dealings have been common knowledge for a long time.

    love this headline (none / 0) (#12)
    by CST on Thu Jan 22, 2015 at 02:41:26 PM EST
    "Following Arrest, New York Speaker Sheldon Silver Should Step Down"

    No $hit...

    Although it reminds me of my favorite (in a punchline kind of way) former Boston mayor James Michael Curley who was actually re-elected from prison.

    Parent

    I'm put in mind (none / 0) (#15)
    by jondee on Thu Jan 22, 2015 at 02:50:56 PM EST
    of a story that was in the Smithsonian about the Giants spying on and stealing the Dodger's signs on that fateful day when Bobby Thompson hit the homerun off Ralph Branca..

    Have to google that.

    Parent

    But then both teams moved to California ... (none / 0) (#23)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Thu Jan 22, 2015 at 03:11:30 PM EST
    ... a few years later, where they were much more civil toward one anothe-- oh, yeah. I forgot about that. Never mind.

    Parent
    I remember when Reggie Smith... (none / 0) (#35)
    by Dadler on Thu Jan 22, 2015 at 04:23:45 PM EST
    ...climbed into the stands at Candlestick and went at it with a heckling fan. (link)

    Parent
    Speaking of that great American (5.00 / 1) (#39)
    by jondee on Thu Jan 22, 2015 at 04:49:24 PM EST
    institution the baseball fight, Pedro Martinez goes into the Hall this year..

    I remember reading in Cobbs book that Ruth and Gehrig both chased him around the field to kick his ace..

    Parent

    Good for them (none / 0) (#45)
    by Dadler on Thu Jan 22, 2015 at 06:12:52 PM EST
    Wish they woulda caught him. ;-)

    Parent
    I also remember Steve Yeager getting ... (5.00 / 1) (#41)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Thu Jan 22, 2015 at 05:11:25 PM EST
    ... into it at home plate with Gary Carter -- then of the Montreal Expos -- at Dodger Stadium in 1979, which caused both benches to empty. It was about 10 minutes before order was finally restored, and while both Yeager and Carter remained in the game, two other Expos and Dodgers were ejected, four in total. That was the only on-field brawl I've ever seen personally.

    I miss the Montreal Expos.

    Parent

    From our "Oy Caramba!" file: (none / 0) (#46)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Thu Jan 22, 2015 at 06:21:43 PM EST
    Says New York Mayor Bill de Blasio of State Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver:

    "Although the charges announced today are certainly very serious, I want to note that I've always known Shelly Silver to be a man of integrity, and he certainly has due process rights."

    Mayor De Blasio, of course, has every right to express his personal opinion about Mr. Silver. That said, from a purely political perspective, I'd note that a long-lived bass knows when to not rise to the bait.

    Aloha.

    Parent

    ok folks (none / 0) (#24)
    by CST on Thu Jan 22, 2015 at 03:30:47 PM EST
    it's official - Tom Brady also had nothing to do with it.  He said so himself.

    Must've been the Colts.

    And I suppose he didn't notice either? (5.00 / 2) (#26)
    by nycstray on Thu Jan 22, 2015 at 03:39:28 PM EST


    Parent
    Best quip thus far comes from ... (5.00 / 3) (#32)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Thu Jan 22, 2015 at 04:09:01 PM EST
    ... Colts punter Pat McAfee via Twitter:

    "If New England was to be DQ'd.. We'd be their replacements right??... I should probably lay off these strawberry margs"

    LOL!


    Parent

    He didn't know he was throwing a NERF ball? (none / 0) (#34)
    by Dadler on Thu Jan 22, 2015 at 04:20:14 PM EST
    Uh-huh.

    Gonna be an interesting S.B., hope it's a great game in the end.


    Parent

    So noted. (none / 0) (#42)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Thu Jan 22, 2015 at 05:15:47 PM EST
    And Mr. Brady acquitted himself rather well, I must say.

    ;-D

    Parent

    Maybe now (none / 0) (#70)
    by jbindc on Fri Jan 23, 2015 at 07:46:05 AM EST
    Brady can be the spokesman for Viagra.  "No deflation here!"

    Parent
    It's too late! (none / 0) (#177)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Fri Jan 23, 2015 at 04:19:58 PM EST
    He and Belichick are already with Cialis.
    ;-D

    Parent
    Notorious cheating to win (none / 0) (#36)
    by jondee on Thu Jan 22, 2015 at 04:27:23 PM EST
    incidents also puts me in mind of Bobby Clarke slashing and smashing the great Russian forward Kharlamov's ankle during the early-seventies Team Canada vs the USSR hockey series.

    Clarke now acknowledges that he was "elected" by the team to do the dirty deed because Kharlamov, up to that point in the series, had been making the best of the NHL look like monkeys on skates.

    Did not know that.... (none / 0) (#54)
    by kdog on Thu Jan 22, 2015 at 08:11:29 PM EST
    You might be interested in a new film about the dominant CCCP team...Red Army. I wanna check it out.

    Parent
    That Looks Good... (none / 0) (#83)
    by ScottW714 on Fri Jan 23, 2015 at 09:55:13 AM EST
    ...in 'Mircle' those guys were so menacing, and the old film they just look like robots on ice.

    I always wonder if they were training like Rocky or Drago.  With Rocky running though the snow carrying large chunks of wood on his backs, or Drago with all space age equipment, and hoses, and tubes hooked up to computers.

    Parent

    I heard about the doc... (none / 0) (#84)
    by kdog on Fri Jan 23, 2015 at 10:03:47 AM EST
    in the new Rolling Stone...the director was saying the impression of the CCCP team as robotic Ivan Drago automatons was all wrong, they were actually a free-wheeling bunch whose creativity revolutionized hockey...he compared the team to the Showtime LA Lakers of the 80's.

    Parent
    Kharlamov was unique.. (none / 0) (#145)
    by jondee on Fri Jan 23, 2015 at 03:09:13 PM EST
    as fluid with a hockey in his hands as Buddy Rich was with a pair of drum sticks..

    A faster, more fluid Guy Lafluer. If that's possible..

    They say the vodka was his undoing. The George Best syndrome. He burned out, but never faded away. 'Cuz, as the poet said, a thing of beauty is a joy forever..

    Parent

    Saudi Arabia's (none / 0) (#44)
    by Zorba on Thu Jan 22, 2015 at 06:07:52 PM EST
    King Abdullah has died.
    NPR
    So, anything going to change there?  Somehow, I doubt it.

    Enjoy the Cheap Gas... (5.00 / 1) (#85)
    by ScottW714 on Fri Jan 23, 2015 at 10:07:21 AM EST
    ...because if his half brother might not be on the same page.
    Already, there are signs of jitters: Shortly after Abdullah's death was announced on Wednesday, the price of West Texas Intermediate crude jumped 2 percent, to $47 per barrel.

    One key question on everyone's mind is whether Saudi Arabia might alter its policy of keeping oil output high even as the rest of the world is oversupplied with crude. This controversial stance has helped drive global oil prices down over the last few months. But those low prices are also squeezing Saudi Arabia's budget -- and the policy has attracted criticism from some members of the royal family.

    This is interesting, from Zorba's link:

    Abdullah was born before Saudi Arabia was even a country

    Noting that Abdullah became de facto ruler of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia in 1995 when his predecessor, King Fahd, suffered a stroke, Al Jazeera English explores the ruler's reputation as a reformer in his conservative government, noting his work to stimulate growth in the Saudi private sector.

    He also paved the way for municipal elections, granted women the right to vote and to run for office, and issued them with ID cards, allowing them for the first time to do business without the involvement of a male guardian.

    Good thing for Obama/Kerry the funeral isn't on SB Sunday.

    Parent

    The funeral (none / 0) (#108)
    by Zorba on Fri Jan 23, 2015 at 01:29:05 PM EST
    is already over, and would never have been delayed that long, anyway.  It is Muslim practice to hold the funeral, which is a very simple affair, as soon as possible after death.
    In any case, the new king, Abdullah's half-brother Salman, is 79 years old, and said to be in poor health.  So who knows how long he will be on the throne?
    And I never expected the gas prices to remain so low forever, anyway.  Anyone who does think so is living in a dream world.
    OTOH, sales of SVU's are up.  They may regret that, eventually.  It may be awhile (and it may not), but gas prices will go up.
    On the other, other hand, we just filled up our fuel oil tanks for the cheapest price in I can't remember when.    ;-)

    Parent
    Fuel oil... (none / 0) (#113)
    by kdog on Fri Jan 23, 2015 at 01:49:29 PM EST
    Isn't is awesome Z?  Though I'm still playing thermostat cop at the crib, by force of habit.  

    The long-standing policy has been put it above 66 and I will strike down upon thee with great vengeance and furious anger!  They make sweaters for a reason.

    Parent

    Mr. Zorba wants to (none / 0) (#120)
    by Zorba on Fri Jan 23, 2015 at 02:15:46 PM EST
    keep it at 66-68, but that's too cold for me.
    I set it at 70, and tell him, if he turns it down, he's sleeping on the couch.    ;-)

    Parent
    The more I hear of Mr. Z... (5.00 / 2) (#130)
    by kdog on Fri Jan 23, 2015 at 02:39:13 PM EST
    the more I'm convinced we're kindred spirits...if I had gotten into science I could be him, if he had gotten into dope he could be me;)

    Parent
    Well, definitely not any more, (none / 0) (#155)
    by Zorba on Fri Jan 23, 2015 at 03:28:22 PM EST
    at any rate.  There were some times in college, however, and a few years afterwards, when we (ahem) may or may not have sampled the "demon weed."  Plausible deniability.   ;-)
    But certainly not since we had kids, and a house and property that could possibly be confiscated by the police.

    Parent
    We barely (none / 0) (#140)
    by jbindc on Fri Jan 23, 2015 at 03:01:07 PM EST
    Turn the heat on.  Granted, we live in a condo on the 3rd floor, surrounded by others with their heat on, so it stays around 70, but we do crack the bedroom window every night, rain or shine.

    Usually we need more air conditioning!

    Parent

    "OMG Dad... (none / 0) (#134)
    by ScottW714 on Fri Jan 23, 2015 at 02:51:10 PM EST
    ...but I am freezing !!", he was a stickler for 65.

    Since here in Texas my bill is rarely over $30, it's freewheeling 73 in the day and 70 at night.

    They get us here in the summer.

    Parent

    Oh, yes (none / 0) (#191)
    by Zorba on Fri Jan 23, 2015 at 06:31:38 PM EST
    Sounds like my dad.  And his response was, "Put on a sweater."
    Of course, he was trying to raise five kids, and he worked in a factory, while my mom stayed home to raise us, so money was tight.

    Parent
    I'm on natural gas... (none / 0) (#136)
    by CST on Fri Jan 23, 2015 at 02:53:29 PM EST
    and there has been no relief - if anything there is a natural gas shortage in NE right now and it's super expensive.

    Last month I was being generous and allowing 68 - but after that heating bill, it's down to 60, there are blankets on the couch, as long as the pipes don't freeze - deal with it.

    Parent

    The first thing CNN did (none / 0) (#56)
    by Militarytracy on Thu Jan 22, 2015 at 08:46:20 PM EST
    Was produce a whole bunch of people who said President Obama had to go to the funeral.  It was unthinkable for him not to be there. It would be a horrible insult and nobody else could go as a representing figurehead. They were going to make it the New France absentee issue.  Some talking head said he had to go, and the Secret Service had this....why was my confidence not instantly bolstered?

    There is no longer a visible US military presence in Saudi Arabia because it was driving the extremists, emphasis on visible I suppose.  But that evolved because it WASN'T safe.  Another yacking head said security in Saudi Arabia was even better now than it was 10 yrs ago so Obama had no reason not to go.  I asked my spouse if he thought security in Saudi Arabia was even better and he said solemnly no.

    Then all the talk about where Obama must be in the Middle East on a specific day evaporated.  I'm thinking CNN phones were ringing, and it wasn't the common folk viewership calling.

    Parent

    Send Dubya to the funeral (5.00 / 1) (#62)
    by Mr Natural on Fri Jan 23, 2015 at 12:33:00 AM EST
    - for one last kiss.

    Parent
    Exactly! (none / 0) (#67)
    by Militarytracy on Fri Jan 23, 2015 at 06:56:36 AM EST
    Haven't we heard many times, he's practically family.  This is the perfect bipartisan moment in my mind.  I would feel well served if George W Bush went to the funeral as my representative.

    Parent
    Perfect opportunity (none / 0) (#68)
    by Slado on Fri Jan 23, 2015 at 07:02:07 AM EST
    For this president to send a message.

    We do not support SA in several areas.   Human rights and their quiet support for radical Islam just to name a few.

    This is how you let them know we expect change.  

    I hope though he just doesn't not show up and then we have the pointless debate by talking heads.

    Let's see what happens.

    Parent

    But we support Saudi Arabia in other ways (none / 0) (#69)
    by Militarytracy on Fri Jan 23, 2015 at 07:13:09 AM EST
    Very strongly, and influence is important.

    I'm not talking about snubbing them, just being a jerk.  I can't even get that to make sense in my head while we train their military here in the United States.  I'm talking about the safety and security of our existing President.  It isn't my call to make, but it certainly isnt CNNs call to make either.  I do have concerns though.

    Parent

    We do and we shouldn't (5.00 / 1) (#75)
    by Slado on Fri Jan 23, 2015 at 08:51:52 AM EST
     While using this particular ceremony to make a big statement is problematic at some point we need to change our policy with Saudi Arabia.

    The status quo will continue to lead to the spread of radical Islam. So if we really want to do something about terrorism and Radical Islam now is the time and place to start doing something about it.

    Unfortunately Obama like presidents before him he does not want to upset the diplomatic apple cart when it comes to SA so we continue with this ridiculous relationship.

    Parent

    Isolation does not accomplish (none / 0) (#77)
    by Militarytracy on Fri Jan 23, 2015 at 09:00:27 AM EST
    Anything.  And it can be argued very successfully that isolating Saudi Arabia, and not having shared interests with the rest of the world will only make the world even more unsafe.

    I bristle at the reality for women in Saudi Arabia, but isolation won't change what happens to them in that country.  Exposure moves that needle over time.  Exposure moves lots of needles :)

    Parent

    What will move the needle big time (none / 0) (#91)
    by NYShooter on Fri Jan 23, 2015 at 10:49:42 AM EST
    is Yemen falling to the terrorists.

    The Saudi's are scared out of their minds over this dangerous, new development.

    Parent

    I think Yemen is being a little hyped (none / 0) (#197)
    by Militarytracy on Sat Jan 24, 2015 at 07:20:57 AM EST
    Obama wants to force the Republicans into giving him a new AUMF.  He is not keen on the current AUMF surviving much longer.

    It is really difficult for me to feel too sorry for Saudi leaders because they are the main creators of ISIS.  They are where ISIS derived most of its past funding.  I think if they want the extremists stopped, that capability is in their hands much more so than it is in ours.  I will feel badly though for the women and children of Saudi Arabia, they did nothing to deserve war.

    Parent

    Not saying isolate them (none / 0) (#111)
    by Slado on Fri Jan 23, 2015 at 01:43:46 PM EST
    Just saying we don't need to continue to ignore their violations of human rights and the spread of radical Islam that they sponsor.

    I've never heard an American leader Republican or Democrat forcefully call them out for what they're doing on the world stage.

    Parent

    Because (none / 0) (#146)
    by Ga6thDem on Fri Jan 23, 2015 at 03:09:38 PM EST
    the Sauds have more money than God.

    Parent
    Like Goldman Sachs (none / 0) (#148)
    by jondee on Fri Jan 23, 2015 at 03:11:17 PM EST
    but with a (primitive) ethos..

    Parent
    It's kind of dangerous calling them out (none / 0) (#198)
    by Militarytracy on Sat Jan 24, 2015 at 07:36:31 AM EST
    Because they are a theocracy, and when anyone calls them out they are instantly visited with a backlash in this country and called bigots and racists.

    I think their human rights violations are often appalling, but we sure aren't in a good position to say much.  We are recent torturers, unprosecuted war crimes in everyone's faces,  if you are mentally ill in the United States you now go to jail or prison instead appropriate treatment.  It wasn't that long ago that in this country we allowed insurance companies to deny needed treatments to suffering children.  We have lost our way on human rights too.  We don't have much room to criticize others.


    Parent

    Note to Illinois Gov. Bruce Rauner: (none / 0) (#52)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Thu Jan 22, 2015 at 07:48:05 PM EST
    Generally speaking, "a superstar governor" doesn't garner only 37% of the popular vote in her last election. Just sayin'.

    questions (none / 0) (#58)
    by womanwarrior on Thu Jan 22, 2015 at 10:11:14 PM EST
    1.  So what if a lot of people emailed the NFL and said they weren't going to watch the superbowl until they clean up cheating and lying, and then, actually didn't watch the superbowl?  Would anything happen?

    2.  And if Obama goes to Saudi Arabia for the funeral, how many people will say he's a muslim?


    Silk Road Trial continues (none / 0) (#64)
    by Mr Natural on Fri Jan 23, 2015 at 01:35:28 AM EST
    Ulbricht Confessed to Running Silk Road, His College Friend Testifies

    "[In real life,] is there anyone with a clue at all?" Variety Jones asks Ulbricht.

    "There are two, but they think I sold the site and got out a month ago," Ulbricht responds. "One I'll probably never speak to again and the other I'll drift away from."

    "Clear your old trail," Variety Jones tells Ulbricht. "You are the weak link from those two prev contacts."
    It's stealing, folks! (none / 0) (#72)
    by jimakaPPJ on Fri Jan 23, 2015 at 08:17:07 AM EST
    We know that 11 out of 12 balls failed. We know that the Pats won some close games.

    Had they lost then the whole playoff picture is shuffled and a lot of performance money goes to players on other teams.

    This whole argument reminds me of two buddies "soft playing" each other in a poker tournament by one of them folding a hand that would have beat the other and allowing the other bud to win a pot from the other player(s) that he would have other wise lost and been out of the game.

    That'll get you thrown out of the poker game and maybe even banned.

    Nothing less for Brady.

    Tom Terrific join Charlie Hustle and Muscled Up Barry for lunch.

    Charlie Hustle... (none / 0) (#86)
    by kdog on Fri Jan 23, 2015 at 10:09:00 AM EST
    to my knowledge, never cheated on the field.  His only crime was betting on his own team.  

    I don't think it's fair to lump Rose in with the likes of Tom Brady.  

    May not even be fair to Bonds, who never cheated on the field, he only doped after players of lesser talent (McGwire, Sosa, Palmeiro, Brady F*ckin' Anderson) who were doping were hitting so many more homeruns than him.  His crime was keeping up with the Joneses.

    Parent

    best analogy I can think of (none / 0) (#87)
    by CST on Fri Jan 23, 2015 at 10:11:33 AM EST
    Is the corked bat.

    Although I disagree with you about the impact/significance of steroid use.

    Parent

    Reasonable position... (none / 0) (#90)
    by kdog on Fri Jan 23, 2015 at 10:33:22 AM EST
    I just don't care much about doping...the only people that should care are other players who don't want to dope.  What a grown arse man or woman ingests into their body is their business..

    Different animal than on the field cheating imo. The corked bat and scuffed ball or spit ball is the best analogy, I agree.  Which is punishable by ejection and suspension in MLB.

    We can compare Brady to Bonds if and when it comes out that other QB's were doing it and Brady only started monkeying with balls to level the playing field because opposing QB's were deflating.  When all is said and done it wouldn't surprise me that Brady is not the only one throwing an illegal ball.

    Parent

    The spitter (none / 0) (#144)
    by jondee on Fri Jan 23, 2015 at 03:04:11 PM EST
    was always a kind of recognized underground art form in pitching. Going way back. It was a head game. Batters would start seeing things that weren't there and think pitchers were loading up even when they weren't..

    How much skill does it take to dope, get an unfair leg on the competition, and then deprive some guy who's worked hard but doesn't want to dope of a livelihood?

    Parent

    One of the quirky quaint things,,, (none / 0) (#152)
    by kdog on Fri Jan 23, 2015 at 03:24:23 PM EST
    I love about baseball is the long history of cheating...the spitters, the sandpaper, the corked bats, the bennies.  The same quirky quaintness does not lend itself to football for some reason.  

    Like I said, I totally understand why players would care about doping...I don't understand why fans would care.  But don't let me not caring stop anybody else from caring.  

    Parent

    How about parents with (none / 0) (#185)
    by jondee on Fri Jan 23, 2015 at 04:46:21 PM EST
    athlete kids caring about a sports milieu that includes rampant doping?

    This isn't an unjust drug law issue we're talking about here.  

    Parent

    Doping had a huge impact in baseball. (none / 0) (#170)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Fri Jan 23, 2015 at 04:07:48 PM EST
    If you want proof, you need look no further than Barry Bonds' statistics as an active player over his entire career. Because at a time in his career during his late thirties, when those annual statistics should've started to ebb as they do for everyone else, Bonds' statistics instead rose at a rather inexplicably high rate.

    Consider that prior to age 30, when baseball players are naturally at their peak physically, Barry Bonds' very best year for slugging percentage was in 1993, when he was .677 with 46 homers at age 28. In fact, prior to age 30, Bonds only hit more than 30 home runs four times in a single season.

    But then, look at how sharply Bonds' slugging percentages had risen by the time he was between the ages of 34 and 39: .617 with 34 HR (1999); .688 with 49 HR (2000); .863 with 73 HR (2001); .799 with 46 HR (2002); .849 with 45 HR (2003) and .812 with 45 HR (2004).

    Even at age 42, Bonds still hit 28 homers and had a .565 slugging percentage, both of which were fully one-third higher than the slugging stats he enjoyed at age 21, during his rookie year with the Pittsburgh Pirates! And of the MLB record total of 762 home runs Bonds hit in his 22-year career, 41% of them came after age 35!

    That's what doping did to major league baseball, kdog. Absent that, and both Roger Maris's season home run record and Hank Aaron's career home run record would likely still be standing today.

    Aloha.

    Parent

    Giving credit (none / 0) (#189)
    by FlJoe on Fri Jan 23, 2015 at 05:20:36 PM EST
    where credit is due, the NFL was 20 years ahead of MLB in dealing with the steroid issues. Makes you wonder what the baseball poo-bahs were thinking.Just kidding,we all know what they were thinking, TV ratings! Those epic home run sprees from Bonds and the rest gave baseball the popularity boost they needed to compete with the growing popularity of NBA,NFL,NCAA and other sports. There is no way the owners were going to kill the at golden goose, they preferred to tacitly approve the use of PED's by their willful ignorance.
     

    Parent
    And in the process, ... (none / 0) (#190)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Fri Jan 23, 2015 at 06:05:30 PM EST
    ... they unfortunately turned major league baseball into a virtual freak show, in which hallowed records that had stood for decades prior to the PED era were broken repeatedly, all in the span of just a few years.

    Stats from that entire period, during which baseball's leadership just stood around with their heads up their rear ends and admired the view, should be forever marked with an asterisk.

    Aloha.

    Parent

    The thing is that it filters down (none / 0) (#192)
    by jimakaPPJ on Fri Jan 23, 2015 at 10:33:34 PM EST
    And the comparison is only that all three violated the rules. If you say its okay for Rose to gamble because he bet only on his on team you've opened the door for a marginal player, envious of the money paid to others, gets in bed with gamblers to influence results in a variety of ways.

    Bonds steroid up and took a slot that someone who followed the rules might have got there as well as the record issue. The real issue is that steroid s are bad for you and if its okay for Bond, why not a kid in high school who's desperate for some help to let him, or her for that matter, get into college.

    As for Tom Terrific I plead guilty to being biased against the Pats. But if you've ever handled a football in a game, and I know you have, you know that a soft ball let's you have a better grip and control. When he claims to know nothing I feel like the guy who was having his shoes pee'd on while being assured it was raining.

    Parent

    When it comes to balls and hot air (5.00 / 2) (#196)
    by Mordiggian 88 on Sat Jan 24, 2015 at 06:39:03 AM EST
    I can think of nobody better qualified to opine on those two subjects than you.

    Parent
    So who did it? (none / 0) (#109)
    by Uncle Chip on Fri Jan 23, 2015 at 01:42:51 PM EST
    Tom Brady's footballs were all tested BEFORE Colts game and were 'full' - then they mysteriously lost pressure

    'According to an NFL source with direct knowledge of the situation, referee Walt Anderson inspected all 24 of the Patriots' footballs with a pressure gauge supplied by the league, as well as all 24 footballs from the Colts' reports The Boston Globe.

    'All 48 footballs were found to be within the allowable range of 12.5-13.5 pounds per square inch.'

    Furthermore, when officials decided to swap out the 12 balls at the half, they grabbed the other 12 that had previously been tested, and were properly inflated.

    So then the NFL now knows that the deflation of the balls took place after Brady took possession of them.

    This whole thing is mind-boggling (none / 0) (#112)
    by Slado on Fri Jan 23, 2015 at 01:46:07 PM EST
    Someone from the patriots altered the footballs. That much is obvious.

    If they would just admit who and when the NFL could find them because that's all the rule says they have to do. We play the Super Bowl and sure there's a little bit of a tank top but we all move on.

    Now this thing is getting dragged down and it's turning into where the cover-up is bigger than the actual crime which for most football fans isn't even one.

    Both the NFL and the patriots seem to be handling this about as poorly as possible.

    Parent

    And it's bringing the likes of (none / 0) (#128)
    by Uncle Chip on Fri Jan 23, 2015 at 02:38:30 PM EST
    Dan Marino down with them.

    He claimed that he couldn't tell the difference between the inflated and underinflated football.

    So this morning the local radio station dragged two pedestrians off the street then handed them two footballs -- one inflated to 12.5 and the other underinflated at 10.5.

    It took the pedestrians all of 10 seconds to identify the underinflated one and they said it wasn't even close.

    Do the NFL and the Deflatriots all think we are that stupid???

    Parent

    Not just Dan Marino (none / 0) (#131)
    by CST on Fri Jan 23, 2015 at 02:48:49 PM EST
    The colt who intercepted the ball is now claiming he didn't notice and it wasn't him.

    The football players are overwhelmingly circling the wagon on this one.

    But it's not the Patriots bringing them down.  They are doing it to themselves - and you gotta wonder if there is a reason for that.

    It's also why I don't think the union is gonna just roll over if they pin it on Brady or another player without proof.

    Parent

    You're starting to sound a little desperate. (none / 0) (#135)
    by Anne on Fri Jan 23, 2015 at 02:51:35 PM EST
    I don't see "overwhelming" circling of the wagons, but I can understand where you'd want to.

    Parent
    Players get traded (none / 0) (#138)
    by nycstray on Fri Jan 23, 2015 at 02:57:44 PM EST
    perhaps it's about particular careers vs the whole league acting like the Pats . . .

    Also, if it is routine, maybe there should be a pressure rule change based on what the players feel is a better pressure for the balls . . . .

    Oh, and why didn't the Colts do it?

    Parent

    just saying (none / 0) (#149)
    by CST on Fri Jan 23, 2015 at 03:11:36 PM EST
    not sure how you can blame the Patriots for something Dan Marino said and saying that they are "bringing him down" - he's the one who said it - no one put a gun to his head

    I also never said it was routine - just that there's a bit of a protect our own vibe to some of the responses.  No one believes Brady wouldn't notice - so why would other players step up and say "hey we didn't notice either" - if it's not circling the wagons.

    Also - I mean Aaron Rodgers is on record liking inflated balls - maybe the Luck does too?  More likely they just follow the rules.

    Finally - maybe I do sound desperate but realistically it is what it is.  I will say I find the holier than thou attitude from a Ravens fan more than a bit grating.

    Parent

    That's pretty funny, the Ravens fan thing. (none / 0) (#158)
    by Anne on Fri Jan 23, 2015 at 03:30:17 PM EST
    If you can tell me what off-the-field behavior - I'm assuming this is the Ray-Lewis-is-a-murderer and Ray-Rice-is-a-wife-beater thing - has to do with the ACTUAL GAMES, I'm all ears.

    I guess you also missed my comment above, where I said that the whole Ray Rice situation, as to Ravens management, and what has been reported about how things were handled, took my respect for them way down, and really put me off the game this year.  

    Parent

    It has to do with the fact that it's just a game (none / 0) (#161)
    by CST on Fri Jan 23, 2015 at 03:36:13 PM EST
    What's worse - someone cheating at a game - or the fact that the game makes so much money / has so much influence that it allows people to get away with stuff that matters in real life

    And I guess you've missed my many comments about how I think Brady is full of it and lying and obviously cheated - but you still felt the need to make it personal

    Parent

    What I feel worst about - and I mean this (5.00 / 1) (#183)
    by Anne on Fri Jan 23, 2015 at 04:35:58 PM EST
    sincerely - is that you've been put in a position where you feel you need to defend these guys.  I know how that feels, and it sucks.

    I know it's just a game, and what grates on me is that it's always about the money - and how could it not be when you have men who play a freaking game for a living are being paid millions and millions of dollars.  

    And it's about Roger Goodell making 40 million a year and being about the least objective and way too conflicted/compromised "commissioner."  The Ray Rice commission/investigation wasn't put together to get to the truth, it was done to make sure none of the stink stayed on Goodell.  The connections between and among the likes of Mueller, Rooney, Mara and Goodell were ridiculous.

    What grates on me is that this will all probably get whitewashed and trivialized as if it doesn't matter.

    Apologies if it seemed like I was jabbing - having been on the receiving end of that as a Ravens fan, I should know better.

    Parent

    Marino (none / 0) (#184)
    by Uncle Chip on Fri Jan 23, 2015 at 04:45:44 PM EST
    not sure how you can blame the Patriots for something Dan Marino said

    You're kidding right????

    Marino stepped in it big time because he stepped forward to try to help Brady and Patriots pull their arses out of the mire.

     If their arses were not in the mire in the first place then he wouldn't have to try to pull them out.

    Parent

    Here's ANOTHER angle on Deflation Nation (none / 0) (#137)
    by Dadler on Fri Jan 23, 2015 at 02:57:22 PM EST
    Fumble prevention. The Patriots have fumbled at a rate FAR less than even the next closest team statistically. Now, I hadn't even thought of it, but now that I do, fumble prevention would be much greater with a flatter ball. Hugely. (LINK)

    Go Hawks!!!

    Parent
    They Don't Fumble... (none / 0) (#150)
    by ScottW714 on Fri Jan 23, 2015 at 03:11:53 PM EST
    ...because Belichick benches them and if it continues, he gets rid of them.  He does not play with fumblers.

    Parent
    All I know is (none / 0) (#154)
    by jondee on Fri Jan 23, 2015 at 03:27:18 PM EST
    if I'm Richard Sherman, I'm stocking up on some priceless, on-the-field smack-talk one liners for the Super Bowl..

    I wonder if the Hawks defenders are going to give the ball a pronounced squeeze every time they have an opportunity to touch it..

    Parent

    If I'm Richard Sherman (none / 0) (#187)
    by Uncle Chip on Fri Jan 23, 2015 at 04:55:08 PM EST
    I show up at the game with a box of air pumps and  gauges for the whole defensive squad.

    If I'm the Seahawk girls I lead off my dance routines with "Just Pump It -- Just Pump It"

    And everytime the Patriots touch the ball I ask the refs to check the air pressure.

    Parent

    All disgruntled fans (5.00 / 1) (#199)
    by FlJoe on Sat Jan 24, 2015 at 07:59:37 AM EST
    should bring a whoopie cushion. Let the stadium roar with the sound of flatulence ever time Tom Terrific touches the ball. Let the punishment fit the crime!

    Parent
    I second the motion. (none / 0) (#156)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Fri Jan 23, 2015 at 03:28:29 PM EST
    After yesterday's public farce of twin press conferences, which both channeled the spirit of Sgt. Schultz, here's hoping that the Seattle Seahawks open up a great big can of whoopass next week on the folks from New England, not unlike what they did to the Denver Broncos last year -- only this time, without giving up the opponent's only points late in the game.

    Parent
    by the numbers (none / 0) (#200)
    by Uncle Chip on Sat Jan 24, 2015 at 08:35:09 AM EST
    The orange line shows the average number of plays teams run between fumbles: The Eagles anchor the league with one fumble every 76 plays, the Patriots lead with one fumble every 187 plays. Their nearest competitor, the Houston Texans, fumble once every 140 plays.

    Those are some impressive numbers the Deflatriots have put up there.  It looks like they have been playing with deflated balls for quite some time.

    It wouldn't surprise me if Brady had a specially designed deflation ring with a needle attached that he wore on his left hand under his glove so that as he was handling the balls warming up with them he was also able to letting air out at the same time right out in the open with no one the wiser.

    That deflation ring probably sits in a locked drawer right next to his Superbowl rings in location and importance.

    Parent

    Lets Get the Facts (none / 0) (#202)
    by SomewhatChunky on Mon Jan 26, 2015 at 01:12:38 AM EST
    I find it interesting that on a defense oriented legal site most want to hand the Patriots out to dry without getting the facts.  The media hysteria reminds me of the Duke lacrosse case.  How did that turn out?

    I saw Belichick's press conference Saturday.  I believe he thinks they Patriots did nothing wrong (he's dead if he's covering anything up).  He went through how the Patriots have replicated the process they used to prepare the ball and how they found it explained the pressure drop.  Believe Belichick or not, it should be easy for a neutral 3rd party (perhaps the NFL investigative team?) to replicate the same test and then we'll know.

    The Colts balls went through a different process than the Patriots.  Not an apples-to apples comparison.  Any college science student needs you need to control independent variables in an experiment to have replicable results.

    Not to mention the fact that the "information" everyone is relying on is a series of unsourced leaks.  We all know how accurate that can be.

    The NFL has put in place a top team to investigate this.  Impressive forensic firms and Ted Wells, a nationally-known investigative attorney.  I assume they'll do a through job.  It won't be quick but they'll get there.

    Former players like Aikman and Brunell crucifying the Patriots are why there is the expression "dumb jock."  Brady can "tell" the difference?  It's an indisputable fact that footballs deflate in cold weather (plenty of really cold weather games in the NFL each year).  That's why the kickers can't kick it as far.  Have you ever heard one comment on the pressure change in a football during a game from any quarterback ever?

    Personally, I went out and bought two new footballs for my Super Bowl party. I have inflated one to 12.5 and one to 10.5 and will poll my guests to see which on is higher.  I can't tell - they are both much firmer than the one I already had.  Should be interesting.

    Thursday Open Thread | 202 comments (202 topical)