Roger Goodell’s Impossible Tom Brady Conundrum
Say what you’d like about “sources” and “leaks”, but at least they made a full day of following Tom Brady’s DeflateGate appeal a lot more entertaining yesterday.
As Tuesday wound into the late evening hours, the only shred of hope to be found for Patriots fans was Brady’s attorney and noted Rebel Scum of the NFL Jeffrey Kessler’s comments to the press, which consisted of “I think we put in a very compelling case”, per ProFootballTalk. A college sophomore walking out of a Calculus final exam could put together a more informative answer than that.
Today, though, we have a little more to work with, again courtesy of Mike Florio at ProFootballTalk:
“Per a league source, Brady simply reiterated his denial regarding any involvement in or knowledge of whatever it was that John Jastremski and Jim McNally may have been doing with the team’s footballs. When pressed on certain facts relating to Brady’s potential knowledge or involvement, the answers were regarded by some in the room (i.e., some who aren’t paid to exonerate Brady) as not entirely credible.
Apparently, Brady’s case hinged heavily on attacking the science, under the broader umbrella of taking the position that: (1) he didn’t do anything wrong; and (2) Ted Wells can’t prove that Brady did. The question then becomes whether the NFL is willing to throw out the entire Wells report based on the flaws in the science (and the science is definitely flawed), or whether the NFL continues to be troubled by the Jastremski-McNally exchanges and Brady’s answers to questions about his interactions with either or both of them.”
Welp.
In addition to that, though, Florio’s next couple thoughts outline what some people have seen as inevitable for months now: Roger Goodell, regardless of the decision he makes, has a lower chance of making a choice that’s both fair and leaves everyone happy than Peyton Manning does of not saving his worst game of the year for the playoffs.
Toss in the old cliché that a good compromise leaves everyone upset, and that’s what this decision boils down to. The Commissioner can’t exonerate Brady, Florio says, because “…the Commissioner nearly lost his job last year by not going far enough in disciplining a player. When the Commissioner goes too far, eventually having his decisions overturned by some independent party, he suffers little or no PR fallout.”
This is true.
Florio’s last paragraph is where he really seems to be simultaneously exasperated, and resigned to Brady’s suspension staying put:
“With one path jeopardizing his job and the other path not triggering even a peep of substantial criticism, the smart play for Goodell will always be to uphold a suspension and let the player and his union fight for further reduction or outright elimination of it in court. And that’s the kind of inherent conflict that arguably makes Goodell unfit to be the final decision-maker in any of these cases.”
(file under: “Thank you, Captain Obvious”)
The ultimate irony here, for Patriots fans, is that literally nothing in this entire travashamockery (travesty+sham+mockery) has made a single lick of sense so far, so a reaction from the NFL that doesn’t fit Mike Florio or anyone else with a functioning brain’s logic might be the only hope New England fans have left.
We’ll have more news on this as it develops.
As for right now, I’m going to go make a sandwich.