Assuming they were properly checked, of course. But I'll cede this much: Something weird happened probably while in Pats custody.
The NFL finally released a statement the other day. It didn't say much, but one of the things it did note was that the balls had been checked prior to the half time checking. So the foundation for control/responsibility is being put out. Where they go, how hard they come down is another matter, but they're putting the plate on the table.
The whole ignorance is no excuse bit will probably come back into play, I figure. Goodell's friendship with Kraft will, oddly, probably factor into the sanctions being tougher than you'd expect. No pretense of favoritism and all that.
Maybe. I don't agree with Aikman that sanctions should be harsher than those meted out against the Saints. I think infractions have to be weighed on their own merits and prior bad acts, outside of the demonstrably habitual, shouldn't enter into it, unless you have a player or organization on some sort of probationary period. Else, where do you break the line at tolling?
And the most you can say about this is there was an apparently unsuccessful attempt to gain a relatively slight advantage. It's no where near a conspiracy to routinely violate the letter and spirit of the law in a way that endangers physical safety and even careers. So he's nuts on that count, to my mind.
I'd sit Brady down for a few games early on and hit them with a draft pick loss. That would hurt, but wouldn't kill a season over nada. I don't see how Bill could be expected to know something that could isolate, again, to one or two people. Hitting him with anything would seem unfair.
Look, if they have the Pats dead to rights, at least let us know. This is bollocks.
This really bothers me with its impact and the near dead certainty that they know everything they're going to. Just say here's what will happen next year and let everyone get on with it. Because you can't penalize the Pats within the context of the Super Bowl without damaging the championship game.
Here's what I think is a very plausible scenario: A ball guy knows how #12 likes em, puts them at the very edge of what's acceptable...and then says to hell with it. Leak it a bit. The poor schmuck probably thought he was doing Brady a favor.
Wouldn't surprise me, but Tom knew, had to really given he's stated he can tell, which is the only way you can announce a preference. I think he should have had better counsel on his press conference...now if he talks to the commissioner and says it a little differently behind closed doors...as in, "Sure, I noticed the balls seemed easier to handle, but I knew they'd been tested because they always are and I didn't know anyone had monkeyed with them so as far as I knew they were just on the low side of legal".
That might get him a stern rebuke for not at least looking into it, but it would be hard to counter. I mean, who can tell the difference between the marginal push from low acceptable to low actionable?
And that's why the Pats should have hired me before anyone said anything.
Takes nothing away from the team in all three phases. Stupid, no doubt. Well meaning? I guess. But completely daft. A conspiracy? No way. As I said yesterday, I think the Pats are as interested in what happened as anyone else.
I don't think it's something that would have occurred to more than a couple of people. No, a conspiracy would be reaching. And it's really not in the league's best interest to in any way tarnish arguably the best qb of a generation (hey, I said arguably) especially over this sort of thing.
That trash talk is going to be worth two touchdowns. Watch.
I think one of two things happens. They committee Gronk and Brady tears them up throwing away from him or they single and get cut up that way.
Either way the secondary doesn't decide this one. They have to get serious pressure on Brady. So it's pass rush or bust.