Thoughts On One Of The Lamest Super Bowls Ever - And Why Tom Brady Is Not "The Greatest of All Time"

Brady hyping it up as he leads his Patsies down the field in SB LIII

I confess that, initially,  wifey and I had no intention of watching the travesty that passed for a Superbowl game yesterday.  We were still enraged at the New Orleans Saints  being denied their rightful appearance in the 'show'.  Saints' QB Drew Brees 3rd down incomplete pass ought to have been flagged for blatant, BLATANT - as in 'in your face'--  pass interference, e.g.

But wasn't as the ref  (left) just stood there gawking like a drooling, recently lobotomized zombie as Rams's cornerback Robey-Coleman committed the mugging on receiver Tommylee Lewis. Even admitting with a smirk he expected a flag but the "football gods" let him get away with it.  No the football gods did no such thing!  A cowardly, two-bit weasel of an official did that.   Many pundits have called it "mistake" or "missed" call, but it was clear to me it was plain, yellow -bellied cowardice. 

Look, when you have the Rams' gangsta corner (Nickell Robey-Coleman)  even chuckling about it in the aftermath you know it's a game time crime - that effectively decided which team got to the Super Bowl.  In this case, the inferior team, as we beheld yesterday - with an inexperienced 3rd year QB (Jared Goff) and his equally inexperienced head coach (Sean McVay) exposed as pretenders on the nation's biggest sports stage.  But more on this in a bit, as I argue the Saints would have beaten the Patsies and handed Brady his 4th SB loss - given they'd be fielding a QB every bit as talented and experienced (Brees) and a savvy coach in Sean Payton  - already a Superbowl winner too.

Clear as an asteroid crash, no doubts and no ambiguity - pass interference on a Richter '10' scale. Call the damned penalty - at least throw the red flag - and N. O. has first down on the 10 with time to run down the clock and score with a FG at least.  That gives the the NFC championship and a Super Bowl berth with two confirmed stars:  Brees vs. Brady.    But what really happened here?  The ref saw the penalty as clearly as the rest of us but opted not to call it because he feared allowing the game outcome to depend on it. His febrile brain probably rationalized along the lines of "Well, even if I don't call it the Saints' still have the chance to pull it out!"

But he didn't reckon in the devastating effect on the Saints' offense of having essentially been denied prime field position, a first down and the chance to put the game away.  Also, the defense  -  already running on fumes - would have been deflated on realizing they'd have to go back out again, and then again (in overtime) when they didn't need to.

There were a litany of pundit excuses and blather in the aftermath, all of which had Janice ready to blow her top. (She's been particularly irate about the no call, almost as if it had happened to her Ravens.) The excuses included: "the refs are only human and make errors", "the Saints had plenty of time to come back",  "the defense just didn't get it done", and (from Shannon Sharpe) "they should have just done run plays, no pass plays to run off clock".

But the dumbest ever rationalization came out of SI (Scorecard, Jan. 28-Feb. 4, p. 14) from a Michael Rosenberg who actually argued the poor referees are now like "being stuck in a marriage with 100 million angry spouses."  And why is this? Because we now have HDTV and can spot every tiny little blemish, every flaw, ever ref miscue. Yeah, right, like anyone needed HDTV to see the outrageous no call committed by the gutless zebra - more worried about the game being determined by a flag than having the right team represent the NFC in the Superbowl.

The result? A team of inferior offense was exposed on the big stage, with the young, inexperienced Goff looking like a flag football QB suddenly thrust into the tackle game ---  in the Super Bowl.  I think Janice and I counted 8 successive Ram punts before we went to get our chili and garlic bread dishes, nachos.   My argument?  Interject Brees and the Saints and you have a highly competitive Super Bowl with the Saints winning it in the end - Sean Payton having two weeks to prepare really good D-schemes.  The result? Brady is 5-4 in Super Bowls and we cease hearing this infernal nonsense about him being the "greatest quarterback ever".  NO - he is not!

How can I say this?  In a separate SI piece it was noted how the game has "evolved" in the past thirty years or so with defenses declawed and offenses now replete with star boy QBs - almost like China dolls.  They can no longer be leveled by linebackers in the style of Deacon Jones, Ray Nitschke and Lawrence Taylor. (Google Lawrence Taylor's hit on Joe Theismann.  E.g.

Lawrence Taylor Hit - YouTube

 
In other words, Brady's SB wins must be taken in the context of the defensive rules that have been essentially neutered.  As even one SI piece admitted (as the likely consequence if the same NFL defenses existed now as 30 years ago): "Would you really want backup quarterbacks like Deshon Kizer getting more game time than stars like Tom Brady, Aaron Rogers or Drew Brees.?  

Well no, but we would want more honesty in acknowledging that today's star QBs play in a weakened defensive rules era - designed to highlight offense and the passing game.  That means the QBs of old - like Joe Montana and Terry Bradshaw - who had to play against the likes of Lawrence Taylor or Mike Singletary, merit vastly more consideration in the G.O.A.T game.    Indeed, by my reckoning, both Bradshaw and Montana (with 4-0 SB records) merit more consideration as G.O.A.T. than Brady - who'd be 5-4 had the Patriots played the Saints instead of the LA Shams.

The presence of the Saints would also have meant a much more competitive and entertaining game as opposed to the schlock that passed for a Superbowl yesterday.   At least in New Orleans they could properly celebrate in their own way knowing deep down they were the rightful winners, and the NFC team that played were a bunch of pretenders dubbed the "Shams" by N.O fans.  

 Lastly. even if the Saints had played the Patsies and somehow lost that would not mean Brady is the "greatest of all time".  As noted in a piece in today's USAToday,

https://ftw.usatoday.com/2019/02/super-bowl-bill-belichick-mvp-patriots

 the game showed Bellichick never needed Brady to win a Super Bowl and indeed may not have needed Brady to win any. That means that while Bellichick may well be the "greatest NFL coach of all time",  Tom Brady is not the greatest QB.  If he was, he'd be indispensable to Bellichick's  (and offensive coordinator Josh McDonald's) offensive plans.

See also:

Super Bowl ratings plummet as Who Dats strike back

The NFL got the matchup they wanted -- and the game got the viewership Saints fans think it deserved.

And:
Saints would’ve spiced up bland Super Bowl 53             

Brady Needs to Fall On His Sword - For the Good of the Game - And Himself

The game of football cannot be exceeded in importance by one player or one team. That includes prima donna QB Tom Brady, and his New England Patriots.

Sports Illustrated columnist Phil Taylor and I differ in only one respect in the matter of Tom Brady and  deflategate, he believes deflategate is "nonsense" and I don't. I believe fooling around with the rules- no matter what the hell they are- threatens the integrity of the game. And the fact remains, those balls were fiddled with. Taylor can believe it or not.

On the other hand, I agree with Taylor that - that no matter what one thinks - it's time Brady and the Patsies put the whole issue behind them with Brady "falling on his sword". Brady, owner Robert Kraft and the other Pats' bozos have had their histrionics and now it's time to get serious. As Taylor put it (SI, Aug. 10, p. 100):

"There is only one man who can put an end to the madness before it goes any further:Brady. He should call a press conference and announce he is accepting the suspension with no further appeal.  He can make it clear that this is not an admission of guilt, just an effort to end the matter in the best interest of the sport and before it crowds the courts. It would be his movie star moment ....and create a clip of video that would reflect far better on him than the press conference he had when the story broke, when he strained credibility as if he barely knew what a football was...."

Taylor goes on to aver that accepting his 4 game suspension sentence - as opposed to whining about it and pursuing a court case- would redound to his benefit especially as his "golden boy" image has been badly scuffed.  And yeah, while some (including me) would "see it as a tacit admission of guilt" the "weary public would surely give Brady points for ....putting this story out of its misery."

Maybe. But I still believe the story had value, in terms of exposing the skein of cheating woven into the fabric of the country - which not only involves deflated footballs, but tax cheats - using gimmicks to get an edge, as well as student cheats who try to game tests to get an edge up - or attempt to terrorize instructors with poor evaluations.

The deflategate story then put an urgently needed focus directly on ethics-related issues and the notion that "the ends justifies the means.". While some dismiss it all as "entertainment"  or "nonsense" - these are takes of those who probably lack any discerning judgment or ethical radar, period. They are so inured to PR and media junk food, they are no longer able to discern flatulence from significance. Sad. But note this: if we disallow our most cherished sports and games adhering to principles or honor, why should we demand any principle or honor in regular life?

Hell, assassinations of heads of state are fine and dandy so are films depicting them, just don't do any to our guys! CIA torture?  No biggie. Hacking into another nation's computers to gain a spy edge? No biggie again, it's all good!  Gives us an edge so what's wrong with that? Once the small transgressions are permitted, all others can follow with even fewer apologias.

Those who treat deflategate as trivial fail to grasp that it's not the magnitude of the infraction  but the ethical principle that inveighs against doing it - then using specious justifications.

A Portrait of 3 Reprobates: Walter Palmer, Tom Brady & Mike Huckabee

A trio of unrepentant slimeballs: Walter Palmer (top left) with a lion he killed in 2008, cell phone evidence destroyer Tom Brady and hate inciter Mike Huckabee.

I decided that rather than deal separately with the reprobates Tom Brady and Walter Palmer (now wanted in Zimbabwe for murdering Cecil the Lion) I'd treat them alongside the rat's ass fool and Über reprobate Mike Huckabee, to show the singular moral blindness that applies to all three. 

I already ripped into Huckabee in an earlier post, e.g.
http://brane-space.blogspot.com/2015/07/mike-huckabee-exposes-himself-as.html

So will not overly dwell on his moral dysfunction seen through the lens of his vicious conflation of the Iran nuke deal with  the Auschwitz ovens.  In the end each of these characters exhibits a separate "lens", for lack of a better term, by which their lack of principled ethics can be seen.

Suffice it to say, all truly principled people (whether conservative or other)  have come out to thrash Huckabee's rhetorical misfire, including the Jewish Anti-Defamation League, the Israeli Ambassador to the U.S. and Richard Haas, President of the Council of Foreign Relations - who observed how it "demeaned" the whole  level of the Iran debate. All three sources emphasized how such calculated, incendiary rhetoric undermined the credibility of those who invoked it - or supported it.  As Haas pointed out, the Holocaust was "a one of a kind historical atrocity" (in terms of magnitude)  and so to invoke any measure of similar outrage at common diplomacy - to conflate it with this singular atrocity-  was to automatically lose the argument.  This Huckabee has done as well as those yapping in his clueless echo chamber.

Even Joe Scarborough, long time conservative mouthpiece on 'Morning Joe' - and vociferous opponent of the Iran nuclear deal -  bemoaned (yesterday morning)  how Huckabee had "cheapened the debate" to below the lowest common denominator. As Scarborough said, "the difference between marching Jews into ovens and negotiating a bad deal is so enormous it's obvious the comments were crass and political".

Mike Barnacle also asserted how the comments "cheapened the debate and also cheapened history in regard to the  purpose for which they were used." That is, for the purpose of political self-promotion. In effect, Huckabee's outrageous "oven" remarks amounted to an insult to all those who perished in Auschwtiz' gas chambers. They'd literally be turning over in their graves with the realization they were being used as rhetorical pawns in a political campaign.

Meanwhile, one of Joe's guests (Sam Stein)  exposed Huckabee as a bald faced hypocrite given he had called for the same balanced measures back in 2008, to bring Iran's nuke aspirations under control. The best ending sound bite from Joe Scarborough?

"Republicans need to be aware that these comments will stay with them"

True, and let's hope that Huck's stupidity sinks them all, especially given 'the Donald' has also chimed in now to support him - disclosing he really is as nutso as many of his earlier comments make him out to be - especially the ones on the Mexicans being "rapists and murderers".


Then there is Bloomington, Minnesota dentist Walter Palmer, currently with less value than the Donald's lickspittle after this jackal (as Jimmy Kimmel called him) lured a majestic and beloved Lion named "Cecil" outside of his game preserve to shoot him on a nearby farm with bow and arrow. Cecil suffered for 40 hours before the vermin pseudo-hunter tracked him down and finished him off - cutting off the beast's head, skinning him and allowing the carcass to rot in the sun.

 The turd is now paying for his crime and being slimed across the internet, as on YELP, where the hate is hot and deep, as well as death threats  e.g.

http://www.yelp.com/biz_photos/river-bluff-dental-bloomington?start=0

Of course, while a bit of net hate can have its therapeutic value, I don't approve of death threats, any more than I did when they were launched against my then pastor brother ('Pastor Mike') after he proposed a "National Atheist Registry".  But there is simply no excuse  for threats,  no matter how enraged one might be at a person's actions and/or proposals.

Anyway, Palmer the big, bad Bwana hunter soon became the hunted,  when  the UK Telegraph identified him as the poacher who  killed Cecil the Lion in Zimbabwe in early July. The Internet, as is typical when its collective ire has been aroused,  responded with such ferocity you'd have thought Cecil was a personal pet of millions. Brutal reviews of Palmer's dental practice and a cavalcade of online threats followed - many of which can be seen at the highlighted links.  (Eventually forcing Palmer to shutter his dental office and go into hiding as protesters post 'Coward!' and 'Killer!' signs on his doors.)

Within an hour of the Telegraph’s report Tuesday, death threats appeared on Twitter and, soon after, on a new Facebook page called "Shame Lion Killer Dr. Walter Palmer and River Bluff Dental," which had more than 1,000 likes as of early Tuesday afternoon. Palmer's name trended worldwide on Twitter, and many of the posts on Facebook are calling for him to be held accountable and imprisoned.

Shamed at being exposed, Palmer took to social media in an attempt to placate the  Internet haters and scribbled:

"In early July, I was in Zimbabwe on a bow hunting trip for big game. I hired several professional guides and they secured all proper permits. To my knowledge, everything about this trip was legal and properly handled and conducted.

"I had no idea that the lion I took was a known, local favorite, was collared and part of a study until the end of the hunt. I relied on the expertise of my local professional guides to ensure a legal hunt. 

"I have not been contacted by authorities in Zimbabwe or in the U.S. about this situation, but will assist them in any inquiries they may have.
"Again, I deeply regret that my pursuit of an activity I love and practice responsibly and legally resulted in the taking of this lion."

 The problem is that the account given here simply isn't credible. As one animal sanctuary keeper and conservationist explained on a CBS News segment, everyone within 1,000 miles of Zimbabwe knew of Cecil's iconic heritage and reputation, and no "guides" could possibly have existed who could claim they were ignorant. It didn't add up.  Worse for Palmer, he'd  already been caught using a similar modus operandi in Wisconsin in luring a black bear to his lair and slaughtering him.

So yeah, Walter can piss and moan all he wants but he's guilty as hell.

Then there is that rascal Brady, who had to face a ten hour appeal with NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell, at which time it finally came out he destroyed his cell phone on the same day he was to face investigator Ted Wells. Goodell, no fool, saw this as yet another piece of evidence pointing to Brady's guilt.

As CBS commentator James Brown pointed out:

"Even though he knew investigators wanted emails and texts from his cell phone, Tom Brady ordered his assistant to destroy it. Something he says he does whenever he gets a new one. Brady had the phone for just four months at that point and Roger Goodell pointedly noted that Brady previous cell phone was still around.

The Commissioner concluded Brady 'made a deliberate effort to ensure the investigators would never have access to information that he had been asked to produce."

As one legal commentator (Nancy Armor) put it, after noting Brady had 10,000 text messages on the phone:

"If you're not guilty, if you had no knowledge and had no role in this then why would you destroy your cell phone? "

Goodell himself added that scientific tests showed the balls did not deflate from natural causes. He added Brady's 4 game suspension was justified because "he was an active participant to tamper with the game balls."

Of course, Brady's lapdog agent Don Yee called the Goodell appeal process a "sham" and asserted Brady was "completely transparent" - which is total bollocks that only a Patsie homer could believe. (Or to quote Boston Globe sports columnist Dan Shaughnessy, "It’s time for local loyalists to parachute down from Planet Patriot and get in touch with reality.".) The biggest joke is Yee calling it "junk science" - based on an "alternative study" by economists at the American Enterprise Institute - when no less a REAL science stalwart than Bill Nye already demonstrated how Bellichick's original theory was full of hot air. No pun intended!  I think Yee needs a crash course in physics.

But as Armor pointed out: "It's not the crime itself, it's the cover up".  Brady could have gotten off with just a slap on the wrist, if he'd just 'fessed up, but he, Robert Kraft and the other Patsy assholes were too damned arrogant and believed they were above the law. Bad mistake.

NY Times sports columnist Bill Rhoden appearing on CBS yesterday morning was even more blunt noting how this "completely changes his legacy". As he put it:

"Once you destroy evidence, in any investigation, I don't care where you are, you cannot do this. This is not about football any more, this is almost borderline criminality. Frankly, it even surprises me this guy's still playing.

If I found out this guy destroyed evidence, I'd cut him. I mean he's disrespecting attorneys, disrespecting the league, he's disrespecting the game. He's basically saying 'I'm larger than the game'. It's one thing to tamper with a football, it's another to tamper with evidence."

Rhoden's take, while vehement, is the ethically correct one - as opposed to bloviators (i.e. on ESPN) who mocked the seriousness based on the original ball deflations. After all, the Patriots did blow out the Colts so what's the big deal? The "big deal" is it doesn't matter if the score was 44-7, 10-7, or 250-3, it was the attempted gaming of the system by breaking the rules.  And as I noted in a post earlier this year, if you endorse cheating of any magnitude you will endorse its use in many others.


What is the unifying moral deficit underlying all of these cases? I believe it is flouting the basic cornerstone principle that "the ends never justifies the means".

In Huckabee's case, he became convinced that in order for him to compete in the presidential polls he had to make an outrageous, slanderous statement comparing Obama to Hitler, and Obama's peace plan to marching Jews to ovens.  In so doing, he may have garnered attention and an added point in the latest Marist poll-  but lost whatever 'soul' he had.

Worse, he revealed himself as the most reviled form of politician:  one who will spew any venomous, inflammatory vitriol in order to incite the hotheads who perpetually feed on indignation and anger. Knowing he'd draw them in just as moths to a flame, but not so much light emitted here as incendiary rhetoric that demeans and distorts political debate - with potential poll numbers purchased by cynical manipulation.

In Palmer's case, he became convinced from decades ago the only way to become the big game hunter he fancied was to lure majestic animals to a place outside their protected environments  and then kill them in a canned "turkey shoot" setup.   Whereas a real man would go toe to toe with a predator and not try to bag or kill endangered species, and certainly not take out iconic members of a species like Cecil.

But Palmer, who fancied himself a macho hunter because he could lure big cats or other predators into a trap - was really a coward. In many ways his tactics reminded me of former NFL safety Darren Sharper's who had to resort to putting pills in women's drinks to induce them to have sexual relations with him. He didn't have the manly courage to enter into a conscious relationship to fulfil the sexual ends and face the possible consequence of rejection.

And before we get too carried away by Palmer's transgressions, let's bear in mind there are dozens of rich guy pseudo-hunters just like him still out there, who - according to stats released last night on the news- bag 600-800 lions a year. They pay $50,000 each for a lion, for example, which basically entails setting the lion up for a kill that is near 100 percent assured.  They call this "hunting" but it's a mockery of actual hunting. We need to ferret out these other degenerates and shame them like millions have Walter Palmer.

Then there is Tom Brady, who became fully convinced he was bigger than the game itself, so could justify the ends of trying to spare his reputation and that of his team by using the means of destroying his cell phone - and all the evidence on it.  An act of bankrupt morality which only ensured his rep is tarnished in perpetuity.

As I said, a trio of slime balls.

See also:

https://www.bostonglobe.com/sports/2015/07/28/shaughnessy/T32IKjU6IVYjEWml2YfrMI/story.html

And:

http://www.salon.com/2015/07/30/fox_news_and_the_batsht_bump_trump_huckabee_and_the_real_reason_why_the_gop_is_a_national_punch_line/

And:

http://www.salon.com/2015/07/30/the_world_of_trophy_hunting_cecil_the_lions_killing_shines_a_light_on_a_business_rife_with_unscrupulous_conduct/

Tom Brady's Deflategate Punishment? Eight Game Suspension - No Pay!

New England Patriots' "golden boy" Tom Brady, was like a king holding court at Salem State University - the audience full of mindless Patsy homers  and groupies. Typical reactions from these goobers: "He did nothing wrong!" and "This is a conspiracy between the NFL and the Colts!" Right, well hopefully most of those making such claims haven't received degrees.

Alas, the stage setting was not conducive to hard questions by interviewer Jim Gray (who acknowledged the event was scheduled before the Ted Wells report came out), what with random shouts of "We love ya Tommy!" and "We know you're innocent!" ringing out. But Gray, to his credit, at least tried his best.

He noted "there is an in the elephant room " - to which Brady popped, "Where?" And Gray retorted, "You may be the only one that doesn't see it."

When Gray added "You're in the news here, and the Ted Wells report has just been released", the crowd delivered a trademark chorus of homer-style  boos -  acknowledging for any doubters that they were dedicated to denial. Hear no evil, see no evil, and acknowledge no evil.

When Gray asked Brady for his reaction to the report, numerous bobble-headed mutts yelped "Who cares?" laced with other epithets mainly preceded by Fs. Meanwhile, Brady flashed his typical shit-eating grin and said "See,  I can't usually say those things".

When he finally settled down he said "I don't have any reaction since it's only been thirty hours and I haven't had a chance to digest it fully. But when I do I'll be sure to get back to you."

Great escape hatch!  But most of us aren't buying.

One of the Homer Boston Globe sports writers added to those egregious takes, telling anchor Chris Hayes: "Most of us think this is the greatest story about nothing ever."

Well, of course they would, the same as Warren Commission diehard groupies would be convinced any evidence for conspiracy in the Kennedy assassination is the "greatest story about nothing ever".

Why would they believe otherwise with luminaries like Vince Bugliosi and Gerald Posner brainwashing them that way?

But let's return to deflategate. As I noted in a Jan. 22 blog post, this dismissive attitude uncovers an ethical blind spot in too many who also spout nonsense such as:

Cripes! Big deal! The Patriots killed them 45 to 7 ! So without the tampering maybe it would have been 45-14. Who cares?".

Which totally misses the central point:  cheating to gain an unfair advantage irrespective of the outcome, while destroying the integrity of the game itself - risking fan alienation similar to the PED effects in major league baseball.   It doesn't matter if the final score was 70-7 or even  200-7, it is the principle  and the intention that we are about here.  Did it break a rule or not? If it did it demands a sanction.

Other claims aggregate around the:  "It was just gamesmanship,  not cheating" trope. Somehow merely changing the word to a euphemism renders the nefarious act innocuous.  The cheaters thereby become merely winners in disguise if they're  prepared to use their talents in innovative ways.

Those who peddle the gamesmanship meme are so inured to PR and media junk food, they are no longer able to discern flatulence from significance. They can no longer see principles - other than as expedient hostages to money and profits that accumulate for "winners".  No thought of how the integrity of the game  has been seriously been eroded. Further, what's the message to students, for example?  That cheating is ok just as long as they think of it as "gamesmanship".  I can take this illegal calculator into my trig class when it is explicitly forbidden.

"I ain't cheatin' just gamin' the system!"

This brings us to the penalty the NFL ought to level on Brady after finding, via the Wells report, that he "probably knew about the deflated footballs".  One sportscaster interviewed last week on CBS Early Show didn't mince words, asserting a mere fine would be a joke. "He could pay a hundred thousand fine right out of his pocket!" 

He stated that a suspension would be the only penalty worth anything, and indicated all eyes will be on the NFL to see whether they treat if flippantly - like Brady and his Patsy homers at Salem State - or seriously as a threat to the game's integrity.

What magnitude of suspension? He said "eight games" or half the season, with which I agree.  ESPN's Keith Olbermann didn't hold back while airing his grievances against Tom Brady last Thursday, saying the Super Bowl-winning quarterback should be suspended a year for his role in Deflategate and his mishandling of the scandal.

"They need to suspend Tom Brady for a year -- one day for the inflation, 364 days for everything else," he said in his commentary during his ESPN2 program. "Everything else" would encompass Brady's refusal to turn over emails, text messages, as well as his flippant takes including before (media day)  and after the SuperBowl.

Olbermann earlier zeroed in on the "innocent until proven guilty" defense of Brady's father:

"In a courtroom you're innocent until proven guilty. Everywhere else, like in a private company like the National Football League, or even in a government, 'probable' is plenty. Ask Richard Nixon. Ask Dan Rather. Ask Pete Rose."

Bingo! 

But will the NFL deliver a serious punishment, even after venerable Dolphins' coach Don Shula weighed in on how bad the deflategate  perfidy was - saying his perfect 17-0  (1972) team never had to resort to such hijinks?

I don't know. But whether that happens or not, New England's legacy will be tainted as will Tom Brady's - the same way Barry Bonds' legacy has been. (With an asterisk * beside his home run record).   This is the lesson that needs to be brought home to the kids who follow football, as well as other sports. 

Cheating never pays!

NE Cheating Patsies Should Pay (Dearly!) For Their Deflated Ball Strategy

Tom Brady didn't need deflated balls to beat Tim Tebow and the Broncos in December, 2011.

Overshadowing the Super Bowl itself-  now ten days away - is a new NE  Patriots' cheating controversy. This came to light in the wake of the AFC Championship game in which the Patsies blew out Indy 45- 7. Since then, an ESPN investigation (citing anonymous sources) exposed that the NFL has  found that 11 of 12 footballs used by  these cheaters were deflated in the AFC Championship game. (The NFL still hasn't concluded its own investigation.)

What do we mean here?

A deflated football is a helluva lot easier to handle - by QBs or receivers- in the rain or slippery conditions, as existed in Foxborough last Sunday. According to league rules, two hours before game time  the footballs (12 for each  team),   are measured and weighed by game officials to meet NFL specs-  this is indicated by being marked with the ref's signature.

Ten minutes before the game the balls are given to ball runners for each team. So how could ball deflation occur with such a small window of time?

CBS' Ron Mott demonstrated how last night on a CBS Evening News segment. As he noted - pulling out a small pump needle:

"In just a few seconds someone using a pump needle like this can insert it into the ball and release two or three pounds of pressure. Enough to gain an edge even if it's barely noticeable. "

NFL standards require pressures from 12.5  to 13.5 pounds per square inch for each football.  The ESPN source cites 2 psi less for 11 of the 12 Patriots' balls.

According to NFL rules:

"If any individual alters the footballs he will face discipline including a fine of $25,000"

But for many of us, especially after the earlier NE "Spygate" scandal, this is less than a slap on the wrist.

Echoing many sentiments, Mike Lupica of the NY Daily News Sports - noted last night:

"I believe a suspension of the head coach might be in play depending on what kind of proof the NFL has and what kind of chain of custody they find on these stupid footballs."

This is a sentiment echoed by Gregg Doyel of The Indianapolis  Star, e.g.

http://www.indystar.com/story/sports/2015/01/21/doyel-patriots-have-to-be-at-super-bowl-not-belichick/22118459/

What should happen? In the ideal universe and in a nation of moral rectitude - with its sports' standards to match - the Patsies would be summarily "DQ'd" from the Super Bowl. The stupid, useless 'Pro Bowl' scheduled for Sunday in AZ would be replaced by a special playoff round with the two NE- victimized teams, Baltimore and Indy, playing for the Patsies' place, to go against Seattle.

But in the real world that will never happen, and it's even unlikely Bellichick will be suspended. Indeed, many otherwise sober observers are treating it all as a big joke. NE QB Brady himself laughed it all off on a radio talk show interview and so did ex-sub par QB Matt Leinart who offered: "This is a joke, all teams fiddle with footballs". Which is kind of like saying in response to massive tax cheating, "this is a joke all taxpayers cheat".   Which is bollocks because many of us don't, believing paying taxes is an honor and helps the country pay its freight.

But this uncovers the ethical blind spot in many who also spout nonsense such as:

"Cripes! Big deal! The Patriots killed them 45 to 7 ! So without the tampering maybe it would have been 45-14. Who cares?".

Which totally misses the central point:  cheating to gain an unfair advantage irrespective of the outcome, while destroying the integrity of the game itself - risking fan alienation similar to the PED effects in major league baseball. .  It doesn't matter if the final score was 70-7 or even  100-7, it is the principle  and the intention that we are about here. That so many Americans seem to have this ethical blind spot is disturbing and suggests the recent polls with a majority seeing no problem with CIA torture are no fluke.

Some also dismiss it all as "entertainment" which is the take of a person who probably lacks any discerning judgment or ethical radar, period. They are so inured to PR and media junk food, they are no longer able to discern flatulence from significance. Sad. But note this: if we disallow our most cherished sports and games adhering to principle or honor, why should we demand any principle or honor in regular life?

Hell, assassinations of heads of state are fine and dandy so are films depicting them, just don't do any to our guys! CIA torture?  No biggie. Rectally excavating a prisoner is just a "little discomfort" to use Dick Cheney's parlance. Hacking into another nation's computers to gain a spy edge? No biggie again, it's all good! 

Once the small transgressions are permitted, all others can follow with even fewer apologias.

What would my sanction be? Well, I'd disallow ALL NE draft picks for this year. Zero.  None. Nada. Suck it up, cheaters.

But whether that happens or not, New England's legacy will be tainted, and alas, so also will this year's Super Bowl given the Pats will be involved in it.

Maybe it's just as well the Pack won't be a part of this year's  sorry spectacle.

Denver Broncos Want No NE Fan "Chowderheads" In Their Stadium - But It Won't Matter!

“No offense to proper Bostonians or any wicked arrogant fan of the New England Patriots. But the Broncos do NOT want you here in Denver. The local NFL franchise did not give blood, sweat and tears all season long to surrender the home field advantage to an invasion of loudmouths from New England. No Chowderheads allowed!"- Mark Kiszla, 'Go HOME, Chowderheads!', Denver Post, Jan. 17 column

Yes, Kiszla and other promoters of the Denver Broncos are on their high horses again. And we ain't talking MJ.  They believe they can effectively keep all NE fans out of Sports Authority Field tomorrow afternoon so there will be no competitive screams (or colors) to rival the Denver fans'.  This means their boys will have the optimum chance to win with a real "home field advantage", or so they believe.

Why this animus to opponent fans in their stadium? According to one Bronco quoted by Kiszla:

"Our fans remember what happened during the last AFC championship in Denver and they didn't like it".

He was referring to the Denver- Pittsburgh AFC 2006 face off when Broncos' players arrived at their stadium to find thousands of yellow "terrible towels" waving- leaving them to wonder where the Denver fans were.  According to former Denver player John Lynch, who was on the 2006 team:

"It was brutal. I'll never forget walking out into the stadium with Champ (Bailey) as we were going out for DB drills early, before the game. We both looked at each other and said: 'What is this?' The problem with the Pittsburgh fans was the Terrible Towels were so visible, so it felt like there were more Steelers fans than Broncos fans. You shouldn't let that affect you but it affected us....and the Steelers got off to a hot start.

We let a great opportunity go. It was a sickening feeling and I think people in the Denver Broncos' organization said: 'We can never let this happen again'"

The upshot,  according to Kiszla, was a 24-3 Steelers' lead at half time from which Denver never recovered .

The hidden reason, buried in another paragraph, is that Denver fans were "too subdued" in their purchase of championship tickets, leaving 30 % unsold just days before - which the Steelers' fans bought up. Kiszla notes this won't happen this time because under the new Bronco dictates, orders can only processed to zip codes in the Mountain West, Massachusetts zips are disallowed. Thus, according to Kiz, all 2,800 available tickets went to buyers in Bronco country.

This means, theoretically, there should be no Patriots' fans in the stands. Of course, this overlooks the money-greed dynamic present in every town's fans, so the ability to sell tickets over eBay or Craigslist remains. So I suspect enough "chowderheads" will show up to at least be heard, maybe part of the time.

In the end, it won't matter. The Broncos are hobbled by having lost star corner Chris Harris Jr. to an ACL injury, after having already lost  LB Von Miller. As SI has noted, this means the Broncos D will struggle to generate pressure. Add on to that NE RB LeGarrette Blount, who doesn't so much run through D-lines as plow through them, and the Pats have the formidable means to dominate time of possession and keep Manning off the field. Finally, let us recall that Brady is 7-0 vs. Jack del Rio coached defenses. Each time he faces them he puts on a QB clinic.

People - superficial observers - say that the Chargers running game didn't succeed  last week in Denver,  so why should New England's now? But they forget that the Chargers' top RB, Ryan Matthews, was only at half strength - having been injured the week before in Cincinnati. This time, the Pats bring a full deck for their running game and Bellichick won't let them be stopped.

Even if the Broncos manage to keep every last NE fan out of their stadium it won't matter in the end:

Patriots 31  Broncos 20


P.S. Don't look for Manning's "OMAHA!" callout  to be used more than once, if at all. It was designed to provoke SD defensive lineman into false starts - but it won't work against the Pats. All those who plunked down $100 for "OMAHA!" tees, sorry 'bout that!

-------------------------
Footnote: 1/ 20

Arrrgh! YES! Yes, I was wrong on both counts: The Ponies managed to take the game (after Wes Welker took out Patriots' D-back Aqib Talib, thereby assuring Manning would have a field day, and Manning also barked 'Omaha!" at least 25 times.  I only later discovered corporate sponsors in Omaha  (of Manning's charity) had planned to donate in proportion to how many times he yelped 'Omaha'. So naturally, he'd try to help his own charity.

Anyway, let the ponies enjoy their brief time as champs. It won't be so easy against the No. 1 defense in the NFL - the Seahawks. As we know great SB D's beat great O's. Wanna see the script? Look at Superbowl XIX!

Pats Dispatch Tebow - Hopefully No More "Tebowing" in Our NFL Future!

 Tim Tebow is now gone from the NFL ranks, at least for now - and let us hope forever. While his Xtianoid groupies may be saddened they'll see no more "Tebowing" - the rest of us are delighted. We had had enough of his sanctimony, and also hypocrisy - thanking the Lord and praising him after a 'W' - but delivering nary a tweet after a loss. What? "Satan" caused your losses?

Robert Kraft, NE Patsies'  owner explained yesterday on CBS Early Show why the kid's time was up. He was diplomatic saying: "Well, we've only really ever used two quarterbacks and we already have them." But the real reason as anyone who's into football knows, is that Tebow - aside from some option tricks- didn't have the ball skills to consistently beat NFL secondaries ....or D-linemen.

The Patriots taking Tebow in the first place was somewhat astonishing, given that back in December, 2011 they laid on a big time butt whuppin'. See the image below of one of the many sacks Tebow took at the Pats' hands:


As I wrote on a blog post back then:

"Patriots 41, Broncos, 23. Praise the Lord and pass the humble pie!"

And recall Dan Shaughnessy's (of The Boston Globe's)  remarks the next day:

"A simplistic, throw-back offense isn't enough to exchange scores or keep pace against Patriots quarterback Tom Brady , a thoroughly 21st century man.
Sorry, Tim Tebow. Your time never arrived."

Indeed! Meanwhile, Tom Brady - a real QB - sadistically picked apart an outmanned Broncos' secondary - almost like a necrotic kid ripping off a fly's wings and legs one by one. Brady completed 23 of 34 for 320 yards, two touchdowns and zero interceptions. And he had a 1-yard rushing touchdown, followed by a menacing spike, in the second quarter that put the Pats up, 24-16 after they had once trailed, 16-7.

At the point of that spike, Brady was heard by many fans in the stadium to scream:

"Take that! You Tebow Maniacs!"

Here he is in mid-Yell:

Let's also get straight that many Denver Broncos' fans were themselves embarrassed by the overt, holier-than-thou baloney coming from Tebow. It so turned some fans off that they actually took the time to pen letters to the Denver Post, averring they were changing allegiance - to the Kansas City Chiefs!

Now, that is a pretty gross downer and state of disappointment. Of course, meanwhile, the Colorado Christians were pumping Tebow's saintliness until it stuck in just about every normal person's craw. Thankfully, at the end of the 2011 season, Tebow was sent packing to the Jets, where he became a media darling of the dumbo set, but never really delivered more than a few offensive tricks as the Jests slid back.

Again, it was strange and odd beyond belief the Pats took Tebow, given what they exposed of his weaknesses two years back. One can only surmise that Bill Belichick thought he could somehow remake the guy into a real pocket passer - but in practices likely discovered it was a lost cause.

A Tom Brady, Joe Flacco or Aaron Rodgers, he ain't.

We do wish Tim well, and hey - perhaps a college coaching job or some other similar gig (HS coach in Gainesville, FL) is in his future. But I am fairly certain no other NFL team will pick him up before the season begins - which is tomorrow,  but technically not until Sunday when most teams face off. While Tebow did win the Heisman, his tricks simply weren't adequate to spell success in the harder hitting, more remorseless NFL. When one of is glorifiers writes his autobiography that's what they ought to keep in mind.