05-12-2015, 09:06 AM
I'm certainly going to be in the minority here, but I'll throw it out there.
I think that the suspension is silly. I also think that this idea that the Patriots got some sort of significant advantage from the under-inflated balls is silly. They steamrolled the Colts in the second half of that game. Brady played very well in the Super Bowl with the proper inflation. There is little to no reason to believe that slightly under-inflated balls played a significant role in the Patriots' success.
I do agree with the idea that the lack of transparency is what got the Patriots penalized like they were. Taking away draft picks is probably the way to go. Heck, I would've thought it was fine to take away a first next year and a second the year after. Heck, take a third after than and progressively down to a seventh in the years following. Give Brady the max fine, along with the Patriots organization as a repeat offender.
But taking Brady off the field not only deprives the game of (arguably) the best player of an era, it gives an overwhelming competitive advantage to the first four teams the Patriots are slated to play this year. While the Patriots will feel the loss short-term, losing draft picks is a much more severe punishment.
Now the season starts with a game between one team without one of the best young running backs and (again, arguably) the best player of his generation. And that stinks for football fans.
I think the appeal is won, and the suspension is reduced to the max fine or one game.
I think that the suspension is silly. I also think that this idea that the Patriots got some sort of significant advantage from the under-inflated balls is silly. They steamrolled the Colts in the second half of that game. Brady played very well in the Super Bowl with the proper inflation. There is little to no reason to believe that slightly under-inflated balls played a significant role in the Patriots' success.
I do agree with the idea that the lack of transparency is what got the Patriots penalized like they were. Taking away draft picks is probably the way to go. Heck, I would've thought it was fine to take away a first next year and a second the year after. Heck, take a third after than and progressively down to a seventh in the years following. Give Brady the max fine, along with the Patriots organization as a repeat offender.
But taking Brady off the field not only deprives the game of (arguably) the best player of an era, it gives an overwhelming competitive advantage to the first four teams the Patriots are slated to play this year. While the Patriots will feel the loss short-term, losing draft picks is a much more severe punishment.
Now the season starts with a game between one team without one of the best young running backs and (again, arguably) the best player of his generation. And that stinks for football fans.
I think the appeal is won, and the suspension is reduced to the max fine or one game.
