Thread: TOM BRADY
View Single Post
      09-06-2015, 12:54 PM   #89
tony20009
Major General
tony20009's Avatar
United_States
1042
Rep
5,660
Posts

Drives: BMW 335i - Coupe
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Washington, DC

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheAxiom View Post
Honestly I googled it, and that was the first one that came up. But again, what I quoted should have cleared up any confusion. It states only 3 messages were missing, which they actually found through the recipients, They have/had the full listing of Brady's texts.
What Mr. Brady provided was a log/listing of messages, not the messages themselves, not the content. I know you have to see as shady the pattern of behavior and the convenient circumstances surrounding Mr. Brady's text messages.

Put yourself in the shoes of someone trying to get to the bottom of something. Put yourself in the shoes of someone who is well aware that they will be among the key individuals from whom historic details will be sought.

Ethically speaking:
  • As the former party, would you not see the latter individual's destroying a key item just before the meeting to question the latter party as duplicitous?
  • As the latter party, and having knowledge before one's specific meeting with investigators that they'd want content from an item one possess, would you destroy that item if you knew it contained no "incriminating" info? Would you hang on to it and work with investigators to find a way to share the the relevant content while preserving one's privacy re: non-work-related content? Would you make nothing available to the investigators, and only make anything available when one launches one's own appeal after investigators make a decision that is unfavorable to oneself?
Once again, specific guilt or innocence re: inflating the balls isn't the crux of what irks me about Mr. Brady and his comportment in the deflategate matter. What bothers me and what I have zero tolerance for is the appearance of impropriety that Mr. Brady surrounded himself with and used to create doubt, doubt that favored his position, rather than "from square one" doing everything possible to avoid creating or not reducing the element of doubt.

I'm sorry, but that's not how I was raised. It's not how I raised my kids. It's not what I expect of professionals. And it's certainly not what I expect of someone who's done no wrong and who could all but instantly show that to be so well before a formal investigation begins.

In my opinion, Mr. Brady should have from damn near "day one" (the day of or day after the AFC Championship game) simply removed himself from contemplation as a participant in the under inflation by going to the relevant officials and saying, "Here. Let me show you my texts/emails so you can see I was in no way involved." That quite simply is not what he did, and that is the problem I have with Mr. Brady. (Alternatively, and if it were the case, he could also have said, "Yes, I was aware the handlers had toyed with the idea of under inflating the balls, but as you can see, I discouraged them from doing so (or whatever it is he did do were he aware of what they were considering.")

If you look at my various comments in this and at least one other thread, you'll see that I've never been particularly concerned or distraught over the actual under inflation or who was party to it. My issue has been, and remains, the apparent lack of ethical, "in good faith" if you will, behavior displayed by Mr. Brady.

Why don't I care about the actual under inflation and its direct game-related consequences? Mainly because there's not ever been much doubt in my mind that hijinks like that occur, or at least happen. What goes through my mind is that even though it may happen, it's against the rules, and as such, in making it happen or ignoring that it has happened, one is knowingly taking a risk of not getting caught and (hopefully) benefiting from it's incidence. What that means is that if one gets caught, the right thing to do is just "come clean" about it to whatever is the most comprehensive extent one can.

As many folks have noted, the act itself was (1) minor and (2) devoid of game-play outcomes. The whole damn matter should never have gotten past an internal "discovery" meeting between Pats team personnel and the NFL. Such a meeting, with all parties truthfully and comprehensively disclosing the full extent of their roles should have been sufficient to preempt a full blown investigation such as that which we've seen drug through the news.

Mr. Brady's stonewalling actions were instrumental in making the thing go well beyond that. The man is clearly viewed by many as a role model and as such, his onus is to behave to an even higher standard of ethical conduct than are most folks. And pitifully, he just didn't.

All the best.

P.S.
I don't actually even care whether Mr. Brady was involved or not involved. As I've said, I am miffed over how he handled the matter.
__________________
Cheers,
Tony

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
'07, e92 335i, Sparkling Graphite, Coral Leather, Aluminum, 6-speed
Appreciate 0