The "blustering NFL has now been backed into a corner" following the release of Ted Wells' report on the Patriots' "Deflategate" scandal, according to Mark Bradley of the ATLANTA JOURNAL-CONSTITUTION. It was "easy to come down on a rogue organization and to take a stand against domestic violence." But what "will the Tiffany League do" after the investigation found it "'probable' that its highest-profile franchise 'was involved in a deliberate attempt to circumvent the rules'" (ATLANTA JOURNAL-CONSTITUTION, 5/7). THE MMQB's Peter King writes if NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell fines the Patriots, but "does not come down hard" on QB Tom Brady, other owners "will feel that their suspicions that the close bond between Goodell and New England owner Robert Kraft (well, it used to be a close bond, before this investigation frayed it) played a role in the league taking it easy" on the Patriots. So this is a "complex, explosive, divisive issue, and not just between the Patriots and the league office." King: "I don't think the sanctions will be as harsh as the 2007 whacking for the Patriots taping opposing sidelines to try to steal a foe's signals. ... I wouldn't be surprised if Goodell puts the onus on the two employees and Brady more than the team" (MMQB.SI.com, 5/7). In Miami, Greg Cote writes Goodell is left in a "no-win situation." Cote: "I’d suggest a public reprimand, a dismissal of the two equipment guys involved, an assurance of safeguards against it happening again, a club fine of around $100,000 and forfeiture of a substantial but not first-round draft pick -- maybe a second or third rounder. I’d not suspend Brady, not even for one game, based on 'more probable than not'” (MIAMI HERALD, 5/7).
CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE? In N.Y., Mike Lupica writes Goodell "can’t let this go, as much of the case Wells has built against Brady is circumstantial." The NFLPA may knock the "air out of Goodell with a grievance if Goodell does suspend Brady." If Goodell "didn’t think that Deflategate was some kind of attack on the integrity of his brand, if he didn’t think that the Patriots, even in a grubby way, were attacking the integrity of the competition, then he never should have hired Ted Wells in the first place" (N.Y. DAILY NEWS, 5/7). In Boston, Ben Volin writes the "report has some holes," but Brady and the two Patriots staffers "had every opportunity to answer Wells's questions and put this issue to rest." Now, Brady and the Patriots are "going to have to pay the price" (BOSTON GLOBE, 5/7).
LOOKING FOR PRECEDENT: PRO FOOTBALL TALK's Mike Florio noted when the time comes for Goodell to discipline the Patriots, the "most recent precedent comes from the fine plus no lost draft picks imposed on the Browns and the fine plus forfeited 2016 fifth-round pick imposed on the Falcons" (PROFOOTBALLTALK.com, 5/6). SI.com's Michael McCann noted the NFL's Game Operations Manual "dictates that violations of the PSI rule triggers a modest $25,000 fine." There is "no remedy in the NFL constitution that would empower Goodell to vacate Patriots wins or take away the teams' victory in Super Bowl XLIX." McCann: "Such a remedy, moreover, would seem wholly inappropriate" (SI.com, 5/6).
