Editorial -- Deflategate Shows Patriots "Win at All Costs" Mentality

A new report released today shows that the Patriots "more likely than not" deflated footballs on purpose in order to get an advantage in their playoff game with Indianapolis last year. These findings show that the Patriots organization is one which values the "win at all costs" mentality that is detrimental to society given previous instances in which the organization has been in trouble with the NFL.

The Patriots completely outclassed the Colts that day 45-7, meaning they would have likely won whether they deflated balls on purpose or not. And, in fact, the Patriots did better after the balls in question were removed. However, the deflating of footballs gave Patriots Quarterback Tom Brady an advantage -- he could call plays knowing that he was handling a deflated football and knowing that his receivers would handle them. If they were using one of Indianapolis' balls, he could keep it on the ground. A football that is deflated is much easier to handle and catch, especially if thrown at high speed.

Given that this is not the first time that the Patriots organization has been in trouble, the NFL should penalize them with serious consequences. To do otherwise would send the message to other teams that the NFL rulebook does not mean anything and that rules are enforced based on who you are as a team. We understand that NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell is in a dilemma. If he comes down too harsh, he will be accused of caring more about deflategate than domestic violence, which was in the news last fall. If he is too lenient, he will be accused of damaging the NFL by sending the message that rules don't mean anything. This, in part, explains his muted response (so far) to the deal. 

Back in 1919, following the Black Sox Scandal, baseball was in an existential crisis. Public confidence was undermined in the sport; after all, people could not be sure whether the errors that the local heroes committed were simply a result of a bad day or part of a prearranged outcome. The banning of the Black Sox for life, while harsh, was a necessary step to restore public confidence in the game, as was the banning of Pete Rose. We don't think that such a step is appropriate here, but the rules have to mean something. And the belief that "everybody does it" is not an excuse to circumvent the rules. 

But one of the things that was not discussed in the NFL report was whether low wages were a factor. We know that the reason Eddie Cicotte got involved in throwing the 1919 World Series to Cincinnati was the fact that he wanted to pay off a $4,000 mortgage; in other words, he and other baseball players were underpaid.

Cicotte, like many players, felt chronically underpaid. For many years he lived at 2382 Central Avenue, near Vernor. In 1919, the large brick house, which still stands, was bursting with family members. In addition to being the sole support of his pregnant wife and their two young daughters, Rose and Virginia, Cicotte had taken in his wife’s parents, his brother and wife and their young daughter, and Rose’s sister and husband. He owned a garage, co-managed by his brother, and had taken out a $4,000 mortgage on a farm in Livonia Township, near present-day Seven Mile and Merriman roads. As Cicotte later related, he used the tainted money to pay off the mortgage and install new floors in the farmhouse and barn. He also bought livestock and feed.

We know from the report that Jim McNally, an attendant, and John Jastremski, an equipment assistant, were involved in the doctoring of the balls. We also know from the report that they received extensive gifts from Brady. From the NYT link:

Investigators looked at a wide range of evidence, including footballs, emails, text messages, security video and weather data. McNally and Jastremski received sneakers, jerseys, autographs and other items from Brady in the months before the A.F.C. championship game, the report said.

While the two employees in question had worked for the team for a long time and were presumably making more than an entry level wage, the fact that this sort of thing would happen suggests that there is a serious potential problem regarding team employees and athletes. An employee who feels they are not getting paid enough by the organization could be tempted to help the athletes push the envelope in ways that circumvent the rules.

We also know that most NFL teams pay their cheerleaders pay shockingly low salaries. For someone who works for low wages, items like sneakers, jerseys, autographs, and other items from Brady would be a major financial temptation given what they can fetch on the market. In order to prevent these sorts of scandals from happening again, NFL teams have an obligation to pay their low-level employees and cheerleaders a living wage if they are not already doing so; well-paid employees are happier employees. Furthermore, if they are not already doing so, NFL teams have an obligation to set or tighten up standards of conduct governing interaction between players and employees. It is natural to form relationships of this nature while working together towards a common goal; however, such relationships should not get to the point where the rules of the game are being circumvented.

And from a taxpayer perspective, there should be no more taxpayer subsidies unless low-level employees and cheerleaders of these organizations are paid a living wage. A professional sports franchise is an excellent way of creating economic activity in a city. However, it won't do any good if such a franchise does not pay its employees enough to pay the bills. Most people would be grateful to work for their favorite sports teams doing menial tasks. However, gratitude does not necessarily pay the rent, the car payment, or the food. 

TAGS