As in every aspect of this, there are 2 camps again now.  One group feels Kraft caved as part of a deal to get Brady's suspension reduced or eliminated.  This group has largely been wrong about everything so far, but the idea does have at least some merit, given that Kraft should get something in return.

 

I'm with the other group, the one that feels Kraft met strong resistance during his "back channel" discussions, and strong support for Goodell by the other owners.  I don't know if Goodell threatened to go after phones in discovery, or if Goodell indicated they had other evidence, or maybe Goodell threatened to begin a new investigation of the numerous other allegations that have emerged in recent months, especially considering headsets in Foxboro and other gameday issues.

 

I think Kraft didn't really have a leg to stand on in a civil case.  It's never good to go to war with your Golden Goose.  And it could have led to more embarrassing revelations, and new sanctions.  So I feel Kraft didn't really surrender anything today, except the opportunity to further embarrass himself.  We are hopefully free now of Kraft's rebuttals and responses. 

 

Ultimately, which side is seen as more prophetic will depend almost completely on the ruling in the Brady appeal.  If Goodell reduces the suspension, even a little, Group 1 will say, "quid pro quo, Kraft made a deal to help his QB".  If Goodell upholds the 4 game suspension, the other side will claim the Commish had the goods on the Pats and played hardball. 

 

*** side note*** the question of McNally and Jastremski's termination had become a bit of a sticking point, with Kraft evading the question in his recent interview with Peter King.  Basically, why did you fire these guys you keep claiming are innocent?  Today it came out that the termination was NOT at the NFL's request as the Patriots had claimed - another Patriot lie exposed.  Maybe that was the last straw for Kraft.  Caught in another lie, from continuing the stupid cover-up. 

---