New York Times responds to NFL’s response to New York Times

Getty Images

The circle is now complete, for anyone who is paying attention. And it’s safe to say not many people are actually paying attention.

To summarize, the New York Times cobbled together an article nearly 3,000 words long that criticized the NFL for flawed concussion research from 1996 through 2001 and that pointed out superficial connections between pro football and Big Tobacco (leaving out, curiously, the fact that the supposed smoking-gun scientific expert from #Deflategate once opined that second-hand smoke doesn’t cause cancer), and the NFL issued not one but two lengthy statements taking issue with specific aspects of the Times article.

The Times has since responded to the response. Here it is.

And now our work here is done. If we ever figure what all of this was really about, we’ll let you know.

18 responses to “New York Times responds to NFL’s response to New York Times

  1. What it’s really about is that the NFL’s aura of invincibility is gone. After a string of disastrous and often incompetent investigations targeting the Saints, Patriots, Dolphins, and others, everyone now knows the NFL will lie about anything — they have no integrity even as they claim to defend the game’s integrity. I expect every scandal going forward to be heavily scrutinized on the simple premise that the NFL must be lying about something.

    tl;dr: It’s the Mark Cuban Effect.

  2. what is it really about?

    the NFL is clearly using the big tobacco playbook and they got called out on it by a highly respected mainstream newspaper.

    the NFL narrative is going off the tracks and they are trying to recover

    the silly thing is, they didn’t have to go with the big tobacco approach. all they had to do was stroke a check for independent research and start seriously working the problem 20 years ago when this started heating up and they would be fine PR wise.

    instead they put together a bunch of incomplete garbage internally motivated research and set up a committee of lawyers and bureaucrats to push their PR line and protect the league from player liability suits

    welcome to CYA corporate guidance

  3. This CTE tragedy feels so much like the big tobacco style of denial, putting out false reports to lessen the impact the role playing football affects brain injury. The thing is if you have half a brain (no pun intended) it makes total sense that a brick wall (player) running into another brick wall head on will cause brain damage. the NFL trying to deny it is laughable.

  4. So, the NFL selectively and inaccurately produced their own, self-funded, non-independent figures, using discredited experts and omitting a massive amount of data that didn’t agree with the required result. NE fans might be forgiven a deja vu moment.

  5. interesting statement from the NY Times. looks like the NFL was trying to put words into the Times’ mouth and then discredit those words.

    now that’s some Integrity for you.

  6. We need more of these stories from the main stream media until the filth is washed out of 345 Park Ave. Funny how none of the major networks who do business with the NFL have picked up on this. It is truly a sad commentary about the greed of corporate America. We are all just numbers to the 1 percenters.

  7. EXPOSED. Please let this show how much the crooks in the league office lie to try to discredit their opposition in whatever matter. Why is this not getting more coverage?

  8. The more money they make the more awful they become. It’s sort of an universal truth in business. A commenter on the article about the Bills stadium put it best, ‘with each passing day the more I hate the NFL.’ There is a reason Goodell gets booed for three hours on draft day. It’s not just him and its not just a bunch of oafs in one room, its also who and what he represents.

  9. Once again the only ones that lie are the bastion of Integrity, Goodell and all at 345 Park ave. They lie about PSI, text messages and Mother Nature..Now they lie about brain damage and players lives. When will you Goodell defenders wake up?

  10. Why do you think no one is paying attention to the lead story on the front page of America’s most respected newspaper? This is big news, and should be another nail in the coffin of concussion-ball. It won’t be, but it should be.

  11. Now this is getting very reminicent to Watergate…when Ben Bradley of the Washington Post took the stance “We stand by our story.”

    Watergate took down the POTUS. Where is this mess going to end up?

  12. patsbrat says:
    Mar 25, 2016 12:10 PM

    Now this is getting very reminicent to Watergate…when Ben Bradley of the Washington Post took the stance “We stand by our story.”

    Watergate took down the POTUS. Where is this mess going to end up?

    Hard to say, since the COTNFL believes that the laws of mortal men don’t apply to him or his actions.

  13. The NYT? Since when were they the bastion of journalism? Didn’t they try to frame the Duke lacrosse players of rape when it NEVER happened?!

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Not a member? Register now!