Roger Goodell took his time in deciding to uphold Tom Brady's suspension, and one of the reasons behind his rationale stood out.
Goodell indicated that Brady's actions represented a competitive advantage similar to steroid use, and his punishment was somewhat based on that comparison.
In terms of the appropriate level of discipline, the closest parallel of which I am aware is the collectively bargained discipline imposed for a first violation of the policy governing performance enhancing drugs; steroid use reflects an improper effort to secure a competitive advantage in, and threatens the integrity of, the game. Since the advent of our testing for steroid use in the 1980's and now, pursuant to our Collective Bargaining Agreement, the first positive test for the use of performance enhancing drugs has resulted in a four-game suspension without the need for any finding of actual competitive effect. ...
The four-game suspension imposed on Mr. Brady is fully consistent with, if not more lenient than, the discipline ordinarily imposed for the most comparable effort by a player to secure an improper competitive advantage and (by using a masking agent) to cover up the underlying violation.
One of the major talking points throughout "Deflategate" was whether Brady's actions would change his legacy. Everyone will have their own opinion on that subject, of course, but it will be interesting to see if others share Goodell's viewpoint.
- With h/t to CBS Sports
