Roger Goodell likely won't change Tom Brady's punishment

WHEN LAST we saw Tom Brady, New England's favorite superhero was wearing a Charlie Brown smile while Jim Gray grilled him gently about the findings in the Ted Wells report.

"I haven't had a chance to digest it fully," Brady told Gray and a raucously supportive audience at Salem (Mass.) State College back on May 7. "But when I do, I'll be sure to let you know how I feel about it. And everyone else."

This morning, 47 days later, Brady, his agent and his attorneys will meet with NFL commissioner Roger Goodell to share those feelings. At stake is not just a reduction or elimination of the four-game suspension levied by Goodell 5 days after receiving those findings, but Brady's status and legacy among those who judge such things - and his team's, as well.

Brady told Gray, "There's a lot of people who don't like Tom Brady and I'm OK with that." Today's hearing indicates either he has reconsidered his stance or was hiding hurt feelings to begin with. Brady has not issued one public statement since that night in the town that made witch hunts famous, but his agent, Don Yee, has repeatedly slammed the findings, and famed labor lawyer Jeffrey Kessler - who has challenged league discipline frequently and successfully - will be at his side when the hearing begins this morning.

Clearly he cares. Clearly this is about more than the four games. Yet he cannot just scramble out of this for a small gain, cannot simply eke out another victory as he has in all four Super Bowls he has won.

And there will be no satisfaction in a close loss either.

He needs - excuse the pun - a blowout.

Brady needs to present evidence that will blow up Wells' investigation, make it crystal clear that the two indefinitely suspended locker-room ball handlers, one of whom dubbed himself "The Deflator," let the air out of a dozen balls without the quarterback's urging or knowledge. And since Wells' conclusion "that it is more probable than not that Tom Brady was at least generally aware of the inappropriate activities . . . involving the release of air from Patriots game balls" is based largely on the text messages supplied from the ball boys but made unavailable by Brady and his advisers, it seems unlikely that Brady will produce anything today that would flip Goodell's sentence. Remember: Goodell hired Wells in the first place and spent $5 million of the owners' money to investigate this. He chose to hear the appeal himself rather than hand it off to someone else, as he did with Ray Rice. If Brady had the kind of evidence that would have stopped Goodell from agreeing with Wells that he cheated, would he not have produced it during the investigation or immediately after Wells announced his decision?

To be clear: This is not an argument that Goodell acted correctly, or incorrectly, in the first place. Only that, once he promised a thorough investigation during Super Bowl week, once he spent the owners' millions on this investigation, once he issued his ruling, his backtracking will only reinforce the doubts about his stewardship born during the Rice and Adrian Peterson fiascos.

Make no mistake: It's not just Brady on trial here. Nor is it just the Patriots and their coach, Bill Belichick, who crossed swords with this commissioner during the whole Spygate episode. This far in, Goodell cannot backtrack without risking a further erosion of support among his bosses. This is why he is not handing off the appeal to someone else. He needs to appear in charge here, perhaps more than he ever has.

But Wells is right when he defends himself against accusers who say he was carrying out a vendetta against Brady. Brady is far from the choirboy many contend. He fathered children with two women, and his sideline tantrums and potty-mouth are well-documented. But Brady has already secured his place among the gods of this game, and taking him down is not good for anyone - except, perhaps, the Jets.

Suspicions that Belichick was the intended target make more sense. That whoever aimed at the owner got the golden goose instead.

Goodell is said to still be peeved at what he perceived as Belichick's double-cross at the end of Spygate. He has told reporters that he received verbal assurances from Patriots officials that Belichick would express contrition and full details of that affair to the media afterwards, which the coach didn't do and said he never promised to do.

That would be an alternate and better explanation for the vigorous pursuit of discipline for what seems to be a minor rules infraction. So minor, in fact, that the suggested punishment for altering the football - as outlined in the 2006 game operations manual - is a $25,000 fine.

We're too many rounds into this bout to settle for that.

It seems highly unlikely that Brady will produce anything today that can rescue his reputation. It is even less likely that Goodell, with his own reputation at stake, will help him do so.

On Twitter: @samdonnellon

Columns: ph.ly/Donnellon