Ed Werder breaks down why the Giants and coach Ben McAdoo were fined and a fourth-round draft pick was moved as the punishment for using a walkie-talkie on the sideline against the Cowboys. (1:15)

In 2015, the NFL ruled that one of its players conspired to reduce air pressure in footballs used during the AFC Championship Game. That player was suspended without pay for four games. His team was fined $1 million and docked two draft choices, including a first-round pick.

In 2016, the NFL ruled that one of its coaches used impermissible equipment to relay playcalls during a regular-season game. That coach was fined $50,000. His team was ordered to pay another $150,000 and had a fourth-round pick dropped to the bottom of that round.

Here you have two relatively minor equipment violations that, at worst, provided the teams a mild competitive advantage. If you weren't asking before, you are now: Why did the NFL hammer Tom Brady and the New England Patriots for Deflategate while spanking the New York Giants with a modest penalty?

There are plenty of conspiracy theories going around, most of which focus on Giants owner John Mara's close relationship to commissioner Roger Goodell. (Of course, a similar rapport between Goodell and Patriots owner Robert Kraft appeared to have little value in Deflategate.)

NFL hands down discipline The NFL has fined the Giants $150,000 and coach Ben McAdoo $50,000 for the illegal use of walkie-talkies during their Week 14 victory over the Cowboys, the league announced Tuesday. Read more

The NFL would tell you the Giants fully cooperated with an investigation into coach Ben McAdoo's use of a walkie-talkie to call five plays in a Week 14 game against the Dallas Cowboys. On the other hand, the league criticized the Patriots for failing to make a part-time staffer available for a second interview. The NFL also used Brady's decision to destroy his cell phone, rather than provide it to investigators, as a key piece of circumstantial evidence and lack of cooperation.

Another difference: This was the Giants' first such rule violation. The Patriots had previously been warned, following the 2007 Spygate punishment, that future violations would be disciplined more severely.

There is no disputing those facts and distinctions, but I'll choose explanation behind Door No. 3. Call me naïve if you want, but maybe -- just maybe -- the NFL has learned the value of a proportional response. No one would admit it, of course, but perhaps the league realizes how foolish its pursuit of Brady and the Patriots was relative to the crime they were suspected of committing.

On a micro level, Deflategate was an abomination for its circumstantial nature and its apparent ignorance of science. On a macro level, it was a massive overreaction to what would have been a minor violation if it had in fact occurred. The Patriots' refusal to set up a single interview among dozens of requests, and Brady's cell phone, were outsized excuses.

In the best-case scenario, Brady would have been able to grip the ball better when throwing footballs less than 12.5 psi. McAdoo, meanwhile, was not subject to the 15-second cutoff coaches get on their headsets when using the walkie-talkie. It's difficult to conceive a game being decided by either violation.

That's not to suggest the NFL should look the other way when it suspects a team or player of bending or breaking the rules. I would submit the Giants didn't get off easy here. They were disciplined appropriately. The Patriots were not, which most of us already knew implicitly to be the case. They were made into a national spectacle, one that is bad for business if nothing else. Perhaps the NFL has realized it as well. We can only hope.