#DFG: Canceling the Noise
- Thread starter nattysez
- Start date
J.McG said:
Not saying you're wrong in this specific case, but one of the more amazing aspects of this thread is the way that people claim that every single official or reporter who says anything negative about the Patriots is biased against the team.
Should have had McNally test them in the bathroom. Heard he's pretty quick in there.Marbleheader said:
"consistency of his (Anderson) recollection with information provided by each of the Patriots and Colts regarding their target inflation levels."RedOctober3829 said:
Any idiot could have told you what the Pats and Colts target levels were 24 hours after the game. Such high standards to prove that you remember what the balls provided tested at....
PTI talking about it now.. Wilbon wants Brady suspended 3-4 games for lying. He predicts the NFL will do nothing. Tony agrees he should also get games.
Silverdude2167 said:
They apparently "ran out of time". So starting the 2nd half on time was more important than ensuring the "integrity of the game" and a balanced investigation. They made damn sure all the Pats balls were measured though, twice. McNally can accurately deflate 12 footballs by at least 1 PSI in less than 100 seconds, but the officials can't measure 12 balls within a 10-12 minute intermission.
B H Kim said:
I was being mostly facetious with that comment.
If there's a silver lining to a Brady suspension, and I think that a suspension would be pure bullshit, it would be that Garappolo gets some experience with the first team in a game when it really matters. Brady can't play forever, and getting the guy next in line some reps, especially early in the season when there's time to make up for a loss, could pay dividends down the road.
Alright so time constraints.Ed Hillel said:
Shouldn't this mean the balls cannot be used as a control. We don't know if the 7 other Colts balls did not deflate further so the control is not the same and no conclusions can be drawn based upon it.
Pick 4 balls from the Pats that tested above the levels and call it a day.
amfox1 said:
Yes, except the report still cannot prove that Brady had told anyone to "circumvent the rules". Brady likes his footballs prepped on the low side, as Rodgers does on the high side.
Unless the two clowns' text messages show a more direct order, this whole show is an embarrassment to all except the Pats & Brady.
To me, the bright side of this story is the lack of anything tying Tom to a request to deflate the balls below 12.5 psi.
But it does appear that Tom lied about not knowing one of the two ball guys. And all of the texts and calls after this thing broke do suggest that Tom was very worried about it and may have been covering his tracks or trying to. That is the part I can't quite ignore or put a happy face on.
But it does appear that Tom lied about not knowing one of the two ball guys. And all of the texts and calls after this thing broke do suggest that Tom was very worried about it and may have been covering his tracks or trying to. That is the part I can't quite ignore or put a happy face on.
Ed Hillel said:
This basically confirms that the Colts balls were tested last and that the four they tested had probably been inside for ~10 minutes before getting tested. I have no idea whether that length of time would have started to bring PSI levels back up but it seems plausible.
This was discussed in the science-y portion of this thread and one member even ran some tests. If I remember correctly, the conclusion was: it's plenty of time.Morgan's Magic Snowplow said:
Morgan's Magic Snowplow said:
Wells staff requested that Exponent use the delay time as thirteen and a half minutes (which seems preposterous, and reads like someone did the calculations and tried to figure out how long the delay would need to be for the results to be out of spec), meaning that the earliest they could have got to the Colts balls would have been after 18-19 minutes. Which is inconsistent with the NFL's claims that the slight delay was due to the Patriots' balls at the time.
SeoulSoxFan said:
Does the report say that Brady did this? Not that anyone is doing anything more here than shaking their fists at the sky, I think the better point is that "generally aware" is "barely involved."
"Mr. Wells report is a model of craftsmanship and integrity. I am just unsure what "generally aware" means."
You know what, if Brady did lie during his press conference, I don't blame him. If the risk is getting suspended for the Superbowl vs. facing a bigger suspension down the line, he made the logical decision, particularly at his age. It kind of left him stuck for the Wells interview, but whatevs.
Here is a small question for our SoSH lawyers. Given that the evidence is more than a bit circumstantial and the term "probably" is thrown around in a very accusatory manner, I am curious as to what happens of Goodell tries to push through a significant suspension of Brady. I am wondering if Brady might explore not only an appeal but also a potential defamation of character suit against the NFL and Wells' firm. This report is certainly damning his character on very loosely based evidence. Just a thought.
Chris Long has the best answer:
@JOEL9ONE Heard we are talking About footballs again dude I'm tuning it out
@JOEL9ONE Heard we are talking About footballs again dude I'm tuning it out
TheoShmeo said:
I think it's entirely credible (indeed, more probable than not), that A) Brady had ongoing concerns that game officials were over-inflating his balls without an administrative need to, and B) knew that his guys had it worked out so that he need not be concerned.
And therein lies the uncrossable gap from which conspiracy theories and defenses will spring forth from for eternity. Because of course Brady wasn't "involved". That's not how it works, we know that. Brady's a bawse, these two guys are a jamoke and a sub-jamoke. Brady doesn't give two shits about what they do or don't do. He says "when I get on the field, I want it this way", and they make sure it is that way. It's not his job to plan their process, know where the line is, or how far to cross it, that's their job. And, this being a player on a team in a league that had Playmakers canceled for being too real, it's equally likely that the extent of his knowledge was "get it done" or "get it done, wink wink".
What the report doesn't do a square job of doing is identify "it" as anything besides a 12.5 target. The assumption across the board is that McNally deflated to get them below 12.5; what the presented evidence supports is that he was concerned he was being given back balls above 12.5 and were trying to get them to that target.
Brady - 1-game suspension
Patriots - $100k fine (intentionally equal to Revis penalty) and loss of 5th-round pick in 2016 draft
Jastremski and McNally fired
NFL implements new procedures whereby it takes control of footballs for all games not less than 90 minutes before each game
Note that if Brady is suspended, the Patriots will be forced to carry three quarterbacks through training camp.
Patriots - $100k fine (intentionally equal to Revis penalty) and loss of 5th-round pick in 2016 draft
Jastremski and McNally fired
NFL implements new procedures whereby it takes control of footballs for all games not less than 90 minutes before each game
Note that if Brady is suspended, the Patriots will be forced to carry three quarterbacks through training camp.
I do not think that kind of a suit by Brady is likely. I am not a labor lawyer or an expert in defamation, but by overall experience suggests to me that Brady will not pursue those avenues. I am guessing that by being an employee of an NFL team, Tom has agreed to and is subject to the NFL's power to investigate and reach findings and conclusions based on those findings.
That depends how the question was asked. McNally is game day employee that works 10-12 days a year. Maybe Brady knows his face or that he's Jim, Jastremskis guy, but there's nothing in the report that suggests a deeper relationship.lexrageorge said:
If they suspend Brady longer than Greg Hardy or Peterson like a lot of people want then what does it say about the continued joke of the domestic violence policy?dcmissle said:
drtooth said:
The punishment wouldn't be a basis for a defamation suit. If he wants to claim he's been defamed, he would have to show that a fact stated in the report, which hurts his reputation, is objectively false. Good luck with that.
If Goodell says something objectively false in announcing a punishment, or in some public statement, he theoretically could have a claim.
If the press misreports a fact and the misreporting is defamatory in nature, he would theoretically have a claim against the press outlet. But it is very hard to establish a claim against the press when you're a public figure and when the matter is thought to be one of public concern (which, silly as it is, this is). You have to essentially show great disregard of the truth and failure to retract after getting a nasty letter from a lawyer.
He could have contradicted his press conference during the interview; a false denial during a press conference is not that big of a deal (it happens all the time). Lying during the Wells interview wasn't so smart, but he'll still win the appeal regardless.Ed Hillel said:
Could just be worry for his reputation, not worry that their inside job was going to be discovered. His statements on WEEI, if genuine, show that he had no idea anything wrong was being done and found it humorous that such a trivial topic was the focus of conversation following a playoff game. Once he realized this was a "thing" he talks to the employees to better understand what was really going on. His words of encouragement resonate as a leader reassuring a blue collar guy painted as a criminal and stuck in the middle of a national investigation not to worry over something so trivialTheoShmeo said:
Going into this it seemed likely that Tom said he liked his balls in the lower end of the inflation rules and the ball preparers knew that. Nothing in the report contradicts that and only confirms our assumptions that Tom is anal and a pain in the ass to work for.
The problem I have is the conclusions it tries to draw when there isn't sufficient supporting evidence. To take out of context text messages from part time, low wage employees, filled with jokes and vulgarity, and connect Brady to their potential "scheme" is, again, quite reckless
Brady has a speaking engagement planned tomorrow night at Salem State. I have tickets and I'm curious to see if he cancels it.
I just want to get this over with and move on, whatever the punishment might be. If Brady is suspended for a game or two, that'll be bullshit but fuck it, I look forward to watching Jimmy G light up that Steelers defense.
drtooth said:
He'd have a really hard time proving "more probably than not" that he wasn't "more probably than not" "generally aware" that the deflators were deflating (or whatever it is that the conclusion is) AND that Wells said he was with either "reckless disregard for the truth or with knowledge that the conclusions was false" (a/k/a "actual malice"). As a public figure, he'd have to do both (falsity and actual malice).
I have little doubt that he'd appeal a suspension; but I have just as much confidence that he'd never file such a lawsuit.
Did they ask Anderson and his co-officials for access to their cell phones and emails to ascertain whether or no they had exchanged calls/texts to possibly cover up the fact they never actually put the guages to the balls, but instead gave them the eyeball/feel test? Isn't the absence of that effort an indication that Wells more probably than not had an agenda? </HumorAttempt>RedOctober3829 said:
The irony here is if you watch the main board threads, posters are called out for posts that are as without basis as this report is.
There aren't going to be any libel cases filed by Tom. You open up your whole life when you file one of those and are put under oath. It's not smart; Tom is not Roger Clemens dumb.
I think we are probably a bit behind the curve on the penalty as fans. Who cares about fines? I think there will be a suspension, which Tom will appeal. It probably will be for more than one game, so it can be cut back.
I also think we're losing a second or third round pick. Atlanta might as well be Pluto for these purposes.
Watch and listen to Schefter is my advice for a hint.
I think we are probably a bit behind the curve on the penalty as fans. Who cares about fines? I think there will be a suspension, which Tom will appeal. It probably will be for more than one game, so it can be cut back.
I also think we're losing a second or third round pick. Atlanta might as well be Pluto for these purposes.
Watch and listen to Schefter is my advice for a hint.