#DFG: Canceling the Noise

[wibi]

Maybe, but being the team that was to play them in the largest game of the season it would make sense not only to care about rules violations, but also to make their time leading up to the game more about this incident than game preparation.

 
No.  This is a crazy thought process that has no basis in reality.  Seattle made little to no comments on this whole bullshit.  The only inflammatory comment made was from Jeremy Lane about how Gronk sucks which was stupid and idiotic.

 

[DJnVa]

Just being devil's advocate, he knew something he was doing was at a minimum 'scandalous' - because he made the reference to "not going to ESPN, yet".

 
You're inferring a lot here. He could have been talking about going to ESPN and telling them what an asshole Brady was about the balls and how he chews them out when they're not exactly like high highness wants them. By assuming that this had to mean he was going to ESPN with some smoking gun you're doing the same thing Wells did.
 
Also, if McNally was actually serious about going to ESPN with a smoking gun because he couldn't stand Brady, couldn't you then assume he would have been a star witness for Wells? Why the sea change in his opinion?

 

[jimbobim]

 
Agreed.  The "one team complaining more than others" suggests a frequent foe, ergo Buffalo/Miami/NYJ or Indy/Baltimore/Denver.  My guess is the Jets.

I'd go Denver. All of their ex players and GM have been very salty and they arguably have the most to realistically gain by maybe securing a home field advantage lead in that first 4 game stretch. 

 

[tims4wins]

Maybe, but you would think the amount he let out would be more consistent. He would have had to let like four times the air out of same balls than others to get the results we see.
 
Yes, that's an assumption. In Anderson's favor is the fact that he remembers inflating two of the balls that were below. I think it's a reasonable assumption that the Patriots' balls were all in the 12.5-12.6 range - but "reasonable" is not always the same as "correct."
 
Oh, I agree with this - especially since we know one ball they did use (the Jackson interception ball) did measure within the range we would expect by the Ideal Gas Law. If the intention was just to deflate and use certain balls, they messed up. Natural laws and use of the logo gauge does not explain all the data, but I'm not sure tampering is the obvious conclusion either.
 
One interesting note: they measured four Patriots and four Colts balls after the game (see page 72 of the Wells report) but concluded that the data "did not provide a scientifically reasonable basis" for any further analysis.

I don't disagree but the big assumption here is that all balls started the same. If they didn't then having readings all over the map at halftime would make a lot of sense. Hard to know what truly happened during pre game testing since it wasn't recorded, and obviously a lot of faulty science can occur based on whatever assumptions are made.

 

[nolasoxfan]

 
 
My copy of the paper has Jenkins' piece as the first story on first page of the Sports section.

Mine too.  Top of the fold.

 

[DJnVa]

Did the report provide any reasons why the remaining Colts' balls weren't measured after the game?

 
Each team had 4 balls randomly checked after the game.
 
http://www.coldhardfootballfacts.com/content/wells-report-more-probable-than-not-colts-played-with-under-inflated-footballs/33495/

 

It got more curious after the game: four balls were randomly selected from each team's stash after New England's 45-7 humiliation of the Colts and were measured again by officials.
 
All four Patriots footballs weighed in within the legal 12.5 to 13.5 PSI range, according to at least one official; and 3 of 4 weighed within the legal range according to both offcials. One Patrots football was OVERinlfated according to one official. 
 
Meanwhile, 3 of4 Colts footballs were underinflated, according to one official; and one was underinflated according to both officials. 
 

 

[JeffLedbetter]

I don't think enough is being made of the alleged independence of Wells's report. The NFL paid millions of dollars to his firm; the NFL is his firm's client. I think a lot of people in the media and beyond begin with the presumption that the NFL is itself neutral in this case. If you begin with the idea that it is not, it changes the whole complexion.

 

[DJnVa]

Did they provide the data? I missed this and that's pretty ridiculous.

 
 
 
Yes, see: http://sonsofsamhorn.net/topic/89354-125-psi-brady-x-4gms-1m-1-x-1rd-1-x-4rd/?p=6038485

 

[Seonachan]

One of the things that keeps coming up is that why would the league look to nail one of it's signature players. Wells himself made that point that it would basically be preposterous for the league to want to hurt itself that way. Anyone that feels that way hasn't been paying attention to the way the NFL operates. Rozelle preached parity was the key to success of the NFL. Goodell takes it further with his emphasis on "the shield". The league is not about the marketability of individual players, it's about the NFL. Players, including the Brady's, Manning's and Montana's,are fungible and will be replaced eventually. No player is bigger than the game. I have no doubt that many on Park Ave are thoroughly enjoying the fact that they can now prove that no player is bigger than the game. Brady was a huge target as his pop culture status transcended the sport.

 
Whatever elements there may be in the League who have a grudge (or worse) against the Patriots, the Wells report doesn't strike me as a "get the Pats no matter what" document so much as a "clear the NFL no matter what" document, which would be consistent with Wells' relationship to the League and doesn't require him to either personally or professionally invested in finding anyone guilty. The "why would I want to hurt the League by nailing its premier player/franchise?" line is a red herring. All the League players in this story - from Goodell to Kensil to Anderson to the guy stealing the balls - are either presented as having done their full and competent duty, or else left out of the narrative entirely. Once that is done, the only explanation left for all the unanswered questions and fuzzy data is that the Patriots had an organized scheme to take 0.2-0.4 psi out of the balls.

 

[joe dokes]

Isn't this the plot of Rollerball?

 
John Houseman would be a better commish than Goodell.

 

[Stitch01]

Right - and the thinking is that most teams in the league should feel this way. Eventually you would think all owners would realize the implications of the draft pick penalty and million dollar fine and how it might affect them down the line. But it seems like so many of them are caught up in catching the Pats that they don't see the forest for the trees.

Seattle has to be docked a first round pick and fined a million bucks next time one of their players fails a PED test, right? Culture of cheating, repeat offender.

.

No chance

 

[tims4wins]

.

No chance

Obviously. Just pointing out the hypocrisy (again)

 

[MarcSullivaFan]

I had an interesting Facebook discussion with three law school classmates about this--two management side labor lawyers and one Union-side guy. One is a Colts fan, one is a Lions fan, and one an Eagles fan.

All three agreed that there was probably some cheating going on, but that the punishment was way too harsh, and that the Wells report was a piece of crap. It was refreshing.

 

[Harry Hooper]

More weirdness in the report concerns the testing of 11 Pats balls. They say that the intercepted ball is not among the 11 and one ball was removed for a milestone. So, they then work backwards and say the game ball bag had 13 balls in it. But as was discussed on here months ago, one of the 12 game balls was tossed into the stands. So, then there were really 14 footballs in the game bag? One more indication of the ridiculousness of trying to apply NASA-level precision to an activity built on fat guys wrestling on turf.

 

[troparra]

Yes, and it's even more crazy than that, because the average would have been .2 or .4, but the variance was all over the place - a couple balls would have been deflated nearly 1 PSI, three or four not at all, and most in this small range. That doesn't seem consistent with tampering to me - at least any sort of competent tampering.
 
The difference between the logo gauge and the non-logo is pretty consistently .35-.45. Assuming the logo ball was used pre-game would explain some of the gap but not all of it. Look at ball 10 - it reads below 11 on both gauges even though it was one of the last balls measured (and thus would have had some time to come up above 48 degrees). Use of the logo gauge does not explain this ball (which doesn't mean that we need to infer tampering to explain the difference), and there are another 2-4 balls that cannot be explained even if we assume the logo gauge was used.

 
We don't know the variation of the balls pre-game and we don't know the true mean pressure of the balls.  It's clear that the NFL didn't think ball pressure was important, it's clear that the referees didn't know anything about temperature, pressure, etc.  It's clear that the referees pick and chose gauges at random without any thought to precision or accuracy, and from this you can surmise that the refs weren't particularly careful in measuring the balls pre-game. As evidence, they don't even write down the pressure of the balls. Nobody ever has.  We have no idea whatsoever how much variation a team's balls might have pre-game, even ones that are approved by the ref.
 
Despite this, and despite not knowing what the initial variation of the Patriots balls was, they find that the variation of the Patriots balls at halftime is highly suspicious.   
 
Even so, the Wells report states this:  

Although our experts determined that the difference between the variability of the halftime measurements of the Patriots and Colts footballs was not statistically significant, they drew certain conclusions on variability when the data was considered in the context of the experimental results.
 

 
Not significant = not different.   Especially when you have measurements of 4 balls for the control group (which is only a sampling) and 11 balls of the experimental group (the entire group). You cannot say, "Pish posh, with a larger sample size the difference would be signficant". One of the major causes of bias in research is sampling bias. In other words, is the sample you selected for your study representative of the rest of the population?  In the Patriots' case, the refs looked at every ball.  No sampling bias.  In the Colts' case, the refs looked at 4 balls.  Eight balls were excluded and no explanation for how the four balls were chosen is given.  Were they the balls at the top of the bag? Were they used in the game? Were they wet?   
 
Despite these questions about the sample of 4 out of 12 possible balls, the Wells report takes the Colts' sample data and treats it as gospel truth. They ran their analyses assuming that all 8 other balls were very similar to the 4 that were tested.  
If they looked at 40 out of 120 balls, and the balls were randomly selected, that would be one thing. Four out of 12 is not large enough to draw any meaningful conclusions.   The reason is that the very next Colts ball may have measured 11.5, or some other pressure out of line with the ideal gas law.  This is a real possibility, and if it happened it would entirely negate the variability theory. Entirely (unless the Wells report threw that data point out as an outlier, which is something they would probably do). 
 
edit: clarification

 

[Bergs]

At this point, I don't think it's "more probable than not the balls" hit the field below 12.5, let alone some clever deflation scandal masterminded by Tom Brady was going on. This whole situation is a crock of shit, and I hope Roger Goodell dies in a fire.

 

[OnWisc]

 
Whatever elements there may be in the League who have a grudge (or worse) against the Patriots, the Wells report doesn't strike me as a "get the Pats no matter what" document so much as a "clear the NFL no matter what" document, which would be consistent with Wells' relationship to the League and doesn't require him to either personally or professionally invested in finding anyone guilty. The "why would I want to hurt the League by nailing its premier player/franchise?" line is a red herring. All the League players in this story - from Goodell to Kensil to Anderson to the guy stealing the balls - are either presented as having done their full and competent duty, or else left out of the narrative entirely. Once that is done, the only explanation left for all the unanswered questions and fuzzy data is that the Patriots had an organized scheme to take 0.2-0.4 psi out of the balls.

Well put.

 

[PedroKsBambino]

Hawks? Jets?

 
I know of no reason at all to think Seahawks would do this.   I like making fun of Pete Carroll as much as the next guy, but nothing anyone associated with the team has done suggests they'd mess around with this kind of back-office political baloney.
 
Denver seems far more likely, especially given Elway's public statements.

 

[MarcSullivaFan]

I posted this on Facebook earlier in a discussion about Wells's independence (or lack thereof):

"I don't think Wells was out to get the Patriots, or was unethical. I do think the report was crap, and that "independent" is a major stretch. Wells was being paid to make Goodell's life easier by assuming responsibility for making factual determinations. I believe Goodell would have been satisfied with either of two outcomes: (1) complete exoneration of the Patriots; or (2) unequivocal finding that Pats and/or Brady violated the rules. Instead, the investigation uncovered inconclusive "scientific" data on whether the balls were tampered with at the AFCGG, and some evidence that Jastremski and McNally tampered with balls, but not necessarily during the AFCCG, and not necessarily with Brady's knowledge or tacit approval. Obviously I'm biased, but it seems to me that the only reasonable conclusion is (1) there is not sufficient evidence to conclude that balls were tampered with at the AFCCG; (2) cannot rule out that Jastremski and McNally violated the rules at some point, but the evidence is inconclusive as to when/exactly how that happened. And, given (2), there is not sufficient evidence to show that Brady participated in a scheme to tamper with balls. That is a pretty tough sell to the client, and frankly leaves Goodell in a more difficult position than when the investigation began. In other words, I don't think Wells was determined to reach a particular conclusion, but I do believe he was determined to reach a definitive conclusion one way or another. This came through when he said that he believed to the bottom of his heart that Brady was part of a scheme to deflate footballs. That's a funny thing for an independent investigator to say when the facts in his own investigation only allowed him to conclude that it was more probable than not that Brady was "generally aware" that the balls were being tampered with. To me, that suggests someone who was determined to reach a definitive conclusion, and, when the facts were inconclusive, worked backwards from a gut feeling. This also suggests to me that Brady was essentially punished twice for "failing to cooperate." In other words, Wells made an adverse inference due to Brady's refusal to produce data from his phone, and that adverse inference weighed heavily in Well's ultimate factual determination.
Independence is not simply a lack of bias."

 

[jimbobim]

Hahaha listen to this from the 4 letter network 
 


Tom Brady: Some think Brady's ban could be overturned


Tom Brady - QB - NE - May. 13 - 9:14 am et

One source texted ESPN's Adam Schefter saying he thinks Tom Brady's four-game suspension could be overturned altogether.
Another source described the legal team Brady is putting together for his appeal as "unreal." It's made up of a load of experienced lawyers, including Jeffrey Kessler. Many believe Brady at least has a better than even chance to have his suspension reduced. "I don't think the Patriots are going to go quietly into the night," Schefter said. "I think this story is just getting started." Deflategate still has months to go, but smart money is on Brady not serving his full four-game ban. May. 13 - 9:14 am et 
Source: ESPN.com
 
An unreal legal team for an unreal punishment. sounds right.

 

[Bongorific]

 
Whatever elements there may be in the League who have a grudge (or worse) against the Patriots, the Wells report doesn't strike me as a "get the Pats no matter what" document so much as a "clear the NFL no matter what" document, which would be consistent with Wells' relationship to the League and doesn't require him to either personally or professionally invested in finding anyone guilty. The "why would I want to hurt the League by nailing its premier player/franchise?" line is a red herring. All the League players in this story - from Goodell to Kensil to Anderson to the guy stealing the balls - are either presented as having done their full and competent duty, or else left out of the narrative entirely. Once that is done, the only explanation left for all the unanswered questions and fuzzy data is that the Patriots had an organized scheme to take 0.2-0.4 psi out of the balls.

This is very well said

 

[Ed Hillel]

 
Whatever elements there may be in the League who have a grudge (or worse) against the Patriots, the Wells report doesn't strike me as a "get the Pats no matter what" document so much as a "clear the NFL no matter what" document, which would be consistent with Wells' relationship to the League and doesn't require him to either personally or professionally invested in finding anyone guilty. The "why would I want to hurt the League by nailing its premier player/franchise?" line is a red herring. All the League players in this story - from Goodell to Kensil to Anderson to the guy stealing the balls - are either presented as having done their full and competent duty, or else left out of the narrative entirely. Once that is done, the only explanation left for all the unanswered questions and fuzzy data is that the Patriots had an organized scheme to take 0.2-0.4 psi out of the balls.

 
You could actually hear Wells getting counseled, more probably than not by NFL officials/lawyers, while he was touting his independence from the league. If that doesn't say enough about their relationship, I don't know what does.

 

[Otis Foster]

I had an interesting Facebook discussion with three law school classmates about this--two management side labor lawyers and one Union-side guy. One is a Colts fan, one is a Lions fan, and one an Eagles fan.

All three agreed that there was probably some cheating going on, but that the punishment was way too harsh, and that the Wells report was a piece of crap. It was refreshing.

 
That's about where I am.
 
The Deflator is an absolute idiot. He should never be allowed near a communications device in the coming years. I have pretty much concluded there was something going on. I have a hunch that TB knew they were under mandate to get to as close to the line as possible. I'm less sure that he knew they would underinflate the balls, but would guess he might have. Scotch Verdict on that.
 
I have a bad feeling about the texts from TB. Assuming for the moment that Wells was ready to offer some accommodation, there was no reason to stonewall right there unless you had to. I do suspect the texts disclosed or redacted would have included TB in the web. These advisors aren't stupid. As bad as the fallout from the stonewalling might be, it was only the second worst option. Wells sniffed it out, which is why he emphasized it in the report. Still, a weaker reed to rely on, IMO.
 
I don't think there was an attempt to ensnare the NEPs, but it was likely one of those things where the innermost circles at the NFL recognized belatedly what they should have done, especially since Alexander was horribly sloppy in adhering to the suggestion that they keep an eye on this. Once Grigson got on his cell about underinflation, there was no turning back and it would be clear in retrospect that they should have recognized the possibility and called the NEPs beforehand. This was a major screw-up and should have mitigated the penalties. Good luck with that - the Ginger Hammer was dead set on regaining his manhood on this one. You've yet to hear a word of apology from those pricks.
 
100% BB was in the dark beforehand. Did he warn his staff to make sure they stayed within the lines? Who knows - probably not, but he might have been overly-cautious given the paranoia amongst other fans. But that's not BB's MO. Was he guilty by omission? Only if you apply the strictest standards. 
 
Should Kraft et al. have also recognized this? If they were more cautious and lawyer driven, sure - the employment lawyers here can apply some of there thoughts, applied by analogy to this situation. I suspect (a) that RK is a crap-shooter; and (b) tha they're anything but lawyer driven. I also think they began to believe the organization was bullet-proof. All of this contributed to the refusal to make McNally available. I don't want to exhume that argument; I simply want to ask if the NEP organization went trhrough training on how NFL rules applied to their jobs. Maybe so, but if not, they should have. I guess this falls into lack of oversight.
 
For most organizations with no rap sheet, this would be a slap on the wrist. The noise about the taping and the general resentment and hate generated by the NEP success and an arrogant fan base (Hands up here) pushed Goodell and Vincent over the top. Even Pats haters now recognize this, but there's no do-over  on elements of these penalties. 
 
There's a lot of hind sight in this on my part. I tried to weed it out, but I do think there's a fair amount of responsibility that falls on the NEPs as well as the NFL.

 

[troparra]

To go on (maybe unnecessarily) about sampling and the Wells report using only 4 Colts balls and assuming their variability readings to be representative of the other 8 balls, here is a link for describing an obesity drug trial that halted. It's from yesterday:
http://www.forbes.com/sites/matthewherper/2015/05/12/heart-benefit-for-orexigen-drug-nearly-vanishes-with-new-data/
 
The title of the article is "Heart Benefit for Orexigen Drug Nearly Vanishes with New Data"
 
Here is an excerpt: 

When 25% of the data were collected, 59 patients in the placebo group had heart attacks, strokes, or died from cardiovascular causes, compared to 35 on Contrave, a 59% decrease in risk that appeared statistically significant. But the next 25% of data showed 43 heart attacks, strokes, or cardiovascular deaths for placebo compared to 55 for Contrave. Combining all the data, that’s only 12% decrease that is no longer statistically significant. It’s likely that the entire benefit would have vanished had the study been finished. Because the drug raises blood pressure and this takes time to result in heart attacks or strokes, it might still be possible that the pill could increase patients’ cardiovascular risk.
 

 

[lambeau]

One false note was Polian going on TV saying the penalty was fitting because Brady obtained a "huge" competitive advantage. Very odd since he is an outlier.
So I do think there are some real haters out there bombarding the league, that Goodell wants to placate to protect his job.
This could mean Goodell doesn't care how the appeal turns out,since he now looks unbiased, and he can nominate a truly independent arbitrator. We'll see.

 

[Ed Hillel]

The Deflator is an absolute idiot. He should never be allowed near a communications device in the coming years. I have pretty much concluded there was something going on. I have a hunch that TB knew they were under mandate to get to as close to the line as possible. I'm less sure that he knew they would underinflate the balls, but would guess he might have. Scotch Verdict on that.

 
I think the fact that he was allowed to have a device pretty much demonstrates Kraft/BB had no idea what was happening, assuming it was. However, what's your take on the 16 PSI Jets game in October? That would indicate the Pats didn't mess with the footballs after the refs touched them, at least up to that point, wouldn't it? The "deflator" text falls months before that.
 

One false note was Polian going on TV saying the penalty was fitting because Brady obtained a "huge" competitive advantage. Very odd since he is an outlier.

 
Brady kicked the shit out of his team for a decade, what would you expect him to say? It's also been demonstrated that he will shill for the league, as evidenced by the Rice debacle, where he offered a critical stance towards the league, the camera cut out, went to commercial, and he told a completely different story defending Goodell.

 

[OCST]

 
You could actually hear Wells getting counseled, more probably than not by NFL officials/lawyers, while he was touting his independence from the league. If that doesn't say enough about their relationship, I don't know what does.

 
I haven't read the Warren Report Wells Report yet, so I'll withhold judgment on that.
 
I feel very comfortable saying that the mere act of appearing in public to defend and justify his report tainted Wells and his supposed objectivity.
 
If I'm Wells, NFW do I appear at a press conference to defend my work.  His response should have been: I was commissioned to investigate; I investigated; here's my report; let the chips fall where they may as I have no stake in the matter.
 
Maybe he wanted to bill a few more hours at $2000/hr for the press conference; maybe the V12 in his Lamborghini needed a new set of plugs.  Who knows.

 

[kartvelo]

Well you are also assuming that the balls were measured pregame to precisely and uniformly, without any error, exactly 12.5 based on Andersons best recollection when there is plenty of circumstantial evidence that the officials were less than consistent about measuring balls pregame.

Added that for you.

 

[PedroKsBambino]

 
I haven't read the Warren Report Wells Report yet, so I'll withhold judgment on that.
 
I feel very comfortable saying that the mere act of appearing in public to defend and justify his report tainted Wells and his supposed objectivity.
 
If I'm Wells, NFW do I appear at a press conference to defend my work.  His response should have been: I was commissioned to investigate; I investigated; here's my report; let the chips fall where they may as I have no stake in the matter.
 
Maybe he wanted to bill a few more hours at $2000/hr for the press conference; maybe the V12 in his Lamborghini needed a new set of plugs.  Who knows.

 
Consensus of lawyer friends of mine is that NFL had to have asked him to do the PC; it also appeared to me that he was quite willing to do so to 'defend his independence'.  
 
I would be shocked if he didn't wake up today wishing he had not done it, though

 

[EricFeczko]

To go on (maybe unnecessarily) about sampling and the Wells report using only 4 Colts balls and assuming their variability readings to be representative of the other 8 balls, here is a link for describing an obesity drug trial that halted. It's from yesterday:
http://www.forbes.com/sites/matthewherper/2015/05/12/heart-benefit-for-orexigen-drug-nearly-vanishes-with-new-data/
 
The title of the article is "Heart Benefit for Orexigen Drug Nearly Vanishes with New Data"
 
Here is an excerpt: 

This is a mathematical problem, actually. If you are underpowered to detect differences between two groups, and observe a statistically significant difference. The size of the significant difference will always be greater than the true (i.e. population) difference.
 
 

Added that for you.

You can model variation in initial PSI measurements using a simulation based approach. Such as the one I posted in the prior thread. If you do so properly (assuming 12.5 and 13.0 with an SD of 0.3), there is a failure to replicate a significant difference in PSI drop between the two raters.

 

[pappymojo]

For how much money was spent and how much time was spent, why wouldn't they conduct some actual tests with actual balls using the same gauges? 

 

[kartvelo]

Just being devil's advocate, he knew something he was doing was at a minimum 'scandalous' - because he made the reference to "not going to ESPN, yet".

Or, he wasn't going to ESPN with his tell-all about how "choir boy Brady is really an overbearing asshole who hasn't even bothered to learn my real name in all the years I've worked here."

 

[DJnVa]

Seems like a quiet day--no Wells getting pissed calls? No Yee statements? Nothing from the team about if it's simply accepting the draft choice punishment?

 

[Bleedred]

Agreed, I think the scenario you're looking at calls for a $25k fine.

I also agree that it's quite ridiculous for TB to pass on the rules to the refs while trying to circumvent them (people cheating rarely try to call attention to the rules that they're breaking), however McNally deflating balls in the bathroom (if true, big if) would be a very odd thing to do on his own.

I think there's a *big* piece of missing info somewhere (sadly it probably is on Brady's phone) because none of this makes much sense from either the cheated or not cheated angle.

Gary Hart, former presidential candidate, says hello.  (yes, I'm old)

 

[EricFeczko]

For how much money was spent and how much time was spent, why wouldn't they conduct some actual tests with actual balls using the same gauges? 

Because we really have no idea what gauges were used and who used them; nothing about the initial measurements were recorded. Simulation approaches make few assumptions about the data, so simulations are a more powerful approach for testing differences between groups when information is absent.

 

[EricFeczko]

Or, he wasn't going to ESPN with his tell-all about how "choir boy Brady is really an overbearing asshole who hasn't even bothered to learn my real name in all the years I've worked here."

Or, he wasn't going to ESPN with his tell-all about how "the ball handler with the pats organization (jas) has been paying me under the table to do his job".

 

[kartvelo]

Or, he wasn't going to ESPN with his tell-all about how "the ball handler with the pats organization (jas) has been paying me under the table to do his job".

Or,... one of a million other possibilities. Exactly.

 

[Hoya81]

Or, he wasn't going to ESPN with his tell-all about how "the ball handler with the pats organization (jas) has been paying me under the table to do his job".

 
Or Jastermski was providing him with Pats autographed gear to sell on the side and they were splitting the profits.

 

[OCST]

 
Consensus of lawyer friends of mine is that NFL had to have asked him to do the PC; it also appeared to me that he was quite willing to do so to 'defend his independence'.  
 
I would be shocked if he didn't wake up today wishing he had not done it, though

 
This would not surprise me, but if I were Wells, I would have told Rog: "No.  Appearance of impropriety and all that.  The report speaks for itself. I'm not appearing in public to defend it."

 

[Harry Hooper]

Or,... one of a million other possibilities. Exactly.

. How about this one? McNally was not doing anything, hence the 16 psi, but he had convinced Jastremski that he could, and was wheedling SWAG from Jastremski.

 

[Doctor G]

 
This was discussed some yesterday, but McNally left himself zero margin of error if this was true.  If he left the needle in too long and a ball got down to 9/10psi then it would be obvious that something happened.  I will grant you that McNally is not likely to be joining Mensa anytime soon, but this seems like an awful lot of risk to take even for an idiot.

the needle goes in the gauge gives a reading and you push a button to lower the reading.https://www.google.com/search?q=football+pressure+gauge&rlz=1C1CHMD_enUS394&es_sm=93&tbm=isch&imgil=sxEN69hOV9gwbM%253A%253BCr0Qf0MzxOWcFM%253Bhttp%25253A%25252F%25252Fwww.greenbowsports.co.uk%25252Ffootball-ball-pressure-gauge.html&source=iu&pf=m&fir=sxEN69hOV9gwbM%253A%252CCr0Qf0MzxOWcFM%252C_&usg=__jhEdZ5YrRQgKKHOBnJiiz3uawIQ%3D&biw=800&bih=457&ved=0CDsQyjc&ei=cWtSVZuzDs7isATkqoHgDQ#imgrc=KRq_moib3l3BRM%253A%3Bi5rNjJdhIvbygM%3Bhttps%253A%252F%252Flintvwood.files.wordpress.com%252F2015%252F01%252Fdefalted-footballs-ap-012215.jpg%253Fw%253D650%3Bhttp%253A%252F%252Fwoodtv.com%252F2015%252F01%252F23%252Fnfl-says-no-conclusion-yet-on-pats-deflated-footballs%252F%3B650%3B370
it is important to remember that the video showing McNally going in the bathroom was provided to the league by the Patriots.If they were so interested in obstructing the investigation why did they provide what is being characterized by the investigators as the key piece of evidence and something worthy of a demand for a physical description of the interior of the lavatory.
 
 
This whole investigation at this point hinges on a bunch of text messages which could be the product of a guy trying to picture himself as a much more crucial employee than he actually was  whose main motivation seemed to be increasing what he perceived to be an inadequate share of swag provided by his immediate supervisor  and the team's star QB who he resented at times when he felt like he was being taken for granted  as a  "key player."  

 

[Norm loves Vera]

and more piling on...
 
"Feeley said on 97.5 The Fanatic that when he was playing for the Dolphins in 2004, he saw Patriots quarterback Tom Brady using old, broken-in balls at a time when NFL rules said that teams had to use new balls provided by the league."
 
http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2015/05/13/a-j-feeley-says-he-witnessed-patriots-use-doctored-footballs/

 

[Bleedred]

Or, he wasn't going to ESPN with his tell-all about how "choir boy Brady is really an overbearing asshole who hasn't even bothered to learn my real name in all the years I've worked here."

Why would JJ give a shit about that?  Think about it...."you want to sing to ESPN that Brady's an asshole, have at it."   But if McNally's going to ESPN to let them know that JJ has authorized him to deflate balls to ____ psi, that's a story that JJ would most definitely not want out there.    I'm in the same camp as retractable roof.  We don't have enough information to know what that comment meant, I personally do not consider it proof of any nefarious fooling with the balls.  That said, it remains the one data point that I'm most curious about and could be harmful, in my opinion.   Regardless...even if we stipulated that Brady knew or generally knew, the punishment is so outlandish as to be absurd.   

 

[OCST]

Seems like a quiet day--no Wells getting pissed calls? No Yee statements? Nothing from the team about if it's simply accepting the draft choice punishment?

 
In some sleek office tower somewhere, harried associates are furiously cranking out complaints.
 
I assume that the poring over all relevant documents, looking up old cases, and producing sheafs of memos on possible causes of action/defenses has already been done.

 

[BroodsSexton]

 
Consensus of lawyer friends of mine is that NFL had to have asked him to do the PC; it also appeared to me that he was quite willing to do so to 'defend his independence'.  
 
I would be shocked if he didn't wake up today wishing he had not done it, though

 
He's going to take a lot of shit at the next partners' meeting, I would suspect.  

 

[pappymojo]

Why would JJ give a shit about that?  Think about it...."you want to sing to ESPN that Brady's an asshole, have at it."   But if McNally's going to ESPN to let them know that JJ has authorized him to deflate balls to ____ psi, that's a story that JJ would most definitely not want out there.    I'm in the same camp as retractable roof.  We don't have enough information to know what that comment meant, I personally do not consider it proof of any nefarious fooling with the balls.  That said, it remains the one data point that I'm most curious about and could be harmful, in my opinion.   Regardless...even if we stipulated that Brady knew or generally knew, the punishment is so outlandish as to be absurd.   

 
How do you know that JJ gave a shit?

 

[rodderick]

and more piling on...
 
"Feeley said on 97.5 The Fanatic that when he was playing for the Dolphins in 2004, he saw Patriots quarterback Tom Brady using old, broken-in balls at a time when NFL rules said that teams had to use new balls provided by the league."
 
http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2015/05/13/a-j-feeley-says-he-witnessed-patriots-use-doctored-footballs/

 
Sure, and no ref ever noticed it. It's one thing to play with footballs a little underinflated, since it isn't obvious there's something wrong with them, but a scrubbed, broken in ball would surely catch the attention of opponents and refs alike during a game.

 

[Super Nomario]

 
We don't know the variation of the balls pre-game and we don't know the true mean pressure of the balls.  It's clear that the NFL didn't think ball pressure was important, it's clear that the referees didn't know anything about temperature, pressure, etc.  It's clear that the referees pick and chose gauges at random without any thought to precision or accuracy, and from this you can surmise that the refs weren't particularly careful in measuring the balls pre-game. As evidence, they don't even write down the pressure of the balls. Nobody ever has.  We have no idea whatsoever how much variation a team's balls might have pre-game, even ones that are approved by the ref.
 
Despite this, and despite not knowing what the initial variation of the Patriots balls was, they find that the variation of the Patriots balls at halftime is highly suspicious.   
 
Even so, the Wells report states this:  
 
Not significant = not different.   Especially when you have measurements of 4 balls for the control group (which is only a sampling) and 11 balls of the experimental group (the entire group). You cannot say, "Pish posh, with a larger sample size the difference would be signficant". One of the major causes of bias in research is sampling bias. In other words, is the sample you selected for your study representative of the rest of the population?  In the Patriots' case, the refs looked at every ball.  No sampling bias.  In the Colts' case, the refs looked at 4 balls.  Eight balls were excluded and no explanation for how the four balls were chosen is given.  Were they the balls at the top of the bag? Were they used in the game? Were they wet?   
 
Despite these questions about the sample of 4 out of 12 possible balls, the Wells report takes the Colts' sample data and treats it as gospel truth. They ran their analyses assuming that all 8 other balls were very similar to the 4 that were tested.  
If they looked at 40 out of 120 balls, and the balls were randomly selected, that would be one thing. Four out of 12 is not large enough to draw any meaningful conclusions.   The reason is that the very next Colts ball may have measured 11.5, or some other pressure out of line with the ideal gas law.  This is a real possibility, and if it happened it would entirely negate the variability theory. Entirely (unless the Wells report threw that data point out as an outlier, which is something they would probably do). 
 
edit: clarification

I largely agree with this. Comparing the variance of a sample size of 11 versus that of a sample size of 4 is nonsense, especially when we know there's a time factor causing variance. They claim the data shows variance that would not be explained by time (such as ball 10 measuring much lower than ball 9), but without a valid control group it's hard to know how serious to take that.
 
I think there is a bias here, but a bias towards billable hours rather than against the Patriots. The idea that they can extrapolate with no clear starting points and a control group of just four doesn't hold up to statistical scrutiny, but you can't bill as many hours for labeling it as "inconclusive" as you can if you run 60 pages worth of tests resting on that shaky data foundation. I think the tests themselves were thorough and unbiased, but that doesn't make them valid or significant.

 

[Bleedred]

 
He's going to take a lot of shit at the next partners' meeting, I would suspect.  

Right up until he presents his "collections" report from the NFL for $5 million.   So, by "taking shit" if you mean slaps on the back...then...yeah.  

 

[Yossarian]

But why, at that point, would anyone even think ESPN would care about doctored footballs? The league certainly didn't seem to, both by the minimal fine in the rule itself and the actual application of it to the Vikings game ("hey guys, please stop doing that").