#DFG: Canceling the Noise

Is there any level of suspension that you would advise Tom to accept?


  • Total voters
    208

DJnVa

Dorito Dawg
SoSH Member
Dec 16, 2010
54,581
PhilPlantier said:
 
I text fairly often, but I never commingle two unrelated thoughts on unrelated subjects in a single text while using confusing pronouns.
 

I read the rebuttal, but someone was on a phone while sitting in a car.
 
Where are the confusing pronouns coming from? Didn't he say it referred to a friend--a male friend that was a fraud investigator?
 

dcmissle

Deflatigator
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Aug 4, 2005
28,269
Shelterdog said:
 
I think that's precisely the point--I think he's going to tell the other owners at their next meeting that he cannot live with this witch hunt and this draconian punishment and that if the owners don't walk it back somehow  he's suing the ever living shit out of the league for some kind of breach of contract claim against the league  based on Goodell's actions and the complaint is going to be filed publicly and it will  make NFL headquarters look like a bunch of assholes . 
The owners' meeting:

DON CORLEONE
Ah well, let's get down to business.
We are all honorable men here, we
don't have to give assurances as if
we were lawyers.
(he sits, gazes out
at them, and sighs)
How did things ever go so far?
Well, no matter. A lot of
foolishness has come to pass. It
was so unfortunate, so unnecessary.

The VIEW examines the room once again, as the DON speaks. A
large, clicking board is changing numbers at various times,
and two tapes, showing the fluctuations of the Market during
the day's trading, and projected above.

DON CORLEONE pauses; and TOM HAGEN hands him a cold drink.

DON CORLEONE
Tattaglia has lost a son; I have
lost a son. We are quits. Let
there be a peace...
(he gestures
expressively,
submissively, with
his hands)
That is all I want...
 

nighthob

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
12,814
The Four Peters said:
This also has me realizing how terrified I'd be if my text history became public. I do 75% of my communicating with people that way, and it's probably gibberish to anyone not involved in any of the conversations (and even to some of them). God forbid the group texts between my friends and I got out.
I can tell you for a fact that a couple of my clients would be suicidal if our text logs ever became public (kid lit writers can't be publicly engaging in bawdy talk).
 

Rovin Romine

Johnny Rico
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jul 14, 2005
25,906
Miami (oh, Miami!)
E5 Yaz said:
The "deflate as weight loss" stupidity will be latched on by media as a reason to disregard the entire rebuttal. Already hearing it on ESPN
 
Yep.  Bad move.  Never give the other side ammunition, even if you have to stay quiet on a point or two. 
 

kartvelo

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Aug 12, 2003
10,520
At home
Rovin Romine said:
 
Yep.  Bad move.  Never give the other side ammunition, even if you have to stay quiet on a point or two. 
Staying quiet on the point would have been ammunition for the other side.
 

OCST

Sunny von Bulow
SoSH Member
Jan 10, 2004
24,953
The 718
The Four Peters said:
Have people ever texted before? I've had text conversations with friends that had 2 to 3 different streams of thought going at once, and would seamlessly switch and intermingle the two.
 
doesn't this happen routinely here?  Messageboarding != texting, but close enough.
 

lexrageorge

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2007
18,723
dcmissle said:
Things that make you feel good often are not good for you. Lots of Pats' targets are wearing Teflon made of the explication of "deflator". The choir does not need converting.
I certainly would not have advised the Pats to release what they did (then again, I'm not a lawyer).  Sometimes in these situations, the right thing to do is wait, play out the process a bit until someone is able to broker an adult conversation regarding the matter:  "Roger, look, here are all the holes in that report you sanctioned, and we were far more cooperative than you're giving us credit for.  Hey, I'll throw Rosencrantz and Guilderstern (thanks Rev) under the bus, and I'll accept a fine and mid-round draft pick.  But you need to come clean and give some context regarding the cooperation bit, and the league needs to come up with procedures to make sure there's never any question about ball tampering again.  And let's figure out a way to give each other an out so you come out looking OK".  
 
I'm guessing that once Roger unleashed Wells' ill timed press conference yesterday, the Pats felt the gloves had to come off.  It may or may not move the needle among the mediots, but I'm not convinced that was the Patriots end goal here.  
 
Anyway, I suggest buying stock in providers of popcorn the next few days; it will be entertaining. And the NFL and the Patriots are in the entertainment business after all. 
 

Leather

given himself a skunk spot
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
28,451
kartvelo said:
Staying quiet on the point would have been ammunition for the other side.
 
They could have just left it there and not drawn attention to it, and said "There's nothing here that suggests he was referring to deflating balls any more than there is anything here that suggests that Mr. Jastremski has a corn chip for a penis."
 

SeoulSoxFan

I Want to Hit the World with Rocket Punch
Moderator
SoSH Member
Jun 27, 2006
22,228
A Scud Away from Hell
One thing is for sure. 
 
In Well's passionate defense, he said "it was the evidence" and there's no way anyone can look at the texts and conclude they were not "direct" evidence.
 
How can anyone look at the transcript and say the same? 
 

nighthob

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
12,814
E5 Yaz said:
The "deflate as weight loss" stupidity will be latched on by media as a reason to disregard the entire rebuttal. Already hearing it on ESPN
ESPN was going to latch onto the single text as a life preserver whether or not the Patriots addressed it. They're an NFL partner, they know where their bread is buttered.
 

bankshot1

Member
SoSH Member
Feb 12, 2003
25,216
where I was last at
Shelterdog said:
 
I'm missing the Henderson reference.
 
Anyhow, I don't think Kraft is trying to convince Roger to hit reset--he's trying to get the other owner's to take this out of Roger's hands by saying that this means war, that this is a clusterfuck, etc.  And you know, he's going to have some credibility after taking his Spygate beating like a man, being a league guy, defending the league and commissioner in public after Ray Rice, leaving his dying wife's side to help with the labor negotiations, etc. 
This was the point I was making.
 
A few BSD owners brokers a deal, the Pats keep their 1, lose a 2, stick it on less than perfect Pats cooperation, and Goodell keeps his job, despite his fucking up every investigation he gets his hands on. 
 

Rovin Romine

Johnny Rico
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jul 14, 2005
25,906
Miami (oh, Miami!)
kartvelo said:
Staying quiet on the point would have been ammunition for the other side.
 
It's a choice between two evils.  While there are exceptions, generally parties do best when they control the conversation/arguments.  
 
"Deflator" =s weight loss does not pass the sniff test.  
 

E5 Yaz

polka king
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Apr 25, 2002
91,827
Oregon
kartvelo said:
Staying quiet on the point would have been ammunition for the other side.
 
They would use it either way. Best answer would have been to say he was the "deflator" of getting balls down to 12.5 ... ignore the weight deal
 
The other point media are harping on is ... if Jastremski and McNally did nothing wrong, why were they disciplined by team?
 
This is an uphill climb because it doesn't follow the national storyline
 

Shelterdog

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Feb 19, 2002
15,375
New York City
sodenj5 said:
 
We don't need to derail this thread with Incoginito. Literally every time I tried to bring up the point of how every teammate and coach defended Incognito as doing nothing wrong or outside of the realm of "normal" in an NFL locker room, I was absolutely skewered.
 
It's hilarious seeing people bringing up quotes from Jim Turner as the beacon of truth suddenly.
 
False.  Technically speaking we were riding train on you.
 

E5 Yaz

polka king
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Apr 25, 2002
91,827
Oregon
nighthob said:
ESPN was going to latch onto the single text as a life preserver whether or not the Patriots addressed it. They're an NFL partner, they know where their bread is buttered.
 
Of course, as several of us have said for weeks.
 
The point is, reaching for an unlikely explanation diminishes the impact of the rest of the statement in public view.
 

Bob420

New Member
Jul 14, 2005
918
PhilPlantier said:
 
Right, but it doesn't address the timing of the subsequent texts.  If you believe the rebuttal, McNally made a comment about how "Tom sucks" and he's going to make the ball a "balloon."  Then Jastremski responds: "Talked to him last night. He actually brought you up and said you must have a lot of stress trying to get them done..."
 
According to the Wells Report, 29 seconds later, with no intervening calls texts from McNally, Jastremski writes:
 
Jastremski: I told him it was. He was right though
Jastremski: I checked some of the balls this morn The refs fucked usa few of then were at almost 16
 
Why would Jastremski interject a complete non-sequitur about the stress of getting "them" (ticket sales) done, only to immediately revert back to talking about ball pressure?
It might not be Tom Brady they are talking about. It could be Tom from Quincy. A very demanding 3rd grader upset about the pressure in the kickball.
 

The Social Chair

Member
SoSH Member
Feb 17, 2010
6,341
nighthob said:
ESPN was going to latch onto the single text as a life preserver whether or not the Patriots addressed it. They're an NFL partner, they know where their bread is buttered.
 
Not just ESPN. Deadspin dismissed the whole rebuttal based on the weight loss thing. 
 

TomRicardo

rusty cohlebone
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Feb 6, 2006
21,288
Row 14
The Social Chair said:
 
Not just ESPN. Deadspin dismissed the whole rebuttal based on the weight loss thing. 
 
Deadspin will only get on a bandwagon if attacks Goodell and/or ESPN.  
 

lexrageorge

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2007
18,723
SeoulSoxFan said:
One thing is for sure. 
 
In Well's passionate defense, he said "it was the evidence" and there's no way anyone can look at the texts and conclude they were not "direct" evidence.
 
How can anyone look at the transcript and say the same? 
But the duty of Wells is to consider alternative explanations and decide how much weight to give them.  And it wasn't just the texts where Wells refused to do that.  For example, selectively deciding that Walt Anderson's recollection of the pressure gauge that was used to check the balls prior to the game was going to be ignored.  
 
"We saw one text where McNally referred to himself as Deflator.  But we also uncovered another one where the term was used in a completely different context."
 

DJnVa

Dorito Dawg
SoSH Member
Dec 16, 2010
54,581
Rovin Romine said:
 
It's a choice between two evils.  While there are exceptions, generally parties do best when they control the conversation/arguments.  
 
"Deflator" =s weight loss does not pass the sniff test.  
 
Seems like a judgment call and they thought the opposite.
 
 
Could this be a case of the Patriots trying to draw a distinction between the rebuttal and the Wells Report? We've taken shots at the Wells Report for downplaying or omitting info that would support the Pats case. The Patriots are saying that no matter how dumb it may look on the face of it, we're still putting it all out there.
 

pappymojo

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 28, 2010
6,756
I believe that Kraft is also trying to appease his team's fan base. If I, as a Patriots fan, think that Kraft did not do right by Brady (and Belichick), and they then retire, my allegiance to the team is a lot weaker. If, however, Kraft goes all-in publicly in support of Brady (and Belichick) and they retire, my allegiance to the team remains much stronger. This is 'us versus them' and Kraft is now firmly on the 'us' side.
 

kartvelo

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Aug 12, 2003
10,520
At home
lexrageorge said:
But the duty of Wells is to consider alternative explanations and decide how much weight to give them.  And it wasn't just the texts where Wells refused to do that.  For example, selectively deciding that Walt Anderson's recollection of the pressure gauge that was used to check the balls prior to the game.  
 
"We saw one text where McNally referred to himself as Deflator.  But we also uncovered another one where the term was used in a completely different context."
...and which context corroborates his explanation of the term.
 

Leather

given himself a skunk spot
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
28,451
TomRicardo said:
 
Deadspin will only get on a bandwagon if attacks Goodell and/or ESPN.  
 
And they've been blasting away at Goodell recently, meaning they will err on shitting on the Pats to even the scales a bit.
 

lexrageorge

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2007
18,723
E5 Yaz said:
 
They would use it either way. Best answer would have been to say he was the "deflator" of getting balls down to 12.5 ... ignore the weight deal
 
The other point media are harping on is ... if Jastremski and McNally did nothing wrong, why were they disciplined by team?
 
This is an uphill climb because it doesn't follow the national storyline
Someone should show the mediots the NFL's press release which states that McNally/Jastremski are current barred, by the NFL, from working for the team.  
 

nighthob

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
12,814
E5 Yaz said:
The other point media are harping on is ... if Jastremski and McNally did nothing wrong, why were they disciplined by team?
They did do things wrong. The texts exposed that they were stealing shit from the clubhouse. This before getting into the fact that the NFL was (as someone else cleverly noted) turning them into Rosencrantz and Guildenstern. Though while the NFL undoubtedly intended this to be grand Shakespearean tragedy good ole' Dorito Dink has turned it into Stoppardian absurdity.
 

SeoulSoxFan

I Want to Hit the World with Rocket Punch
Moderator
SoSH Member
Jun 27, 2006
22,228
A Scud Away from Hell
drleather2001 said:
They could have just left it there and not drawn attention to it, and said "There's nothing here that suggests he was referring to deflating balls any more than there is anything here that suggests that Mr. Jastremski has a corn chip for a penis."
 
To me the report wasn't written for the real Dorito Dinks like the ESPN talking heads, nevermind for Shannon Sharpes & Matt Simms of the world. 
 
It was written as a big warning shot to Goodell & Vincent IN PREPARATION for the actual heavies to follow.
 

JimD

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 29, 2001
8,734
E5 Yaz said:
The "deflate as weight loss" stupidity will be latched on by media as a reason to disregard the entire rebuttal. Already hearing it on ESPN
 
So, those media members are willing to disregard 98 percent of a report's contents to focus on ridiculing the 2% that is questionable.  I can't think of a better example of how shallow the 2015 sports media complex is.
 

moondog80

heart is two sizes two small
SoSH Member
Sep 20, 2005
8,412
Rovin Romine said:
 
It's a choice between two evils.  While there are exceptions, generally parties do best when they control the conversation/arguments.  
 
"Deflator" =s weight loss does not pass the sniff test.  
 
Sure, if you willfully ignore the text where it was used in that context.
 

Stevie1der

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 6, 2009
1,075
Morrisville, NC
DrewDawg said:
The info about the Pats having some kind of proof of the Colts ball boys having needles during a game with Jacksonville.
 
Is Jacksonville an ally here?
 
You mean the same Jacksonville team that might get to face the Brady-less Patriots if the suspension is upheld?  Yeah, not gonna hold out hope that they come rushing to our defense.
 

E5 Yaz

polka king
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Apr 25, 2002
91,827
Oregon
JimD said:
 
So, those media members are willing to disregard 98 percent of a report's contents to focus on ridiculing the 2% that is questionable.  I can't think of a better example of how shallow the 2105 sports media complex is.
 
Correct on both counts
 

Zedia

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 17, 2005
7,172
Pasadena, CA
Rovin Romine said:
  
"Deflator" =s weight loss does not pass the sniff test.  
 
I have a feeling this was posted at some point in the mega-thread, but this is always a good watch:
 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yznRGS9f-jI
 

DaughtersofDougMirabelli

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 17, 2006
3,016
nighthob said:
They did do things wrong. The texts exposed that they were stealing shit from the clubhouse. This before getting into the fact that the NFL was (as someone else cleverly noted) turning them into Rosencrantz and Guildenstern. Though while the NFL undoubtedly intended this to be grand Shakespearean tragedy good ole' Dorito Dink has turned it into Stoppardian absurdity.
 
Can SoSH pass a rule to ban quoted texts in sigs? Your posts are pissing me off more than this whole DeflateGate scandal. 
 

nighthob

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
12,814
Stevie1der said:
You mean the same Jacksonville team that might get to face the Brady-less Patriots if the suspension is upheld?  Yeah, not gonna hold out hope that they come rushing to our defense.
Or the same one that might want to get the hell out of Jacksonville, now with a new ally in the owner ranks.
 

PBDWake

Member
SoSH Member
May 1, 2008
3,686
Peabody, MA
Rovin Romine said:
 
It's a choice between two evils.  While there are exceptions, generally parties do best when they control the conversation/arguments.  
 
"Deflator" =s weight loss does not pass the sniff test.  
 
I don't know. It may or may not, but Seanberry (and Marciano) did have the gist of it a few pages ago, although he may have been using it as a pedestal for attack.
 
How do these guys know each other? Because they work together on equipment with the Pats. They're routinely inflating and deflating balls. People use terms and nicknames based on what they share in common. I have friends through a game I play where common terminology for a mistake is a "punt". We were watching the Sox game at a bar, and I disagreed with the relief pitcher they brought in. I called it a punt. Someone could have overheard me and reasonably assumed I had no idea about sports and was making shit up as I went along. I have similar colloquialisms for work, people I know from college, and numerous other things. When you actually think about it, it's still a strange coincidence, but using that term isn't the extraordinary circumstance most people are portraying it as.
 
I mean, it's not like Ray Lewis's coach was serious when he called him killer in pop warner...
 

Tim Salmon

Member
SoSH Member
Oct 24, 2005
3,334
DrewDawg said:
 
I read the rebuttal, but someone was on a phone while sitting in a car.
 
Where are the confusing pronouns coming from? Didn't he say it referred to a friend--a male friend that was a fraud investigator?
 
Note: The date and time stamps are from the Wells Report (p. 77).  I'm assuming he at least got those right, though I could be giving him too much credit.
 
10/17/14 09:05:45 EDT  McNally: Tom sucks…im going make that next ball a fuckin balloon
10/17/14 09:07:08 EDT  Jastremski: Talked to him last night. He actually brought you up and said you must have a lot of stress trying to get them done…
10/17/14 09:07:37 EDT  Jastremski: I told him it was. He was right though…
10/17/14 09:08:08 EDT  Jastremski: I checked some of the balls this morn… The refs fucked us…a few of then were at almost 16
 
If you believe the Pats rebuttal, then Jastremski ignored McNally's text about Tom (presumably Brady), and instead responded by talking about his fraud investigator friend.  He didn't give any indication to McNally that he was switching to a conversation about tickets, or that the "him" referred to anyone other than Tom.
 
By itself, I don't think that's especially significant.  But he followed up with a text 29 seconds later that appears to refer, in a single line, to both the preceding statement about stress and McNally's opening statement about ball pressure.  I don't think the fact that people often flit back and forth between subjects explains: (1) the use of a pronoun before any subject has been introduced (how the hell was McNally supposed to know who "him" was, if not Tom); (2) the timing (this conversation took place within a span of a couple minutes); and (3) Jastremski's statement that "he was right" on the same line in which he is purportedly referring to the stress of selling tickets.
 

NortheasternPJ

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 16, 2004
19,707
DaughtersofDougMirabelli said:
 
Can SoSH pass a rule to ban quoted texts in sigs? Your posts are pissing me off more than this whole DeflateGate scandal. 
 
Just turn off signatures. I did it years ago since it annoyed me.
 

Jettisoned

Member
SoSH Member
May 6, 2008
1,062
PhilPlantier said:
To each his own.  I read the whole thing and thought it was an awesome takedown of the "science" and assumptions in the Wells Report.  But I don't think the alternative explanations of the texts pass the smell test.
 
I think this line undercuts the "texter with ADD" defense:
 
Jastremski: I told him it was. He was right though…
 
The first sentence only makes sense if it refers back to the "stress" line.  The second sentence only makes sense if you read it in conjunction with the following text, which refers back to complaints about ball pressure:
 
Jastremski: I checked some of the balls this morn… The refs fucked us…a few of then were at almost 16
 
I text fairly often, but I never commingle two unrelated thoughts on unrelated subjects in a single text while using confusing pronouns.
 
I don't know, I'd like to see a few more preceding texts.  It could be that the whole text is referring to someone other than Brady, and then he switches to talking about Brady in the next one.
 

PBDWake

Member
SoSH Member
May 1, 2008
3,686
Peabody, MA
PhilPlantier said:
 
Note: The date and time stamps are from the Wells Report (p. 77).  I'm assuming he at least got those right, though I could be giving him too much credit.
 
10/17/14 09:05:45 EDT  McNally: Tom sucks…im going make that next ball a fuckin balloon
10/17/14 09:07:08 EDT  Jastremski: Talked to him last night. He actually brought you up and said you must have a lot of stress trying to get them done…
10/17/14 09:07:37 EDT  Jastremski: I told him it was. He was right though…
10/17/14 09:08:08 EDT  Jastremski: I checked some of the balls this morn… The refs fucked us…a few of then were at almost 16
 
If you believe the Pats rebuttal, then Jastremski ignored McNally's text about Tom (presumably Brady), and instead responded by talking about his fraud investigator friend.  He didn't give any indication to McNally that he was switching to a conversation about tickets, or that the "him" referred to anyone other than Tom.
 
By itself, I don't think that's especially significant.  But he followed up with a text 29 seconds later that appears to refer, in a single line, to both the preceding statement about stress and McNally's opening statement about ball pressure.  I don't think the fact that people often flit back and forth between subjects explains: (1) the use of a pronoun before any subject has been introduced (how the hell was McNally supposed to know who "him" was, if not Tom); (2) the timing (this conversation took place within a span of a couple minutes); and (3) Jastremski's statement that "he was right" on the same line in which he is purportedly referring to the stress of selling tickets.
 
Well, what was McNally's text before that. That bears mentioning. If McNally's text is an unanswered text from like 3 hours before asking something like "How's your friend?", and JJ is responding to each at the same time, in turn, because he missed the first one and the second message alerted him to the first, that makes sense. And happens all the time with me. Although I feel like if that were the case we might have had it in the pats response.
 

JimBoSox9

will you be my friend?
SoSH Member
Nov 1, 2005
16,679
Mid-surburbia
E5 Yaz said:
The "deflate as weight loss" stupidity will be latched on by media as a reason to disregard the entire rebuttal. Already hearing it on ESPN
 
News cycles don't get set in cement in a couple hours, whatever folks like to say about how the internetz have changed things.  Just like with the Report itself, the more nuanced analysis will start to trickle out tonight and tomorrow (as the more responsible folks actually peruse and absorb it rather than running to nearest ESPN set).  The Deflator nickname bit is getting the early run because it's the lowest-hanging fruit.
 

DJnVa

Dorito Dawg
SoSH Member
Dec 16, 2010
54,581
Stevie1der said:
 
You mean the same Jacksonville team that might get to face the Brady-less Patriots if the suspension is upheld?  Yeah, not gonna hold out hope that they come rushing to our defense.
 
My point was they might have already done so. If there's "proof" from a Jacksonville-Indy game of the Colts doing someone wonky, where did it come from? Either Jacksonville or the media covering the game I would think.
 

Comfortably Lomb

Koko the Monkey
SoSH Member
Feb 22, 2004
13,202
The Paris of the 80s
An aside: I think it's amazing that anyone in this day and age would ever put anything in an email, text, or other documentable electronic communication that is an any way related to something they shouldn't be doing.
 

Tim Salmon

Member
SoSH Member
Oct 24, 2005
3,334
Jettisoned said:
 
I don't know, I'd like to see a few more preceding texts.  It could be that the whole text is referring to someone other than Brady, and then he switches to talking about Brady in the next one.
The Wells Report states that this was the first text exchange between the two in 12 days (p. 77, n. 49).  Again, I think the report is crap, but I'm going to assume that he isn't lying about dates and times that opposing lawyers could easily refute.