#DFG: Canceling the Noise

[AB in DC]

In the big picture, I gotta say, I'm leaning less toward "the NFL was out to get us" and more toward Hanlon's Razor: Don't attribute to malice what can be adequately explained by incompetence.  The entire process was fucked from start to finish.  No one had any idea about what happens to air pressure or how to measure it.  Someone in the NFL front office was given completely wrong PSI numbers, but no one knows where they came from.  So yeah, there were plenty of folks who automatically assumed that Patriots were doing something nefarious, but if there really were footballs deflated to 10.1 psi, then a lot of reasonable people would have done the same.  And the NFL has proven that they have absolutely no clue how to run a proper investigation.  They wouldn't know "due process" if it bit them in the ass.  And Goodell is clearly uninterested in the mistakes made by his staff.  But I'm not sure the outcome would have been a whole lot different if it were some other team.  Then Wells comes in and bring all of his own biases as a defense attorney, not to mention his long history of twisting the truth on behalf of his big-money clients.  Ultimately, his opinions are as valid as anyone else's -- the problem was the NFL had no way of distinguishing the facts of the situation from Wells's opinion, and no one wanted to take the effort to think independently and question whether one man's opinion really provide sufficient basis for punishment.  It was just, Wells said Brady did something wrong, so we have to punish him.  That's it.
 
And now we find out that the Ravens started the mess because they thought something funny was happening with the K-balls.  They may have been right -- except that it was the crooked ref swapping out the balls, not anything the Patriots were doing.  And we all know that the Colts are a bunch of whiners, so it's no surprise that they bought into it.  To some extent, it's just gamesmanship, which would be no big deal until someone goes blabbing to Kravitz after the game was over.  That's what started the shitstorm, and clearly the NFL had no idea how to handle it.  No one understood what happened, so Goodell sends in the hired goods at NFL Security, but of course they make a complete mess of the situation.  I'm sure Goodell thought that the whole thing would be resolved in a week, so he probably didn't mind the publicity, since it drove up interest in the Super Bowl.  He probably figured it was a one-week story that would blow over once NFL Security finished talking to folks.  But he totally underestimated the complexity of the situation, and he naively trusted his internal investigators would clear thing up from him (and the public at large) before they flew to Arizona for the Super Bowl.
 
 
The worst thing that the NFL did was to smear Brady and the Patriots through a one-sided PR campaign.  That was (and is) pure evil.  But really, would things be a whole heck of a lot different today if that didn't happen?  I'm not so sure any more.
 
 
Someone, please convince me that I'm wrong.  I've spent the last three months believing that this was all biased and pre-judged against the Patriots from the beginning.  Now it's starting to feel like the whole thing was so fucked that it was basically a coin flip as to whether it would have led to punishment or exoneration.  Am I crazy to think that Brady and the Patriots were just collateral damage from what was almost entirely a matter of gross incompetence and a broken investigation/punishment system?

 

[Leather]

Typically, when lawyers refuse correspondence or information to an opposing party during discovery (which is the process by which both sides ask for and collect data on the case being litigated), the lawyer must provide a "privilege log" that gives a brief description of the document/correspondence refused or redacted (e.g. "7/8/13 email from Mr. Jones to Ms. Bones") and the justification for withholding it (e.g. "Protected by attorney client privilege.").   If the parties disagree, or the opposing party still wants access, the attorney has to make a strategic decision on whether to force the other party to ask for an order to compel disclosure (usually through an in camera review by the judge), work out a deal ("I'll give you this if you stipulate to X") or just say "F it" and turn it over because it's not actually harmful and worth it to appear accommodating and reasonable in the event you go before the judge on another issue (which gets to the strategy of claiming privilege and work product). 
 
Now, of course, Yee isn't representing Brady in litigation, so the above does not legally apply.  However, he should have been aware that everything was going to potentially used against his client, either in the report itself or in the court of public opinion.  Yee (and to a certain extent, the Patriots and Brady) appeared naive throughout this entire process.  People on SoSH spotted what was potentially going on back in January; that the NFL was out to thump the Patriots, so they should tread lightly and button up.   Yee should have proceeded as close to "by the book" as he could have so there could be no claims later on that he was coming into any appeal with dirty hands.    So, while he wasn't required to, Yee should have presented a letter to Wells in very general terms as to why he was advising Brady to keep the phone.  Something like: "We believe the relevant data has already been supplied; the NFL has means to access any data they desire; there is sensitive private data on Mr. Brady's phone; the security of the NFL's office regarding data is suspect; etc..."
 
Something, anything, that was at least quasi-legalistic so that there's more to back up Brady's refusal than "My lawyer said so."
 
It would have been a lot better for Brady if his team could produce a copy of such a letter and say: "See?  We were reasonable."

 

[Average Reds]

 
Yee might have had many good reasons not to turn over the information. But it seems like he didn't explain any of them to Wells. In situation where I'm not complying with at least facially reasonable requests (which this is -- its a valid investigation, Wells is trying to get at least arguably relevant info), I've explained why.  I never had a lawyer on the other side *not* explain. We may not like or agree with the explanations, but that's how professionals behave.
 
I know nothing of Yee's lawyer background. Some agents really practiced law.  Some are Theo Epstein and Tony LaRussa -- skilled people with law degrees -- But not lawyers.
Taking Wells's characterization at face value, Yee saying "No and that's the end of it" is pretty close to unheard of without trying to discuss ways to get to, or close to, "yes."  Maybe you can't actually get there.
 
From where I sit now, if Wells accurately characterized both the "two buckets " of info he was looking for, provided Yee with the search terms to give to his own searcher, and take Yee's word that he had a good faith search done, Yee's actions are inexplicable to me. They are not the actions of an experienced lawyer.
 
 
EDIT: Average Reds sez (my quote function is FUBAR):
 
 
But wasn't the search Wells asked Brady to do eventually done?
http://deadspin.com/the-full-story-of-tom-bradys-destroyed-cell-phone-1722190784
 
Maybe I'm confusing timelines. But I just don't see Wells's request -- if this was the request -- "search these terms; show us what you find; I'll trust you (yee/Brady) that you'll do it on the up-and-up" as problematic.
 
As far as Wells's conclusions go, maybe others have had different experiences, but I never had another lawyer refuse a discovery request without any comment at all.

 
It's only problematic if Wells has no right to ask for the information and if providing that information would then create a precedent that could be used for other fishing expeditions for whatever reason Goodell wants. 
 
And I simply do not accept Wells at face value when he implies that the request was refused without comment.  He knew very well why Brady refused and he's being coy to claim otherwise.
 
Edit:  And again, that's not to be supportive of Yee, who appears to have been out of his depth here.

 

[GregHarris]

Finally got a chance to read this.
 
Kessler destroyed Caliguri. 

 

[amarshal2]

Finally got a chance to read this.
 
Kessler destroyed Caliguri. 

Please expand. I really didn't read it that way. I felt he left a lot on the table with the time thing and the was not explicit or punchy enough on the gauge thing. I felt like Caliguri squirmed out of it or obfuscated enough that Goddell wouldn't be able to follow.

I'm also wondering if this is more incompetence than conspiracy on behalf of the NFL.

 

[joe dokes]

AB in DC
 

Someone, please convince me that I'm wrong.  I've spent the last three months believing that this was all biased and pre-judged against the Patriots from the beginning.  Now it's starting to feel like the whole thing was so fucked that it was basically a coin flip as to whether it would have led to punishment or exoneration.  Am I crazy to think that Brady and the Patriots were just collateral damage from what was almost entirely a matter of gross incompetence and a broken investigation/punishment system?
 
 

 
I think this is it.  I separate "the League" from individuals like Pagano, Grigson and Kensil, whose teams get killed or trick-played. 
 
But the League? NFW. That's straight-out incompetence. The whole "the NFL is out to get us" always sounded ridiculous to me.
 
If you knew nothing about science, and found a bunch of balls below the minimum pressure, you'd look into it.  Even the ax-grinders, like Grigson, et al.  They just *thought* they found something. And the league was too incompetent to tell them they didn't.

 

[DavidTai]

Please expand. I really didn't read it that way. I felt he left a lot on the table with the time thing and the was not explicit or punchy enough on the gauge thing. I felt like Caliguri squirmed out of it or obfuscated enough that Goddell wouldn't be able to follow.

I'm also wondering if this is more incompetence than conspiracy on behalf of the NFL.

 
I feel like it's incompetence in terms of actual handling of the deflateball-gate, and conspiracy in terms of PR.

 

[Myt1]

 
Yee might have had many good reasons not to turn over the information. But it seems like he didn't explain any of them to Wells. In situation where I'm not complying with at least facially reasonable requests (which this is -- its a valid investigation, Wells is trying to get at least arguably relevant info), I've explained why.  I never had a lawyer on the other side *not* explain. We may not like or agree with the explanations, but that's how professionals behave.
 
I know nothing of Yee's lawyer background. Some agents really practiced law.  Some are Theo Epstein and Tony LaRussa -- skilled people with law degrees -- But not lawyers.
Taking Wells's characterization at face value, Yee saying "No and that's the end of it" is pretty close to unheard of without trying to discuss ways to get to, or close to, "yes."  Maybe you can't actually get there.
 
From where I sit now, if Wells accurately characterized both the "two buckets " of info he was looking for, provided Yee with the search terms to give to his own searcher, and take Yee's word that he had a good faith search done, Yee's actions are inexplicable to me. They are not the actions of an experienced lawyer.
 
 
EDIT: Average Reds sez (my quote function is FUBAR):
 
 
But wasn't the search Wells asked Brady to do eventually done?
http://deadspin.com/the-full-story-of-tom-bradys-destroyed-cell-phone-1722190784
 
Maybe I'm confusing timelines. But I just don't see Wells's request -- if this was the request -- "search these terms; show us what you find; I'll trust you (yee/Brady) that you'll do it on the up-and-up" as problematic.
 
As far as Wells's conclusions go, maybe others have had different experiences, but I never had another lawyer refuse a discovery request without any comment at all.

I've been in arbitration a with no discovery and, "Because you're not entitled to it," is a perfectly valid answer that I've been given. If I intended to make an argument or a conclusion about the failure to produce something at a later date, I'd paper it by sending a letter detailing my request and the refusal, listing the likely outcomes of the refusal, and then requesting a reason for the record.

Nothing about this process had anything to do with how discovery is actually done, and it's not like listing a reason (see refusal to produce a witness for the upteenth time) would have had any effect.

 

[ivanvamp]

 
I think this is it.  I separate "the League" from individuals like Pagano, Grigson and Kensil, whose teams get killed or trick-played. 
 
But the League? NFW. That's straight-out incompetence. The whole "the NFL is out to get us" always sounded ridiculous to me.
 
If you knew nothing about science, and found a bunch of balls below the minimum pressure, you'd look into it.  Even the ax-grinders, like Grigson, et al.  They just *thought* they found something. And the league was too incompetent to tell them they didn't.

 
It may have been incompetent at the beginning, but very quickly they should have realized that the science indicates nothing happened.  And they should have said, we looked into it, and look, this is what happens on cold days.  So now that we really get what's going on, we're going to make sure that at halftime of cold days, we're going to re-inflate the balls to proper levels and go from there.  
 
Easy as pie.
 
But they didn't do that.  In fact, they leaked blatantly false information that was very damaging to the Patriots, and even when they knew the correct information, they let it hang out there.  The Patriots pushed back, and then Goodell got his gander up, and the game was on.  And everything from that point on, in the very least, has all been about Goodell not being willing to look in any way soft on this issue.  Instead of doing the right and reasonable thing, he took this to places nobody on earth ever dreamed it would go.  All Brady et al have done is defend themselves from ridiculous charges.  They have every right to do that.
 
Goodell could have stepped this down right from the beginning, but he chose to go nuclear.  He preferred to tarnish Brady and the Patriots in order to look tough.  So at some point, this became not about deflated footballs but all about Roger, his image, and his power.  That's not really incompetence.  That's unconscionable.  

 

[joe dokes]

AverageReds
 
It's only problematic if Wells has no right to ask for the information and if providing that information would then create a precedent that could be used for other fishing expeditions for whatever reason Goodell wants. 
 
And I simply do not accept Wells at face value when he implies that the request was refused without comment.  He knew very well why Brady refused and he's being coy to claim otherwise.
 
Edit:  And again, that's not to be supportive of Yee, who appears to have been out of his depth here.
 

 Fair enough. I don't agree that Wells had no right to ask, but I get the argument.  But Yee's is not the side I want to defend in front of a Judge (if this is an accurate shorthand of how it went down):
 
Wells: As you know, we're looking into the deflation of balls. We'd like you to give us your phones, but if you don't want to do that, you can have your people search them for emails and texts with words like "deflate" (etc.) and send us the results. We can work with you and Mr. Yee on redaction for personal info."
 
Yee: No. 
 
 
You may be right, that anything other than "here you are Mr. Wells, take everything for as long as you want" would have yielded the same result. I'm not as sure.
 
 
 
One thing, though, it looks like Brady *did* eventually turn over the requested-for-searched info (minus the stuff on the one missing phone), if I read that Deadspin piece correctly.

 

[MuppetAsteriskTalk]

 
I think this is it.  I separate "the League" from individuals like Pagano, Grigson and Kensil, whose teams get killed or trick-played. 
 
But the League? NFW. That's straight-out incompetence. The whole "the NFL is out to get us" always sounded ridiculous to me.
 
If you knew nothing about science, and found a bunch of balls below the minimum pressure, you'd look into it.  Even the ax-grinders, like Grigson, et al.  They just *thought* they found something. And the league was too incompetent to tell them they didn't.

 
What about the league refusing to correct misinformation when it paints the Pats/Brady in a bad light, but immediately correcting information that makes the league look bad? (Including sometimes lying when "correcting" information, i.e. - the 4 hour thing.)

 

[joe dokes]

Goodell could have stepped this down right from the beginning, but he chose to go nuclear.  He preferred to tarnish Brady and the Patriots in order to look tough.  So at some point, this became not about deflated footballs but all about Roger, his image, and his power.  That's not really incompetence.  That's unconscionable.  

 
All true. But that's not Goodell trying to "get the Patriots."  They just happened to be the first  opportunity for Goodell to swing his dick, post domestic-violence clusterfuck.  *That's* why he didn't shut it down. Because he'd look weak and ineffective.  Again. Not, IMO, because it was the Patriots.
 
 

What about the league refusing to correct misinformation when it paints the Pats/Brady in a bad light, but immediately correcting information that makes the league look bad? (Including sometimes lying when "correcting" information, i.e. - the 4 hour thing.)
 

 
See above. Once it started, it was all about looking strong and tough and very judicial.  All the things that the League (Goodell) failed to look like with Rice.

 

[edmunddantes]

 Dan Steinberg, at WaPO: Link
 

 
Last week, I relied on the word of Roger Goodell. I won’t make that mistake again.
 
When the NFL commissioner issued his 20-page decision to uphold Tom Brady’s suspension, I was asked to whip up some thoughts that might (and did) go on the front page of The Washington Post. To the extent I had a conclusion, it was that this ridiculous scandal was making everyone look bad, for no apparent reason.
 
When it actually came time to ding Brady for his misdeeds, though, I found them pretty slim. He seemed non-believable when he claimed he didn’t know a Patriots ballboy, for example, which is hardly a crime. And the destruction of his cell phone felt sort of odd — although so does eating morning-after Taco Bell.
...
 
Goodell further argued that the huge uptick in communication between Brady and the assistant “undermines any suggestion that the communications addressed only preparation of footballs for the Super Bowl rather than the tampering allegations and their anticipated responses to inquiries about the tampering.”
 
Those words swayed my original piece, which was based on Goodell’s report. And those words were, to be frank, hogwash.
...
 
Still, that’s mostly trivia and fact-checking. Being deliberately misleading about whether or not Brady openly admitted to discussing the allegations with the assistant during those conversations is not.
 
This isn’t about whether or not anyone took air out of footballs, or whether or not a quarterback knew anything untoward was happening. This is about whether the commissioner of the NFL cares at all about accuracy, and whether he can be believed when he belches out his 20-page decisions. Last week, I made the mistake of assuming he could. I’ll try not to do that again.

 

[( . ) ( . ) and (_!_)]

 
It may have been incompetent at the beginning, but very quickly they should have realized that the science indicates nothing happened.  And they should have said, we looked into it, and look, this is what happens on cold days.  So now that we really get what's going on, we're going to make sure that at halftime of cold days, we're going to re-inflate the balls to proper levels and go from there.  
 
Easy as pie.
 
But they didn't do that.  In fact, they leaked blatantly false information that was very damaging to the Patriots, and even when they knew the correct information, they let it hang out there.  The Patriots pushed back, and then Goodell got his gander up, and the game was on.  And everything from that point on, in the very least, has all been about Goodell not being willing to look in any way soft on this issue.  Instead of doing the right and reasonable thing, he took this to places nobody on earth ever dreamed it would go.  All Brady et al have done is defend themselves from ridiculous charges.  They have every right to do that.
 
Goodell could have stepped this down right from the beginning, but he chose to go nuclear.  He preferred to tarnish Brady and the Patriots in order to look tough.  So at some point, this became not about deflated footballs but all about Roger, his image, and his power.  That's not really incompetence.  That's unconscionable.  

 
 It's ego and hubris of those involved.  The NFL, meaning Goodell, Pash, Kensil, Vincent, were wounded that the Patriots fought back.  The Pats didn't kiss the ring immediately and that signed their own figurative death sentence.  Now the Pats in no way should have acquiesced to the NFL here, that is not what I am saying.  What I am saying is that by the time the NFL found out that the science was junk and when the rational thing to do was to back down and say that this is what happened, that the egos were too wounded and they could not do it.
 
I am extremely curious about the role of Pash in this.  There have been comments in the past about Kraft and Pash and the line from Kraft's pro Brady statement seemed to take a direct shot at Pash.  My gut tells me that he is one of the chief assholes behind this and that unfortunately his douchebaggery is not on the record in many places (obviously it is in the leaked emails).  

 

[Otis Foster]

Typically, when lawyers refuse correspondence or information to an opposing party during discovery (which is the process by which both sides ask for and collect data on the case being litigated), the lawyer must provide a "privilege log" that gives a brief description of the document/correspondence refused or redacted (e.g. "7/8/13 email from Mr. Jones to Ms. Bones") and the justification for withholding it (e.g. "Protected by attorney client privilege.").   If the parties disagree, or the opposing party still wants access, the attorney has to make a strategic decision on whether to force the other party to ask for an order to compel disclosure (usually through an in camera review by the judge), work out a deal ("I'll give you this if you stipulate to X") or just say "F it" and turn it over because it's not actually harmful and worth it to appear accommodating and reasonable in the event you go before the judge on another issue (which gets to the strategy of claiming privilege and work product). 
 
Now, of course, Yee isn't representing Brady in litigation, so the above does not legally apply.  However, he should have been aware that everything was going to potentially used against his client, either in the report itself or in the court of public opinion.  Yee (and to a certain extent, the Patriots and Brady) appeared naive throughout this entire process.  People on SoSH spotted what was potentially going on back in January; that the NFL was out to thump the Patriots, so they should tread lightly and button up.   Yee should have proceeded as close to "by the book" as he could have so there could be no claims later on that he was coming into any appeal with dirty hands.    So, while he wasn't required to, Yee should have presented a letter to Wells in very general terms as to why he was advising Brady to keep the phone.  Something like: "We believe the relevant data has already been supplied; the NFL has means to access any data they desire; there is sensitive private data on Mr. Brady's phone; the security of the NFL's office regarding data is suspect; etc..."
 
Something, anything, that was at least quasi-legalistic so that there's more to back up Brady's refusal than "My lawyer said so."
 
It would have been a lot better for Brady if his team could produce a copy of such a letter and say: "See?  We were reasonable."

 
 
This is spot on.
 
Any time I sense that a client is in pre-litigation mode - by which I mean that litigation is reasonably foreseeable - I bring a litigation partner in who vetts everything that I and/or the client does. There is no way that we would ever destroy potential evidence.
 
Increasingly, I have the sense that Yee was either flying solo or was ignoring advice from counsel for the NEP and/or Kessler. In any case, this was an exceptionally stupid and unprofessional thing to do.

 

[Average Reds]

 Fair enough. I don't agree that Wells had no right to ask, but I get the argument.  But Yee's is not the side I want to defend in front of a Judge (if this is an accurate shorthand of how it went down):
 
Wells: As you know, we're looking into the deflation of balls. We'd like you to give us your phones, but if you don't want to do that, you can have your people search them for emails and texts with words like "deflate" (etc.) and send us the results. We can work with you and Mr. Yee on redaction for personal info."
 
Yee: No. 
 
 
You may be right, that anything other than "here you are Mr. Wells, take everything for as long as you want" would have yielded the same result. I'm not as sure.
 
 
 
One thing, though, it looks like Brady *did* eventually turn over the requested-for-searched info (minus the stuff on the one missing phone), if I read that Deadspin piece correctly.

 
The reason I came to the conclusion that it wouldn't have mattered what Brady turned over is because (as you note) he did comply with the request at the appeals hearing and this was rejected as being "not practical" which was then turned against him as proof that he was being evasive. 
 
And no, I don't believe that the NFL was trying to get the Pats from the beginning.  But there absolutely were people who were convinced that the Pats were guilty, and that sort of certainty inevitably leads to actions/conclusions that are designed to reinforce the bias rather than discover what happened.  The people who had this level of certainty included the execs from the Ravens and Colts along with Kensil and Vincent, and they drove the process to a place where their bias infected the way the NFL and Goodell handled the situation.  (Arguably because of incompetence, but at this point that feels like a distinction without a difference.)
 
Edit:  I should mention that I'm not sure precisely what Brady turned over at the appeals hearing.  From the description, it sounded like the exact thing that Wells had originally requested but I'm reading in other places that the content of the texts was lost and only a record of who was texted could be retrieved.  And the NFL declined to follow up on that.  Of course, that could be wrong as well.  (So confusing...)

 

[Corsi]

New reports indicate the Ravens 'tipped off" the Colts about deflated footballs before the AFC Championship.
Following are Ravens responses to new reports that the Ravens “tipped off” the Colts about deflated footballs before the AFC Championship:
 
FROM THE RAVENS
 
“Prior to the AFC Championship game, no one from the Ravens talked to the Colts about deflated footballs. We knew nothing of deflated footballs. John Harbaugh has been consistent in his answers to reporters about this since he was first asked on NBC-TV at the Super Bowl.”
 
FROM SPECIAL TEAMS COORDINATOR/ASSOCIATE HEAD COACH JERRY ROSBURG
 
“On or about January 12, 2015, Chuck Pagano called me to ask about a punt-field goal substitution play that New England used against the Ravens in the Divisional game (Jan. 10). At the 10:55 mark of the second quarter at the 34-yard line, New England sent its place kicker (Stephen Gostkowski) onto the field with the field goal unit. This caused us to defend the punt with our field goal block team. The play was blown dead by the officials because the Patriots were penalized for delay of game. Coach Pagano wanted to know about New England’s substitution because the coaching video does not show that part. There was no conversation regarding footballs.”
 
FROM JOHN HARBAUGH
 
“I’ve been consistent from the beginning when asked about whether the Ravens tipped off the Colts about deflated footballs. I’ll say it again – we didn’t. We knew nothing about deflated footballs.
 
“As a former special teams coach, I know that members of the kicking group from teams talk to their counterparts all the time about conditions, including field, weather and footballs. I learned this morning that our kicking consultant (Randy Brown) sent a text to Coach Pagano on Jan. 16 suggesting to the Colts that they pay attention to how the officials rotate the kicking balls into the game. Coach Brown’s text did not mention the Patriots and did not complain about anything the Patriots did. The Colts never responded to Randy’s text, and he had no further communications with the Colts on this matter.” 
 
HERE’S THE TEXT FROM RANDY BROWN TO COACH PAGANO (sent Jan. 16, 2015)
 
“Make sure the refs rotate the kicking balls cause last week they wouldn’t let our ball in the game. Their ball was done so poorly that it was nearly impossible to kick off deep…It was hard and not worked in well at all…Let Tom (McMahon, Colts special teams coordinator) know he can call me at any time.”
 

 

http://www.baltimoreravens.com/news/article-1/Ravens-Statement-On-Tipping-Off-Colts-About-Deflategate/46c5521a-45ba-4acd-bcf7-3cde8c1458ae

 

[LuckyBen]

Link
 

 
 
 
Oof, that is a pretty big mouthpiece to call out Goodell on.

 

[SeanBerry]

Not a perfect comparison but here's a poll I just saw on CBSSports.com
 

Was the NFL's ruling on Tom Brady's Deflategate appeal a fair one?

 
 

Yes. A four-game suspension is just right. The credibility of the sport is at stake.

58%

Roger Goodell should have reduced the suspension to two or three games.

10%

No. The NFL had no evidence tying Brady to the deflated footballs. He should not have been suspended.

32%

Total Votes: 27473

 

 

[AB in DC]

 
I feel like it's incompetence in terms of actual handling of the deflateball-gate, and conspiracy in terms of PR.

 
That sounds right to me. Whoever was doing the leaking clearly believed (or gambled) that Wells would come out against the Patriots, and that Goodell would punish the Patriots for whatever they did wrong, so they were trying to manipulate public opinion to make sure that Wells's/Goodell's message would stick. That part, I agree, was unconscionable. But the conspiracy, in a sense, was to make Goodell look good, not necessarily to make the Patriots look bad.
 
Regardless, I think the situation would be just as bad today without all that negative PR, or pretty close anyway.

 

[jsinger121]

The lies continue out of Owings Mills, Maryland.

 

[Prodigal Sox]

In the big picture, I gotta say, I'm leaning less toward "the NFL was out to get us" and more toward Hanlon's Razor: Don't attribute to malice what can be adequately explained by incompetence.  The entire process was fucked from start to finish.  No one had any idea about what happens to air pressure or how to measure it.  Someone in the NFL front office was given completely wrong PSI numbers, but no one knows where they came from.  So yeah, there were plenty of folks who automatically assumed that Patriots were doing something nefarious, but if there really were footballs deflated to 10.1 psi, then a lot of reasonable people would have done the same.  And the NFL has proven that they have absolutely no clue how to run a proper investigation.  They wouldn't know "due process" if it bit them in the ass.  And Goodell is clearly uninterested in the mistakes made by his staff.  But I'm not sure the outcome would have been a whole lot different if it were some other team.  Then Wells comes in and bring all of his own biases as a defense attorney, not to mention his long history of twisting the truth on behalf of his big-money clients.  Ultimately, his opinions are as valid as anyone else's -- the problem was the NFL had no way of distinguishing the facts of the situation from Wells's opinion, and no one wanted to take the effort to think independently and question whether one man's opinion really provide sufficient basis for punishment.  It was just, Wells said Brady did something wrong, so we have to punish him.  That's it.
 
And now we find out that the Ravens started the mess because they thought something funny was happening with the K-balls.  They may have been right -- except that it was the crooked ref swapping out the balls, not anything the Patriots were doing.  And we all know that the Colts are a bunch of whiners, so it's no surprise that they bought into it.  To some extent, it's just gamesmanship, which would be no big deal until someone goes blabbing to Kravitz after the game was over.  That's what started the shitstorm, and clearly the NFL had no idea how to handle it.  No one understood what happened, so Goodell sends in the hired goods at NFL Security, but of course they make a complete mess of the situation.  I'm sure Goodell thought that the whole thing would be resolved in a week, so he probably didn't mind the publicity, since it drove up interest in the Super Bowl.  He probably figured it was a one-week story that would blow over once NFL Security finished talking to folks.  But he totally underestimated the complexity of the situation, and he naively trusted his internal investigators would clear thing up from him (and the public at large) before they flew to Arizona for the Super Bowl.
 
 
The worst thing that the NFL did was to smear Brady and the Patriots through a one-sided PR campaign.  That was (and is) pure evil.  But really, would things be a whole heck of a lot different today if that didn't happen?  I'm not so sure any more.
 
 
Someone, please convince me that I'm wrong.  I've spent the last three months believing that this was all biased and pre-judged against the Patriots from the beginning.  Now it's starting to feel like the whole thing was so fucked that it was basically a coin flip as to whether it would have led to punishment or exoneration.  Am I crazy to think that Brady and the Patriots were just collateral damage from what was almost entirely a matter of gross incompetence and a broken investigation/punishment system?

That's pretty much were I'm at.  Except I think Kensil and some others in the league office had a hair across their asses about nailing Belichick which probably lead to go off half cocked.

 

[AB in DC]

“As a former special teams coach, I know that members of the kicking group from teams talk to their counterparts all the time about conditions, including field, weather and footballs. I learned this morning that our kicking consultant (Randy Brown) sent a text to Coach Pagano on Jan. 16 suggesting to the Colts that they pay attention to how the officials rotate the kicking balls into the game. Coach Brown’s text did not mention the Patriots and did not complain about anything the Patriots did. The Colts never responded to Randy’s text, and he had no further communications with the Colts on this matter.”
 
HERE’S THE TEXT FROM RANDY BROWN TO COACH PAGANO (sent Jan. 16, 2015)
 
“Make sure the refs rotate the kicking balls cause last week they wouldn’t let our ball in the game. Their ball was done so poorly that it was nearly impossible to kick off deep…It was hard and not worked in well at all…Let Tom (McMahon, Colts special teams coordinator) know he can call me at any time.”

 
Which is exactly what they caught the crooked ref on, right?

 

[DJnVa]

Link
 

 

Yeah, I think we need to stop saying that hardly any national folks are coming out against Goodell. That guy in the link wrote a front page story the other day on the suspension being upheld and he's now calling Goodell a liar.

 

[drbretto]

Yeah, that sounds about right. 58% of the general uninterested population WOULD buy all of Goodell's bullshit. Not sure that completely invalidates the hundreds of intelligent people that have been obsessed with every detail of this case since day one, but I'm sure you'll just call it bias and dismiss it as such, but this is a board that couldn't get 99% consensus on whether or not Kate Upton was hot. There is absolutely something to this and you fucking know it. 

 

[nighthob]

It's ego and hubris of those involved.  The NFL, meaning Goodell, Pash, Kensil, Vincent, were wounded that the Patriots fought back.  The Pats didn't kiss the ring immediately and that signed their own figurative death sentence.  Now the Pats in no way should have acquiesced to the NFL here, that is not what I am saying.  What I am saying is that by the time the NFL found out that the science was junk and when the rational thing to do was to back down and say that this is what happened, that the egos were too wounded and they could not do it.

Can we please stop with the "If only the Patriots had thrown ashes on their heads, donned sack cloth and declared to the world that they were cheaty cheaterers everything would be OK!" thing? Please? It was never going to be OK, and there was no way for New England to make it OK because after the botched sting operation, Irsay's drunken texts to his boyfriend, and Kensil/Pash exploiting that opening for payback the NFL's course was set in stone.

 

[Stitch01]

So here's the thing with other polls or whatever. Fans of the other 31 teams aren't spending hours and hours reading the Wells report, reading Brady's transcripts, reading about ideal gas law obsessing over this etc. They're reading the headlines which, to date, the NFL has done a masterful job of controlling. So the average fan "knows" that the Patriots had 11 underinflated balls that were 2 PSI under spec that the league was shocked and disappointed about, the Colts balls weren't underinflated, a guy known as the deflator took the balls into the bathroom and deflated them, and Brady obviously destroyed his cell phone strictly to conceal the evidence, and hell the Pats taped everyones practices in the past so they had it coming. Maybe that changes some with the transcript release, we'll see.

Now, its completely reasonable for the average fan to do so. I sure as shit didn't spend hours pouring over the evidence when Big Rape got suspended or digging through the Saints bounty testimony. But a random poll that says people outside New England think this is fair doesn't carry weight with me on the merits of the punishment or provide any evidence that Pats fans are being a bunch of homers.

 

[AB in DC]

And by the way, the idea of settling on a one-game suspension (for obstruction only) is starting to look more and more appealing.  Unless Wells misrepresented his conversations with Brady/Yee at the appeal (and I have to assume that Kessler would have challenged him on that if that was the case), this was more than just challenging Wells on his right to the phone.  The lack of explanation to Wells seriously poisoned the investigation, and while the phone destruction was a bit of a red herring, it's absolutely clear that Brady should have just stashed it in a safe-deposit box somewhere just in case there were any issues.  I believe Brady when he says that he never intended to obstruct the investigation, but I can no longer make the case that no obstruction occurred.
 
 
Hopefully the news that Goodell basically lied about Brady's testimony will push him (or the judge) toward a settlement like this.

 

[Leather]

And by the way, the idea of settling on a one-game suspension (for obstruction only) is starting to look more and more appealing.  Unless Wells misrepresented his conversations with Brady/Yee at the appeal (and I have to assume that Kessler would have challenged him on that if that was the case), this was more than just challenging Wells on his right to the phone.  The lack of explanation to Wells seriously poisoned the investigation, and while the phone destruction was a bit of a red herring, it's absolutely clear that Brady should have just stashed it in a safe-deposit box somewhere just in case there were any issues.  I believe Brady when he says that he never intended to obstruct the investigation, but I can no longer make the case that no obstruction occurred.
 
 
Hopefully the news that Goodell basically lied about Brady's testimony will push him (or the judge) toward a settlement like this.

 
Except he wasn't suspended 4 games for destroying his phone.
 
The NFL can't (or, shouldn't anyway) have it both ways.  They can't say: "You are suspended for probably being generally aware of bad deeds" and then when it becomes clear there's no evidence of that, say "Oh, actually, you're being suspended for destroying evidence that might have shown you were generally aware."

 

[DJnVa]

He doesn't owe them an explanation however does he?
 
If he's not required to turn it over, simply saying that isn't obstruction, it's exercising his "right".

 

[Ed Hillel]

So who's lying, the NFL or the Ravens? This could get really fun now. Maybe it's the Colts? Strange bedfellows...

 

[Leather]

The Amanda Knox trial is an interesting comparison.  
 
How you felt/feel about her innocence really depended on your preconceptions.
 
Many Italians were convinced of her guilt, based largely on the preexisting reputation of American college girls being "wild" and the fact that she was an attractive, young, female.  The lack of direct evidence was waved away with an attitude of "Well, she has no good alibi, does she?"
 
Most Americans, on the other hand, thought she was innocent, based on the shoddy evidence collected and the plausible alternative explanations.  Also, frankly, because she was a pretty white girl.

 

[Leather]

So who's lying, the NFL or the Ravens? This could get really fun now. Maybe it's the Colts? Strange bedfellows...

 
Both (all three) parties have no interest in fighting over this, so they won't, so nobody will really care.  
 
There's no legs to that story.   What, Harbaugh is a whiny prick?  Everyone knows that already.

 

[Ed Hillel]

Also, the next person to suggest "incompetence" is going to get internet bullied. The NFL lied about the PSI levels, and kept the numbers from the public, while the Patriots were requesting they fix the issue. That's not incompetence, it's intentional fuckery.

Unlike TB12, ya'll been put on notice. Ya hear?

 

[Kilgore A. Trout]

I keep thinking of Fatty Arbuckle.

 

[EricFeczko]

Also, the next person to suggest "incompetence" is going to get internet bullied. The NFL lied about the PSI levels, and kept the numbers from the public, while the Patriots were requesting they fix the issue. That's not incompetence, it's intentional fuckery.

Can't it be both?

 

[Ed Hillel]

"Both" is an acceptable answer, though I am still uncovinced. Even if the NFL FO was covering its ass, they knew they were doing so at the expense of someone else.

 

[DJnVa]

Yeah, it started with incompetence--they didn't even know what the Ideal Gas Law. "I didn't include science."
 
After that, they dug in.

 

[Average Reds]

Also, the next person to suggest "incompetence" is going to get internet bullied. The NFL lied about the PSI levels, and kept the numbers from the public, while the Patriots were requesting they fix the issue. That's not incompetence, it's intentional fuckery.

Unlike TB12, ya'll been put on notice. Ya hear?

 
More to the point, it's an irrelevant argument.
 
If the NFL's incompetence led them to a point where they had to punish the Patriots to avoid looking like fools or because their egos couldn't accept individuals/a team fighting back, how is that not evidence that the investigation was biased from the beginning?

 

[edmunddantes]

Did the Patriots do anything wrong?
 
Yes. They were hopelessly naive about how this was going, and where it was going.
 
Tom even unknowingly acknowledged that he should have known better with this quote in an email "We are the Patriots. Everything is a big deal"
 
On the other hand, I can't really fault them. Go back to that original morning after radio interview. Brady thinks it's a joke by the hosts. 
 
Who really knew it was going to turn into this circus? Once it did,  Kraft & Brady (and their teams) should treated this much differently like a cutthroat hostile takeover/legal case.
 
They didn't, and they are paying the price for it. 

 

[nighthob]

The Amanda Knox trial is an interesting comparison.  
 
How you felt/feel about her innocence really depended on your preconceptions.
 
Many Italians were convinced of her guilt, based largely on the preexisting reputation of American college girls being "wild" and the fact that she was an attractive, young, female.  The lack of direct evidence was waved away with an attitude of "Well, she has no good alibi, does she?"
 
Most Americans, on the other hand, thought she was innocent, based on the shoddy evidence collected and the plausible alternative explanations.  Also, frankly, because she was a pretty white girl.

Aren't the West Memphis 3 a better comparison? Easy to hate defendants, a case built around the exact same argument (i.e. "Sure, when you look at every single piece of evidence individually it evaporates, but are all these answers credible when we've thrown 48 separate pieces of bullshit against the wall‽‽‽"), and the reality that people predisposed to hate Satan think they're guilty while rational people look at the evidence and say "What sort of assfuckery is this?"

 

[AB in DC]

 
Except he wasn't suspended 4 games for destroying his phone.
 
The NFL can't (or, shouldn't anyway) have it both ways.  They can't say: "You are suspended for probably being generally aware of bad deeds" and then when it becomes clear there's no evidence of that, say "Oh, actually, you're being suspended for destroying evidence that might have shown you were generally aware."

 
That's why it would have to come in the form of a settlement.

 

[EricFeczko]

I'd love it if you stats gurus could provide insight on the exponent testimony where they disagree with AEI and Snyder.

In particular, I found it very hard to follow the discussion on time and whether it (along with other variables such as wetness) were tested to see if they could explain the difference. They both seem to say it matters and it doesn't matter. It clearly matters so I don't follow their explanation of if they left it out and why? There also seemed to be some discussion of whether it was appropriate to average the balls or not.

I did like when the exponent guy got caught trying to argue that an average measurement time under 2 minutes meant that no ball could have been tested after the 2 minute mark.

There's no way Goddell was able to follow this conversation. The direct of Exponent was done well and presented in a simple manner. I can see how Goddell would believe them.

Edit: I realize to admit a flaw would have been career suicide for Exponent, I'd like to know if their justification makes any sense at all.

As noted above by me,Crystalline, and SN, the testimony across the board missed the critical point (that the data are problematic). That being said, I can comment on this later tonight (need to do some monkey work right now). TLDR, none of the experts came off that great to me; snyder was probably the best.

The exponent statistician made some good general points, and made some really awful ones that undermined the good points, unfortunately.

 

[RIFan]

So who's lying, the NFL or the Ravens? This could get really fun now. Maybe it's the Colts? Strange bedfellows...

The email from the Colt's Sullivan only indicated that the Ravens tipped them off about the rotation of the KBalls.  It didn't state that the Patriots had anything to do with that and it more points to the officials since they handle those.  The quote regarding the ball balls deflating balls after inspection was not attributed to a tip. ("As far as the gameballs are concerned it is well known around the league...."
 
The text and phone calls with Ravens staff might have gotten the wheels turning in the Colts heads about balls, but Harbaugh has at least plausible deniability that the Ravens tipped them off on deflation. Personally, I think he's telling the truth and the paranoia within the Colts took a small tip unrelated to the Pats and blew it up.

 

[Section30]

Watching Mike & Mike today (I know, I know) where they have Schilling call in. They were intending to get his take on dipping in baseball. He gets off of baseball and into the Brady situation.
 
Paraphrasing, "This shows how much the NFL has been lying about what happened. I makes you wonder about some of the reports from the NFL over the last 10 years that have been false, how many careers and players have been hurt."
 
Uncomfortable looks from Greenberg and the fill in guy. They immediately change the subject back to dipping.
 
 
Schilling on WEEI
 
Direct quote:On Deflategate: “The media completely fabricated an event [Chris Mortensen’s report that 11 of 12 footballs were 2 PSI below the minimum] and it almost got bought by everybody. … The whole thing. There’s going to be people out there who say he’s a cheater no matter what, but everything about this story, for the most part, was a lie, and look how much traction it had. That’s just terrifying.”

 

[AB in DC]

 
More to the point, it's an irrelevant argument.
 
If the NFL's incompetence led them to a point where they had to punish the Patriots to avoid looking like fools or because their egos couldn't accept individuals/a team fighting back, how is that not evidence that the investigation was biased from the beginning?

 
After reading the appeal transcript, I don't think it was the NFL's egos as much as it was Ted Wells's ego. 

 

[rodderick]

Aren't the West Memphis 3 a better comparison? Easy to hate defendants, a case built around the exact same argument (i.e. "Sure, when you look at every single piece of evidence individually it evaporates, but are all these answers credible when we've thrown 48 separate pieces of bullshit against the wall‽‽‽"), and the reality that people predisposed to hate Satan think they're guilty while rational people look at the evidence and say "What sort of assfuckery is this?"

Yeah, I wouldn't use the West Memphis Three as a comparison, seeing as they were most likely guilty. Not to derail the topic, but those documentaries were very clearly biased.

 

[lambeau]

Wells dropped Columbia not only because they were leaking but, I suspect, because all the physicists were cracking up laughing. Columbia turned to world famous cosmologist (space, time,etc)
Brian Greene, who laughed and promptly published the most elegantly simple explanation I have seen--which should have stopped Wells in his tracks:
 
 
 
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/02/01/sports/football/to-unlock-deflation-puzzle-mind-your-pv-nrts.html

 

[ivanvamp]

Also, the next person to suggest "incompetence" is going to get internet bullied. The NFL lied about the PSI levels, and kept the numbers from the public, while the Patriots were requesting they fix the issue. That's not incompetence, it's intentional fuckery.

Unlike TB12, ya'll been put on notice. Ya hear?

 
I think it's entirely possible that the person telling Mort about the psi levels in that initial tweet could simply have misheard something and went to Mort with it, who then printed it.  That's just a major screwup, if it happened that way.  That's not the same thing as intentionally putting false information out there.
 
However, even if it was just a major screwup, the NFL *did* have the correct measurements and could have corrected it immediately.  As we've seen, they've corrected other things they deem worthy of correction in very short order.  They didn't, and as the email exchange between the Pats and Pash detail, they didn't do anything about the leaks either.  
 
THAT absolutely screams intentionality to me.  They could have quelled this thing.  They chose not to.  What someone needs to sleuth out for real is WHY.  

 

[Myt1]

 
 
This is spot on.
 
Any time I sense that a client is in pre-litigation mode - by which I mean that litigation is reasonably foreseeable - I bring a litigation partner in who vetts everything that I and/or the client does. There is no way that we would ever destroy potential evidence.
 
Increasingly, I have the sense that Yee was either flying solo or was ignoring advice from counsel for the NEP and/or Kessler. In any case, this was an exceptionally stupid and unprofessional thing to do.

Destroying the phone was an awful move because litigation could have reasonably been anticipated.

But Goodell's decision very clearly misrepresents Brady's testimony and draws an adverse inference from that misrepresentation. Actually calling it a misrepresentation is being too kind. Goodell lied about Brady's testimony in his decision.

Aside from the generally inside baseball stuff about spoliation, the phone would have meant literally nothing in this sham process.