Amarshal2, Smith can participate in settlement negotiations even if he is not listed as a co-counsel in the case.
#DFG: Canceling the Noise
- Thread starter nattysez
- Start date
There's a lot of those kinds of things here. "Are you lying or incompetent or leading a which hunt?" 
Tough trilemma
And sorry again.
Tough trilemma And sorry again.
@PatsPropaganda just tweeted out this lovely pic:
https://twitter.com/PatsPropaganda/status/629386039728058369/photo/1
The level of deception, double-speak, and outright lies are getting more and more absurd each day.
https://twitter.com/PatsPropaganda/status/629386039728058369/photo/1
The level of deception, double-speak, and outright lies are getting more and more absurd each day.
It's been over a week, and we still Know nothing about Judge Berman's NFL team allegiance? Color me disappointed.
I personally love footnote #44, which deals with the post-game ball measurements. Lots of uncertainties with the data, they claimed, so no science could be done. Luckily they had rock solid data for pregame and halftime measurements (though it is odd that having no actual pregame measurements is not considered an uncertainty).
Andrew Garda of Sports on Earth provides his Deflategate Liar power rankings. I'm not real quick on the uptake, so I had to read it twice before I figured out that down arrow = good; up arrow = bad:
http://www.sportsonearth.com/article/141507986/deflategate-liar-power-rankings-roger-goodell
http://www.sportsonearth.com/article/141507986/deflategate-liar-power-rankings-roger-goodell
https://twitter.com/PatsPropaganda/status/629386039728058369/photo/1SeoulSoxFan said:
link to tweet
The level of deception, double-speak, and outright lies are getting more and more absurd each day.
My friend and I called her out for this the other day, she responded, but completely dodged.
The first comment at the bottom is a pretty nice takedown of the article:Don Buddin's GS said:
This article shows why there is nothing Tom Brady can do to clear his name. Despite there being not a shred of credible evidence that footballs were tampered with, Tom Brady is quilty because the author believes he is. This article is textbook confirmation bias in the guise of fair and balanced reporting : "I find it impossible to believe that IF this was going on, Belichick didn't know." And this: "There's too much smoke for there to be no fire, and IF the balls were deflated, he knew. " For the author there is clearly no "if" at all. He has made up his mind and the facts, while perhaps inconvenient, long ago stopped mattering. The only thing we know for sure is the NFL has leaked incorrect information to compliant reporters and as the latest releases have shown, Goodell has lied. The NFL's misinformation campaign has created all the smoke the author refers to. But despite his concession that they cannot be trusted - where there is smoke there must be fire. Really? On one side we have a straight arrow QB whose wife once said of him, "Tom is the most naive person I have ever met." On the other side we have Roger Goodell and his record of abuse of power. This is so typical of what passes for journalism today. One side says the most outrageously inaccurate things, and all reporters can come up with is "a pox on both their houses". It is intellectually lazy, and morally pathetic.
Don Buddin's GS said:
It's nice to see more people calling out liars, but he's still rather sure of himself that "something" happened based on "deflator" texts. Baby steps, but I still find that infuriating.
Bleedred said:
God, this perfectly describes the media tendency that I've found the most frustrating throughout this saga. Not the blatant liars, shills, hacks and water-carriers— those I expect and can live with. But the reasonable, thinking people (Charles Pierce's Grantland pieces come to mind) who can't quite bring themselves to call a spade a spade and instead abide in the 'shame on both parties!' stance. It comes out of a perfectly normal, skeptical conservative impulse— one that's perfectly understandable, and yet has done as much as anything else to sell the NFL's line to the public and (mis)shape public opinion.
mwonow said:
One "They call me the deflator!" during the offseason and one "deflate and give someone that jkt" that goes with the away game pic. Technically, you're right. Only one of them says deflatOR, but it's two texts with a word derived from deflate.
Two if memory serves me correctly. One during the Green Bay game where he said something to the effect of deflate and give the jacket. And the second one, where he commented that the only thing deflating was TB's passer rating.mwonow said:
If I'm right, the judge had all this information a few days before it was released. If that's true, he may have already come to the conclusions of many of the unaffiliated press -- Goodell is a snake. Does the timing offer the possibility that this is EXACTLY why he is pushing for a settlement? It makes sense that he says to Goodell "I've seen the evidence, and there is none. You railroaded this guy and the team. He's not guilty of anything, and you are guilty of being a snake. But you are allowed under the CBA to do what you did. Find a way to settle this, or my ruling will uphold your decision, while also highlighting with copious detail how wrong it is." And then says to Brady "I don't believe you did anything wrong. You're innocent of what you've been accused. But that's not the matter in front of me. In front of me is process, and what Goodell did is permissible under the CBA. If you want to be exonerated by this court, yet still suspended for four games, that's where we are heading. Reach a settlement."joe dokes said:
But, I really don't have a good understanding of the standards for "notice."
SoE has gone completely to shit since Pos left. They're articles are masturbatory drivel and I'm actually surprised hey let that comment through (though not surprised by the fact it had the author's bullshit rebuttal attached), as I've pointed out factual errors in many articles they've had and they never get "approved". A few weeks ago someone there stated that Nomar was originally going to Texas in the ARod trade and it took two days for it my comment simply citing the error to get approved, after the article had bumped off the front page and it was back dated. They are junk.Don Buddin's GS said:
If the suspension is upheld, Goodell doesn't care why or what the judge says. If the suspension is overturned, Goodell doesn't particularly care why or what the judge says.twothousandone said:
Everyone needs to stop thinking that Goodell will suddenly grow a sense of shame and settle for the purposes of avoiding having a judge point out what any person with an ounce of care for the sport or logic and reason knows: the emperor has no clothes. That cat is out of the bag with the release of the transcripts basically dragging the national media to finally do their job. The only way the NFL settles is to avoid precedent or to keep a suspension longer than they think they'd get with a decision.
One thing has been bugging me in the wake of the transcript and what Troy Vincent testified to about not including the science...
I'm sure this point was made about a thousand posts back. But how is it remotely possible that no one in the League office seemed to understand that temperature could impact the inflation levels of the balls? Doesn't every asshole with a car know that you don't overinflate your tires in the summer? Isn't this something everyone is told during drivers Ed when they are like 16 years old? Did the League somehow not think this applied to footballs?
I feel like for all our bellyaching over League officials and the media being ignorant of the Ideal Gas Law, at the core of it, this isn't exactly rocket science. It's pretty basic physics that the vast majority of people have some basic understanding of.
I'm sure this point was made about a thousand posts back. But how is it remotely possible that no one in the League office seemed to understand that temperature could impact the inflation levels of the balls? Doesn't every asshole with a car know that you don't overinflate your tires in the summer? Isn't this something everyone is told during drivers Ed when they are like 16 years old? Did the League somehow not think this applied to footballs?
I feel like for all our bellyaching over League officials and the media being ignorant of the Ideal Gas Law, at the core of it, this isn't exactly rocket science. It's pretty basic physics that the vast majority of people have some basic understanding of.
Van Everyman said:
And apparently these idiots who work in the NFL, some with heavy sports backrounds, still don't understand why the basketball they left outside overnight when they were 10 years old didn't bounce nearly as high the next day. Surely I'm not the only kid that was asking his buddies the next day, "does anyone have a pump and a needle?"
Edit: Ribo and I were mental sympatico, but he types faster.
While I mostly agree, I would quibble that you can use a statistically rigorous (e.g. via sampling/resampling techniques) approach to test whether the data are interpretable or not. There are two questions one can answer with statistics, "Is there a significant difference of PSI differences between the colts and pats balls?", or "Do we have sufficient data to determine whether their is a significant difference of PSI differences between the colts and pats balls?".crystalline said:
Of course, when one performs such analyses to answer the latter question, the answer is a definitive "no". Exponent did not perform such analyses in the first place. Ironically, the exponent statistician mentioned the importance of statistical power in her testimony and then in the same answer basically said that it doesn't matter because the p values are so low (which is just plain wrong).
The real problem I had with the report is that a) it presents a circular argument, which has been covered ad nauseum, and b) contradicts one interpretation of Wells' testimony (page 286-287):
I'm not sure what's meant by this last comment and unfortunately, kessler didn't press him on it (perhaps out of professional respect). One interpetation is that Wells' team started the investigation by looking at the statistics, and then proceeded with collecting the non-science evidence (e.g. communications, interviews, etc.). However, this appears to be contradicted by the exponent report, which states that the assumptions underlying the tests were provided by Wells' team, and these assumptions were based on non-science evidence. The other interpretation is that Wells' was merely referring to whether Exponent would be retained for further testing.
A simple question of, "When you say spend a lot more money, are you referring to further testing by exponent or evidence gathering by your team?" would have cleared it up.
This lack of questioning is an example of what bothered me about the experts on both sides and the line of questioning by kessler. Instead of focusing on the data, assumptions made, and whether Wells' biased exponent's report and was lying about it, they focused on experiments and analytic approaches that are really tangential to the question at hand.
This whole debacle is a great lesson in how NOT to use science, and how proper scientific method can be obscured by an avalanche of irrelevant testing.
You don't think, and you don't think Goodell thinks, a scathing statement from the judge,even while affirming the decision, marks the beginning of the end? You think the owners will be okay with that?Myt1 said:
It would be a short term victory and a long term loss. But Goodell and the owners seem to be thinking short term these days.twothousandone said:
Absolutely not, and many owners won't care. Goddell and many of the owners appear to lack any sense of self.twothousandone said:
If they blandly lose, it'll pass just like all the previous overturns. But there's been so much attention on this and an increasing amount of attention on the NFL's lies and incompetence, that a scathing decision will be a huge blow to the golden boy's tenure. In other words: if there are soundbites from a judge that can be turned into TV fodder, then it'll matter.
A "bland loss" would be far worse for the NFL than a victory where the Judge scolds them in his opinion.Tony C said:
This is a power struggle against the players union and he owners are used to getting their way in these matters. Victory is all they care about.
Goodell has already been scolded before in defeat, and it clearly had no bearing on future power abuses.
twothousandone said:
EricFeczko said:
Average Reds said:
(Collectively) this - Goodell is just looking to put a W in his closet, and if he does, he'll get attaboys from his bosses. It should be clear that the NFL cares more about posture than narrative...
If Walt Anderson knew what a shitstorm was going to ensue, he would have guaged the damned balls! I almost feel bad for him, but no. He is one I'd like to see under oath.
He should man up and admit he gave them a cursory examination, no gauge, and this whole thing is just a misunderstanding. That, if it happened, might be enough to bring down ol' Rog.
He should man up and admit he gave them a cursory examination, no gauge, and this whole thing is just a misunderstanding. That, if it happened, might be enough to bring down ol' Rog.
He was overturned and basically called a liar by a federal judge already. And he made the league a national laughing stock with the Rice debacle. The notion that a win with some mean language but that generally affirms the power of the commissioner is the line that must not be passed sort of ignores the historical record on this.twothousandone said:
I mean, who the hell knows what the owners will do? But if their past behavior is any indication, this is less than nothing.
Means Anderson would have told a pretty big lie as a means of covering his own ass and would further mean he has no integrity to not stand up and say anything while watching TB and the Pats get railroaded, but crazier things have happened.Eddie Jurak said:
Yeah. But it might have seemed like an innocous one at the time. In the end, I'm going with "less probable than not", but I think it is at least plausible.tims4wins said:
Agreed - white lie as a CYA and then the whole thing blew up and got so big so fast and he feared for his job so never spoke up. Possible, though not probable. We'll likely never know
Eddie Jurak said:
Given that McNally got up and walked out of the officials' locker room with the ball bag (unaccompanied by any official) both before the 1st half AND before the 2nd half of the AFCCG, it is way more than plausible! That was SOP on getting balls out onto the field, but Anderson turned that into an unprecedented phenomenon in his career on the order of the sun setting in the East.
Pre-game, they probably gauged maybe 4 or 5 of the footballs, and then let the rest slide.
Immediately after donning the gold jacket signifying entry into the Pro Football Hall of Fame on Thursday night, former NFL G.M. Ron Wolf was congratulated by Commissioner Roger Goodell. And Wolf had a message for Goodell, as captured by the NFL Network microphones.
Way to go on that Brady thing, Wolf said.
http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2015/08/07/ron-wolf-to-goodell-way-to-go-on-that-brady-thing/
F U, Ron Wolf. Way to enhance your big hall of fame moment. (Unless you were slamming the commish, in which case not so much F U as Bravo.) Oh, and F U, Rog. Laugh it up while the walls, we hope and pray, start tumbling down. What a pair of DBs.
Edit: typo
Way to go on that Brady thing, Wolf said.
http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2015/08/07/ron-wolf-to-goodell-way-to-go-on-that-brady-thing/
F U, Ron Wolf. Way to enhance your big hall of fame moment. (Unless you were slamming the commish, in which case not so much F U as Bravo.) Oh, and F U, Rog. Laugh it up while the walls, we hope and pray, start tumbling down. What a pair of DBs.
Edit: typo
From Wikipedia: "On December 28, 2014, [Ron] Wolf joined Charley Casserly as a consultant for the New York Jets in their search for a new head coach and general manager, following the firing of Rex Ryan and John Idzik."
There are cameras in the Refs locker room, right? Because they have footage of McNally leaving twice. And the Pats have saved that footage, right? Why couldn't they rewind it a bit and check to see whether Anderson measured all of the balls (and which friggin gauge he used)? Why haven't I thought of this before?
Having cameras in the locker room makes no sense. I'd assume the cameras are in the hallwaytims4wins said: