The report does not address whether one minute and 40 is consistent with the time that it takes a gentleman to enter a bathroom, relieve himself, wash his hands, and leave. In fact, it is.
The report does not address whether one minute and 40 is consistent with the time that it takes a gentleman to enter a bathroom, relieve himself, wash his hands, and leave. In fact, it is.
Yep. Baby gets thrown out with bath water.Smiling Joe Hesketh said:Deadspin already jumping on the Deflator nickname excuse.
That's going to bite the Pats in the ass. No one is going to read the rest of their rebuttal, they're going to look at that one bit and assume the rest of it is a farce. Big misstep here by the team.
Smiling Joe Hesketh said:Deadspin already jumping on the Deflator nickname excuse.
That's going to bite the Pats in the ass. No one is going to read the rest of their rebuttal, they're going to look at that one bit and assume the rest of it is a farce. Big misstep here by the team.
Even if it were true you don't say it because nobody is going to believe it. They opened the door to ridicule.ilol@u said:How can it be a misstep if its the truth?
dcmissle said:Yep. Baby gets thrown out with bath water.
This is badly conceived. Amateur ahour on both sides, it appears.
Smiling Joe Hesketh said:Deadspin already jumping on the Deflator nickname excuse.
That's going to bite the Pats in the ass. No one is going to read the rest of their rebuttal, they're going to look at that one bit and assume the rest of it is a farce. Big misstep here by the team.
Even if it were true you don't say it because nobody is going to believe it. They opened the door to ridicule.
This is right.Shelterdog said:
I think there are owners' meeting next week.
If they didn't say anything to give that context, everyone would key in on how they still have no explanation for that and are therefore clearly guilty.dcmissle said:Even if it were true you don't say it because nobody is going to believe it. They opened the door to ridicule.
dcmissle said:99% if polled would not believe this; nor should they. It's preposterous. To that extent, the spinning is not helpful.
And by the way, this could take down in the public view the good points that are being made.
And if they left it out, critics would blast it for leaving out the most important fact. The case is based off of this one fact!!!dcmissle said:Yep. Baby gets thrown out with bath water.
This is badly conceived. Amateur ahour on both sides, it appears.
Ed Hillel said:
The second text makes it pretty clear, actually. If someone actually picks up on that, it would be great. "Deflate, and give someone that jacket." What else would that be referring to?
"Deflate, and give someone that jacket."
"It was like sitting across from Bob and Bob."bsj said:Former Dolphins OL coach DESTROYS Ted Wells on Mad Dog Sports Radio w Adam Schein
https://soundcloud.com/maddogsportsradio/former-dolphins-ol-coach-jim-turner-joins-adam-schein-and-destroys-ted-wells
Ed Hillel said:Goodell is going to make the team fine worse for leaking these documents, at which point Kraft will go to court. Is that what's going to happen?
Smiling Joe Hesketh said:
Because no one cares about facts, even if it's true. it's all about perception, and by trying to explain this away they look silly.
Had they just stuck to the PSI and sloppiness arguments this might have been considered a stronger rebuttal. But the CHBs across the country are going to jump on this explanation like a hobo on a ham sandwich, and will ignore everything else.
Ed Hillel said:
The second text makes it pretty clear, actually. If someone actually picks up on that, it would be great. "Deflate, and give someone that jacket." What else would that be referring to?
"Deflate, and give someone that jacket."
Smiling Joe Hesketh said:
Because no one cares about facts, even if it's true. it's all about perception, and by trying to explain this away they look silly.
Had they just stuck to the PSI and sloppiness arguments this might have been considered a stronger rebuttal. But the CHBs across the country are going to jump on this explanation like a hobo on a ham sandwich, and will ignore everything else.
Who provided that evidence? Are the Jags backign the Pats?Morgan's Magic Snowplow said:"Evidence was also provided that Indianapolis ball boys, in a prior season, had been seen by Jacksonville personnel with ball needles hidden under their long sleeves."
That's from the Goldberg letter. I haven't heard that one before but, if true, fuck the Colts even harder with a rusty ball needle.
yah... The pats are not stupidDrewDawg said:
But then they'd ask why the Pats didn't talk about the "deflator" text.
Christ, if they were lying, don't you think they'd come up with a better one?
SeanBerry said:
Wouldn't they use the term "deflator" as it relates to weight loss because they spend a lot of time thinking about and actually deflating footballs?
HowBoutDemSox said:This is remarkable:
Patriots counsel also requested from the outset that he be provided with the actual halftime psi measurements. That information was not provided until March 23, over two months into the investigation. It was provided then only on the condition that it not be disclosed and, particularly, that it not be disclosed to the media until the final report was issued. This condition was imposed in the face of the extensively reported misinformation about halftime football psi that the League had refused to correct. One can only speculate why it was so important for the League that the accurate halftime information be withheld from the public until it was ultimately part of a report that downplayed the science and instead relied on selective texts.
SeanBerry said:
Let's say you're right.
Let's say they did use this term as it relates to weight loss.
Wouldn't they use the term "deflator" as it relates to weight loss because they spend a lot of time thinking about and actually deflating footballs?
Marciano490 said:Yeah, you and I wouldn't use deflator as a term for someone to lose weight because we don't have anything to do with footballs in our day to day life. It's not as bizarre considering what they do. When I talk about losing weight, I call it cutting. If I called myself the cutter it wouldn't be because I have a switchblade.
SeanBerry said:
Let's say you're right.
Let's say they did use this term as it relates to weight loss.
Wouldn't they use the term "deflator" as it relates to weight loss because they spend a lot of time thinking about and actually deflating footballs?
Smiling Joe Hesketh said:Deadspin already jumping on the Deflator nickname excuse.
That's going to bite the Pats in the ass. No one is going to read the rest of their rebuttal, they're going to look at that one bit and assume the rest of it is a farce. Big misstep here by the team.
SeanBerry said:
Let's say you're right.
Let's say they did use this term as it relates to weight loss.
Wouldn't they use the term "deflator" as it relates to weight loss because they spend a lot of time thinking about and actually deflating footballs?
Agreed. Everyone will just laugh off the whole appeal process with that.Smiling Joe Hesketh said:Deadspin already jumping on the Deflator nickname excuse.
That's going to bite the Pats in the ass. No one is going to read the rest of their rebuttal, they're going to look at that one bit and assume the rest of it is a farce. Big misstep here by the team.
BannedbyNYYFans.com said:
They're getting killed on national radio (at least every sports station on Sirius). It's 99% of "Don't pee on me and tell me it's raining"....all due to the Deflator nickname. They made a big mistake releasing this rebuttal all because of this one part.
Maybe, but deflating footballs prior to inspection is perfectly legal. Read the rebuttal, and you'll see what I mean.SeanBerry said:
Let's say you're right.
Let's say they did use this term as it relates to weight loss.
Wouldn't they use the term "deflator" as it relates to weight loss because they spend a lot of time thinking about and actually deflating footballs?
SeanBerry said:Yes. I understand that. You think that's where the nickname came from? Ok.
That is actually addressed in both the Wells report and rebuttal. They had those texts and missed them (presumably because they weren't too concerned with texts from last May). After they discovered them, they requested the 5th interview, which the Pats pushed back on. That one text is essentially worth $1M, a first and a forth, because there is no lack of cooperation if Wells didn't come back for another bite at the apple.Silverdude2167 said:But serisouly why did Wells not ask him about this text. If you are going to base most of your findings on this text you should probably ask the guy when interviewing him.
I thought something was said today that those texts were found before the first interview.RIFan said:That is actually addressed in both the Wells report and rebuttal. They had those texts and missed them (presumably because they weren't too concerned with texts from last May). After they discovered them, they requested the 5th interview, which the Pats pushed back on. That one text is essentially worth $1M, a first and a forth, because there is no lack of cooperation if Wells didn't come back for another bite at the apple.
There was a second way that Mr. Jastremski and Mr. McNally used the term “deflation” or “deflator” which the report disregards. The Wells investigators had the May 9, 2014 “deflator”/espn text string in their possession several weeks before their full day, four lawyer-staffed interviews with each of Mr. McNally and Mr. Jastremski.
The finishing temperature they used was based on the observed temperature of the empty officials' locker room (72º leading to the use of a 71º-74º range), but if you use that as the starting range the math on the Colts balls' didn't work, which led them to assume that the balls were originally measured in some part of the locker room where the temperature was 67º since that made most of the math work (though not all of it as at least one physicist demonstrated). But it all changes when you assume that Anderson was using the logo gauge and the locker room temperature was constant. Because then all the math works properly in both directions and the minor discrepancy on a couple of the balls are more than accounted for by water and the imprecise measurements.Super Nomario said:That is interesting; I had missed that. The Colts' ball pressure is suspect - aside from only four examples, one of the examples makes no sense because the (apparent) Logo reading is lower than the Non-Logo. Exponent treated that in three ways: as-is, excluding it entirely, and swapping the columns (on the idea that someone screwed up writing it). If someone could have screwed up writing it in, it seems plausible to me that someone could have written down the wrong number - and moreover, 12.95 is kind of a ridiculously high figure for balls originally inflated to ~13, even late in halftime, even with the Logo gauge. Set that to 12.15 (consistent with normal differences between the gauges, and a plausible typo vs 9) and you probably get Indy's average pressure in a range where you don't have to assume 67. Per Exponent page 39, every five degrees gets you about 0.25 PSI, so we start creeping into the range where the transition curve does explain the results, probably with the exception of a couple balls.
RIFan said:That is actually addressed in both the Wells report and rebuttal. They had those texts and missed them (presumably because they weren't too concerned with texts from last May). After they discovered them, they requested the 5th interview, which the Pats pushed back on. That one text is essentially worth $1M, a first and a forth, because there is no lack of cooperation if Wells didn't come back for another bite at the apple.
So you think that tweedle dee and tweedle dum cooked up a defense of the nickname in 2014 far in advance of this situation? They anticipated the issue and to provide cover used the nickname in a text that specifically refers to a non-football use of the term. How else does one explain that text? It is clear it is non-football Related. Any use is suspicious in this context unfortunately but as ridiculous as it sounds it is plausible. 51/49 against? Sure. But plausible.dcmissle said:99% if polled would not believe this; nor should they. It's preposterous. To that extent, the spinning is not helpful.
And by the way, this could take down in the public view the good points that are being made.
Wells did.Harry Hooper said:
Eh, personally I wouldn't have gone all-in on which gauge was used.
The Pats were told to do so by the league.Mooch said:If Jastremski and McNally were innocent in all of this, why did the Pats suspend them? I think the Patriots lose a TON of credibility defending them and explaining their texts and actions today.
Mooch said:If Jastremski and McNally were innocent in all of this, why did the Pats suspend them? I think the Patriots lose a TON of credibility defending them and explaining their texts and actions today.