#DFG: Canceling the Noise

[nighthob]

The last time I checked the NFL was not the government and they have to adhere to current workplace law standards, which do not allow employers unfettered access to private third party communications made via private devices. If he were using a company phone, laptop, tablet, etc. he would be compelled to turn them over, but he is not, and doing so establishes an NFL precedent that becomes binding on everyone. So in an actual court the NFL will have trouble making that one stick.

 

[crystalline]

 
In addition to the union paying at least some of the fees, Giselle's net worth is estimated at $320 million, on top of Brady's (which one imagines is somewhere in the $50-$100 mil range) http://www.celebritynetworth.com/richest-celebrities/models/gisele-bundchen-net-worth/
 
I would imagine that this is the single least budget-constrained player in the entire NFL.

Brady is the worst target in the NFL for Goodell, by a long shot.
- he is the least budget constrained
- he probably has one of the top 5 highest Q ratings, meaning he can get on any news outlet whenever he wants
- and he knows how the game is played. He comes from a wealthy white collar family, and his Dad knows how battles like this are fought- and if he doesn't, he has contacts he can ask. Brady isn't some guy who grew up poor and isn't used to navigating business waters.

 

[crystalline]

This intricate shit on how Wells calculates his bill is just thrilling!

I am so impressed by the poster(s) that continue to wow us with their knowledge of billable hours!

I think the most interesting things out of this thread are the inside baseball on top law firms.

You can read about the ideal gas law in 98 million textbooks. Who the top litigators are, how they bill, or how Boies runs his firm is something you can't google.

Edit: and Goodell is a clown. Analyzing his actions is also pretty boring.

 

[DennyDoyle'sBoil]

Thank you for this.

I keep hearing about how Wells is the smartest lawyer in the history of ever and he acted like a rank amateur yesterday.

 
I've done a couple of investigations for clients, and while they were not for public consumption, the very idea of giving a press conference afterwards makes me nauseous even if they were.  If the client request me to, I would very politely [tell them to go fuck themselves] decline.
 
Given our relative books of business, I think it's a good bet that Wells has far more ability to weather telling a big client to pound sand.  If you're such a big baby that you can't tolerate the notion the someone out there in the world questioned your independence, you're in the wrong business.  And if you believe that getting on the radio and declaring your independence is the way to fix the issue, then you should certainly expect others to seriously question paying over $1000 an hour to rent your judgment, because yours ain't worth that.
 
I will take it on faith that he is a good lawyer, though I really don't know if he is or isn't, and will assume that this is just a bizarre lapse.  But it's hard to imagine that if he were advising someone else in that exact position -- if he really is a good lawyer -- he would say, "sure, go on the radio."

 

[MarcSullivaFan]

One question I have is whether the "more probable than not" standard has previously been applied to player discipline. My recollection is that it was originally announced as the standard for determining club violations. Typically in the unioized workplace employee discipline is subject to a just cause standard. An element of just cause, of course, is proving that the violation occurred; most arbitrators require the employer to prove this element by clear and convincing evidence. It'll be interesting to see if the NFLPA challenges the standard of proof on the basis that is inconsistent with past practice/precedent.

 

[Marciano490]

 
I've done a couple of investigations for clients, and while they were not for public consumption, the very idea of giving a press conference afterwards makes me nauseous even if they were.  If the client request me to, I would very politely [tell them to go fuck themselves] decline.
 
Given our relative books of business, I think it's a good bet that Wells has far more ability to weather telling a big client to pound sand.  If you're such a big baby that you can't tolerate the notion the someone out there in the world questioned your independence, you're in the wrong business.  And if you believe that getting on the radio and declaring your independence is the way to fix the issue, then you should certainly expect others to seriously question paying over $1000 an hour to rent your judgment, because yours ain't worth that.
 
I will take it on faith that he is a good lawyer, though I really don't know if he is or isn't, and will assume that this is just a bizarre lapse.  But it's hard to imagine that if he were advising someone else in that exact position -- if he really is a good lawyer -- he would say, "sure, go on the radio."

 
Hubris is a sonuvabitch.  I can see why a great litigator would think he'd be great at giving press conferences, and many are, and many of the skills overlap, but I don't think Usain Bolt would make a great WR and I know Ted Wells isn't so good when not on a brief or in front of a judge and jury.

 

[Nick Kaufman]

I dont lnow about standards of legal propriety and effectiveness but from a pr perspective i thonk wells helped the mfl yesterday.

 

[kartvelo]

One question I have is whether the "more probable than not" standard has previously been applied to player discipline. My recollection is that it was originally announced as the standard for determining club violations. Typically in the unioized workplace employee discipline is subject to a just cause standard. An element of just cause, of course, is proving that the violation occurred; most arbitrators require the employer to prove this element by clear and convincing evidence. It'll be interesting to see if the NFLPA challenges the standard of proof on the basis that is inconsistent with past practice/precedent.

Interesting. I think they'd have a hell of a time trying to prove a violation occurred.
 
No record of initial measurements, using two gauges, picking and choosing Anderson's recollections, transposing measurements, 4 balls vs.12 balls (or was it 13... or 14?), and on and on. It's a farce, and a bad one at that. Instead, take Anderson's stated best recollection of initial measurements, also take his stated best recollection of which gauge he used, and suddenly - there was nothing strange about the balls collected at halftime. If there's nothing strange about them, there's no reason to believe anyone did anything wrong, and by definition it's impossible for someone to be "generally aware" of the occurrence of something that didn't occur.

 

[Average Reds]

 
If he really doesn't want to share, I think he could just say, "Even considering the fact that I didnt turn it over, here's why the penalty is too severe (or the finding is wrong, or whatever)."
 
To me, even if he had evidence on his phone that *completely cleared him* he can't undo the established fact that he did not give it up during the investigation. As f'd up as the investigation might have been, that would be sandbagging, which generally doesn't go over well.
 
Ultimately it would *not* be out of the question for an neutral appeal outcome to say, "Even though the evidence was not sufficiant to show that the balls were actually deflated, the fact remains that by not giving the NFL the information, the 'lack of cooperation' finding is supported." 
 
It may be similar to  Lewis Libby, and all the braying from his supporters about how impossible it was that he was convicted of "obstructing justice" when "there was no underlying crime."  There doesn't have to be.  To use an extreme example, if Brady told Wells to go fuck himself, and then video emerged of Irsay, Grigson and Kensil deflating balls, a finding of "failing to cooperate" against Brady could stick, IMO.
 
The punishment is another matter entirely.

Considering that Brady was not under oath and the NFL has no subpoena power, id say it's nothing at all like the Scooter Libby case.

 

[uncannymanny]

 
Understood.  But (and I pointed this out in the Francesa thread yesterday) when people say, "Why would they risk it?" the answer is obvious:  BECAUSE UNTIL THAT POINT, NOBODY IN THE HISTORY OF THE NFL EVER CARED ABOUT THIS.  Ever.  As in, EVER.  
 
There isn't a chance in hell that the Patriots IMAGINED that this little thing could ever have resulted in such a penalty.  Especially when we know there were at least two other ball tampering incidents that occurred recently - one by the Chargers resulting in a $20k fine, and the other by the Panthers resulting in just a finger-wagging.  And also because the rulebook calls for only a $25k fine (which wasn't even applied in either case I just mentioned).
 
Again, there was no reason whatsoever to even consider that this little act could have resulted in such grave consequences.  None.

...really? The team that was absolutely hammered for misunderstanding a brand new rule in an equally minor infraction didn't have ANY idea that breaking a longstanding rule book rule, however minor, might possibly get them some very harsh punishment from an unassailable commissioner known for erratic, finger in the wind, out of whack punishments? No idea at all? The team that so many in and out of the game want to see knocked down a peg? This is holy shit level justification. People in this thread "IMAGINED that this little thing" could result in such measures.

Well, regardless, I bet they do now even if these incredibly successful people are dumb as rocks as you seem to think they are.

the ball guys didn't really even think

This I could agree with.

 

[kartvelo]

Considering that Brady was not under oath and the NFL has no subpoena power, id say it's nothing at all like the Scooter Libby case.

Exactly.
And the NFLPA is never going to allow the precedent to be set that a player will be required to turn over their personal cell phones to the NFL every time someone whispers an accusation.

 

[Average Reds]

Exactly.
And the NFLPA is never going to allow the precedent to be set that a player will be required to turn over their personal cell phones to the NFL every time someone whispers an accusation.

The flip side of that is that this wasn't a judicial proceeding of any sort and due process doesn't apply. The CBA does. So all comparisons to trials, standards of proof, etc. are really non-operative.

 

[E5 Yaz]

The flip side of that is that this wasn't a judicial proceeding of any sort and due process doesn't apply. The CBA does. So all comparisons to trials, standards of proof, etc. are really non-operative.

 
Shhhh ... you're about to flush about 1,500 posts in this thread down the drain

 

[86spike]

There's a couple of possible outcomes here, ranging from 100% exoneration to a negotiated reduction in the penalties.
 
For those who want exoneration, keep this in mind:
 
1. It doesn't matter what the impact of deflation is to the game on the field. This is about breaking a rule concerning tampering with balls after approval by the officials
 
2. It doesn't matter what the Patriots provided to the NFL. This is about not providing 100% cooperation.
 
3. It doesn't matter what other teams have done. But it DOES matter how this punishment relates to previous penalty judgments.
 
The best outcome involves the complete release of Wells' primary source material, unedited and raw (including raw materials from Exponent). It should also involve relevant communications between the League and other teams and testimony concerning a possible sting and/or retribution.
 
1. A competent independent forensic engineering/physics/statistical and materials testing team can easily and systematically debunk the Exponent Report. Which will leave only the texts, which are problematic. I imagine a good lawyer, possibly augmented by context not provided in the Wells Report, may counter the "more probable than not" standard exposed by those texts. This is the questionable part and may rely on believable testimony by McNally and Jastremski, which sounds like a stretch. The Exponent team simulated someone needling the balls...did they re-measure the balls afterward? Was only a needle used, or was it another gauge that had a deflation button? Could they simulate comparable results or was it only that someone was able to unpackage, stick a needle in a dozen balls and repackage within the time frame?
 
2. The McNally interview refusal can be countered. The only counter for Brady's refusal would probably be a legal defense that he was under no obligation and that he feared leaks of personal/private correspondence. Maybe the counter is for the League to provide all of its relevant communications, including the people who complained and Kensil's role (among others). How does Brady get around the "didn't fully cooperate" angle -which is grounds for punishment?
 
3. It's clear that the punishment does not fit the crime, as it all comes down to videos and texts that are circumstantial and have no reliable scientific confirmation. What does Brady have on his electronics? Is there a smoking gun? His refusal is the only real basis for concluding that he "more probably than not" had a "general knowledge" of rule breaking - as opposed to simply preparing inflation levels to his liking before inspection.
 
Wells has some explaining to do about how McNally could inflate balls after inspection, because he can't pick and choose his texts. The same crap that has him labeling himself the deflator needs to be combined with his contention that he could over-inflate balls. That's not sticking a needle (gauged or not) into a football surreptitiously - that's pumping up a ball after inspection. If that's a line of bullshit, how does Wells give other statements credence?
 
It all comes down to the texts, McNally's lying, and the bathroom video. We know scientists can argue their's no substantial proof that balls were deflated, but lawyers will need to argue the other stuff. How will they do that?

The report explains that:

A) part of McNally's job is to bring an air compressor and gauge to the Ref Lockerroom along with the balls so that the refs can pump up any balls as needed. (Jastremski claimed that all the texts about "I've got a big needle for you" were referring to a needle for that compressor).

B) In a regular season game, McNally would often be left alone in the area Lockerroom during the warm ups and would have time to theoretically take the ball bag into the private area and alter pressure (he didn't have this alone time on the day of the AFC Championship since there were a lot of extra people around.

McNally's threats to over-inflate balls could have conceivably been carried out when he was alone with the balls on a regular game day.

 

[kartvelo]

...really? The team that was absolutely hammered for misunderstanding a brand new rule in an equally minor infraction didn't have ANY idea that breaking a longstanding rule book rule, however minor, might possibly get them some very harsh punishment from an unassailable commissioner known for erratic, finger in the wind, out of whack punishments? No idea at all? The team that so many in and out of the game want to see knocked down a peg? This is holy shit level justification. People in this thread "IMAGINED that this little thing" could result in such measures.

Sure, people in this thread imagined such measures.... after an unsubstantiated rumor became a PR firestorm. That's after the fact.
 
But the post you're responding to here was explaining why anyone (Brady, McNally, Jastremski, unnamed ballboy, etc.) would theoretically even dare to try doing such a thing, and the explanation was "Since no one ever cared about it before (see heated balls on the sidelines, etc.), there's no way they could have anticipated the outcome we've seen."

 

[dcmissle]

The opening brief and opposition have been filed. The reply is due on the 26th.

Thanks. Will check Pacer.

 

[kartvelo]

The report explains that:

A) part of McNally's job is to bring an air compressor and gauge to the Ref Lockerroom along with the balls so that the refs can pump up any balls as needed. (Jastremski claimed that all the texts about "I've got a big needle for you" were referring to a needle for that compressor).

B) In a regular season game, McNally would often be left alone in the area Lockerroom during the warm ups and would have time to theoretically take the ball bag into the private area and alter pressure (he didn't have this alone time on the day of the AFC Championship since there were a lot of extra people around.

McNally's threats to over-inflate balls could have conceivably been carried out when he was alone with the balls on a regular game day.

McNally theoretically could have inflated balls, deflated them, or wiped his butt with them. However, if we accept all of Walt Anderson's recollections as stated in Roger's own report and run the numbers, the evidence that he did any of those things is exactly zero.

 

[swingin val]

 
To answer your question with a question the next time you hear that PW did an independent report of some kind will you think it's impartial or will you assume it's unfairly biased in favor of the company paying the bills.
 
Let alone getting work from Pats fans.

He seems to work in the client's best interests. Of course, as a Pats fan, I would hire him if I had millions to spend on a defense.

 

[snowmanny]

I think Yee was giving Wells the benefit of the doubt by questioning his independence instead of his competence.

That being said, a better NFL investigation/query would have included whether balls are generally in regulation pressure limits and whether it matters at all. Are they really going to pointlessly measure psi from here on?

 

[uncannymanny]

Sure, people in this thread imagined such measures.... after an unsubstantiated rumor became a PR firestorm. That's after the fact.
 
But the post you're responding to here was explaining why anyone (Brady, McNally, Jastremski, unnamed ballboy, etc.) would theoretically even dare to try doing such a thing, and the explanation was "Since no one ever cared about it before (see heated balls on the sidelines, etc.), there's no way they could have anticipated the outcome we've seen."

Except they'd already warned 2 teams that season about messing with balls, the team had already been severely punished for something no one had previously cared about and the guy in charge is a maniac. But sure! This naivety play is the worst yet.

 

[Myt1]

How?   Do you think current clients or future ones will not use Wells or PW because of the press conference?    

I want my mercenaries to be coldblooded assassins. Overreacting to Yee's incredibly vanilla claims and is one thing. Doing so emotionally is even worse, especially when the role Wells is suppose to be playing is that of neutral, detached arbiter.

The emotion, combined with the pretty obvious slanting of the report (regardless of factual innocence or guilt), are the first steps in building the exact opposite narrative you want for this sort of work. I mean, what the hell did he think was going to happen?

 

[dcmissle]

 
Hubris is a sonuvabitch.  I can see why a great litigator would think he'd be great at giving press conferences, and many are, and many of the skills overlap, but I don't think Usain Bolt would make a great WR and I know Ted Wells isn't so good when not on a brief or in front of a judge and jury.

Ted Wells has probably never been spoken of like that in his life -- and that may be the problem. The first two paragraphs of Yee's press release last week were not personal. They were the introductory paragraphs of a complaint or brief on behalf of Tom Brady. Yet rough, tough, savvy lawyer guy took it personally and Yee got a two-fer.

This isn't a lawyer weakness or a NY weakness. You see this stuff down here all the time. Most notably among high profile journalists. They commit multiple public muggings each month, but have paper thin skin. It's called self entitlement.

 

[Myt1]

The flip side of that is that this wasn't a judicial proceeding of any sort and due process doesn't apply. The CBA does. So all comparisons to trials, standards of proof, etc. are really non-operative.

This is mostly true. But there's some shading of gray/overlap/borrowing when it comes to due process on grievance and disciplinary procedures, especially once things get before a labor arbitrator.

Think hammers and nails. We're all carpenters.

 

[MarcSullivaFan]

The flip side of that is that this wasn't a judicial proceeding of any sort and due process doesn't apply. The CBA does. So all comparisons to trials, standards of proof, etc. are really non-operative.

That's not entirely true. Yes, it is not a judicial proceeding. However, labor arbitrators consider "industrial due process" in analyzing the propriety of employee discipline. Was the employee aware of the rule? Was the rule uniformly enforced? Was the rule properly implemented under the CBA? etc. And there certainly is a standard of proof in labor arbitrations--usually clear and convincing evidence [in discipline/discharge cases]. All of this is potentially relevant if the decision of the hearing officer on Brady's appeal is taken to federal court on a petition to vacate.

 

[Marciano490]

Ted Wells has probably never been spoken of like that in his life -- and that may be the problem. The first two paragraphs of Yee's press release last week were not personal. They were the introductory paragraphs of a complaint or brief on behalf of Tom Brady. Yet rough, tough, savvy lawyer guy took it personally and Yee got a two-fer.

This isn't a lawyer weakness or a NY weakness. You see this stuff down here all the time. Most notably among high profile journalists. They commit multiple public muggings each month, but have paper thin skin. It's called self entitlement.

 
Smartest guy in the room weakness?

 

[lexrageorge]

Thanks, I had not heard that before.

You can find the story if you Google hard enough.  The incident apparently happened during the league meetings in the 2008 offseason, after the whole Matt Walsh and John Tomase fiascoes had finally run their course.  Kraft asked Belichick if there was any advantage to taping from the sidelines, and Belichick's response was basically there was practically no advantage whatsoever.  Which makes perfect sense, as there is no rule against video taping from the coaches booth, and the same information could have been gleaned from either location just as easily.  Kraft supposedly replied "Well, then you're a schmuck".  

 

[Myt1]

Ted Wells has probably never been spoken of like that in his life -- and that may be the problem. The first two paragraphs of Yee's press release last week were not personal. They were the introductory paragraphs of a complaint or brief on behalf of Tom Brady. Yet rough, tough, savvy lawyer guy took it personally and Yee got a two-fer.

This isn't a lawyer weakness or a NY weakness. You see this stuff down here all the time. Most notably among high profile journalists. They commit multiple public muggings each month, but have paper thin skin. It's called self entitlement.

Yeah, you need lifetime tenure before you can get away with that shit.

IMHO, the dumbest thing Wells did yesterday was call on Yee, who has very plainly been wearing an advocate hat all along, to publicly release his notes. Good fucking luck resisting any discovery yourself, Captain Independence.

 

[soxhop411]

This is how the NFL let deflate-gate get out of control and ridiculous By Dan Wetzel
 
 

With anger still simmering, an appeal coming and Ted Wells holding a fiery teleconference Tuesday to attack Tom Brady's agent (professionalism straight out of the WWE), it's fair to say we are far from the end of deflate-gate.
A first-year attorney could lampoon Wells' report, and Brady has hired the prominent Jeffrey Kessler, so expect the four-game suspension to be halved on appeal. We'll see about the New England Patriots' lost draft picks and $1 million fine.
Still, at this point it's worth contemplating the totality of evidence, as Wells likes to write. And what's apparent is deflate-gate was more misdemeanor than felony, a molehill that commissioner Roger Goodell's office turned into a mountain via incompetence, vengeance or both.


View gallery


 
The idea a Patriots lackey carried game balls into a bathroom and took a little air out via a needle prior to the AFC championship game is a relatively moderate rule violation – and a comical bit of gamesmanship. It's wrong and deserves punishment but not something that should merit a four-month, multi-million dollar investigation and the tsk-tsking of over-the-top pious law-and-order types.
"It's not ISIS," Tom Brady said back in January.
Wells should have focused on that line rather than whine about Brady not handing over electronic communication that may not exist (did he expect to find a confessional email chain with BBelichick@Patriots.com?).
It doesn't matter whether you think Brady and New England are guilty or innocent, punished properly or inappropriately. Me? I go with common sense and common sense says the Patriots' equipment guys did it to gain some advantage and Brady was approving of the act. Yet the biggest take away from this tiresome ordeal is how Goodell's lack of touch, vision, courage and guile created a circus.
Start with this: the story didn't go big until ESPN reported about 24 hours after the game that the NFL had discovered that 11 of the 12 footballs were measured to be more than 2 pounds per square inch below the league minimum of 12.5.
That gave a subject that almost no one knew much about context, significance and potentially sinister intent. ESPN cited a nebulous "league source" at a time when it's believed no one outside the NFL office knew the actual measurements.
Of course, that story wasn't true. It wasn't even close to true. Wells' report showed that none of the footballs, each measured twice, were that underinflated.
At that very moment, the NFL had to know the story wasn't true. Yet it did nothing.
So the league either created a fake story that was extremely prejudicial to the Patriots by leaking inaccurate information or someone else did it and the league office let it run wild rather than correct it with the actual air pressure measurements. It's tough to figure out which scenario is worse for Goodell.
Once it appeared the Patriots were up to something big then the public and media rightfully demanded a serious investigation into what wasn't that serious of a story. Goodell didn't steer this to the truth and away from the heated condemnation of a signature player and the validity of a Super Bowl participant (and soon champion).
He instead commissioned Wells' report, lending credence to a false narrative. Abdicating his authority to Wells led to the build-up for the report, which allowed a pack of Manhattan lawyers to serve as the cops, judge and jury.
[SIZE=15.0000009536743px]There is probably no report without that demonstrably false ESPN story. What would be the point?[/SIZE]
 

more at the link

 

[dcmissle]

Yeah, you need lifetime tenure before you can get away with that shit.

IMHO, the dumbest thing Wells did yesterday was call on Yee, who has very plainly been wearing an advocate hat all along, to publicly release his notes. Good fucking luck resisting any discovery yourself, Captain Independence.

"Who the hell do you think you are, Judge Kaplan?"

 

[kartvelo]

Except they'd already warned 2 teams that season about messing with balls, the team had already been severely punished for something no one had previously cared about and the guy in charge is a maniac. But sure! This naivety play is the worst yet.

Huh. Interesting. I didn't interpret the post we're referring to as a "play" of any kind, but I won't presume to speak for the poster.
Your last point is sadly compelling. With Goodell in charge, it's like living with a parent who's an abusive drunk. You never know what trivial or innocuous event might set them off.

 

[Ferm Sheller]

And then BB laughed and replied, "and you're a dickwad".

And then Kraft laughed and said, "I'd rather be a dickwad than a schmuck."

And they then both howled with laughter and then Kraft said, "C'mon, let's go get some Chinese."

(All I'm getting at it we may know the words said, but we can't know their force.)

 

[Leather]

Oh I think it was, indeed, an offhand remark and not one where Kraft was expressing any real animosity. It would be like a kid getting caught drinking at a friends house and months later the father said "Ah, he was a schmuck but what can you do."

 

[SuperManny]

The report explains that:

B) In a regular season game, McNally would often be left alone in the area Lockerroom during the warm ups and would have time to theoretically take the ball bag into the private area and alter pressure (he didn't have this alone time on the day of the AFC Championship since there were a lot of extra people around.

McNally's threats to over-inflate balls could have conceivably been carried out when he was alone with the balls on a regular game day.

 
In regard to part B, has anyone explained what happened the prior week against the Ravens? If this was a weekly occurrence but during the playoffs they had to switch up the routine then why isn't there evidence of McNally taking the balls out of sight the prior week?

 

[Ferm Sheller]

Oh I think it was, indeed, an offhand remark and not one where Kraft was expressing any real animosity. It would be like a kid getting caught drinking at a friends house and months later the father said "Ah, he was a schmuck but what can you do."

And it makes a much better story to tell it as if there was animosity so that's what gets perpetuated.

 

[natpastime162]

Belichick was stupid to continue taping from the sidelines regardless of whether he had the better reading of the bylaw. It was a reckless decision, and it hurt the team then and now. Goodell is unreasonable, but he's the commissioner, and until he's not, you avoid going out of your way to incur his wrath.

 
I recall and interview from a few years ago with Goodell in which it was pretty clear he was still bitter about the apology and felt Belichick didn't grovel at his feet and beg for mercy wasn't contrite enough.  Does anyone remember that interview?  

 

[Bongorific]

I think Yee was giving Wells the benefit of the doubt by questioning his independence instead of his competence.

That being said, a better NFL investigation/query would have included whether balls are generally in regulation pressure limits and whether it matters at all. Are they really going to pointlessly measure psi from here on?

I don't think this investigation was the proper place to determine whether the rule matters.

However, that's a hell of a question the NFL needs to address. We've learned in all of this that the pressure can change based upon temperature, precipitation, how the footballs are handled, etc.

Here's the rule regarding football regulations

Rule 2 The Ball
Section 1
BALL DIMENSIONS
The Ball must be a Wilson, hand selected, bearing the signature of the Commissioner of the League, Roger Goodell.
The ball shall be made up of an inflated (12 1/2 to 13 1/2 pounds) urethane bladder enclosed in a pebble grained, leather case (natural tan color) without corrugations of any kind. It shall have the form of a prolate spheroid and the size and weight shall be: long axis, 11 to 11 1/4 inches; long circumference, 28 to 28 1/2 inches; short circumference, 21 to 21 1/4 inches; weight, 14 to 15 ounces.
The Referee shall be the sole judge as to whether all balls offered for play comply with these specifications. A pump is to be furnished by the home club, and the balls shall remain under the supervision of the Referee until they are delivered to the ball attendant just prior to the start of the game.

So the Rule requires that the ball be between 12.5 and 13.5 PSI. However, based on a variety of conditions, the ball inflation will, at times, be outside of those parameters. Sometimes, significantly outside. If the NFL leaves the rules as currently constructed, that the ball should be between 12.5 and 13.5 and presented to the refs at these levels, and the NFL doesn't institute a new rule that requires the balls to be reinflated at times during the game, they are implying that the actual PSI of the football used at any particular time does not provide a competitive advantage.

If that's the case, WTF are we doing here?

When the rules were drafted, the league either had no idea of the Ideal Gas Law, or knew of it and determined there was no way to control football PSI. Based on the naviety demonstrated by the league, players, coaches throughout this ordeal, my guess is it's the former.

PSI was never a big deal until the NFL decided to make it a big deal after the AFCC. So they have two choices here. One, they adopt a new rule which requires the refs to keep the footballs constantly inflated and uniform. Alternatively, they leave the rule as is which implies the actual PSI level doesn't provide a competitive advantage. In that case, it is illogical to hand down the harshest team penalty in history for a violation that has no impact on the game outcome.

 

[BroodsSexton]

If PSI is measured on the field under game conditions, and not in a toasty warm locker room, it's probably not a big deal. The rule could be modified to say that the PSI will be in range per measurement at the beginning of the game and thereafter at the referees' discretion.

 

[SoxinSeattle]

 
In regard to part B, has anyone explained what happened the prior week against the Ravens? If this was a weekly occurrence but during the playoffs they had to switch up the routine then why isn't there evidence of McNally taking the balls out of sight the prior week?

Excellent point assuming they have video cameras in every room/hallway where the balls are dealt with. 
 
Aside: I keep telling my Seahawks friends not to worry the Ravens would have beaten them as well.

 

[Bongorific]

If PSI is measured on the field under game conditions, and not in a toasty warm locker room, it's probably not a big deal. The rule could be modified to say that the PSI will be in range per measurement at the beginning of the game and thereafter at the referees' discretion.

Agreed.  But this isn't going to happen, unless they make it the Bud Light Pre-Kickoff On Field Gauge Test.
 
The most likely thing to happen will be the league changing the rule such that once the footballs are approved in the locker room, the refs or league representative are in charge of the footballs.  If that's the rule, the footballs will continue to adapt to the environment; some games the footballs will be 11.3 PSI, other games 14.2.

 

[theapportioner]

Lawyer people:
 
I'm trying to understand the practical effects of Wells' press conference. Is it just a bad PR move or does it have any effect on the appeals process, and potentially other moves down the road? Myt mentioned that he'd be less likely to resist discovery. Anything else?
 
Interesting window to a world that I have barely any understanding of.

 

[Chuck Schilling]

The report explains that:

A) part of McNally's job is to bring an air compressor and gauge to the Ref Lockerroom along with the balls so that the refs can pump up any balls as needed. (Jastremski claimed that all the texts about "I've got a big needle for you" were referring to a needle for that compressor).

B) In a regular season game, McNally would often be left alone in the area Lockerroom during the warm ups and would have time to theoretically take the ball bag into the private area and alter pressure (he didn't have this alone time on the day of the AFC Championship since there were a lot of extra people around.

McNally's threats to over-inflate balls could have conceivably been carried out when he was alone with the balls on a regular game day.

If the club supplies the pump and gauge, then wouldn't it be a hell of a lot easier to mess with the calibration on the gauge to begin with - have it read 1 PSI higher than actual? Why screw around with some old guy stealthily deflating by feel?

 

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

B) In a regular season game, McNally would often be left alone in the area Lockerroom during the warm ups and would have time to theoretically take the ball bag into the private area and alter pressure (he didn't have this alone time on the day of the AFC Championship since there were a lot of extra people around.

McNally's threats to over-inflate balls could have conceivably been carried out when he was alone with the balls on a regular game day.

This still doesn't add up to me. About 1000 posts ago there was commentary from an NFL security official who said (paraphrasing) "it's his job to walk to the field with the officials for the past 12ish years. McNally has always been part of that group coming out with the balls. Suddenly at the AFC champ game McNally wasn't there"

Now this looks bad on its face, except if we ask what happened the previous week during the Ravens game.

Presumably the officials room was crowded for this game as well, so McNally couldn't deflate balls in that room. So did he walk out with the refs and this security guy or not?

Let's say that he did not. Well if so why haven't we heard about the balls disappearing for that game as well?

Now let's that he did. Well then why did he during the AFC champ game? To deflate the balls or to take a leak? But why would he do it one week but then not the next?

Obviously this falls apart if the refs room isn't as crowded for the divisional game as it is for the conf champ game.

 

[Harry Hooper]

If the club supplies the pump and gauge, then wouldn't it be a hell of a lot easier to mess with the calibration on the gauge to begin with - have it read 1 PSI higher than actual? Why screw around with some old guy stealthily deflating by feel?

 
 
Yes, the old Oakland A's trick -- lower the infield level to effectively raise the mound..

 

[86spike]

In regard to part B, has anyone explained what happened the prior week against the Ravens? If this was a weekly occurrence but during the playoffs they had to switch up the routine then why isn't there evidence of McNally taking the balls out of sight the prior week?

 

The report notes that Patriots security footage is overwritten every 10 days so they had no footage from other home games.

 

If the club supplies the pump and gauge, then wouldn't it be a hell of a lot easier to mess with the calibration on the gauge to begin with - have it read 1 PSI higher than actual? Why screw around with some old guy stealthily deflating by feel?

It notes that the Pats supply a pump and gauge but that most refs use their own gauges.

 

[dcmissle]

Lawyer people:
 
I'm trying to understand the practical effects of Wells' press conference. Is it just a bad PR move or does it have any effect on the appeals process, and potentially other moves down the road? Myt mentioned that he'd be less likely to resist discovery. Anything else?
 
Interesting window to a world that I have barely any understanding of.

1. He was supposed to be an impartial investigator; during the presser he bared his teeth and took on the role of an advocate. That is going to be woven into "the story" as told by TB and maybe Kraft.

2. He said some uninformed things helpful to the accused. Those sound bites are going to be used. Strict rules of evidence will not apply as we go forward.

3. I think his value as a witness has been compromised -- or at least the accused have helpful cross-examination they didn't before yesterday. In any hearing, it's likely not going to be sufficient to argue generally that Kraft and TB were not cooperative because they did not gives us this or that. The duty to cooperate is not without boundaries. As a hearing officer I want to know why what was asked for was needed, and how the investigation was compromised by failing to provide it. Not in the abstract -- concretely. I want to know these things to determine whether there was a violation and, if so, the severity of that violation to measure the reasonableness of the sanction.

Wells would seem to be best positioned to testify to this. I don't know if I want Mr. Thin Skin on the stand, especially since it will open him to questions on the impartiality of the investigation generally, and particularly if they get discovery from Mr. Thin Skin's files.

I suppose I'm glad to know this now if I am team Goodell, but teams Brady and Kraft know it too. Great lawyers can be shitty witnesses and worse clients.

 

[uncannymanny]

I don't think this investigation was the proper place to determine whether the rule matters.

However, that's a hell of a question the NFL needs to address. We've learned in all of this that the pressure can change based upon temperature, precipitation, how the footballs are handled, etc.

Here's the rule regarding football regulations

Rule 2 The Ball
Section 1
BALL DIMENSIONS
The Ball must be a Wilson, hand selected, bearing the signature of the Commissioner of the League, Roger Goodell.
The ball shall be made up of an inflated (12 1/2 to 13 1/2 pounds) urethane bladder enclosed in a pebble grained, leather case (natural tan color) without corrugations of any kind. It shall have the form of a prolate spheroid and the size and weight shall be: long axis, 11 to 11 1/4 inches; long circumference, 28 to 28 1/2 inches; short circumference, 21 to 21 1/4 inches; weight, 14 to 15 ounces.
The Referee shall be the sole judge as to whether all balls offered for play comply with these specifications. A pump is to be furnished by the home club, and the balls shall remain under the supervision of the Referee until they are delivered to the ball attendant just prior to the start of the game.

So the Rule requires that the ball be between 12.5 and 13.5 PSI. However, based on a variety of conditions, the ball inflation will, at times, be outside of those parameters. Sometimes, significantly outside. If the NFL leaves the rules as currently constructed, that the ball should be between 12.5 and 13.5 and presented to the refs at these levels, and the NFL doesn't institute a new rule that requires the balls to be reinflated at times during the game, they are implying that the actual PSI of the football used at any particular time does not provide a competitive advantage.

If that's the case, WTF are we doing here?

When the rules were drafted, the league either had no idea of the Ideal Gas Law, or knew of it and determined there was no way to control football PSI. Based on the naviety demonstrated by the league, players, coaches throughout this ordeal, my guess is it's the former.

PSI was never a big deal until the NFL decided to make it a big deal after the AFCC. So they have two choices here. One, they adopt a new rule which requires the refs to keep the footballs constantly inflated and uniform. Alternatively, they leave the rule as is which implies the actual PSI level doesn't provide a competitive advantage. In that case, it is illogical to hand down the harshest team penalty in history for a violation that has no impact on the game outcome.

Holy shit. For the billionth time, the egregious actions are the alleged post-inspection tampering with the balls and coverup.

The most likely thing to happen will be the league changing the rule such that once the footballs are approved in the locker room, the refs or league representative are in charge of the footballs.  If that's the rule, the footballs will continue to adapt to the environment; some games the footballs will be 11.3 PSI, other games 14.2.

It's the last sentence in the rule you just posted. Is everyone taking crazy pills?!

 

[kartvelo]

This still doesn't add up to me. About 1000 posts ago there was commentary from an NFL security official who said (paraphrasing) "it's his job to walk to the field with the officials for the past 12ish years. McNally has always been part of that group coming out with the balls. Suddenly at the AFC champ game McNally wasn't there"

Now this looks bad on its face, except if we ask what happened the previous week during the Ravens game.

Presumably the officials room was crowded for this game as well, so McNally couldn't deflate balls in that room. So did he walk out with the refs and this security guy or not?

Let's say that he did not. Well if so why haven't we heard about the balls disappearing for that game as well?

Now let's that he did. Well then why did he during the AFC champ game? To deflate the balls or to take a leak? But why would he do it one week but then not the next?

Obviously this falls apart if the refs room isn't as crowded for the divisional game as it is for the conf champ game.

Some of the people interviewed said McNally went out to the field alone about half the time, but their statements were dismissed as implausible by the Wells report. The only people who said he *never* did before the AFCCG were the people who might have thought they'd get in trouble themselves if he had been allowed to do so. For some reason, Wells adjudged those statements more reliable than the statements from people with no motivation to lie about it.

 

[smokin joe wood]

I think the Wetzel article above sums up my feeling on this situation about as well as any article I've seen. 

 

[cshea]

I'm probably being naive and a Pats homer, but I still find the clandestine operation of deflating the 12 balls in the bathroom in 1:40 as fairly implausible. I mean, lug two large bags of balls in, lock door, take out 12 balls, deflate 1 by 1, pack everything back in the bags, and head out. Really? I guess if you knew you were on a clock and could practice it's doable and I know the report says they found it was replicable, but it still seems so far fetched that they would go to such lengths and that this McNally stooge could pull it off. Especially since the bathroom trip was out of the norm per the findings of the Wells Report.

 

[AB in DC]

That's not entirely true. Yes, it is not a judicial proceeding. However, labor arbitrators consider "industrial due process" in analyzing the propriety of employee discipline. Was the employee aware of the rule? Was the rule uniformly enforced? Was the rule properly implemented under the CBA? etc. And there certainly is a standard of proof in labor arbitrations--usually clear and convincing evidence [in discipline/discharge cases]. All of this is potentially relevant if the decision of the hearing officer on Brady's appeal is taken to federal court on a petition to vacate.

Would love to hear more about these.  Clearly due process was basically non-existent here.  Is this enough for Kessler to hang his hat on?