#DFG: Canceling the Noise

[DJnVa]

 
I text fairly often, but I never commingle two unrelated thoughts on unrelated subjects in a single text while using confusing pronouns.

 

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

 

[dcmissle]

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

The owners' meeting:

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

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

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

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

 

[nighthob]

This also has me realizing how terrified I'd be if my text history became public. I do 75% of my communicating with people that way, and it's probably gibberish to anyone not involved in any of the conversations (and even to some of them). God forbid the group texts between my friends and I got out.

I can tell you for a fact that a couple of my clients would be suicidal if our text logs ever became public (kid lit writers can't be publicly engaging in bawdy talk).

 

[Rovin Romine]

The "deflate as weight loss" stupidity will be latched on by media as a reason to disregard the entire rebuttal. Already hearing it on ESPN

 
Yep.  Bad move.  Never give the other side ammunition, even if you have to stay quiet on a point or two. 

 

[CaptainLaddie]

Hahahah you saying you have friends makes me chortle, TFP.

(Nothing but love.)

 

[soxhop411]

Jeff Darlington ‏@JeffDarlington  4m4 minutes ago
I'm not convinced Brady will serve all four games simply by seeing similar holes in Wells' report this time compared to his report on Miami.

 

[kartvelo]

 
Yep.  Bad move.  Never give the other side ammunition, even if you have to stay quiet on a point or two. 

Staying quiet on the point would have been ammunition for the other side.

 

[OCST]

Have people ever texted before? I've had text conversations with friends that had 2 to 3 different streams of thought going at once, and would seamlessly switch and intermingle the two.

 
doesn't this happen routinely here?  Messageboarding != texting, but close enough.

 

[lexrageorge]

Things that make you feel good often are not good for you. Lots of Pats' targets are wearing Teflon made of the explication of "deflator". The choir does not need converting.

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

 

[Leather]

Staying quiet on the point would have been ammunition for the other side.

 
They could have just left it there and not drawn attention to it, and said "There's nothing here that suggests he was referring to deflating balls any more than there is anything here that suggests that Mr. Jastremski has a corn chip for a penis."

 

[bluefenderstrat]

But even with the headline about the nickname, this story goes into the guts of the teardown.  It'll get out there.  Jets & Dolphins fans won't be swayed anyway, so who cares?
 
http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/nfl-shutdown-corner/the--deflator--was-a-term-for-losing-weight--pats-fire-back-at-wells--report-171744937.html

 

[SeoulSoxFan]

One thing is for sure. 
 
In Well's passionate defense, he said "it was the evidence" and there's no way anyone can look at the texts and conclude they were not "direct" evidence.
 
How can anyone look at the transcript and say the same? 

 

[nighthob]

The "deflate as weight loss" stupidity will be latched on by media as a reason to disregard the entire rebuttal. Already hearing it on ESPN

ESPN was going to latch onto the single text as a life preserver whether or not the Patriots addressed it. They're an NFL partner, they know where their bread is buttered.

 

[bankshot1]

 
I'm missing the Henderson reference.
 
Anyhow, I don't think Kraft is trying to convince Roger to hit reset--he's trying to get the other owner's to take this out of Roger's hands by saying that this means war, that this is a clusterfuck, etc.  And you know, he's going to have some credibility after taking his Spygate beating like a man, being a league guy, defending the league and commissioner in public after Ray Rice, leaving his dying wife's side to help with the labor negotiations, etc. 

This was the point I was making.
 
A few BSD owners brokers a deal, the Pats keep their 1, lose a 2, stick it on less than perfect Pats cooperation, and Goodell keeps his job, despite his fucking up every investigation he gets his hands on. 

 

[Rovin Romine]

Staying quiet on the point would have been ammunition for the other side.

 
It's a choice between two evils.  While there are exceptions, generally parties do best when they control the conversation/arguments.  
 
"Deflator" =s weight loss does not pass the sniff test.  

 

[E5 Yaz]

Staying quiet on the point would have been ammunition for the other side.

 
They would use it either way. Best answer would have been to say he was the "deflator" of getting balls down to 12.5 ... ignore the weight deal
 
The other point media are harping on is ... if Jastremski and McNally did nothing wrong, why were they disciplined by team?
 
This is an uphill climb because it doesn't follow the national storyline

 

[Shelterdog]

 
We don't need to derail this thread with Incoginito. Literally every time I tried to bring up the point of how every teammate and coach defended Incognito as doing nothing wrong or outside of the realm of "normal" in an NFL locker room, I was absolutely skewered.
 
It's hilarious seeing people bringing up quotes from Jim Turner as the beacon of truth suddenly.

 
False.  Technically speaking we were riding train on you.

 

[E5 Yaz]

ESPN was going to latch onto the single text as a life preserver whether or not the Patriots addressed it. They're an NFL partner, they know where their bread is buttered.

 
Of course, as several of us have said for weeks.
 
The point is, reaching for an unlikely explanation diminishes the impact of the rest of the statement in public view.

 

[Bob420]

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

It might not be Tom Brady they are talking about. It could be Tom from Quincy. A very demanding 3rd grader upset about the pressure in the kickball.

 

[The Social Chair]

ESPN was going to latch onto the single text as a life preserver whether or not the Patriots addressed it. They're an NFL partner, they know where their bread is buttered.

 
Not just ESPN. Deadspin dismissed the whole rebuttal based on the weight loss thing. 

 

[TomRicardo]

 
Not just ESPN. Deadspin dismissed the whole rebuttal based on the weight loss thing. 

 
Deadspin will only get on a bandwagon if attacks Goodell and/or ESPN.  

 

[sodenj5]

 
False.  Technically speaking we were riding train on you.

 
Haha, that may be more accurate.

 

[lexrageorge]

One thing is for sure. 
 
In Well's passionate defense, he said "it was the evidence" and there's no way anyone can look at the texts and conclude they were not "direct" evidence.
 
How can anyone look at the transcript and say the same? 

But the duty of Wells is to consider alternative explanations and decide how much weight to give them.  And it wasn't just the texts where Wells refused to do that.  For example, selectively deciding that Walt Anderson's recollection of the pressure gauge that was used to check the balls prior to the game was going to be ignored.  
 
"We saw one text where McNally referred to himself as Deflator.  But we also uncovered another one where the term was used in a completely different context."

 

[DJnVa]

 
It's a choice between two evils.  While there are exceptions, generally parties do best when they control the conversation/arguments.  
 
"Deflator" =s weight loss does not pass the sniff test.  

 
Seems like a judgment call and they thought the opposite.
 
 
Could this be a case of the Patriots trying to draw a distinction between the rebuttal and the Wells Report? We've taken shots at the Wells Report for downplaying or omitting info that would support the Pats case. The Patriots are saying that no matter how dumb it may look on the face of it, we're still putting it all out there.

 

[pappymojo]

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

 

[kartvelo]

But the duty of Wells is to consider alternative explanations and decide how much weight to give them.  And it wasn't just the texts where Wells refused to do that.  For example, selectively deciding that Walt Anderson's recollection of the pressure gauge that was used to check the balls prior to the game.  
 
"We saw one text where McNally referred to himself as Deflator.  But we also uncovered another one where the term was used in a completely different context."

...and which context corroborates his explanation of the term.

 

[Leather]

 
Deadspin will only get on a bandwagon if attacks Goodell and/or ESPN.  

 
And they've been blasting away at Goodell recently, meaning they will err on shitting on the Pats to even the scales a bit.

 

[lexrageorge]

 
They would use it either way. Best answer would have been to say he was the "deflator" of getting balls down to 12.5 ... ignore the weight deal
 
The other point media are harping on is ... if Jastremski and McNally did nothing wrong, why were they disciplined by team?
 
This is an uphill climb because it doesn't follow the national storyline

Someone should show the mediots the NFL's press release which states that McNally/Jastremski are current barred, by the NFL, from working for the team.  

 

[nighthob]

The other point media are harping on is ... if Jastremski and McNally did nothing wrong, why were they disciplined by team?

They did do things wrong. The texts exposed that they were stealing shit from the clubhouse. This before getting into the fact that the NFL was (as someone else cleverly noted) turning them into Rosencrantz and Guildenstern. Though while the NFL undoubtedly intended this to be grand Shakespearean tragedy good ole' Dorito Dink has turned it into Stoppardian absurdity.

 

[SeoulSoxFan]

They could have just left it there and not drawn attention to it, and said "There's nothing here that suggests he was referring to deflating balls any more than there is anything here that suggests that Mr. Jastremski has a corn chip for a penis."

 
To me the report wasn't written for the real Dorito Dinks like the ESPN talking heads, nevermind for Shannon Sharpes & Matt Simms of the world. 
 
It was written as a big warning shot to Goodell & Vincent IN PREPARATION for the actual heavies to follow.

 

[JimD]

The "deflate as weight loss" stupidity will be latched on by media as a reason to disregard the entire rebuttal. Already hearing it on ESPN

 
So, those media members are willing to disregard 98 percent of a report's contents to focus on ridiculing the 2% that is questionable.  I can't think of a better example of how shallow the 2015 sports media complex is.

 

[moondog80]

 
It's a choice between two evils.  While there are exceptions, generally parties do best when they control the conversation/arguments.  
 
"Deflator" =s weight loss does not pass the sniff test.  

 
Sure, if you willfully ignore the text where it was used in that context.

 

[Stevie1der]

The info about the Pats having some kind of proof of the Colts ball boys having needles during a game with Jacksonville.
 
Is Jacksonville an ally here?

 
You mean the same Jacksonville team that might get to face the Brady-less Patriots if the suspension is upheld?  Yeah, not gonna hold out hope that they come rushing to our defense.

 

[E5 Yaz]

 
So, those media members are willing to disregard 98 percent of a report's contents to focus on ridiculing the 2% that is questionable.  I can't think of a better example of how shallow the 2105 sports media complex is.

 
Correct on both counts

 

[Zedia]

  
"Deflator" =s weight loss does not pass the sniff test.  

 
I have a feeling this was posted at some point in the mega-thread, but this is always a good watch:
 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yznRGS9f-jI

 

[DaughtersofDougMirabelli]

They did do things wrong. The texts exposed that they were stealing shit from the clubhouse. This before getting into the fact that the NFL was (as someone else cleverly noted) turning them into Rosencrantz and Guildenstern. Though while the NFL undoubtedly intended this to be grand Shakespearean tragedy good ole' Dorito Dink has turned it into Stoppardian absurdity.

 
Can SoSH pass a rule to ban quoted texts in sigs? Your posts are pissing me off more than this whole DeflateGate scandal. 

 

[nighthob]

You mean the same Jacksonville team that might get to face the Brady-less Patriots if the suspension is upheld?  Yeah, not gonna hold out hope that they come rushing to our defense.

Or the same one that might want to get the hell out of Jacksonville, now with a new ally in the owner ranks.

 

[SeoulSoxFan]

 
Correct on both counts

 
With so many outlets, the "media members" roster is more watered down than if NFL had expanded to 320 teams. 

 

[PBDWake]

 
It's a choice between two evils.  While there are exceptions, generally parties do best when they control the conversation/arguments.  
 
"Deflator" =s weight loss does not pass the sniff test.  

 
I don't know. It may or may not, but Seanberry (and Marciano) did have the gist of it a few pages ago, although he may have been using it as a pedestal for attack.
 
How do these guys know each other? Because they work together on equipment with the Pats. They're routinely inflating and deflating balls. People use terms and nicknames based on what they share in common. I have friends through a game I play where common terminology for a mistake is a "punt". We were watching the Sox game at a bar, and I disagreed with the relief pitcher they brought in. I called it a punt. Someone could have overheard me and reasonably assumed I had no idea about sports and was making shit up as I went along. I have similar colloquialisms for work, people I know from college, and numerous other things. When you actually think about it, it's still a strange coincidence, but using that term isn't the extraordinary circumstance most people are portraying it as.
 
I mean, it's not like Ray Lewis's coach was serious when he called him killer in pop warner...

 

[Tim Salmon]

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

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

 

[SeoulSoxFan]

 
Can SoSH pass a rule to ban quoted texts in sigs? Your posts are pissing me off more than this whole DeflateGate scandal. 

 
You can ignore anyone's signature. 

 

[soxhop411]

Joe Banner ‏@JoeBanner13  2m2 minutes ago
Pats response tells us that the team is not going to pursue legal action. If they were they would not have wanted to lay out their arguemant
 
 
https://twitter.com/AlbertBreer/status/598922792550146048

 

[DaughtersofDougMirabelli]

You can ignore anyone's signature. 

 
Reeaaally?
 
Guess I'm the DoritoDink of the Day. 

 

[NortheasternPJ]

 
Can SoSH pass a rule to ban quoted texts in sigs? Your posts are pissing me off more than this whole DeflateGate scandal. 

 
Just turn off signatures. I did it years ago since it annoyed me.

 

[Jettisoned]

To each his own.  I read the whole thing and thought it was an awesome takedown of the "science" and assumptions in the Wells Report.  But I don't think the alternative explanations of the texts pass the smell test.
 
I think this line undercuts the "texter with ADD" defense:
 
Jastremski: I told him it was. He was right though…
 
The first sentence only makes sense if it refers back to the "stress" line.  The second sentence only makes sense if you read it in conjunction with the following text, which refers back to complaints about ball pressure:
 
Jastremski: I checked some of the balls this morn… The refs fucked us…a few of then were at almost 16
 
I text fairly often, but I never commingle two unrelated thoughts on unrelated subjects in a single text while using confusing pronouns.

 
I don't know, I'd like to see a few more preceding texts.  It could be that the whole text is referring to someone other than Brady, and then he switches to talking about Brady in the next one.

 

[PBDWake]

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

 
Well, what was McNally's text before that. That bears mentioning. If McNally's text is an unanswered text from like 3 hours before asking something like "How's your friend?", and JJ is responding to each at the same time, in turn, because he missed the first one and the second message alerted him to the first, that makes sense. And happens all the time with me. Although I feel like if that were the case we might have had it in the pats response.

 

[JimBoSox9]

The "deflate as weight loss" stupidity will be latched on by media as a reason to disregard the entire rebuttal. Already hearing it on ESPN

 
News cycles don't get set in cement in a couple hours, whatever folks like to say about how the internetz have changed things.  Just like with the Report itself, the more nuanced analysis will start to trickle out tonight and tomorrow (as the more responsible folks actually peruse and absorb it rather than running to nearest ESPN set).  The Deflator nickname bit is getting the early run because it's the lowest-hanging fruit.

 

[DJnVa]

 
You mean the same Jacksonville team that might get to face the Brady-less Patriots if the suspension is upheld?  Yeah, not gonna hold out hope that they come rushing to our defense.

 
My point was they might have already done so. If there's "proof" from a Jacksonville-Indy game of the Colts doing someone wonky, where did it come from? Either Jacksonville or the media covering the game I would think.

 

[Comfortably Lomb]

An aside: I think it's amazing that anyone in this day and age would ever put anything in an email, text, or other documentable electronic communication that is an any way related to something they shouldn't be doing.

 

[Tim Salmon]

 
I don't know, I'd like to see a few more preceding texts.  It could be that the whole text is referring to someone other than Brady, and then he switches to talking about Brady in the next one.

The Wells Report states that this was the first text exchange between the two in 12 days (p. 77, n. 49).  Again, I think the report is crap, but I'm going to assume that he isn't lying about dates and times that opposing lawyers could easily refute.