#DFG: Canceling the Noise

Is there any level of suspension that you would advise Tom to accept?


  • Total voters
    208

ifmanis5

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 29, 2007
40,804
Rotten Apple
Seabass177 said:
They probably didn't do anything. I'm really ready for this to be over. It's the stupidest thing that's ever dumbed. 
This.
 
Roger is the W. of Commissioners. Burying the important stuff but making a mountain out of nothing just to show he's in charge. Clownshow.
 

Chuck Schilling

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 5, 2001
3,607
the belly of the clam
amarshal2 said:
 

 
 
 
 
I voted that nothing happened.
 
I have never met someone who thinks the Patriots are guilty who accurately understands the science and can articulate his position.  
 
95% of the people I speak to basically say that they believe the Patriots probably did it because of the circumstantial evidence or because they haven't been paying close attention to such a stupid and boring controversy.  Most of these people are intelligent, well-intentioned people who are not overly biased -- several are Patriots fans.  But their in-going assumption is that the Patriots did it and they have not invested time in confronting their preconceived notions.  If you ask them why, the responses range from pointing at headlines to rather detailed understandings of the circumstantial evidence.  None of them make any arguments about science.
 
Edit: I find SN's devil's advocate scenario illogical for a number of reasons.
 
The best argument, in my mind, is the one Chuck Schilling made while I was writing this:
 
 

Basically, the procedures were so sloppy we have to throw the science out entirely.  I don't agree, but it's a reasonable position.
 
As for non-science, I find the Dorito Dink texts to be wholly unconvincing.  He texted that he was the "deflator" in May of 2014.  We have direct evidence of Brady being pissed about the balls being inflated to 16 psi during a home Jets game in like October.  Obviously, when he referred to himself as the deflator he wasn't deflating footballs or they never would have been 16 psi during a home Jets game.
 
The Colts accusations completely fall on deaf ears for me.  They thought something was up during their last game which was played in Indianapolis.  Dorito Dink didn't travel to that game and the Patriots didn't have access to the balls outside the view of cameras (of which there are many, if something happened, we'd know.)  Thus, if you believe the Colts, you don't believe the entire bathroom argument for the balls being deflated during the AFCCG.  Now you're really on thin ice.
 
So, basically, either McNally just decided not to deflate the footballs for a home Jets game for no apparent reason and didn't text anything about it being his fault or the texts are irrelevant.   And if you throw out the texts, you've got nothing.
 
Sorry, but the "Deflate and give somebody that jkt"  text is all about a thin guy looking tubby in an ill-fitting down jacket?
 

nighthob

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
8,668
RIFan said:
 The Ravens, Colts, and Kensil went on something more than a hunch.  
Actually, it was a hunch. The Ravens were whining about the Patriots messing with the deflation of the footballs the week before, when the game was played in a frozen tundra. Put another way, they went on an ignorance of the effect of temperature on air prerssure.
 

amarshal2

Member
SoSH Member
Oct 25, 2005
4,770
Chuck Schilling said:
Sorry, but the "Deflate and give somebody that jkt"  text is all about a thin guy looking tubby in an ill-fitting down jacket?
 
You asked...
 
DoritoDink was at home.  He sent that text to Jastremski, the Patriots equipment manager, who was on the Pats sidelines.  Jastremski and the rest of the Patriots organization had no access to the balls after the officials had them as the home team brings them to the field.  If he had accessed the balls it would have been illegally on the sidelines in view of the cameras, fans, officials, etc.  Given that we are sure the Wells team looked into this and nobody could find anything, I think it's fair to say that Jastremski was not deflating footballs on the sidelines during away games.  Wells does not make any such accusation.
 
I don't know what that text is about but if you've got no scientific support and no plausible theory for how he was deflating footballs then I don't know why it's logical to conclude that it was about illegally deflating footballs.
 

tims4wins

PN23's replacement
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
24,252
Hingham, MA
Chuck Schilling said:
Sorry, but the "Deflate and give somebody that jkt"  text is all about a thin guy looking tubby in an ill-fitting down jacket?
 
I probably shouldn't get sucked into this, but let's remember this text came from McNally to JJ. McNally was not in Green Bay, JJ was. McNally was the one who has been accused of letting the air out of the footballs, not JJ. Let's be sure to have their identities correct before speculating on the meaning.
 
And as drbretto shows, JJ was literally holding a jacket around the time that JM texted him. JM clearly was watching the game on TV, saw JJ get some air time, and texted him to give him shit.
 
Edit: also covered by amarshal
 
This all being said, I am not 100% sure what he meant by deflate here
 

nighthob

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
8,668
Chuck Schilling said:
Sorry, but the "Deflate and give somebody that jkt"  [/size]text is all about a thin guy looking tubby in an ill-fitting down jacket?
I mean McNally was sitting in his living room when he sent the text and the timestamp on it shows that it was sent while Jastremski was actually on TV. It's certainly a simpler explanation than trying to shoehorn it into the Internationap Patriots Conspiracy.
 

Super Nomario

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 5, 2000
12,756
Mansfield MA
geoduck no quahog said:
 
Using averages...with gauges that are obviously inaccurate (reference the measurements of the intercepted ball).
 
If you take it ball-by-ball, don't assume the longest time period for measuring Pats footballs, and use the "worst case" deviation of gauge readings, you could assert that all the footballs were less inflated than they should have been. The recorded deviations between Patriots footballs were greater than for the 4 Colts footballs.
 
All I'm saying is, if you graphed the results using error bars, you'd find the footballs could all have been above the "expected" pressure...or all could have been below. The assessments of data taken in completely uncontrolled circumstances on defective instrumentation mean nothing in the world of engineering.
I don't disagree with any of this. I'm just pointing out that it's possible the balls were tampered with more than 0.2-0.3 PSI. They could have been tampered with more, and they might not have been tampered with at all.
 
nighthob said:
Actually, it was a hunch. The Ravens were whining about the Patriots messing with the deflation of the footballs the week before, when the game was played in a frozen tundra. Put another way, they went on an ignorance of the effect of temperature on air prerssure.
Something that just occurred to me: if the Patriots did intentionally deflate the footballs, that would mean that they, too, were ignorant of the ideal gas law. After all, if cold temperatures are going to drop the ball pressure ~1.0 PSI (or more in colder weather), there's no need to tamper with the footballs to get them deflated.
 

Chuck Schilling

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 5, 2001
3,607
the belly of the clam
tims4wins said:
 
I probably shouldn't get sucked into this, but let's remember this text came from McNally to JJ. McNally was not in Green Bay, JJ was. McNally was the one who has been accused of letting the air out of the footballs, not JJ. Let's be sure to have their identities correct before speculating on the meaning.
 
And as drbretto shows, JJ was literally holding a jacket around the time that JM texted him. JM clearly was watching the game on TV, saw JJ get some air time, and texted him to give him shit.
 
Edit: also covered by amarshal
 
This all being said, I am not 100% sure what he meant by deflate here
Yeah, I know all that, and I didn't mean to get sucked into it, either, but that shot was taken just after GB went up by by 9. I find it more likely he was talking/joking about taking air out of balls, others think differently.
 

j44thor

Well-Known Member
Silver Supporter
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
9,466
tims4wins said:
 
I probably shouldn't get sucked into this, but let's remember this text came from McNally to JJ. McNally was not in Green Bay, JJ was. McNally was the one who has been accused of letting the air out of the footballs, not JJ. Let's be sure to have their identities correct before speculating on the meaning.
 
And as drbretto shows, JJ was literally holding a jacket around the time that JM texted him. JM clearly was watching the game on TV, saw JJ get some air time, and texted him to give him shit.
 
Edit: also covered by amarshal
 
This all being said, I am not 100% sure what he meant by deflate here
 
If someone showed me the picture with the text I would assume he was making a joke about him wearing a rather puffy jacket.  I'm sure this text only made the Wells report because it was one of the very few that matched the search term "deflate" that they clearly used to try and find incriminating evidence.
 

amarshal2

Member
SoSH Member
Oct 25, 2005
4,770
Chuck Schilling said:
Yeah, I know all that, and I didn't mean to get sucked into it, either, but that shot was taken just after GB went up by by 9. I find it more likely he was talking/joking about taking air out of balls, others think differently.
So your thought is that this is something Jastremski was doing beyond McNally at away games/without the help of a bathroom but the NFL just wasn't able to find any evidence of it?

I'm asking seriously because I don't understand how you're connecting the dots.
 

rodderick

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 24, 2009
6,620
Belo Horizonte - Brazil
Chuck Schilling said:
Yeah, I know all that, and I didn't mean to get sucked into it, either, but that shot was taken just after GB went up by by 9. I find it more likely he was talking/joking about taking air out of balls, others think differently.
If they had a scheme to take air out of footballs, we know by now it wasn't done on the sidelines, and Jastremski likely wouldn't be directly involved in the process. So if that text is a joke about deflating footballs it doesn't make much sense, but trying to attribute a concrete meaning to inside jokes between those dinks is an exercise in futility.
 

tims4wins

PN23's replacement
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
24,252
Hingham, MA
Chuck Schilling said:
Yeah, I know all that, and I didn't mean to get sucked into it, either, but that shot was taken just after GB went up by by 9. I find it more likely he was talking/joking about taking air out of balls, others think differently.
 
The sequencing of the phrasing in the text would be weird if this was the case, IMO. As it stands, the text is saying deflate, and give someone that jacket. If the text was truly about deflating footballs, wouldn't McNally have written something more along the lines of "give someone that jacket and go deflate" or something like that - as in, holding that jacket is useless, get rid of it and make yourself useful by deflating balls since we're down a couple of scores.
 
This is an exercise in stupidity and futility, trying to make sense of these texts. But reading way more into it than I should, I think he would have reversed the phrases if he was actually talking about deflating balls.
 
I am sorry for even discussing this.
 
PS it was a high of 36 degrees that day in GB so the Pats were likely playing with illegal balls anyway
 

Chuck Schilling

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 5, 2001
3,607
the belly of the clam
amarshal2 said:
So your thought is that this is something Jastremski was doing beyond McNally at away games/without the help of a bathroom but the NFL just wasn't able to find any evidence of it?

I'm asking seriously because I don't understand how you're connecting the dots.
I find it more plausible that they stick a needle up a sleeve (wasn't there a report of a complaint directed at another team of doing this?) and let a little air out on the sidelines than the story they gave to explain those texts. 
 

troparra

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 3, 2007
1,831
Michigan
Chuck Schilling said:
 
 
I voted #2 for much the same reason - the most reasonable interpretation of the texts from Dorito Dink and his buddy is that they do deflate footballs after inspection when they have the opportunity and the need to keep Brady happy. The science and the potential for sloppy measurement error bars may not clearly demonstrate that it happened before or during the AFCCG, but if I had to wager whether or not it ever happened I'd bet Yes.
 
The below quote kinda undermines the texts (Wells report p. 61):
 
"Richard Farley, who has been the NFL Security Representative for New England
for approximately twelve years and is present in the Officials Locker Room before and during
every Patriots home game, said that he considers it part of his job description to accompany the
referee to the field and that he is generally in close proximity to McNally and the game balls
when he walks to the field with the referee. According to Farley, he often opens the door to
allow McNally to exit easily with the ball bags, and then McNally, Farley, the referee and the
head linesman will walk to the field together or in close proximity to each other. Farley cannot
recall McNally previously bringing game balls to the field prior to the start of a game without
being accompanied by or in close proximity to one or more game officials." 
 
 
 
 
McNally apparently never brought the balls to the field before a game without being accompanied by one or more game officials.  
Based on this, the AFC championship game was the only time he did this in the last 12 years.  So the dates of the texts, 5/9/14 and 11/30/14, must have been in reference to a plan by Brady and McNally/Jastremski to secretly deflate balls in the bathroom before the AFC championship game, even though they didn't even know they'd be in that game at the time of the texts.    
 

drbretto

guidence counselor
SoSH Member
Apr 10, 2009
9,879
Concord, NH
Chuck Schilling said:
I find it more plausible that they stick a needle up a sleeve (wasn't there a report of a complaint directed at another team of doing this?) and let a little air out on the sidelines than the story they gave to explain those texts. 
 
Why? I'm not saying that to be argumentative, I'm asking you why. You can see the picture right there. He looks inflated and is carrying a jacket. I don't understand a leap in the other direction that you're taking without it being based almost entirely by prejudice.
 
Don't get me wrong, you can squint and read into any of this because a lot of it is subjective, but absent of any actual concrete evidence to anchor everything else, you're left with evidence of nothing. This is the reason why we hold something like "innocent until proven guilty" in such high regard. That's how innocent people end up in jail. Obviously, being that you're not the government, you're free to think otherwise, but I just have to ask why? If you take this somewhat ambiguous bit out of it, what do you have left for a foundation that he's a cheater? Brady has never been accused of cheating at any point in his entire career. 
 

amarshal2

Member
SoSH Member
Oct 25, 2005
4,770
Chuck Schilling said:
I find it more plausible that they stick a needle up a sleeve (wasn't there a report of a complaint directed at another team of doing this?) and let a little air out on the sidelines than the story they gave to explain those texts. 
 
This totally sounds plausible on the surface but when you actually think about it, it completely falls apart.
 
McNally wasn't a ball boy.  He did not have legal access to the balls on the sidelines and the video of the AFCCG did not show him interacting with the balls during the first half.  Therefore, it had to be someone other than "the deflator" who was doing the deflating on the sidelines.  This blows up the text string entirely.  
 

edmunddantes

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 28, 2015
4,737
Cali
troparra said:
 
The below quote kinda undermines the texts (Wells report p. 61):
 
 
McNally apparently never brought the balls to the field before a game without being accompanied by one or more game officials.  
Based on this, the AFC championship game was the only time he did this in the last 12 years.  So the dates of the texts, 5/9/14 and 11/30/14, must have been in reference to a plan by Brady and McNally/Jastremski to secretly deflate balls in the bathroom before the AFC championship game, even though they didn't even know they'd be in that game at the time of the texts.    
Except when they let him do it in the 2nd half after they felt like they had caught the Patriots.
 
Let that sink in. For such a breech to occur that led to the deflating of footballs. Don't you think someone would accompany him at minimum or have someone completely different take the balls out?
 
Nope. McNally. By himself, after everyone thought the Patriots definitively altered the balls in the first half. 
 

Chuck Schilling

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 5, 2001
3,607
the belly of the clam
amarshal2 said:
 
This totally sounds plausible on the surface but when you actually think about it, it completely falls apart.
 
McNally wasn't a ball boy.  He did not have legal access to the balls on the sidelines and the video of the AFCCG did not show him interacting with the balls during the first half.  Therefore, it had to be someone other than "the deflator" who was doing the deflating on the sidelines.  This blows up the text string entirely.  
I'd still interpret it as referring to an action that they may have taken in the past, and not necessarily in Green Bay, nor during the AFCCG. I'm not arguing that it's impossible that I'm wrong, just that I feel my interpretation is more likely than yours. 
 

NortheasternPJ

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 16, 2004
14,351
nighthob said:
Actually, it was a hunch. The Ravens were whining about the Patriots messing with the deflation of the footballs the week before, when the game was played in a frozen tundra. Put another way, they went on an ignorance of the effect of temperature on air prerssure.
 
Where is the whining you're referencing? I haven't seen it. I referenced earlier theirs a clip of the Ravens complaining the balls were as hard as rocks. If it's out there I'd love to see it. (No sarcasm in this post, I just haven't seen any evidence of it)
 

amarshal2

Member
SoSH Member
Oct 25, 2005
4,770
Chuck Schilling said:
I'd still interpret it as referring to an action that they may have taken in the past, and not necessarily in Green Bay, nor during the AFCCG. I'm not arguing that it's impossible that I'm wrong, just that I feel my interpretation is more likely than yours. 
I had edited my post to account for this but was too late.  Here's what I wrote:
 
So maybe McNally was the middle man between JJ and the ball boys?  Why would he need a middle man?  How many ball boys out there know the truth?  Why was Brady trusting a big group of people to get this done?  
 
If you throw out the science this text string isn't convincing.  Yeah, it has the word "deflate" in it written by the guy who is accused of deflating.  And on the surface that sounds like an impossible coincidence.  But if you are insane enough to waste time thinking it through, none of it makes any sense.
 
edit: It's shockingly easy for people to build a case supporting a perspective and have lots of others believe what they are saying.  All people are inherently mentally lazy and it takes a ton of effort to examine a story put in front of you.  Whoever has the easiest narrative to follow with simple bits of supporting anecdotes-- even if those anecdotes are illogical or incorrect when put to scrutiny-- will win.  Unless there is considerable fact checking, whoever has to use details to support their points will lose.  It's that simple.
 
edit2: It's also insanely difficult to convince people they are wrong when it is a belief that is behind their position.  You can put the evidence rejecting their belief in front of them and they will adjust their position to something else supporting the belief or just ignore the evidence entirely and say some version of "because."  Ultimately, I think that's what's happening here.  
 
I found myself doing that recently and it probably happened 100 times in the past week where I wasn't aware of it.  We're all human.
 

jtn46

Member
SoSH Member
Oct 10, 2004
8,290
Norwalk, CT
The thing that's frustrating about the process is that there's a lot of stuff like those texts that look terrible but would have never been uncovered if the nfl wasn't insane. If the nfl said after the AFCCG "we're fining the Patriots $25k for deflated footballs, and we are recommending they discipline or fire their equipment people" the Patriots, given the timing, would have likely just copped to it. If the nfl did this kind of investigation on every minor infraction, nfl teams would all probably come off pretty badly.
 

ivanvamp

captain obvious
Jul 18, 2005
6,104
Chuck Schilling said:
I'd still interpret it as referring to an action that they may have taken in the past, and not necessarily in Green Bay, nor during the AFCCG. I'm not arguing that it's impossible that I'm wrong, just that I feel my interpretation is more likely than yours. 
 
I think your feelings are an unreliable gauge here, Chuck.  There is nothing in the facts that support it.  
 

ivanvamp

captain obvious
Jul 18, 2005
6,104
amarshal2 said:
I had edited my post to account for this but was too late.  Here's what I wrote:L
 
So maybe McNally was the middle man between JJ and the ball boys?  Why?  How many ball boys out there know the truth?  Why was Brady trusting a big group of people to get this done?  
 
If you throw out the science this text string isn't convincing.  Yeah, it has the word "deflate" in it written by the guy who is accused of deflating.  And on the surface that sounds like an impossible coincidence.  But if you are insane enough to waste time thinking it through, none of it makes any sense.
 
edit: It's shockingly easy for people to build a case supporting a perspective and have lots of others believe what they are saying.  All people are inherently mentally lazy and it takes a ton of effort to examine a story put in front of you.  Whoever has the easiest narrative to follow with simple bits of supporting anecdotes-- even if those anecdotes are illogical or incorrect when put to scrutiny-- will win.  Unless there is considerable fact checking, whoever has to use details to support their points will lose.  It's that simple.
 
This is key:  we all know - every single one of us who has ever texted before - that texting is very often an exercise in imprecise, "in-house" language.  That is, I might text something to you using a couple of words that make total sense to you and me, but which would make no sense to anyone else on earth.  We ALL KNOW this is how it works in the texting world.  
 
Yet we are trusting that somehow Roger Goodell can correctly interpret this one stupid term, which took place completely out of context for actually deflating footballs, as many here have pointed out, as being their little reference to an illegal football deflation scheme?  Really?  
 
I agree with what someone else earlier said.  Goodall and Wells were fishing for something - ANYTHING - that could be interpreted as a malicious scheme, and so when they saw this term "deflator", they latched onto it as if they really understood what it meant.  None of us really knows what the hell it means, but it is a MASSIVE leap of logic to assume that it not only refers to deflating footballs, but more importantly ILLEGALLY deflating footballs.
 
In any other normal, rational world, we'd chalk up this attempt at divination as total insanity.
 

DJnVa

Dorito Dawg
SoSH Member
Dec 16, 2010
40,829
Chuck Schilling said:
Sorry, but the "Deflate and give somebody that jkt"  text is all about a thin guy looking tubby in an ill-fitting down jacket?
 
 
No. It FUCKING CLEARLY means that Tom Brady directed a scheme to deflate footballs.
 
 
 
The only context to that text is the story that the NFL and ESPN proffered that is full of refs using the wrong gauges and people not knowing the Ideal Gas Law.
 
If there was something, anything, ONE THING, that shows Brady EVER said he likes balls below the limit, then there's context for that text. But there's not.
 

TheoShmeo

Skrub's sympathy case
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jul 19, 2005
12,890
Boston, NY
I voted "tampered/punishment did not fit crime" because I think they probably reduced the level of air level...but I have no reason to believe that they intended to do so below the prescribed limits.
 
I believe that is a technical, minor violation.  Meaning that they were doing something "wrong," but it was exceptionally minor. 
 
There is no evidence that I have seen anywhere that they intended to go below 12.5.
 

soxfanSJCA

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 3, 2005
110
Outer Space
I voted no, there remains no proof to this day despite the gross expenditure of time and money. 
This entire affair has been extremely short on facts. There has been a great abundance of inferences, accusations. outright lies, obfuscations, omissions, and power trips by the NFL and it's mouthpieces for hire.
The NFL FO has shown a consistent and sustained effort to smear the NEP, and Tom Brady, and it certainly would have have been "it" for BB were anything close to a "fact" revealed during the 5 million dollar "fishing exhibition".
The NFL has consistently and willfully maintained a ludicrous level of conflict of interests which are not in any conceivable way the actions of people with actual integrity.
 
It must suck to be Kensil, or Goodell, or Vincent. They have a great jobs, with exceptionally great pay and benefits, and even a little power.
Yet at the end of the day, they are them.
I can not think of a more cruel and unusual punishment  then Goodell, Kensil, and Vincent having to be themselves.
Good day to you sir!
 
 
 
 
 
 

Padaiyappa

lurker
Dec 3, 2007
61
NOVA
I have felt that TB12 has been innocent. Call it a homerism. However, i def believe he is crazy/ocd about his balls being at 12.5. My interpretation of the texts is that McNally wants to be rewarded by his rich uncle Tom .. If the balls were overinflated like the Jets game, that meant no autographs or nice Patriots gear for him via JJ. If there was any deflation, I think McNally acted on his own for his gain...
 

soxhop411

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 4, 2009
35,586
“@AlbertBreer: In transcript of his appeal-hearing testimony, Brady says he approves balls pregame and ”never“ asks that they be altered after that.”
 

drbretto

guidence counselor
SoSH Member
Apr 10, 2009
9,879
Concord, NH
Again, there are a ton a blanks to be filled in and anyone can certainly sit here and say that they personally feel like happened to fill in those blanks. I can sit here and tell you that it was aliens. We'd both have the same amount of evidence to back it up. But it's all completely inside everyone's heads. There are actually very reasonable explanations for everything that actually fits, so it's a bit of a stretch to assume anything nefarious happened because there's absolutely no reason to believe anything did. That's not proof that nothing happened, but it's damn near impossible to prove a negative. That's why it's up to the accusers to actually prove something. 
 
Now, let's leave that aspect of this case as an unknown for a moment. What we DO know is that Goodell and the NFL have gone to great lengths to spin this narrative and that's incredibly obvious. It started with the misleading/inaccurate/exaggerated PSI leak that Mort tweeted and most recently ended up with SAS being commissioned to focus everyone's attention on the broken cellphone. For those who haven't been following this thing daily, there are a ton of other examples all the way through, but I'm sure you've seen enough to see what they have been doing there. The cellphone thing was obvious misdirection. That particular party has been the only party that has been deceitful this whole time. Why should they get the benefit of the doubt over the guy that's never been accused of cheating ever? Is it because of the NFL's history of making rational decisions? Because I could post some links to some news stories you may have missed.
 

RIFan

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 19, 2005
2,180
Blackstone MA
drbretto said:
 
Why? I'm not saying that to be argumentative, I'm asking you why. You can see the picture right there. He looks inflated and is carrying a jacket. I don't understand a leap in the other direction that you're taking without it being based almost entirely by prejudice.
 
Don't get me wrong, you can squint and read into any of this because a lot of it is subjective, but absent of any actual concrete evidence to anchor everything else, you're left with evidence of nothing. This is the reason why we hold something like "innocent until proven guilty" in such high regard. That's how innocent people end up in jail. Obviously, being that you're not the government, you're free to think otherwise, but I just have to ask why? If you take this somewhat ambiguous bit out of it, what do you have left for a foundation that he's a cheater? Brady has never been accused of cheating at any point in his entire career. 
This is what is irritating about the whole debate.  What you are accusing him of (bolded) is exactly what you are doing.  Your prejudice is that there is no crime, no cover up and nothing nefarious.  A rational person can see the word Deflate in that text and think maybe it is about ball deflation.  It does not seem rational to me to think that there is no way it could possibly refer to ball deflation.  You don't have to believe they did anything, but failing to acknowledge that the text looks bad and has a possible bad meaning makes you look obtuse.
 

RIFan

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 19, 2005
2,180
Blackstone MA
nighthob said:
Actually, it was a hunch. The Ravens were whining about the Patriots messing with the deflation of the footballs the week before, when the game was played in a frozen tundra. Put another way, they went on an ignorance of the effect of temperature on air prerssure.
Not to be pedantic, but unless you spoke with Harbaugh and he told you everything you don't "actually" know anything. It may have been a hunch, it may have been a whisper campaign, it may have been someone seeing someone with what looked like a needle.  What got this rolling is likely never to be known.
 

mwonow

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 4, 2005
5,492
I voted no, because it was the closest answer to what I believe. I don't think it's inconceivable that McNally popped a gauge into 1-2 of the balls in the bathroom, found that they were properly inflated to 12.5 - TB's preferred state - and then went on his way. That's not strictly legal, but it's about as minor as infractions get. Forced to choose that McNally actually let air out of 12 footballs or that he deflated none of them, I'd go with none. Even if he did, I'd wager that TB had no knowledge of that action, unless making his preferences clear in the past constitutes a basis for knowledge.
 
Even writing this hurts my head. To twist a common meme here, this whole affair is the stupidest stupid that has even been stupided.
 

edmunddantes

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 28, 2015
4,737
Cali
Which means that Colts definitely were breaking the same rule that Brady and Patriots got hammered for allegedly breaking, and the NFL knows it.
 
Also cuts down on the time the ball could have acclimated to temperature when they gauged it (illegally).
 

amarshal2

Member
SoSH Member
Oct 25, 2005
4,770
RIFan said:
This is what is irritating about the whole debate.  What you are accusing him of (bolded) is exactly what you are doing.  Your prejudice is that there is no crime, no cover up and nothing nefarious.  A rational person can see the word Deflate in that text and think maybe it is about ball deflation.  It does not seem rational to me to think that there is no way it could possibly refer to ball deflation.  You don't have to believe they did anything, but failing to acknowledge that the text looks bad and has a possible bad meaning makes you look obtuse.
 
He may be biased, but it doesn't change the point.  It does not logically fit with the accusations made by Wells.  Nobody has made a cogent argument for how it is related to ball deflation during the AFCCG that is supported by the entirety of the Wells report.  
 
I've laid out arguments for why it doesn't fit.  I think it's on you to demonstrate where there is prejudice.  Even better would be coming up with a sound argument for it being related that does not ignore key facts.
 
I'm not saying it's impossible.  I make it clear where I think it just requires what I believe to be crappy logic.
 

drbretto

guidence counselor
SoSH Member
Apr 10, 2009
9,879
Concord, NH
RIFan said:
This is what is irritating about the whole debate.  What you are accusing him of (bolded) is exactly what you are doing.  Your prejudice is that there is no crime, no cover up and nothing nefarious.  A rational person can see the word Deflate in that text and think maybe it is about ball deflation.  It does not seem rational to me to think that there is no way it could possibly refer to ball deflation.  You don't have to believe they did anything, but failing to acknowledge that the text looks bad and has a possible bad meaning makes you look obtuse.
 
You're mistaking prejudice for Judging.  I've been following all along from the beginning with a wide-open mind that has only ultimately becomes closed based on all of the facts and reading everyone's opinions and piecing everything together. That's not PRE judging anything. By all means, you are welcome to offer the rebuttal everyone asks for, which is one that doesn't focus on one or two pieces of circumstantial evidence while ignoring everything else but your feelings, then we'll all be happy to listen. 
 

RIFan

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 19, 2005
2,180
Blackstone MA
drbretto said:
 
You're mistaking prejudice for Judging.  I've been following all along from the beginning with a wide-open mind that has only ultimately becomes closed based on all of the facts and reading everyone's opinions and piecing everything together. That's not PRE judging anything. By all means, you are welcome to offer the rebuttal everyone asks for, which is one that doesn't focus on one or two pieces of circumstantial evidence while ignoring everything else but your feelings, then we'll all be happy to listen. 
Umm, no. You are so deeply entrenched at this point that if pictures came out of Brady with a needle stuck in the ball you'd scream "Photoshop!!!" before you'd ever consider that it was even possible it was an untouched picture.  You are the walking definition of prejudice, and I guarantee that your response that will follow in approximately 12.3 seconds will only reinforce that. More power to you and your strong convictions, but you are way past the point of being able to consider anything rationally.
 

Reverend

for king and country
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jan 20, 2007
45,086
Wells pretty clearly stating that a good deal of his conclusions hinge on his subjective judgment is not a good look for someone with his credentials.
 
How the fuck did a lawyer like him get in this situation?
 

Eddie Jurak

Go Leafs Go
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 12, 2002
26,153
Melrose, MA
There is no Rev said:
Wells pretty clearly stating that a good deal of his conclusions hinge on his subjective judgment is not a good look for someone with his credentials.
 
How the fuck did a lawyer like him get in this situation?
The question is... if he had run an independent investigation, would he have reached the same conclusion for the same reason?  And, was there a point in time - say after the interview with Brady - that he came to realize that it wasn't independent.
 

Leather

given himself a skunk spot
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
25,991
There is no Rev said:
Wells pretty clearly stating that a good deal of his conclusions hinge on his subjective judgment is not a good look for someone with his credentials.
 
How the fuck did a lawyer like him get in this situation?
 
Money and ego.  
 
At the time, I'm sure he thought it would be a fun, profitable, and high-profile gig that had little downside.
 
I do wonder, though, if the scope of his responsibilities changed over time when it became clear there was no smoking gun.     That "In all my years, no witness has ever..." crap is really grade-A bullshit.   You're telling me he's never had opposing council file a motion in limine?  Did he try to build his former cases around it?  
 

bowiac

I've been living a lie.
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 18, 2003
12,700
New York, NY
Q. And how many Super Bowls have you led the Patriots to during your career?
A. Four.
Q. Now, how many did you go to?
A. Six.
Q. I know you are focused on how many did you win?
A. Four.
Q. Okay. Has anybody won anymore?
A. Same, Montana.
 

simplyeric

aggressively nonsensical
SoSH Member
Feb 14, 2006
12,147
Richmond, VA
So in 40 years of practice, he's never seen anything that hurt a witnesses credibility more than not producing a phone (along with the communications from it), which he is not required to produce, but which communications were available to him via other sources?
 
That somehow strikes me as bias right there.
 
 
Either that, or he's had 40 years of either incredbily credible witnesses who never did any little think askew, or incredible incredible witneses, for whom phone destruction wouldn't serve to further reduce that person's credibility.
 
But realistically, that's gotta be hyperbolic bullshit, no?