You would want to go to a fair trial where you could cross-examine the Exponent witness and put on contrary evidence.
I
#DFG: Canceling the Noise
- Thread starter nattysez
- Start date
I
Sometimes it takes being forced to go through it yourself, to see how fucked up the system really is. Whether it be probate, criminal, whatever. I know that's what it took for me personally.
Saw this on twitter. Not to get back into this, but, interesting nugget here from an old article:
http://articles.latimes.com/2007/sep/23/sports/sp-ref23/2
Well we know that wasn't the Patriots, as it would either have been considered a huge scandal or it would have come up in the ballghazi reporting.
Is this potentially more ammunition for the appeal? Corrente's name was on the list of those interviewed, but his name or Carey's never appear anywhere else. The LA Times article seems to be drawing from Corrente's recollection. It is difficult to believe that he would not have mentioned the parallel when interviewed.
Am I remembering correctly that Brady's team was given all interview transcripts but not investigator notes?
The fact that we can't even determine which team was punished from a google search is so ridiculous I'm not sure how to process the information.
Am I remembering correctly that Brady's team was given all interview transcripts but not investigator notes?
The fact that we can't even determine which team was punished from a google search is so ridiculous I'm not sure how to process the information.
There was a reference on page 47-48 of the WR to a October 2004 incident where a practice ball was given to the ref by one of the ball boys, who McNally supervised.
But Pro Football Ref box score shows that neither Corrente or Carey were on the crew, so it wasn't the Patriots. The head ref? Walt Anderson.
http://www.pro-football-reference.com/boxscores/200410240nwe.htm?mobile=false
How many times can he sell that tattered old thing, anyway? Is he like Voldemort (without the superpowers), cutting his soul into seven/eight pieces?
My understanding is that the accuracy of the report is not in question. It's the 4 points raised by Brady's team:
1. Lack of Notice
2. Insufficient Procedures
3. Fundamental Unfairness
4. Partiality of NFL
We all know evidence fails to indicate that the balls were fucked with.
We all know (as the prof pointed out) that cold weather games, by definition, have to be played with low-pressure balls...lower than any of the measurements during the Colts game - and nobody cares.
I don't understand two of the professor's approaches:
(a) Taking an average of both gauges. Why? It was either a or b. (I hate this "average" stuff as part of any analysis)
(b) Accuracy of any of the measurements, particularly gauge accuracy. No data should be a dot...all the data should be bars.
Anyway, it doesn't matter. All that matters is the opinion on whether or not the NFL/Goodell had complete authority to do what they did under the CBA.
1. Lack of Notice
2. Insufficient Procedures
3. Fundamental Unfairness
4. Partiality of NFL
We all know evidence fails to indicate that the balls were fucked with.
We all know (as the prof pointed out) that cold weather games, by definition, have to be played with low-pressure balls...lower than any of the measurements during the Colts game - and nobody cares.
I don't understand two of the professor's approaches:
(a) Taking an average of both gauges. Why? It was either a or b. (I hate this "average" stuff as part of any analysis)
(b) Accuracy of any of the measurements, particularly gauge accuracy. No data should be a dot...all the data should be bars.
Anyway, it doesn't matter. All that matters is the opinion on whether or not the NFL/Goodell had complete authority to do what they did under the CBA.
I mean, WTF:
http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/feature/25397980/the-chronicles-of-favre-ia
This guy cried over Deflategate, though.
http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/feature/25397980/the-chronicles-of-favre-ia
Pretty sure the only thing relevant to the appeal is what Berman laid down in his ruling. The NFL doesn't get a brand new trial. It was noted at the time that he did not rule on each independent aspect as a matter of strategy to reduce vulnerable points to attack on appeal.
I almost posted that too. Shooting a dear illegally, watching it flop around trying to stay alive, then dragging it to a stream and drowning it. What a funny story!!!
I mean, even the guys I know who mount deer on their living room walls would be repulsed by that story.
That's horrible and gruesome and cruel. Not that it bestows any special credibility to me, but I have my hunting license; that's just fucked up and awful. In sum, fuck Brett Favre.
I can vouch for this as a person with a deer on a wall and antlers all over that story is repulsing and everything wrong with hunting today. Zero ethics, boys club stupidity and just a complete lack of respect for the animal. Hope he spends his last few moments someday bubbling.
You would think that sooner or later the law of diminishing returns would kick in.
Doesn't this go against what is being said in the sister law thread about the appeal being a "de novo" review? Granted, there was at least one post from a lawyer stating his uncertainty about it being de novo, but I thought that was the consensus.
It's catching on locally, but I doubt it will go any further.
http://boston.cbslocal.com/2015/12/03/deflategate-in-2007-nfl-handled-football-funny-business-differently-not-long-ago/
Probably not. Unless someone can get Mike Carey or another official to talk. There's obviously people out there that know this situation happened.
I thought that also. There's a guy on the Journal that believes they will (and need to) bring up the fact that science proves that there was no "crime" (the smoking gun) before they file. Is that even possible?
Warren Sapp doing some superlative work on his tinfoil hat at Papi's charity event:
http://itiswhatitis.weei.com/sports/newengland/football/patriots/2015/12/04/warren-sapp-rips-patriots-calls-them-cheaters-if-you-aint-cheating-you-aint-trying-to-win/
http://itiswhatitis.weei.com/sports/newengland/football/patriots/2015/12/04/warren-sapp-rips-patriots-calls-them-cheaters-if-you-aint-cheating-you-aint-trying-to-win/
So, that's implying that whenever the Pats won in Foxboro it was because they stole every playbook, ever.
Imagine if they put the same amount of effort of preparation that they did into stealing playbooks and signals!
Imagine if they put the same amount of effort of preparation that they did into stealing playbooks and signals!
That's asinine. Read the legal thread. That guy has no idea what he's talking about. The question of whether there was a violation was over as soon as it entered the court system. It has been all about the legality of the process itself ever since. Brady's side has stated in court that no crime was committed in response to Berman's questions, but it's only of ancillary interest.
How can you argue with Sapp logic like this:
"We went out and got off to a 14-0 lead and [they] came rumbling back after the second half. How many people come to Foxboro and have a 14-point lead? It’s usually the other way around, right? That’s how y’all cheat.”
"We went out and got off to a 14-0 lead and [they] came rumbling back after the second half. How many people come to Foxboro and have a 14-point lead? It’s usually the other way around, right? That’s how y’all cheat.”
Yeah, his evidence is pretty much iron clad. I don't see how anyone could dispute it after this.
BB's cheatin' skills must have still been a work in progress since the Pats went 5-11 in 2000...
He doesn't even have a good memory.
First of all, the Pats sucked in 2000.
But more to the point, the Pats scored first to take a 3-0 lead, then Tampa scored 14 straight to make it 14-3, then the Pats scored a TD to make it 14-10, then Tampa scored to make it 21-10, then the Pats scored to make it 21-16 and failed on the two point try.
So basically his evidence that they were cheating is that they, um, scored a touchdown.
First of all, the Pats sucked in 2000.
But more to the point, the Pats scored first to take a 3-0 lead, then Tampa scored 14 straight to make it 14-3, then the Pats scored a TD to make it 14-10, then Tampa scored to make it 21-10, then the Pats scored to make it 21-16 and failed on the two point try.
So basically his evidence that they were cheating is that they, um, scored a touchdown.
If anyone would like to talk about his quarterback paying the ball boys to tamper with the footballs before their Superbowl win, now would be the time to do so.
From the Projo article, "They first measured 11 Patriots balls — the 12th had been intercepted, which is what started the whole affair." I can't resist mentioning that they measured 11 balls despite one being intercepted and one given away to a fan. It appears there were actually 13 balls in the bag pregame, just one more indication of the tremendous rigor applied by Walt Anderson and crew.
Going from memory here, but the ball given away to a fan was from Blount's TD run in the 2nd half.
I think it was his first half TD (he had two in the second half), which would fit the 11 of 12 at halftime narrative.
Blount tossed one into the stands in the first half, then whosits picked off Brady which left 10. Add the intercepted ball back and you get eleven.
Yeah, with the millions of words written on this debacle and thousands of man hours worth of attention from this dedicated message board alone, I would hope that the number of footballs hadn't been overlooked. 
page 68 of the wells report
I remember this specifically because the intercepted ball that supposedly felt soft was tested three times or four times, by Vincent, Kensil, and a Colts employee (?) and the three results they got were precisely what you would expect when taking into consideration the Ideal Gas Law. Someone, somewhere in these hundreds of pages, did some statistical analysis showing that the distribution between their results was spot on as well. So, naturally, they started a $5 million investigation
The 12th ball results are listed separately in the report because they weren't checked by the refs that did the other halftime tests.
Thanks for digging that up again. So if Blount tossed a ball into the stands in the 1st half, then there were really 14 balls in the bag pregame? Sheesh.
I'm not a hunter myself, but I have no problem with folks who do it legally and ethically. But what they shouldn't even be called hunting. My son went out with his uncle and bagged his first deer last year. I told him I was very proud of him, and why? Because besides having taken his hunter/firearm safety class, being properly licensed, and hunting in an area where they had permission from the landowner, he dropped it right in its tracks with one shot right through the vitals from about 70 yards out. It was probably dead before it hit the ground. That is hunting (and they made some very tasty kielbasa out of it).
Brunell and Farve can go die in a fire as far as I'm concerned.
It's slightly worse than the one last year where they were saying he french kissed his daughter.
Michael McCann and John Leonard are holding a special seminar on Deflategate Friday from 2:30 - 4:00 at MIT:
https://www.eventbrite.com/e/special-seminar-the-law-and-science-of-deflategate-tickets-19866866332
https://www.eventbrite.com/e/special-seminar-the-law-and-science-of-deflategate-tickets-19866866332
