Average Reds said:
But what is that based on?
I mean, he could obviously have known. But isn't it just as likely that Brady had a tantrum after discovering that he played with balls that were later measured around 16 PSI and told them "I don't care how you do it, but you get those refs to set the ball at 12.5 PSI at the low end of the range." That would certainly align with Brady wanting to impress upon a ref that the rulebook allowed them to set the balls at 12.5 PSI.
I have seen no evidence that says Brady knew or should have known that they may have been adjusting the balls after the ref was done with them. And there is still no clear evidence that the balls were adjusted below 12.5 PSI at the start of the game.
It's also interesting (to me at least) that the two separate issues are being conflated into one. Because it does appear likely that someone adjusted the balls after the ref looked at them, which is a violation even if the balls were set within the allowable range. So why was/is Wells and the NFL so intent on proving that the balls were below the 12.5 PSI threshold?
Please do not disregard the most serious of texts which happened in May of 2014, 5 months before the game with the 16psi, in which McNally's text indicate he was deflating the balls in a way that might cause a negative public reaction if it was discovered (I am not going to ESPN).
The October texts indicate several things for me. First of all they indicate that the Pats didn't have a watertight scheme there; it was probably a weekly battle with the refs. But also, that Tom was aware of what was going on. Why would he be concerned that McNally was stressed otherwise? And why would McNally be stressed in the first place if everything he was doing was done by the book? I mean if everything was done by the book, this is as a stress free job as there can be, right?
Last, but not least, McNally was constantly leveraging his involvement in order to get more loot. But people leverage their involvement when they go above and beyond. Why would McNally do so and talk in a prickly and disrespectful manner to his superior if all he was doing was his job? And why would that be tolerated? Again, this indicates he was doing something at least somewhat questionable.
Now, having said that. Can there be a relatively innocent explanation for all of this and Brady really not be culpable. yes it might. Does Tom Brady have a defense? yes. Is the case against him proven beyond reasonable doubt. No. But I don't think that these possibilities are the most probable. I think the most probable one is that there was some scheme going on and Tom knew about it. And knowing about it is a bit misleading in this case, because the scheme was instigated by his desires. So it's just not knowing.
So, all of the above is the strongest part of the case against Brady. The science, like I ve said before is highly suspect. The alleged crime the most minor out of minor crimes.
I guess we should all be jealous about the people tearing their clothes in sanctimony. They must be really virtuous in their lives, never having cut corners and always doing the squeaky clean thing. Personally, I haven't and I would be really happy if my worst wrongdoing was underinflating balls before a football game in order to gain a subjective, but not objectively proven, edge.
