#DFG: Canceling the Noise

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


  • Total voters
    208

FredCDobbs

Member
SoSH Member
Feb 5, 2004
563
Austin
lexrageorge said:
Well, you know, reading the Wells report and the rebuttal and understanding them is a lot of work.  Much easier just to say that "Wells and Goodell say Brady is guilty, and so he must be guilty, especially since he plays for the Patriots.".  
lexrageorge said:
86spike said:
There is no bald-faced direct tie to Brady. Agreed.

However, and I know most of you do not find this theory compelling and I don't expect to win anyone over here, I personally believe that nothing happens to those footballs without Tom Brady's blessing. I have heard nothing from anyone connected to the NFL claiming that balls would ever be adjusted in any way without QB approval.

That's the connection to Brady.

That said, I do not think that connection is strong enough or the other findings in the report showed enough proof to generate the harsh punishment.
 
What 86 Spike said.  Look man, I'm a Pats fan.  You think I want to believe or acknowledge there was ANYTHING, not matter how small, amiss here?   The case is weak as shit, the entire sting is compromised and should never have happened in the first place, and the NFL's response continues to make my jaw drop.  But when you're accused of deflating footballs, and an equipment guy refers to himself as the Deflator, that's just too much smoke for most people.  And no, I'm not going to read the whole freaking Wells report; and neither are 99% of football fans.  That doesn't mean they have no opinion on the matter.
 
Apr 7, 2006
2,505
Do we think that synched up picture of JJ on the sidelines is something even approaching an exculpatory retort to the media reaction to "deflator = weight loss" thing? I'm not being snide, I'm actually desperate to think it might move the needle, so to speak. Thoughts? I feel like I want so badly for that to be helpful that my judgment is clouded. Difference-maker? Cushions the blow at all or no?
 

CaptainLaddie

dj paul pfieffer
SoSH Member
Sep 6, 2004
36,692
where the darn libs live
WELL, not so fast my friend.
 
http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2015/05/05/missouri-supreme-court-invalidates-commissioner-as-arbitrator/
 

 
Missouri Supreme Court invalidates Commissioner as arbitrator
Posted by Mike Florio on May 5, 2015, 11:24 PM EDT
 
When it comes to employment disputes involving individuals teams, the NFL traditionally stacks the deck in its favor, forcing disgruntled employees to agree to arbitration — with the Commissioner of the league presiding. Last week, the Missouri Supreme Court delivered what could become a fatal blow to the league’s obsession with allowing a non-lawyer to make legal decisions that could be influenced by business interests unrelated to what the law requires.
In a lawsuit filed more than four years ago by former Rams equipment manager Todd Hewitt, the Missouri Supreme Court invalidated the requirement of submitting all claims to arbitration resolved by the Commissioner. The Missouri Supreme Court based its conclusion in part on a fairly simply analysis of three provisions of the league’s Constitution and Bylaws.
 
h/t to El Pres on this one
 

kartvelo

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Aug 12, 2003
10,461
At home
JimBoSox9 said:
The actual or target PSI numbers, all the science and hard numbers are meaningless to the point you are responding to. What matters is whether they thought the refs were returning the balls to them at sub-optimal levels. I can accept both your Despites and remain of the belief that Brady ordered post-ref tinkering, should I so choose. The hill you should be Despiting on is the 16 psi text.
And I can choose to believe that monkeys will fly out of my butt if I eat enough bananas, but there's no rational basis to believe either of those things, given what we know.
 

Super Nomario

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 5, 2000
14,012
Mansfield MA
Harry Hooper said:
 
You've said this before, but why not do some simulations and testing, such as of the Pats specific ball prep or of an hour of football playing in cold & wet, rather than relying on assumptions? I am reminded of the physicist who forcefully argued that curveballs were all an optical illusion. His assumption of a smooth spherical baseball left out the impact of the raised seams.
 
 
Edited for clarity.
Did you read the report? Exponent tested vigorous rubbing (page 33), subjecting the football to stresses in an attempt to simulate game action (page 32), and wetness (page 40-44).
 

riboflav

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 20, 2006
9,581
NOVA
MarcSullivaFan said:
Agreed. And because there will not be a neutral the chances of the suspension ultimately holding up are very good.
 
You're the only one here who keeps saying this... and it's making me nervous. So, please stop and let me live with my fantasies. 
 

Hoya81

Member
SoSH Member
Feb 3, 2010
8,458
86spike said:
Maybe the League isn't afraid of a court case because they firmly believe Jastremski and McNally are lying and want to get the under oath. They may have themselves convinced (rightly or wrongly) that they hold that as a trump card and Brady won't actually sue.

They really don't appear to be trying to avoid a suit.
I'm not sure if there is much more than can get out of Jastremski or McNally. They have the phones and emails.
 

86spike

Currently enjoying "Arli$$"
SoSH Member
Apr 17, 2002
25,082
Procrasti Nation
drleather2001 said:
If you believe (as I do) that the NFL is enjoying this off season spotlight, they might find the prospect of a lawsuit appealing regardless of the outcome.
Roger is probably emailing photos of ESPN full screen Deflategate coverage with tiny NBA Playoffs crawl coverage at the bottom to Adam Silver with the caption "Suck on these balls!"
 

Tim Salmon

Member
SoSH Member
Oct 24, 2005
3,296
MarcSullivaFan said:
If he files some sort of Hail Mary defamation claim, then maybe. But good luck surviving a motion to dismiss.
 
Why wouldn't a well-pleaded defamation claim survive a motion to dismiss under a "mixed opinion" theory?  
 

Laser Show

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 7, 2008
5,094
After seeing the website today I really have a hard time believing the Patriots did anything. Maybe I'm just a homer, but to dig in this deep over a couple of deflated footballs, I think they have to be (or at least believe) they're innocent.

I'm just amazed at the irrationality this has caused though. Truly mind blowing.

It won't happen but man would definitive vindication be sweet.
 

Sportsbstn

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 8, 2004
8,794
Hoya81 said:
I'm not sure if there is much more than can get out of Jastremski or McNally. They have the phones and emails.
 
All which at this point proved nothing conclusive.   That might not matter in the NFL realm, but it sure as hell matters in a real court room.
 

RG33

Certain Class of Poster
SoSH Member
Nov 28, 2005
7,199
CA
This is grand. I'm not surprised at all that Goodell decided to hear the appeal, and I have to think that Brady's side (and maybe even the Pats) is extremely happy with this. It gives the air of complete non-independence from the NFL side of things, and can only make a lawsuit from Brady that much more inevitable. I would think barring a complete dismissal of disciplinary action against Brady, that they will be suing the NFL regardless. I would think at this point, Kraft and the Patriots are also thinking that barring a complete dismissal of all disciplinary action against the team means that they will continue the nuclear assault on Wells and the league regardless of where it takes them.

I love it. Put your seatbelts on.
 

Stitch01

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
18,155
Boston
MuppetAsteriskTalk said:
Any way that Brady can argue that as a prominent member of the NFLPA and a named plaintiff on the antitrust lawsuit there is no way Roger can be considered unbiased against him? 
I've wondered if that comes up in court too but IANAL.
 

Harry Hooper

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jan 4, 2002
34,402
Super Nomario said:
Did you read the report? Exponent tested vigorous rubbing (page 33), subjecting the football to stresses in an attempt to simulate game action (page 32), and wetness (page 40-44).
 
Haven't read that part in days, but I thought they didn't actually follow the Pats particular prep script. Why not have a bunch of guys run around with footballs for an hour? 
 

taoofoj

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 16, 2007
227
laserbeam high school
 
There was no reason to put the nickname explanation in even if true.
 
The site is titled 'The Wells Report in Context.'  Its stated intent is adding the needed context to clarify misleading points in the Wells report.  The texts beg for more context than anything else.  They are by far the most troubling to explain away.  Holes in the science are already well-known by anyone who's been semi-closely following this.  They probably felt they had to address the texts or it would be too glaring an omission.  That they addressed them makes sense to me, but what still doesn't make sense is the context offered.  If deflator = losing weight is actually true why not hold off on this rebuttal until you have more corroborating communications?  Because it actually is plausible, if unlikely.  But the single jkt text isn't enough.  And if it's a lie - why such a weak effort?
 

Koufax

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
5,936
You won't love it if the NFL forces Kraft out, puts the team under league management, and steers it to the bottom of the heap for several years.  The potential downward trajectory from here is pretty steep. 
 

DennyDoyle'sBoil

Found no thrill on Blueberry Hill
SoSH Member
Sep 9, 2008
42,297
AZ
Under the arbitration hearing procedures, the hearing must be held in ten days unless the parties agree otherwise or the arbitrator rules otherwise. All exhibits are due three days before the hearing. i would think Brady would want more time to be fully prepared, get experts lined up, get witnesses there. Seems unlikely that will happen now.
 

Sportsbstn

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 8, 2004
8,794
Koufax said:
You won't love it if the NFL forces Kraft out, puts the team under league management, and steers it to the bottom of the heap for several years.  The potential downward trajectory from here is pretty steep. 
 
Except this is not going to happen even in the wildest dreams
 

kartvelo

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Aug 12, 2003
10,461
At home
Mugsy's Walk-Off Bunt said:
Do we think that synched up picture of JJ on the sidelines is something even approaching an exculpatory retort to the media reaction to "deflator = weight loss" thing? I'm not being snide, I'm actually desperate to think it might move the needle, so to speak. Thoughts? I feel like I want so badly for that to be helpful that my judgment is clouded. Difference-maker? Cushions the blow at all or no?
Given the visual, it's hard to make the case that the text could possibly have been referring to deflating footballs.
 

soxhop411

news aggravator
SoSH Member
Dec 4, 2009
46,278
Koufax said:
You won't love it if the NFL forces Kraft out, puts the team under league management, and steers it to the bottom of the heap for several years.  The potential downward trajectory from here is pretty steep. 
That won't happen
 

LuckyBen

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 5, 2012
3,396
Ferm Sheller said:
So, JM wrote deflate and deflator on two separate occasions in his texts to JJ and in completely different contexts (losing weight and letting the air out of a jacket). If that's true, that's some real buzzard luck. I must have a million texts on my phone and I bet I haven't used deflate or deflator once.
Not only that, can you imagine going a full year back on text messages? This is how people talk nowadays. I can only imagine some of the texts I sent in the past year.
 

Hoya81

Member
SoSH Member
Feb 3, 2010
8,458
Koufax said:
You won't love it if the NFL forces Kraft out, puts the team under league management, and steers it to the bottom of the heap for several years.  The potential downward trajectory from here is pretty steep. 
Frank McCourt to the rescue!
 

86spike

Currently enjoying "Arli$$"
SoSH Member
Apr 17, 2002
25,082
Procrasti Nation
CaptainLaddie said:
I'm sure Kraft/NFLPA/Brady has a lawyer who can argue it, no?
I think the thrust of that decision was that since Goodell is paid by the owners, he's can't be impartial in a hearing arbitrating disputes between said owners.

Players are not paying Goodell. Apples to oranges.
 

Super Nomario

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 5, 2000
14,012
Mansfield MA
kartvelo said:
Those "reasonable" assumptions require them saying, with no justification, that some of Walt Anderson's recollections are unassailable and some are to be ignored. In fact, they had to bully him into saying it was "possible" he was wrong about the one recollection they needed him to be wrong about - and that's as far as they could get.
When you use colorful language like "no justification" and "they had to bully him," which aren't supported, you undermine your argument considerably. It's written as "Although Anderson's best recollection is that he used the Logo Gauge, he said that it is certainly possible that he used the Non-Logo Gauge." The Exponent report concludes that it is more likely the Non-Logo Gauge was used because it is truer to actual pressure and therefore was more likely to match the Colts' and Patriots' gauges (since their balls came in as expected), but they ran the results with both sets of data just to be sure and concluded that they couldn't explain the discrepancies either way. I think there are some holes to be poked in some of the assumptions, and all of this is resting on a pretty shaky foundation, statistically speaking, but I don't think they ran most of it using Non-Logo because of bias or in defiance of Anderson's statements.
 

nighthob

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
12,680
PhilPlantier said:
 
Why wouldn't a well-pleaded defamation claim survive a motion to dismiss under a "mixed opinion" theory?  
 
Well the rules are different for celebrities. Of course he could use the avenue that celebrities do and file suit in the UK.
 

DegenerateSoxFan

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 11, 2006
2,064
Flagstaff, AZ
For those who don't have PACER access, I found a link to Judge Doty's ruling in the Peterson case:
 
http://stmedia.startribune.com/documents/Judge+Doty's+ruling+overturning+Peterson's+suspension.pdf
 
The gist of the ruling seems to be that Goodell incorrectly applied the league's new policy as to sanctions for domestic violence (the one brought about by the outcry over the Rice case) retroactively to Peterson. Finding that this was the case because doing so violated the spirit of the CBA, and that Henderson - yeah, that guy - exceded his authority as arbitrator by adjudicating the hypothetical question of whether the discipline was consistent with the old policy, Doty never reached the issue of whether Henderson was not impartial and whether the discipline violated fundamental fairness.  Too bad, because these are issues that would seem likely to be in play for Brady.
 

kartvelo

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Aug 12, 2003
10,461
At home
Harry Hooper said:
 
Haven't read that part in days, but I thought they didn't actually follow the Pats particular prep script. Why not have a bunch of guys run around with footballs for an hour? 
It really doesn't matter, because again, the most reasonable and straightforward interpretation of Exponent's work is that nothing unexpected or out of the ordinary happened to the balls.
 

nighthob

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
12,680
Mugsy's Walk-Off Bunt said:
Let's hope you're right.
 
Given that the Patriots were in Green Bay and there were cameras aimed at the sideline all game, there'd be actual footage of Jastremski doing this. The fact that Wells failed to mention the game's location and didn't provide us with the footage is a pretty good indication that it didn't actually happen.
 

Doctor G

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 24, 2007
2,331
Koufax said:
I would not rule out the possibility that there will be further punishment of the Pats for their website fiasco today.  It was far outside the bounds set by the NFL by-laws, and most of the other 31 owners are probably upset that Kraft has gone public with his complaints.   Roger might well decide that it is time to bring the hammer down once again, just to make the point that you don't challenge his authority, at least not in public.   If so, then kiss the 2017 first round pick goodbye.
Goodell could do this.All this would do is transfer the discussion from the Sports networks to FoxNews and MSNBC.both ofwhich would attack fiercely albeit for different reasons.
,
 

86spike

Currently enjoying "Arli$$"
SoSH Member
Apr 17, 2002
25,082
Procrasti Nation
nighthob said:
Given that the Patriots were in Green Bay and there were cameras aimed at the sideline all game, there'd be actual footage of Jastremski doing this. The fact that Wells failed to mention the game's location and didn't provide us with the footage is a pretty good indication that it didn't actually happen.
Looking at the box score, the Pats were down 7-16 before a late 2nd quarter TD pass to LaFell.

Maybe McNally's text to Jastremski meant "You should deflate the balls to help Tom -and ditch that jacket I just saw you with to do so, dorito dick."

Lots of ways to surmise.
 

Tim Salmon

Member
SoSH Member
Oct 24, 2005
3,296
nighthob said:
 
Well the rules are different for celebrities. Of course he could use the avenue that celebrities do and file suit in the UK.
Right, but to survive a motion to dismiss, he would only have to state a plausible claim that the underlying facts in the Wells Report were distorted with actual malice.  That would at least get him to discovery, even if he had little chance of winning on summary judgment or at trial.
 

amarshal2

Member
SoSH Member
Oct 25, 2005
4,913
86spike said:
Looking at the box score, the Pats were down 7-16 before a late 2nd quarter TD pass to LaFell.

Maybe McNally's text to Jastremski meant "You should deflate the balls to help Tom -and ditch that jacket I just saw you with to do so, dorito dick."

Lots of ways to surmise.
How would he deflate the footballs he didn't have possession of? Are the GB ball boys going to give them to him?
 

CaptainLaddie

dj paul pfieffer
SoSH Member
Sep 6, 2004
36,692
where the darn libs live
Rich Hill just tweeted this:
 
Rich Hill @PP_Rich_Hill
The current song-and-dance with appeals is NFLPA appeals, Goodell listens, NFLPA appeals again to the court system, courts overturn NFL.
 
Rich Hill @PP_Rich_Hill
This process has to be followed because it's in the CBA, but the NFL Bylaws give a straight shot to circumvent Goodell.

 
 

OCST

Sunny von Bulow
SoSH Member
Jan 10, 2004
24,483
The 718
MuppetAsteriskTalk said:
Any way that Brady can argue that as a prominent member of the NFLPA and a named plaintiff on the antitrust lawsuit there is no way Roger can be considered unbiased against him? 
 
Argue to whom?
 

nighthob

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
12,680
86spike said:
Looking at the box score, the Pats were down 7-16 before a late 2nd quarter TD pass to LaFell.

Maybe McNally's text to Jastremski meant "You should deflate the balls to help Tom -and ditch that jacket I just saw you with to do so, dorito dick."

Lots of ways to surmise.
 
 
I mean it was Green Bay, the balls were probably already pretty well deflated. The footballs too for that matter.
 

LuckyBen

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 5, 2012
3,396
86spike said:
Looking at the box score, the Pats were down 7-16 before a late 2nd quarter TD pass to LaFell.
Maybe McNally's text to Jastremski meant "You should deflate the balls to help Tom -and ditch that jacket I just saw you with to do so, dorito dick."
Lots of ways to surmise.
This sounds like criminal mastermind level. I just can't see these two morons texting that level of intricacy. You don't use the term Doritos dink and then mastermind this elaborate plot to deflate balls by .2 psi through hidden text.
 

Hoya81

Member
SoSH Member
Feb 3, 2010
8,458
http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2015/05/14/wells-contradicts-his-own-report-regarding-mcnally-texts/

"Via Bart Hubbuch of the New York Post, Wells addressed the contention from the team’s WellsReportContext.com website that Wells had in his possession all relevant text messages before Wells questioned McNally the first time. Which means that a follow-up interview wasn’t necessary, because it wasn’t based on any new evidence or developments.

Wells explained to Hubbuch that, because the message in which Wells calls himself the “Deflator” was sent in May 2014, Wells hadn’t noticed it before questioning McNally the first time, since Wells had gone through only the text messages from the 2014 football season at that point.

Apart from the question of whether Wells or someone from his team should have churned the billable hours to review all text messages before interviewing McNally (and they should have), Wells’ explanation contradicts his own report.

At page 87, Wells quotes a text message from November 2014 in which McNally said, “Deflate and give somebody that [jacket].” Wells then explains in the report, “We planned to discuss this message with McNally during our requested follow-up interview. As noted above, we were unable to do so because counsel for the Patriots refused to make McNally available.”

In other words, Wells’ explanation is not accurate. Wells now says didn’t notice the May 2014 “Deflator” text message because he had reviewed only the text messages sent during the 2014 football season, and yet the Wells report expressly states that he wanted to question McNally a second time about one of the text messages sent during the 2014 football season.

And so, basically, pretty much everyone connected to this case now has significant credibility problems. Which means that the best outcome may have been (and may still be) for the league to admit that it created this mess by having inadequate football inflation and security procedures, by possessing inferior knowledge of the science of football deflation, and by paying insufficient attention to the reality that, in cold weather games footballs routinely are below 12.5 PSI. The league should simply have changed the procedures, warned all teams that any efforts to circumvent those procedures in the future would be met with harsh punishment, and not attempted to punish any of the many teams that may have taken advantage of what ultimately were proven to be incomplete and borderline inept enforcement of Rule 2, which seemingly requires the football at all times to be between 12.5 and 13.5 PSI, regardless of the weather conditions."
 

Tito's Pullover

Lol boo ALS
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Sep 12, 2007
1,634
Anytown, USA
Am I the only person that only learned today that "jkt" was supposed to mean "jacket"?  I previously read it as a typo of "jk".  In other words, "Deflate and give someone that ball, just kidding".
 
Still doesn't make much sense.  Bird doesn't seem like a very funny fellow.
 

Ferm Sheller

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 5, 2007
20,404
Tito's Pullover said:
Am I the only person that only learned today that "jkt" was supposed to mean "jacket"?  I previously read it as a typo of "jk".  In other words, "Deflate and give someone that ball, just kidding".
 
Still doesn't make much sense.  Bird doesn't seem like a very funny fellow.
I actually kicked around the idea it meant "just kidding, Tom" but the post showing the time sync to the sideline shot in GB game has convinced me he meant jacket
 

Ed Hillel

Wants to be startin somethin
SoSH Member
Dec 12, 2007
43,592
Here
The jacket is huge, it appears he's busting his balls. No idea what deflate means in that context, but it's probably something that makes no sense to anyone but them.