Brady 4 Game Suspension Upheld

[pbmax]

so what PB? Who gives a flying fuck if the pressure changes could be explained naturally? The only thing that matters is whether there was an attempt to deliberately change the pressure. Maybe the ball boy got fired because he didn't let out enough fucking air.

BTW, I am not up to muster on all the little intricate details, and all this fucking obfuscation is just making it worse. Question: was the inflation level of the balls checked at any point after the ball boy disappeared with them into the closet/bathroom whatever? Were they measured later during the game and/or after the game? I just don't recall. (i.e. they were measured at halftime only???)

Balls were measure pre game and halftime. Not sure if they are numbered, so not sure of you can compare each measurement and be sure you are talking about the same ball.

11 Patriot balls were examined at the half. I presume the 12th was the Colts intercepted ball and no one wanted to count that among the evidence, though that doesn't explain why it couldn't be re-inflated. 4 Colts footballs were examined at halftime.

Natural occurrence matters because there is no other evidence of tampering. The Patriot employee in the bathroom/closet (was this ever resolved?) could have done something, but its far from clear he did. He did violate the rules by which the balls are to be delivered to the field. And he was fired.

[mraynrand]

Natural occurrence matters because there is no other evidence of tampering. The Patriot employee in the bathroom/closet (was this ever resolved?) could have done something, but its far from clear he did. He did violate the rules by which the balls are to be delivered to the field. And he was fired.

did you really just write this? amazing.

[mraynrand]

PB have you ever answered this question (with a yes or no):

"Given all the evidence, do you think the Patriots team and/or players deliberately deflated the footballs?"

[pbmax]

PB have you ever answered this question (with a yes or no):

"Given all the evidence, do you think the Patriots team and/or players deliberately deflated the footballs?"

Yes I have. I do not think they did in the Colts game.

[Fritz]

This whole thread is very deflating.

But do I blame the Patriots? I'm not sure.

[pbmax]

The funny part of all this is that after the appeal, none of the details will matter. Stunned as I am that the science of it didn't play a larger part, no one is really disputing that the arbitrator can weigh evidence as they see fit.

This is going to come down, as smuggler suggested much earlier, to deference to arbitration in labor contract disputes versus the NFL being internally consistent and adhering to the spirit of due process.

[sharpe1027]

If Brady was truly innocent (and once he decided to provide phone records in the first place) he had every incentive to make sure that the NFL had all of his phone records. Especially the ones around the relevant time period.

He did not do this. He actually went out of his way to provide partial evidence and obstruct the NFL's investigation. What logical conclusion does this suggest?

[mraynrand]

If Brady was truly innocent (and once he decided to provide phone records in the first place) he had every incentive to make sure that the NFL had all of his phone records. Especially the ones around the relevant time period.

He did not do this. He actually went out of his way to provide partial evidence and obstruct the NFL's investigation. What logical conclusion does this suggest?

It all depends on your political affiliation - are you a Jets fan or a Patriots fan?

[sharpe1027]

It all depends on your political affiliation - are you a Jets fan or a Patriots fan?

Honestly, I most certainly have an unconscious bias against the Pats. Still, I believe that it is not as open and shut as PB has stated.

[pbmax]

If Brady was truly innocent (and once he decided to provide phone records in the first place) he had every incentive to make sure that the NFL had all of his phone records. Especially the ones around the relevant time period.

He did not do this. He actually went out of his way to provide partial evidence and obstruct the NFL's investigation. What logical conclusion does this suggest?

Because this case has legal ramifications for other parties. No one else had turned over phone data before and it would set a precedent. The prior punishment for this, in the only known case, was Favre's phone and it was $25,000 fine and embarrassment served.

[pbmax]

He has presented the NFL with his email collection. Text messages were traced to receiving phone numbers and Brady supplied the identities (or was prepared to). 28 individuals among those receiving text messages were associated with football.

http://deadspin.com/the-full-story-o...one-1722190784

As for the emails Wells originally requested, Brady had more luck in finding these. On June 3 his forensic examiner catalogued all 5,317 emails Brady sent or received between Sept. 1, 2014 and March 1, 2015. These emails were searched for the following terms:

k-ball, kball, gage, air-pump, airpump, needle, pin, PSI, pounds per square inch, 12.5, bladder, McNally, Bird, 1 pound, 1 lb, one pound, one lb, 2 pound, 2 lb, two pound, two lb, gaug* [the * means that all variations of “gaug” were included, such as gauge, gauging, gauged etc.], pump*, inflat*, deflat*, (game OR kick*) ball ~2 [this means Brady’s emails were searched to see whether the words “game” or “kick*” were found within two words of “ball”], (prep* OR rub*) AND (ball OR football) ~10, (investigat* OR meet* OR discuss* OR question) AND (championship OR Jan* 18 OR 1/18), investigat* AND (ball OR football OR Ind* OR Colts) ~10, (equilib* OR atmosphere* OR climat* OR environment* OR test* OR experiment) AND (ball OR football) ~10
All the emails that came up in those searches were submitted as evidence in the ongoing suit, and we are still working our way through all of them (you can get a taste here). But from the forensic examiner’s report it seems like none of them were particularly relevant. For instance, the word bladder was found twice, both times referring to the human body, and the only time “one pound” was used was when discussing eating protein. A bunch of finance emails are included, as Brady discussed the economic concepts of deflation or inflation with others.

The phone messages records recovered matched the one's reported by the Wells Report except for 3 additional messages not highlighted.

Of course, Wells wasn’t solely looking for Brady’s communication with Jastremski and McNally, but also whether he had used a variety of deflation-related terms with anybody else. And as pointed out in the NFL’s questioning of Brady, there are also three texts exchanged with Jastremski on February 7 that do not appear in the Wells Report:

Q. Let’s look back at NFL Exhibit 96, the letter from Mr. Yee to Commissioner Goodell. And I’m directing your attention to page 3 of the letter in the middle of the page. After Number 2, Jastremski, toward the end of that paragraph, it says, “The phone bills also show three text message exchanges on February 7, 2015 between 8:21 p.m. and 8:33 p.m. These occurred after the Super Bowl and were not mentioned or referenced in the Wells report.”

Elsewhere, it was reported by his agent that the 28 people contacted by text beyond the three known Patriots employees were known to them and they submitted those records to the League prior to or during the appeal. Goodell responded that "is simply not practical".

[sharpe1027]

That Brady tried to correct for it after-the-fact, says more about his recognition of the possible consequences (mitigation attempt) than it does about the original act.

[pbmax]

That Brady tried to correct for it after-the-fact, says more about his recognition of the possible consequences (mitigation attempt) than it does about the original act.

Yes and in the complicated world of CBA and Federal Law, that is what you get when you change the rules of the game midstream with no notice. This is Roger reaping what he has sowed by acting by fiat and press release. Stradley's quote I put in here yesterday said it better, but he rules by over-reacting and then trying to cover his ass. Its entirely PR and personality driven.

We have not even gone back over the fact that the violation that Brady was judged to have committed was in a policy never given to the players. And there is no precedent for this kind of action for tampering with game equipment, not to mention failure to turn over phone records now being worth some portion of 4 games.

Tagliabue had this guy's number with the Bountygate disaster when he was appointed arbitrator. Goodell rules capriciously, reacting to the worst possible version of events rather than remaining dispassionate and investigating. He doesn't work with teams and players to stop the behavior first. He just wants to level the hammer.

Its shortsighted and has earned him 8 months of bad press.

[sharpe1027]

Yes and in the complicated world of CBA and Federal Law, that is what you get when you change the rules of the game midstream with no notice. This is Roger reaping what he has sowed by acting by fiat and press release. Stradley's quote I put in here yesterday said it better, but he rules by over-reacting and then trying to cover his ass. Its entirely PR and personality driven.

We have not even gone back over the fact that the violation that Brady was judged to have committed was in a policy never given to the players. And there is no precedent for this kind of action for tampering with game equipment, not to mention failure to turn over phone records now being worth some portion of 4 games.

Tagliabue had this guy's number with the Bountygate disaster when he was appointed arbitrator. Goodell rules capriciously, reacting to the worst possible version of events rather than remaining dispassionate and investigating. He doesn't work with teams and players to stop the behavior first. He just wants to level the hammer.

Its shortsighted and has earned him 8 months of bad press.

Now we are getting somewhere. Yes, Goodell's approach is short-sighted (or just plain blind). Yes, maybe Brady will get off on a legality issue.

But, the evidence is still there to suggest that the balls were tampered with and Brady was encouraging it.

[mraynrand]

Now we are getting somewhere. Yes, Goodell's approach is short-sighted (or just plain blind). Yes, maybe Brady will get off on a legality issue.

But, the evidence is still there to suggest that the balls were tampered with and Brady was encouraging it.

This is what I think. And the history of cheating by the Patsies also weighs into it.

Being commish is different than being in a court. You are kinda judge and jury. You have to protect the integrity of the game, but you don't have to make snap judgments to do it.

The Nancy Grace comparison PB mentioned a while back is apt. And I confess, I slipped into it a bit in this case. Too much hyperventilating. It sure looks like the patsies were gaming the system, but a little caution and reflection could have helped Roger see it as a smaller issue, that a lot of teams engage in, and he could have issued a slap on the wrist 25K fine with a general promise to review the process and perhaps even allow a small leeway for QB preference.

[pbmax]

...

But, the evidence is still there to suggest that the balls were tampered with and Brady was encouraging it.

I agree that those text messages look like something that is not above board. More than likely, the Pats had tried to develop some system for "correcting" wrongly inflated balls. Remember those text messages refer to Brady being incensed about a 16 PSI beachball? The refs found some of the Pats balls lower than 12.5 and over-corrected.

And let's think about this logically. If the goal is to get the balls as low as possible, then this situation of ref correction is extraordinarily likely to happen. Rodgers described the same situation in reverse, that he would ask the equipment guys to get as close to 13.5 without going over. Because if you get out of spec, you have lost control over the eventual pressure of the ball as the refs will correct it.

This is something that competent administrators would work through. If there is something amiss, what is the corrective measure? I doubt the answer to this question in the manual is to make it 2.5 PSI above the legal limit. BTW, this is a sign of exactly how unimportant the NFL saw this issue until the Ravens and Colts came bellyaching to a former Jets official in the League office. This is why a patient and non-maximalist approach should always be preferred. Prior to the game the only people that cared about this were QBs and 3 officials that were pissed at the Patriots handing them their hat for over a decade now. Goodell, reacting like bad news is a mallet to his patellar tendon, was now chasing leaked false info. And that info was about an issue that did not affect the outcome of the game. It just pissed off three opponents.

I maintain the next likeliest scenario is that this was ALL about pre-inspection ball prep. You have to be careful to go low as you can without raising a red flag with the refs. That limits what you can do pre-game.

Third most likely, as no other ref has reported the game balls went missing before a game, is that the events of this playoff game were an anomaly. So if the Patriots text messages (from earlier in the season) are an indication of an illegal scheme, it most likely happened on the sideline, not during transport while the refs were there.

[pbmax]

If Roger owned his own business, he would be able to run things this way. A small business owner can do a lot by sheer force of will.

But he is in charge of an 11 billion dollar industry that is intimately entangled with Congress and Federal law. He doesn't know what he doesn't know.

Think about his rhetoric of protecting the shield when he weighed in first with the Personal Conduct Policy. He has elevated working for the NFL to something closer to worship than employment. He takes the public face of his role far too seriously and spends too little time on details.

[sharpe1027]

OK, but if they did it on the sidelines or they did it in the bathroom, it is the same result and they are equally culpable. Further, even if you are correct that they were doing it on the sidelines previously, it seems like they came up with a better plan - grab the balls and do it somewhere private. It seems pretty risky to do it in full sight of fans and the other team.

Your second scenario is at odds with several of the text messages, but I admit that it is possible.

Your conjecture about Rodgers is not accurate from the quotes I read. Rodgers was fine with if they happened to go over the limit. That was what the "no fair" complaints from the Pats fans started from.

Agreed that the NFL could have done any number of things better in their handling of the situation.

[pbmax]

Rodgers admitted that if they went over (and he did say he was fine if they went just over the 13.5 line, to the next hash) they ran the risk of the Refs intervening and undoing their "hard" work.

The ball boys are always rearranging the balls, into and out of the case they are in. They have towels and are always rubbing them down. It could be done on sidelines. Riskier, however, because you could get caught on camera with this method.

Bathroom break makes sense, but after NFL and Wells investigated for 4 months, they came up with not another instance where the balls went missing before the game. And you KNOW they asked the Head Ref for each Patriot game that year. That is why the bathroom break seems like such an outlier. So rare it has to be unrelated.

[sharpe1027]

Valid point on it looking like an outlier. One thing to consider is that memory is a tricky thing, that we all tend to believe is better than it truly is. If it was not on their radar to watch for missing balls before the game, I think that it is extremely unlikely they would remember it happening weeks or months after-the-fact.

It does not have to be unrelated.

By the way, the fact that the balls are constantly being dried and rubbed down is something neither of the post-Wells reports considered. They assumed that the balls were unprotected from the rain. Is that really a valid assumption?