Brady 4 Game Suspension Upheld

[pbmax]

Roger gave himself a literal vote of confidence.

Also this: http://deadspin.com/nfl-upholds-tom-bradys-four-game-suspension-1720647254


Brady directed that the cell phone he had used for the prior four months be destroyed. He did so even though he was aware that the investigators had requested access to text messages and other electronic information that had been stored on that phone. During the four months that the cell phone was in use, Brady had exchanged nearly 10,000 text messages, none of which can now be retrieved from that device. The destruction of the cell phone was not disclosed until June 18, almost four months after the investigators had first sought electronic information from Brady.

Its sweet poetic justice that Roger is going to lose this in Court while Brady looks very guilty.

[pbmax]

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CLBavDcXAAAoRXx.png:large

Ben VolinVerified @BenVolin
Brady's explanation for destroying his phone: He always does this when he gets a new phone

[pbmax]

Jim Trotter ‏@JimTrotter_NFL 1h1 hour ago
Tom Brady has authorized the NFLPA to appeal his case in federal court, per source.

Chris B. Brown ‏@smartfootball 46s46 seconds ago
Here's the complaint for the preemptive lawsuit the NFL filed in the Southern District of New York vs the NFLPA http://smartfootball.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/NFL-lawsuit-filed-7-28.pdf …


Translation: the NFL knew this was going to the Courts, and Brady probably did too.

[pbmax]

Ian Rapoport ‏@RapSheet 19m19 minutes ago
Interesting. @judybattista says the sides were moving close to a 1-game suspension settlement. But Brady wanted records sealed. NFL wouldn’t

Ian Rapoport ‏@RapSheet 4m4 minutes ago
PA response RT @GeorgeAtallah: Any report that suggests two sides were coming close on a settlement in the Brady matter is rubbish.

Ross TuckerVerified account
‏@RossTuckerNFL
Why would Brady want records sealed if nothing to hide?

Chris B. Brown ‏@smartfootball 10m10 minutes ago
OK, everyone send me your bank statements and college transcripts. I'm discreet, I swear. http://chronicle.com/article/Why-Privacy-Matters-Even-if/127461/ …

Robert Klemko ‏@RobertKlemko 14m14 minutes ago
Tom Brady's not a moron. After phone destruction revelation, obvious next question: Who was he protecting?


During playoffs, everyone was convinced Brady did something to violate the spirit, if not the letter of the rules. After the Wells Report, no one believed the science anymore and thought Goodell overreacted. Now everyone is convinced Brady is guilty of something.

[esoxx]

Good

[King Friday]

I don't think Brady has an automatic win in court on this one.

If he had not destroyed the phone and simply denied access based on any number of "excuses" that could be legally argued in court...he's probably in the clear without much of a problem.

However, the cover up OFTEN winds up costing far more than what the original offense ever would have. It appears that there won't be an exception to that in this case.

[MadScientist]

I could actually get that Brady has his old phone destroyed when he gets a new one, because people would try to grab the data off it and with his celebrity status that would be a big problem. However it just happens to be the day he met with Wells, and he only had the phone for 4 months. Switching phones is a pain, and 4 months is not a normal upgrade cycle. Just way to suspicious to believe that it was a coincidence. If that was the best defense he had, I'm half surprised that Goodell didn't give him 6 games.

[pbmax]

Brady's agent/lawyer says they turned over "unprecedented" documents about his electronic communications. I suspect there are details about what was and wasn't exchanged that we will learn about eventually.

[Joemailman]

Is there anything in the CBA which says a player must turn over personal records to the NFL to aid in an investigation of said player?

[King Friday]

Brady's agent/lawyer says they turned over "unprecedented" documents about his electronic communications. I suspect there are details about what was and wasn't exchanged that we will learn about eventually.

Documents? Did they photocopy pictures of the phone in pieces?

[Guiness]

Is there anything in the CBA which says a player must turn over personal records to the NFL to aid in an investigation of said player?

Yes, there definitely are. Too lazy to go looking for a reference, but I know there is something in the CBA about it.

[pbmax]

Generally speaking, as an employee you have a duty to turn over records related to the business if you wish to stay employed (company owns the work product, etc.) But what the CBA says I don't know.

[pbmax]

ProFootballTalk ‏@ProFootballTalk 2h2 hours ago
NFL offered Tom Brady "at least 50 percent reduction" in exchange for admission of guilt http://wp.me/p14QSB-9OqO

"Mr. Brady? You can have my answer now, if you like. My final offer is this: nothing."

[pbmax]

Documents? Did they photocopy pictures of the phone in pieces?

No idea. Not much of this makes sense. If you believe Yee (his agent) they were not allowed access to the documentation the Wells report had about its investigation.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CLB4z2eWcAA7rUe.png:large

[Guiness]

this genie is absolutely NOT going back in the bottle :drma:

[Harlan Huckleby]

I'm waiting for the Trump connection to come out.

This is a stupid video, do not watch.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RXSFRMJhlgY


This is now officially ugly. Leaking that Brady smashed his phone was nasty.
But it's not over 'till Brady says it's over. Goodell may wake up next to his horse's severed head.

[Joemailman]

“I also disagree with yesterday’s narrative surrounding my cellphone,” Brady wrote. “I replaced my broken Samsung phone with a new iPhone 6 AFTER my attorneys made it clear to the NFL that my actual phone device would not be subjected to investigation under ANY circumstances. As a member of a union, I was under no obligation to set a new precedent going forward, nor was I made aware at any time during Mr. Wells investigation, that failing to subject my cell phone to investigation would result in ANY discipline."

I'm guessing this will be the crux of his defense in court.

[pbmax]

I'm guessing this will be the crux of his defense in court.

The NFLPA won the last case (don't remember which player) on a due process claim. Employers are not obligated to follow due process exactly as it applies to the Court system, but they must follow the spirit of the law. If Brady was not granted access to documents and witnesses, they'll argue that as well.

[pbmax]

Brady on what documentation they turned over:


“To try and reconcile the record and fully cooperate with the investigation after I was disciplined in May, we turned over detailed pages of cell phone records and all of the emails that Mr. Wells requested. We even contacted the phone company to see if there was any possible way we could retrieve any/all of the actual text messages from my old phone. In short, we exhausted every possibility to give the NFL everything we could and offered to go thru the identity for every text and phone call during the relevant time. Regardless, the NFL knows that Mr. Wells already had ALL relevant communications with Patriots personnel that either Mr. Wells saw or that I was questioned about in my appeal hearing. There is no ‘smoking gun’ and this controversy is manufactured to distract from the fact they have zero evidence of wrongdoing.

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2015/07/29/tom-brady-im-very-disappointed-i-did-nothing-wrong/

I was under the impression that cell phone companies kept data longer than that, but perhaps not for months.

But the question remains, did Brady destroy evidence or did the NFL simply leak that action to help sway the public to their side?

[pbmax]

What Brady offered, but was declined by the NFL:


Specifically, it can be found at footnote 11 on page 12 [of NFL statement upholding suspension]: “After the hearing and after the submission of post-hearing briefs, Mr. Brady’s certified agents offered to provide a spreadsheet that would identify all of the individuals with whom Mr. Brady had exchanged text messages during [the relevant time] period; the agents suggested that the League could contact those individuals and request production of any relevant text messages that they retained. Aside from the fact that, under Article 46, Section 2(f) of the CBA, such information could and should have been provided long before the hearing, the approach suggested in the agents’ letter — which would require tracking down numerous individuals and seeking consent from each to retrieve from their cellphones detailed information about their text message communications during the relevant period — is simply not practical.”

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2015/07/28/brady-offered-to-help-nfl-gather-missing-text-messages/

[Guiness]

Brady on what documentation they turned over:



http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2015/07/29/tom-brady-im-very-disappointed-i-did-nothing-wrong/

I was under the impression that cell phone companies kept data longer than that, but perhaps not for months.

But the question remains, did Brady destroy evidence or did the NFL simply leak that action to help sway the public to their side?

Well, he obviously didn't write that himself, and I think he speech writer took the same classes as Alex Rodriguez's, cause as I'm reading it I swear I've heard it before. Anyways, quite a mess.

Has an individual player sued the NFL before? I don't remember ever seeing it happen.

[pbmax]

Brady may face uphill battle on cell phone destruction if this anonymous lawyer is right:

http://www.atlredline.com/no-destroying-tom-bradys-cell-phone-was-not-okay-1720689663

He is required to preserve evidence, even in anticipation of civil litigation is that litigation is reasonably foreseeable:


In Brady’s case, his or the NFLPA’s attorneys will have to argue that litigation was somehow not reasonably foreseeable or anticipated despite every sports show talking head predicting that this situation would end up in court from the first day of the scandal. It seems highly implausible that a reasonable person in Brady’s situation would not foresee litigation and not think to preserve a cellphone after receiving multiple prior requests for it.

In addition, Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 37(e) states that:

Absent exceptional circumstances, a court may not impose sanctions under these rules on a party for failing to provide electronically stored information lost as a result of the routine, good-faith operation of an electronic information system.
Once again, Brady will try to argue that he routinely destroyed cell phones and that it was a giant coincidence that he happened to get rid of thousands of relevant messages on the same day investigators interviewed him.

Apparently, this lawyer is not anonymous:

Steve Silver is the founder of TheLegalBlitz.com. He is a former sports reporter for the Las Vegas Sun and is now a lawyer in Philadelphia. You can reach him at steve@thelegalblitz.com or on Twitter @thelegalblitz.

[Pugger]

I could actually get that Brady has his old phone destroyed when he gets a new one, because people would try to grab the data off it and with his celebrity status that would be a big problem. However it just happens to be the day he met with Wells, and he only had the phone for 4 months. Switching phones is a pain, and 4 months is not a normal upgrade cycle. Just way to suspicious to believe that it was a coincidence. If that was the best defense he had, I'm half surprised that Goodell didn't give him 6 games.

I don't think Goodell could increase the penalty during the appeals process.

[Pugger]

Is there anything in the CBA which says a player must turn over personal records to the NFL to aid in an investigation of said player?

I was under the impression Wells asked Brady to have his attorneys go over the texts and submit only pertinent communications germane to the investigation.

[Joemailman]

Robert Kraft:


"Yesterday's decision by Commissioner Goodell was released in a similar matter, under an erroneous headline that read: 'Tom Brady destroyed his cell phone,'" he said. "This headline was designed to capture headlines across the country and obscure evidence regarding the tampering of air pressure in footballs. It intentionally implied nefarious behavior and minimized the acknowledgement that Tom provided the history of every number he texted during that relevant time frame and we had already provided the league with every cell phone of every non-NFLPA employee that they requested, including head coach Bill Belichick."

If the NFL had been given the cell phones of Patriots employees Brady had corresponded with, I'm wondering why they needed Brady's cell phone.

[pbmax]

Robert Kraft:



If the NFL had been given the cell phones of Patriots employees Brady had corresponded with, I'm wondering why they needed Brady's cell phone.

Burners and personal phones. They know the texts from his old cell to the numbers they have in their possession, but he could have been communicating to phones the NFL is unaware of.

Its really second level stuff. And that's why I think the NFL leaked it, because it looks like tampering with evidence (may indeed be) even if the likelihood of pertinent data on it was low.

[pbmax]

Brady provided list of calls and texts made by Brady over the destroyed phone. NFL thought it not practical to contact each of 10,000 total communications, but ...


Yee said that of the parties pertinent or potentially pertinent to this case, there were just 10 teammates, two current coaches, five former teammates, one NFL Network employee, five members of New England's "front office" and five other Patriots' employees who had phone or text contact with Brady (which brings the total number to 28).

http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/writer/jason-la-canfora/25253590/bradys-agent-nfl-shifted-focus-to-phone-because-its-science-is-junk

Brady is an idiot. Goodell is a weasel.

[Rutnstrut]

I could actually get that Brady has his old phone destroyed when he gets a new one, because people would try to grab the data off it and with his celebrity status that would be a big problem. However it just happens to be the day he met with Wells, and he only had the phone for 4 months. Switching phones is a pain, and 4 months is not a normal upgrade cycle. Just way to suspicious to believe that it was a coincidence. If that was the best defense he had, I'm half surprised that Goodell didn't give him 6 games.

Really 4 months not a normal upgrade cycle? He's fucking rich, and probably has someone that does all the bullshit stuff for him. Why wouldn't he want to upgrade, new phones come out so fast that you could easily upgrade every 4 months. I'm not saying he didn't destroy it to hide something, but normal logic does not apply to filthy rich people.

[Joemailman]

I'm starting to think this suspension has less to do with Brady's supposed involvement with deflating footballs and more to do with sending a message to NFL players that when the NFL asks for your personal information you had better provide exactly what they ask for. Or else.

[Guiness]

Really 4 months not a normal upgrade cycle? He's fucking rich, and probably has someone that does all the bullshit stuff for him. Why wouldn't he want to upgrade, new phones come out so fast that you could easily upgrade every 4 months. I'm not saying he didn't destroy it to hide something, but normal logic does not apply to filthy rich people.

He also went from Android to iOS (iOS to Android?). I've known people who've gone in one direction or the other in less than 4 months after getting a new phone.

[King Friday]

All of this crap just leads me to believe that the next CBA agreement is going to involve a LENGTHY holdout by the players...because Goodell's heavy handed and confusing way of dealing out punishment is not winning over the players.

[Rutnstrut]

He also went from Android to iOS (iOS to Android?). I've known people who've gone in one direction or the other in less than 4 months after getting a new phone.

Same here, hell I have friends that pay full full price to "upgrade" 3 or 4 times a year. Just so they can say they have the latest and greatest, and they are far from millionaires.

[Guiness]

All of this crap just leads me to believe that the next CBA agreement is going to involve a LENGTHY holdout by the players...because Goodell's heavy handed and confusing way of dealing out punishment is not winning over the players.

I'd say +1...but they really seemed lined up to hold out this past time and caved at the 11th hour. I think the nature of the sport - young man's game, outside of QB's a very limited amount of earning years and fungibility of the journeymen class player, a new crop of players available every 12 months, really lowers the possibility of the union putting up a good fight.

[pbmax]

ProFootballTalk ‏@ProFootballTalk 9h9 hours ago
Tom Brady's agent tells @tomecurran that NFL's shift in message to "destroyed" cell phone was expected http://wp.me/p14QSB-9Ouc

I suggest you read it. Because while there are some good nuggets of info, the word tortured does come to mind.

[pbmax]

Tom Curran writes that the man who seems responsible for initiating the investigation of the Patriots for deflate gate was a Jets employee until Eric Mangini was hired as head coach.

http://www.csnne.com/new-england-patriots/attention-circles-back-to-mike-kensil-as-deflategate-source

[pbmax]

Albert Breer @AlbertBreer
From Brady suit: "The purportedly independent Wells Report was edited by Pash, the NFL's General Counsel, before its public release."

[smuggler]

Looks to me like the NFL wins this one. The union's primary argument is that the arbitrator is biased. Arbitrator was agreed upon by the league and Brady via the CBA long ago. Doty would have gone against legal precedent to help out the labor, but the NY judge probably won't. Brady agreed to binding arbitration AND agreed to having it be levied by Goodell. He should have taken a deal. He's toast.

[pbmax]

Looks to me like the NFL wins this one. The union's primary argument is that the arbitrator is biased. Arbitrator was agreed upon by the league and Brady via the CBA long ago. Doty would have gone against legal precedent to help out the labor, but the NY judge probably won't. Brady agreed to binding arbitration AND agreed to having it be levied by Goodell. He should have taken a deal. He's toast.

The NFLPA has won the last two battles over Personal Conduct because of due process, not bias. For Rice, the Judge (not Doty) ruled that Commissioner Hairbrain was not lied to, but failed to understand what a punch might mean in the context of domestic violence. Without the video, he failed to imagine that it could be as severe as the video indicated. The Judge found this failure of comprehension to be consistent with the NFL's admitted failure to take the issue seriously, resulting in the new Policy.

The also lost on a second angle with Rice when they got stopped from applying a new rue after the fact.

Doty found that the same rulings applied to Peterson.

Brady's case, as argued by the NFLPA, is being contested on four points:http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2015/07/29/nflpa-sues-nfl-and-management-council-in-minnesota/

1. Players advance notice of potential discipline. “Brady had no notice of the disciplinary standards that would be applied,” the petition says at page 3, “and no notice of the potential penalties.”

2. The league and the NFLPA collectively bargained the punishment for “alleged equipment tampering by players,” and that the NFL was not permitted to disregard those provisions without advance notice.

3. The petition likewise explains that the “Competitive Integrity Policy” was “never given” to players, and that it specifically applies only to teams, not to players.

4. A fine is the only penalty that has ever been upheld in such circumstances.” (In 2010, Brett Favre was fined $50,000 for failing to cooperate with an investigation regarding allegations that he texted inappropriate photos to a Jets employee.)

5. The petition claims that the discipline violates the “law of the shop” that requires fair and consistent treatment of players by basing Brady’s discipline on air-pressure tests that “did not generate reliable information,” and that the arbitrator (Commissioner Roger Goodell) was “evidently partial.”

Regarding #3, a Jets player, a kicker, was not subject to punishment despite being generally aware of tampering with the K balls (http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2015/07/30/2009-jets-patriotsincident-becomes-issue-in-brady-case/) by the Jets equipment staff in 2009.

[smuggler]

Doty's rulings were contrary to legal precedent and taken to higher court to continue litigation. The league and Goodell pooped thw bed with Rice's case, but it doesn't have any bearing on the Brady case, as far as I can see.

[pbmax]

Doty's rulings were contrary to legal precedent and taken to higher court to continue litigation. The league and Goodell pooped thw bed with Rice's case, but it doesn't have any bearing on the Brady case, as far as I can see.

You might be able to find one or some of his rulings that the NFL claims were contrary to legal precedent, but not Peterson's.


The 16-page ruling from Judge David Doty that reinstates Vikings running back Adrian Peterson turns on one fairly simple conclusion: The NFL cannot apply its new personal conduct policy retroactively.

“There is no dispute that the Commissioner imposed Peterson’s discipline under the New Policy,” Judge Doty wrote. “It is also undisputed that in the [Ray] Rice arbitration, the hearing officer unequivocally recognized that the New Policy cannot be applied retroactively, notwithstanding the Commissioner’s broad discretion in meting out punishment under the CBA. . . . Consistent with that recognition, the Commissioner has acknowledged that he did not have the power to retroactively apply the New Policy: ‘The policy change was forward looking because the League is “required to provide proper notice.”‘ . . . Yet, just two weeks later, the Commissioner retroactively applied the New Policy to Peterson.”

In other words, Judge Doty concluded that the NFL was making it up as went along.

[smuggler]

The legal precedent that Doty set aside was setting aside a binding arbitration. Even when arbitrators err, their rulings are pretty much universally upheld because it's quite the nasty legal can of worms to introduce legally binding agreements as debatable in court. I have heard, and I am no legal expert, that Peterson will lose ultimately because the higher court, while not disagreeing with Doty about the incorrectness of the arbitration, will nevertheless throw out his ruling due to the simple fact that Peterson had legally agreed to Goodell's crooked deal.

[pbmax]

The legal precedent that Doty set aside was setting aside a binding arbitration. Even when arbitrators err, their rulings are pretty much universally upheld because it's quite the nasty legal can of worms to introduce legally binding agreements as debatable in court. I have heard, and I am no legal expert, that Peterson will lose ultimately because the higher court, while not disagreeing with Doty about the incorrectness of the arbitration, will nevertheless throw out his ruling due to the simple fact that Peterson had legally agreed to Goodell's crooked deal.

It is a high hurdle. But after a Federal Court rules (re: Rice), the arbitrator must incorporate that ruling into their deliberations. This one did not even consider it.

We may find out soon. The appeal is still alive despite not being a hot topic. And the contempt of court hearing for Goodell placing Peterson back on the exempt list is set for Aug 13.

[pbmax]

Rodgers made it into the Brady appeal transcript. NFLPA was trying to ascertain the different treatment of previous instances of fooling around with the football's physical condition. First they asked about the Panthers warming the ball versus the Vikes, then Rodgers talking about ball pressure after the Patriots game:


Q: Let me ask you next about the following. Are you aware -- let's take a look at NFLPA Exhibit 177.
You will see this is a report quoting Aaron Rodgers that took place during the November 30th game
between the Packers and the Patriots. And you will see that Mr. Rodgers was quoted 7 as saying, "I like to push the limit to how much air
we can put in the football, even go over what they allow you to do and see if the officials take air out of it."
Do you see that?
A. Yes.

Q. Did you or anyone in your office conduct any 14 investigation of Mr. Rodgers for making that
statement?
A. No, sir.

Q. Would you agree with me that if Mr. Rodgers 18 was pushing the limit of how much air could be in a 19 football, that that would be him at least being
generally aware of activities to try to violate the NFL rules regarding pressure for footballs?
A. The way I'm reading, this is a post-game 23 comment and there is no need for us to react or 24 overreact.

Q. So this was not important enough for you to
react to Mr. Rodgers saying he liked to push the limit and see if officials caught it; that was not a serious thing for you to react?
A. In a post-game interview. Because if the testing of the games (sic) pre-game and all balls were in regulation, there is no need for us to react for post-game comment.

Q. So in your view, Mr. Rodgers not even being investigated and Mr. Brady being suspended for four games for allegedly being generally aware of someone else's activities, you think that's a consistent treatment, in your mind?
A. This is a post-game comment.


Clearly someone is not aware that Rodgers also commented about this on his radio show. Which would make it a pre-game comment as well.

Page 248-249, http://static.nfl.com/static/content/public/photo/2015/08/04/0ap3000000506502.pdf

[pbmax]

Page 254-55

Q. You were asked about Aaron Rodgers. It's NFLPA Exhibit 177. Do you have that?
A. Yes, sir.

Q. You were asked about a quote, and I note in the quote it says something about to see if the officials take the air out of it. And you were
asked whether you did an investigation.
Did you have any information that either
Mr. Rodgers or anyone from the Packers had actually tampered with a football after the officials
measured it?
A. No, sir.

Q. Did you have any information or any evidence that either Mr. Rodgers or anyone associated with the Packers actually used the football in that game or any other game in which the inflation was not properly done on the footballs after the officials
had measured it?
A. No, sir.

Q. Or at any time, did you have information that the packers or Mr. Rodgers used the football that was not properly inflated?
A. Not at all.

Q. If you had such knowledge and such evidence, would you have conducted an investigation?
A. What we would have done is our normal protocol. Before games, we would have tested the ball.

[pbmax]

Stephanie Stradley @StephStradley
Finished #Deflategate transcript. Can see why NFL wanted sealed. They want to win bc legal standard favors them. Not bc Brady did anything.

http://www.stradleylaw.com/nfl-brady-deflategate-transcript/

[mraynrand]

I 15 wonder if Rodgers 12 knows that comments 18 about circumventing rules 51 are never allowed. For example, Charles Woodson 21 used to talk about holding 84 as much as he could if he could get away with it. Ed Hochuli 85 didn't like it, but wood was never suspended.

[sharpe1027]

Isn't the more relevant issue that the deflation was occurring after the inspection? What Rodgers did is (relatively) upfront and (arguably) within the procedures. The only way it gains an advantage is if the NFL is incompetent. The other is fraudulent and clearly outside the procedures.

[mraynrand]

It would be fun to put Rodgers, Brady, a pump and a football together in a room and see what happens. Kind of like an epistasis test for you biologists out there.

[pbmax]

Isn't the more relevant issue that the deflation was occurring after the inspection? What Rodgers did is (relatively) upfront and (arguably) within the procedures. The only way it gains an advantage is if the NFL is incompetent. The other is fraudulent and clearly outside the procedures.

Sure. Both in terms of the integrity of the game rules and the actual effect on the game. But the generally aware standard plus the inferences made by the texts only hint at Brady's knowledge of tampering after inspection.

Even reading Brady as generally evasive and willfully destroying possible evidence, there is no direct evidence he knew about deflating after the fact.

So you can start an investigation of Rodgers last year, find a number of footballs from low temperature games below 12.5 at halftime (or warm temperature games above 13.5), and suspend him for his comments and failure to turn over texts.

I have no doubt Brady rode his equipment crew like rented mules to get the balls down to the barest minimum they could get away with, just as Rodgers is looking for balloon specs. But the evidence that Brady knew about methods to evade the rules after inspection is sorely lacking.

I would however, on principle, go along with sanctioning Hoody just on general principle. Same with Goodell for destroying the tapes of Hoody's malfeasance.

[mraynrand]

Rodgers made it into the Brady appeal transcript. NFLPA was trying to ascertain the different treatment of previous instances of fooling around with the football's physical condition. First they asked about the Panthers warming the ball versus the Vikes, then Rodgers talking about ball pressure after the Patriots game:


Q: Let me ask you next about the following. Are you aware -- let's take a look at NFLPA Exhibit 177.
You will see this is a report quoting Aaron Rodgers that took place during the November 30th game
between the Packers and the Patriots. And you will see that Mr. Rodgers was quoted 7 as saying, "I like to push the limit to how much air
we can put in the football, even go over what they allow you to do and see if the officials take air out of it."
Do you see that?
A. Yes.

Q. Did you or anyone in your office conduct any 14 investigation of Mr. Rodgers for making that
statement?
A. No, sir.

Q. Would you agree with me that if Mr. Rodgers 18 was pushing the limit of how much air could be in a 19 football, that that would be him at least being
generally aware of activities to try to violate the NFL rules regarding pressure for footballs?
A. The way I'm reading, this is a post-game 23 comment and there is no need for us to react or 24 overreact.

Q. So this was not important enough for you to
react to Mr. Rodgers saying he liked to push the limit and see if officials caught it; that was not a serious thing for you to react?
A. In a post-game interview. Because if the testing of the games (sic) pre-game and all balls were in regulation, there is no need for us to react for post-game comment.

Q. So in your view, Mr. Rodgers not even being investigated and Mr. Brady being suspended for four games for allegedly being generally aware of someone else's activities, you think that's a consistent treatment, in your mind?
A. This is a post-game comment.


Clearly someone is not aware that Rodgers also commented about this on his radio show. Which would make it a pre-game comment as well.

Page 248-249, http://static.nfl.com/static/content/public/photo/2015/08/04/0ap3000000506502.pdf

Judge Chamberlain Haller: "Mr. Gambini, That is a lucid, intelligent, well thought-out objection."
Vinny Gambini: "Thank you, Your Honor."
Judge Chamberlain Haller: "Overruled."

[sharpe1027]

Sure. Both in terms of the integrity of the game rules and the actual effect on the game. But the generally aware standard plus the inferences made by the texts only hint at Brady's knowledge of tampering after inspection.

Even reading Brady as generally evasive and willfully destroying possible evidence, there is no direct evidence he knew about deflating after the fact.

So you can start an investigation of Rodgers last year, find a number of footballs from low temperature games below 12.5 at halftime (or warm temperature games above 13.5), and suspend him for his comments and failure to turn over texts.

I have no doubt Brady rode his equipment crew like rented mules to get the balls down to the barest minimum they could get away with, just as Rodgers is looking for balloon specs. But the evidence that Brady knew about methods to evade the rules after inspection is sorely lacking.

I would however, on principle, go along with sanctioning Hoody just on general principle. Same with Goodell for destroying the tapes of Hoody's malfeasance.

I see your point, but there still seems to be a substantive diference. In one instance the QB openly explained what was going on and hid nothing. In fact, there seems to be no wrong doing under the rules and he would probably be allowed to continue with the same process.

In the other, there was fraud occurring with cover-up after-the-fact. The inference seems pretty strong to me. I think that had Brady merely thought it was the same situation as Rodgers, this thing would have been over in about 1 day.

[pbmax]

I see your point, but there still seems to be a substantive diference. In one instance the QB openly explained what was going on and hid nothing. In fact, there seems to be no wrong doing under the rules and he would probably be allowed to continue with the same process.

In the other, there was fraud occurring with cover-up after-the-fact. The inference seems pretty strong to me. I think that had Brady merely thought it was the same situation as Rodgers, this thing would have been over in about 1 day.

Well, we only have Rodgers comments in this reality. But imagine what his comments sound like if there is video of the equipment guys stealing off with the footballs prior to games or if the Bears complained during a game. Is there anything so terribly wrong with re-inflating an official deflated ball back to 13.5 according to the team gauge?

You just need another piece of kindling to produce some smoke if you have teams out to get you (Jets, Ravens, Colts, Brett Favre with the matches).

But what the investigator is after with Vincent about the Vikes/Panthers and Rodgers is the inconsistent criteria of an investigation and punishment. With the Vikes, it was a news story and then fines and warning. Rodgers got nothing. The reason an investigation was triggered for the Pats was because two teams complained (Ravens to Colts, Colts to League). But the trigger was a game ball that a Colts player thought was under inflated. And remember that the Colts ball boys were reportedly seen on the sidelines with inflation needles.

So, you want an inference? The Colts were in charge of the ball that caused the investigation.

At that point, the League was measuring balls with no accurate basis for comparison. And if you consult someone who does not insist on incorrectly applying the Ideal Gas Law, the balls were all within expected tolerances during a wet and cold game.

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/01/30/sports/football/deflation-experiments-show-patriots-may-have-science-on-their-side-after-all.html

So the League is now maintaining they are consistent in applying the in-game standard, when they have no idea what that standard should have been.

[pbmax]

Argument for why the Ideal Gas law is a fine enough stand-in for the pressures/temps under consideration and a mention of Carnegie Mellon's test that revealed that wet leather (assuming no leaks) could drop pressure in the balls another .7 PSI.

http://www.elsevier.com/connect/can-physics-explain-the-deflation-of-nfl-footballs

[Guiness]

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/01/30/sports/football/deflation-experiments-show-patriots-may-have-science-on-their-side-after-all.html

So the League is now maintaining they are consistent in applying the in-game standard, when they have no idea what that standard should have been.

The guys behind the shield are looking more and more like an idiot midget behind a curtain

http://charts.stocktwits.com/production/original_37989931.gif?1433852876

[pbmax]

Another thing to consider is that the formative experience Brady talks about, aside from wishing to have the treatment of game balls placed under the teams again, are his comments about the 16 PSI game balls they used.

I think the story was that the Game Official found them low (or this was back when the Officials controlled access all the way through) and reinflated them well above the current standard.

So to pull a Brady or Rodgers (tempt fate with blow min or above max) inflation game is dangerous if the effect is to put the Officials back in charge of inflation.

Its also why you might want a second visit with the balls after inspection.

[pbmax]

The guys behind the shield are looking more and more like an idiot midget behind a curtain

http://charts.stocktwits.com/production/original_37989931.gif?1433852876

Its classic Roger. Have no plan for bad outcomes, be presented publicly with a bad outcome, make it up as you go along and pretend that was the plan all along.

[sharpe1027]

The inference and lack of credibility of Brady seems to have been a major rationale for the decision.

Apparently, Brady destroyed a phone that was only 4 months old, on the same day he was interviewed. His explanation is that it was his normal procedure, but he still had an older phone that was not destroyed. The destroyed phone just happened to be in the critical time period. -- How unfortunate.

Deflate' was a term they used to refer to losing weight. -- Strange coincidence.

http://deadspin.com/the-full-story-of-tom-bradys-destroyed-cell-phone-1722190784

[smuggler]

Brady and the League both bad, but only one still has (vague) plausible deniability... Sorry Roger!

[pbmax]

The timing does look fishy as does the implementation. Why does he still have the previous phone from the previous year?

And I'll give Wells this, contrary to most of the news coverage at the time, he is not asking for the phone, he is trusting the player and agent or lawyers to do the search.

However, I am not sure this makes a difference. Brady is still bound by a different set of rules than NFL employees so the idea of precedence (see Favre, Brett and Jets masseurs) is an important one. He then turns over the records of all his calls and texts at a subsequent meeting after he is aware that the lack of cooperation is cited as part of his guilt. Goodell then deems this too much work to do, despite the easy calculation that only 28 NFL people would need to be identified and contacted.

So is this a passive aggressive grudge match where one side wants to be able to force the other to do its bidding or is there truly concealment going on? Since the NFL has the phones of all the equipment guys, you need to envision a currently unknown line of communication for it to be on Brady's phone and not the team phones.

[Cheesehead Craig]

Maybe there were naked pics on his phone of the wifey (or someone else) doing something naughty and destroying it saved his marriage. That's worth a 4 game suspension.

[Guiness]

The inference and lack of credibility of Brady seems to have been a major rationale for the decision.

Apparently, Brady destroyed a phone that was only 4 months old, on the same day he was interviewed. His explanation is that it was his normal procedure, but he still had an older phone that was not destroyed. The destroyed phone just happened to be in the critical time period. -- How unfortunate.

Deflate' was a term they used to refer to losing weight. -- Strange coincidence.

http://deadspin.com/the-full-story-of-tom-bradys-destroyed-cell-phone-1722190784

The whole 'destroyed phone' thing now takes on a different slant with the information that he still has the previous phone in his possession. If the NFL knew this, I wonder why they didn't release the information. I think a lot of people understood why he would destroy his old phone, even if the timing was suspect. Of course, it is possible the NFL didn't want to look like they were trying to tar and feather Brady anymore than they already do, so leaked the info to Deadspin knowing it would get out.

Jesus Deadspin is one of the best sources for investigative journalism out there. They have a pretty narrow focus, but it's they decide to look at something, you can be pretty sure they're not going to leave any stone unturned...and they don't kick ass and take names, I don't know that I've seen any unfounded mudslinging coming out of them.

[Patler]

It seems likely Brady was trying to hide something, and he committed the capital error of thinking he could lie his way out of it. Unfortunately for him, he did not carry the deceit far enough, and destroy the earlier phone, whenever. It clearly was not a well-followed standard practice to destroy his old phone immediately upon getting a new one, and the timing of the one phone's destruction is sure questionable. The simple answer is likely the correct answer as to why these facts are as they are, he had something to hide, he destroyed his phone to hide it, and he made up a story to cover it up.

This leaves us with two questions in my mind:
- Why in the word does he get a new phone every couple months?
- Does he have nothing better to do than write 557 texts over a 30 day time span during the season?

[Guiness]

It seems likely Brady was trying to hide something, and he committed the capital error of thinking he could lie his way out of it. Unfortunately for him, he did not carry the deceit far enough, and destroy the earlier phone, whenever. It clearly was not a well-followed standard practice to destroy his old phone immediately upon getting a new one, and the timing of the one phone's destruction is sure questionable. The simple answer is likely the correct answer as to why these facts are as they are, he had something to hide, he destroyed his phone to hide it, and he made up a story to cover it up.

This leaves us with two questions in my mind:
- Why in the word does he get a new phone every couple months?
- Does he have nothing better to do than write 557 texts over a 30 day time span during the season?

Have to disagree with your two questions. With the second, I think your age is showing a bit - now that unlimited texting is generally included in all plans, 2 dozen texts/day is probably on the low side for many (most?) people. As to the first question, as mentioned earlier in this thread, the cycling through phones is, if not common, also not unheard of.

I think the two better questions are
-why destroy the phone that day?
-if the previous phones are always destroyed, why is the older one around?

[pbmax]

Unfortunately, the charge is deflation, not reliability. Even if you think it makes him an unreliable witness, they still don't have the goods. Favre was fined for a failure to turn over an existing phone.

They've got bupkus.

The experts retained by Wells did not even account for the time/temperature effects while measuring the balls inside at halftime. After declaring temperature the most significant factor in changes with pressure under the circumstances, they avoided analyzing that effect when looking at the halftime results.

So its impossible on available evidence to determine if the Colts balls exhibited different loss of pressure characteristics that the Patriots. 3 of the 4 Colts balls were below the legal limit. The evidence of the various pressures seems to support an effort by the Patriots to ensure they were absolutely as close to 12.5 as possible. Even if the 90 second bathroom break is nefarious, it still doesn't link to Brady. And the pressure results don't indicate an absolute intent to get distinctly below 12.5

[Patler]

The charge against Brady is involvement/knowledge/complicity. His destruction of a source of potential evidence can be interpreted if not presumed to be an act to conceal damning evidence against him. He can weaken that by explaining the destruction as "in the course" of standard activity, but the existence of the earlier phone pretty much negates that argument.

[pbmax]

The charge against Brady is involvement/knowledge/complicity. His destruction of a source of potential evidence can be interpreted if not presumed to be an act to conceal damning evidence against him. He can weaken that by explaining the destruction as "in the course" of standard activity, but the existence of the earlier phone pretty much negates that argument.

If he has destroyed all other phones and that phone belonged to one of his kids, it doesn't tell you much. I haven't gone through the entire transcript but I have not seen if he was asked or offered a reason for that phone's continued existence.

They have no evidence of involvement, knowledge or complicity. All they have on Brady is a _possible_ cover up. The physical evidence doesn't add up to a violation. The only direct piece of evidence of tampering is the guy in the bathroom for 90 seconds.

The cover up violation, or more properly, failure to cooperate, has been adjudicated in the past with fines.

Roger has constructed a casserole in order to cover up the weakness of the ingredients.

[sharpe1027]

In preparation for an interview he knew was coming Brady had a forensic examiner look at his phones before he destroyed the missing phone -- but he never gave that phone to the examiner. Then, on the day of the interview, he destroys the phone.

It makes no sense.

As for there not being "direct evidence," I think "direct" vs. "indirect" is a meaningless distinction. They have enough to support a conclusion that there probably was tampering going on, not absolute, but probable. They have enough to support a conclusion that it was probably that Brady knew about it. I think that's really all they need.

[smuggler]

Word through the grapevine is that the league is getting shitty because they specifically asked the Pats to stop doing it and they basically refused.

[sharpe1027]

Word through the grapevine is that the league is getting shitty because they specifically asked the Pats to stop doing it and they basically refused.

I couldn't see Bellechick ever doing that. :roll:

[pbmax]

Word through the grapevine is that the league is getting shitty because they specifically asked the Pats to stop doing it and they basically refused.

Reporters were all over this angle too about a week ago, but the Ravens publicly stated they had not been in contact with Goodell and SalPal on ESPN backtracked his remark.

Neither of those things is dispositive, but have you heard of other instances?

[pbmax]

In preparation for an interview he knew was coming Brady had a forensic examiner look at his phones before he destroyed the missing phone -- but he never gave that phone to the examiner. Then, on the day of the interview, he destroys the phone.

It makes no sense.

As for there not being "direct evidence," I think "direct" vs. "indirect" is a meaningless distinction. They have enough to support a conclusion that there probably was tampering going on, not absolute, but probable. They have enough to support a conclusion that it was probably that Brady knew about it. I think that's really all they need.

Direct means you do not need to infer motive. Video of the attendant in the restroom/utility room (did they ever establish what that room was?) is direct evidence of a single person's access to the balls without supervision. Its not direct evidence of deflation. Its direct evidence of opportunity.

[sharpe1027]

Direct means you do not need to infer motive. Video of the attendant in the restroom/utility room (did they ever establish what that room was?) is direct evidence of a single person's access to the balls without supervision. Its not direct evidence of deflation. Its direct evidence of opportunity.

I think I am not explaining myself properly. Why does it matter that the evidence is indirect, so long as it is sufficient?

[pbmax]

I think I am not explaining myself properly. Why does it matter that the evidence is indirect, so long as it is sufficient?

Indirect, or circumstantial evidence never completes the circle that a crime was committed and you know who did it.

At best, it gives you a probability. In some cases, say a murder or robbery, you have physical evidence, method and a time frame for the crime. Process of elimination with indirect or circumstantial evidence can get you close to certain. Maybe enough to overcome reasonable doubt.

In this case, the complete lack of direct evidence of tampering, including what should have been regarded as less than compelling physical evidence of the balls in use, is being used in connection with direct evidence of opportunity (guy in room with balls) and possibly incriminating conduct (destroy cell phone) to imagine a crime that there is LITTLE TO NO evidence has occurred.

So it SEEMS like Brady is guilty of something. But no one can say with any sense of certainty what he did, or knew about.

[sharpe1027]

Indirect, or circumstantial evidence never completes the circle that a crime was committed and you know who did it.

At best, it gives you a probability. In some cases, say a murder or robbery, you have physical evidence, method and a time frame for the crime. Process of elimination with indirect or circumstantial evidence can get you close to certain. Maybe enough to overcome reasonable doubt.

In this case, the complete lack of direct evidence of tampering, including what should have been regarded as less than compelling physical evidence of the balls in use, is being used in connection with direct evidence of opportunity (guy in room with balls) and possibly incriminating conduct (destroy cell phone) to imagine a crime that there is LITTLE TO NO evidence has occurred.

So it SEEMS like Brady is guilty of something. But no one can say with any sense of certainty what he did, or knew about.

All you ever have is a probability. Sometimes, the probability is so large that we pretend it is absolute, but it never is. Philosophical point aside, the issue is not whether there is direct or indirect evidence, it is what the evidence suggests happened. I believe the relevant standard is more likely than not. If you look at all the data and it suggests that they were more likely than not deflating the balls, then it doesn't matter if the evidence is direct or indirect.

The science doesn't prove tampering, but it doesn't rule it out either.

Let's look at a few other indirect things.

McNally's official job responsibilities did not include preparing, inflating or deflating footballs. It was that of another guy. McNally took the balls without permission of the referees, which allowed him to have access without an official nearby. What was he doing? He should not have had the balls at all.

McNally lied about going to the bathroom when questioned.

McNally/Jastremski exchanged text messages about Brady being unhappy about the PSI in the game balls.

McNally/Jastremski exchanged text messages about providing a "needle" and about how there better be "cash" or he would overinflate.

McNally/Jastremski exchanged text messages about how Brady felt McNally "must have a lot of stress trying to get them done."

McNally/Jastremski exchanged text messages about how the refs "fucked us" by inflating them.

McNally/Jastremski exchanged text messages about "not going to ESPN, yet"

The Wells report simulated the conditions and could not repeat the pressure difference.

[Guiness]

Indirect, or circumstantial evidence never completes the circle that a crime was committed and you know who did it.

At best, it gives you a probability. In some cases, say a murder or robbery, you have physical evidence, method and a time frame for the crime. Process of elimination with indirect or circumstantial evidence can get you close to certain. Maybe enough to overcome reasonable doubt.

In this case, the complete lack of direct evidence of tampering, including what should have been regarded as less than compelling physical evidence of the balls in use, is being used in connection with direct evidence of opportunity (guy in room with balls) and possibly incriminating conduct (destroy cell phone) to imagine a crime that there is LITTLE TO NO evidence has occurred.

So it SEEMS like Brady is guilty of something. But no one can say with any sense of certainty what he did, or knew about.

At this point I truly feel the main thing Brady is guilty of is telling the High King to fuck off.

I'm trying to think of any other instance in which an employer could demand their employees hand over personal property. It would be different if the phone was provided by, or issued by the team or the NFL, but it wasn't. As I've said before, I think the CBA specifically says they have to, but I'm not sure.

What are the odds Brady says enough is enough, and throws in the towel? Not significant, but I'd guess not 0 either. Is he chasing any other significant records? He's got most SB wins by a QB, that would be the big one for him. His statistics were never great, he's not going to run down any of Manning or Favre's records. He's got his health, wife, family and is set for money for life. Shit, he could be in Brazil with Giselle right now, but had to go to New York for the hearing.

Can you imagine the shit storm Goodell would face if he publicly said he was retiring, and this was part of the reason?

edit: he has tied the wins record. I bet he'd like to own that one, and it would stand a while.

[pbmax]

McNally lied about going to the bathroom when questioned.

Was this ever determined? I thought some reports had a commode in there and another report thad said no. But regardless, there are things people can do for 90 seconds that they wouldn't want to reveal that might or might not involve a needle, yet have nothing to do with inflation. But its disconnected to Brady.

McNally/Jastremski exchanged text messages about Brady being unhappy about the PSI in the game balls.

That conversation probably happens each week, even before the refs inspect the balls.

McNally/Jastremski exchanged text messages about providing a "needle" and about how there better be "cash" or he would overinflate.

Seems like a joke to me.

McNally/Jastremski exchanged text messages about how Brady felt McNally "must have a lot of stress trying to get them done."

What was the time frame for this one?

McNally/Jastremski exchanged text messages about how the refs "fucked us" by inflating them.

See previous instance where they thought the refs had gone nuts and taken them to 16 PSI.

McNally/Jastremski exchanged text messages about "not going to ESPN, yet"

Another joke.

The Wells report simulated the conditions and could not repeat the pressure difference.

Other studies were able to duplicate it. With a wet ball, they could get them down 2 PSI in a half of simulated game situation.

The visit to the (non) water closet is the shaky one. And we do not have Brady directly addressing his preference beyond low end of the scale. Now there are three messages unaccounted for that Brady apparently has in his spreadsheet that the Wells report didn't find. If I was the NFL or Brady, I would have spent time looking for them.

I would also be interested to know how the equip guy got his hands on the balls. At one time I read it was a failure of the ref crew to let them out of their sight. Did he really just walk away with them?

[sharpe1027]

Pb, you are a more trusting individual than I am. It seems pretty straight-forward to me.

[sharpe1027]

[B]Other studies were able to duplicate it. With a wet ball, they could get them down 2 PSI in a half of simulated game situation.

What studies are you referring to? The one I read had some holes. Notably, the Wells report indicated that the balls were tested indoors and accounted for that warm up time, which makes sense because that is where they test and inflate them before the game.

[pbmax]

What studies are you referring to? The one I read had some holes. Notably, the Wells report indicated that the balls were tested indoors and accounted for that warm up time, which makes sense because that is where they test and inflate them before the game.

Wells report hired Exponent to do the testing and they ignored the temperature changes that would have occurred during halftime while measuring. Patriots balls were measured first (all 12) and then the Colts 4 (3 of which were under inflated). The study did not calculate the effect that the wait had on the Colts footballs.

Here is the study with the info on wet footballs: https://uploads.strikinglycdn.com/files/131228/81e5b7f8-aec2-4c83-bb3e-ffcbe2a031ac/HeadSmart%20Labs%20DeflateGate%20Lab%20Report.pdf

from these guys: http://www.headsmartlabs.com

[sharpe1027]

That study doesn't recreate the conditions. For example, they wet the balls and then stick them in a cold room. Likely they did not put them in a room with 100% humdity. In all likelihood it was a low humdity room, meaning the balls would be cooled below room temperature.

[pbmax]

Pb, you are a more trusting individual than I am. It seems pretty straight-forward to me.

Oh, believe me, I don't don't trust anyone in that organization. Like a NASCAR team, I assume they are all trying to find an edge that skirts the rules and praying people don't find out.

But this isn't about our baseline suspicions, it should be about what can be proven.

But if the NFL and Goodell did not have their heads up their patoots, this would also be about the why. And the answer is that like Rodgers, the Patriots were after the thin line of 12.5 (or 13.5 for Rodgers). But the Patriots wanted to guard against re-inflation by refs during inspection as well (see story of 16 PSI), due to random fluctuation or differences in gauges.

That's what needs to be fixed. A four game suspension is for PR. If game integrity of footballs was truly this important, the competition committee or other teams would have asked for better rules in the first place.

This PFT piece, actually, covers the relevant considerations that should have been covered prior to the freakout, if the inflation of the ball was a paramount importance. http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2015/08/05/transcript-proves-nfl-didnt-know-air-pressure-could-drop-naturally/

The fact that Vincent (who hopefully never took a physics course at UW-Madison and therefore has an excuse to not know what the Ideal Gas Law is) was unaware of these considerations, shows how monumentally unprepared the League was for this "crisis".

[pbmax]

conduct detrimental versus equipment tampering

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2015/08/08/conduct-detrimental-vs-equipment-violations-in-brady-vs-nfl/

[Guiness]

What's this about 16psi? Did I miss a story? Did a team of officials turn them into cannonballs at some point?

[pbmax]

What's this about 16psi? Did I miss a story? Did a team of officials turn them into cannonballs at some point?

At some point, I do not remember which season it referred to, Brady claimed the game balls they used were way over-inflated. He mentioned 16 PSI, but whether that was an exaggeration or actual measurement, I don't know. The refs had, for this game anyway, been the last to inspect or prep the footballs, and they went overboard according to Tom.

[Guiness]

At some point, I do not remember which season it referred to, Brady claimed the game balls they used were way over-inflated. He mentioned 16 PSI, but whether that was an exaggeration or actual measurement, I don't know. The refs had, for this game anyway, been the last to inspect or prep the footballs, and they went overboard according to Tom.

He better claim it was an exaggeration for effect - "what are those things, like 16psi?". lol, like anyone would say that.
If he'd checked them, that be tampering. A system's state is altered when measured, if he measured the psi of the balls he tampered with the pressure the referees worked so diligently to attain!

[sharpe1027]

PB, after reading the text messages and in view of the odd behavior before the game, do you think it is more likely that McNally tampered with the balls, or do you think it was more likely that there was no tampering?

[pbmax]

PB, after reading the text messages and in view of the odd behavior before the game, do you think it is more likely that McNally tampered with the balls, or do you think it was more likely that there was no tampering?

The thing I can't work out is the disappearance of the balls before the refs would normally take them out. The Head Ref (Walt Anderson) said he had never seen them disappear early before. If the Patriots regularly did this, you would have had more reports of that because you can bet they asked around.

So disappearing into that closet looks suspicious. But it also doesn't make sense that it was the first time.

I almost want to say they were tampering to get a 12.5 reading after ref inspection, but this wasn't when they did it. This was just a weird deal. I would bet they were leaking air on the sidelines.

[sharpe1027]

So, do you think on that day, it was more likely that McNally tampered with some balls, or that he did not tamper with any?

[pbmax]

So, do you think on that day, it was more likely that McNally tampered with some balls, or that he did not tamper with any?

More likely they did not tamper, based on available evidence, mostly the pressure of the balls.

All the other evidence points to them being ready to tamper if the refs re-inflate them.

[Guiness]

And the NFL just keeps looking worse
http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2015/08/04/vincent-admits-brady-was-disciplined-under-policy-not-given-to-players/

It appears that Brady (actually, all NFL players) are not given the copy of the rules that lay out what they can be punished for. A big no-no under labour law.

So, 'conduct detrimental' be dammed, he never should've been charged and put in that position in the first place.

[sharpe1027]

More likely they did not tamper, based on available evidence, mostly the pressure of the balls.

All the other evidence points to them being ready to tamper if the refs re-inflate them.

Fair enough, I would come down on the other side here.

The scientific evidence makes the drop in pressure unlikely, but within the realm of possibility. It doesn't sway me too much in either direction, but I think that there is enough evidence that it is more likely that some air was let out. The text messages are pretty bad. While I agree with you that they were jokes, they read like jokes about what they were already doing and planning to do in the future. If all McNally was doing was setting the balls to 12.5 lbs, he would not be under pressure, expecting a huge signing day or cash, or joking about going to ESPN. The manner in which the balls were taken and the missing time on the cameras really clinches the deal.

We have clear motive.
We have them (arguably) discussing the act.
We have opportunity.
We have evidence of tampering (arguably).
We have destruction of evidence after-the-fact.
We have a growing history of misconduct with this particular organization.

It's enough to shift the needle of probability for me. While I can understand that others don't think the evidence is there, there is no requirement to convince everyone. It is just a few individuals making the decision. There will always be people that disagree on any outcome. On the extreme end, people still deny the moon landing.

[sharpe1027]

And the NFL just keeps looking worse
http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2015/08/04/vincent-admits-brady-was-disciplined-under-policy-not-given-to-players/

It appears that Brady (actually, all NFL players) are not given the copy of the rules that lay out what they can be punished for. A big no-no under labour law.

So, 'conduct detrimental' be dammed, he never should've been charged and put in that position in the first place.

Oops. They need a better HR department.

It's gotta be tough, however, to sit there and say with a straight face that you didn't now messing with equipment was a no-no.

[pbmax]

Well, that is one set of rules the team and owners agree to, that includes the integrity of the game clause. The players do get other rules.

It can get quite esoteric, which is why the judge wants a settlement, because the ruling can come down under equipment, failure to cooperate, or conduct detrimental.

For Sharpe, did any of their discussions indicate tampering after approval? Wasn't most of it Brady being mad if things weren't right? Couldn't a reasonable person infer that they were trying to get inflation levels correct for his approval prior to handover?

[sharpe1027]

For Sharpe, did any of their discussions indicate tampering after approval? Wasn't most of it Brady being mad if things weren't right? Couldn't a reasonable person infer that they were trying to get inflation levels correct for his approval prior to handover?

You could infer that, but that's not what I saw. I think the inference is pretty strong the other way, but again, we can disagree.

If all they were doing is prior to handover, it was as simple as setting them all to 12.5 prior to hand over. Moreover, they expressly told the refs they wanted them at 12.5 and the refs agreed. It was probably as simple as that in each case.

Why would McNally expect anything from Brady for setting the balls at the proscribed 12.5 minimum? How is that any different than setting them at 13, or 13.5?

Why would Brady think McNally was under a lot of pressure for simply setting the balls at 12.5?

Why would they refer to their jobs as "deflation" and providing a "needle" (also joking about a pump not being attached) when all they had to do was inflate to the correct amount in the first instance?

Why would a guy who isn't even in charge of equipment go into the equipment room and take the balls while the referees were absent?

Why would an equipment manager in charge of ball care defer the duties to a part-time guy?

Why would Brady turn over two phones to a forensic examiner, but hold back a third?

Why would Brady destroy the third phone on the same day he is interviewed, knowing they wanted the texts from that phone and he did not turn it over previously?

[pbmax]

Because the refs are under orders to correct balls that are outside the parameters of 12.5 to 13.5. Even before the new rules, they were expected to fix the situation if they found something out of spec. You talk to the refs to ask them, if they need to fix one, please make it 12.5 not 13.2.

So there is pressure to have the balls be low, but not low enough to risk the refs inflating them on their own. There is enough room for fluctuation here that I am sure the 16 PSI ball wasn't the only time Brady was mad. In fact, Brady might be more interested in feel than pressure levels. In this way, haphazard draining air from a ball seems like a bad solution.

However, I do agree, though am not convinced the evidence proves this, that the level of concern seems to indicate a desire to "correct" anything the refs do to the team approved balls. In fact, I find a 90 second trip to the closet more likely indicative of checking than deflating. While testers found it possible to deflate 12 in that time, checking twelve seems more likely. Still have doubts on this one though as they League could not come up with another single instance of the balls moving before ref's walked them out to the field. Just as likely the guy was stealing away for a gulp from his flask.

So as I said earlier, it makes more sense for this to happen on the sideline when the QB is warming up and can comment on them.

As for turning over evidence, he turned over two phones to his examiner after he was punished and failure to cooperate was part of the suspension. Since Wells never asked for physical possession of the phone, the date is less glaring to me. He wasn't going to produce records until that lack of cooperation cost him 4 games, so destruction anytime before the edict was handed down seems to me small potatoes. A better question is why one phone and not the other.

[sharpe1027]

Deflation on the sidelines would be in the presence of a lot of people. It would be possible, but I am not so sure it is the option that makes the most sense. It is the first time I have heard that theory, so I would again suggest that how you might approach the situation may not be how most others would approach it.

The same goes for your theory on measuring vs deflating. Also, there are clear references to a needle and deflation in the text messages.

As to the phones, it seems to me that Brady submitted the old phone in the hopes that the NFL would not realize that there was a missing phone. I think the timeline is such that he only owned up to the missing phone (and excuse) after he was caught because the examiner discovered the time gap.

[pbmax]

Deflation on the sidelines would be in the presence of a lot of people. It would be possible, but I am not so sure it is the option that makes the most sense. It is the first time I have heard that theory, so I would again suggest that how you might approach the situation may not be how most others would approach it.

The same goes for your theory on measuring vs deflating. Also, there are clear references to a needle and deflation in the text messages.

As to the phones, it seems to me that Brady submitted the old phone in the hopes that the NFL would not realize that there was a missing phone. I think the timeline is such that he only owned up to the missing phone (and excuse) after he was caught because the examiner discovered the time gap.

He didn't submit the phone. His lawyers gave the phones to their own forensic examiners. But he wasn't going to do that, to avoid a precedent setting issue, until the ruling came down. That is why I look less critically at the possible date of the destruction.

[sharpe1027]

He didn't submit the phone. His lawyers gave the phones to their own forensic examiners. But he wasn't going to do that, to avoid a precedent setting issue, until the ruling came down. That is why I look less critically at the possible date of the destruction.

He submitted it to forensic examiners. He new damn well that the relevant time period was on the phone he didn't submit. I don't see the relevance of your distinction on who actually looked at the phones.

[pbmax]

He submitted it to forensic examiners. He new damn well that the relevant time period was on the phone he didn't submit. I don't see the relevance of your distinction on who actually looked at the phones.

The question relates to what he feared by turning over evidence.

If he knew Wells wasn't going to demand possession of the phone, then destruction of phone is completely unnecessary. Even to withhold evidence. If he destroys it during this time frame, its possibly benign.

However, after he learns that the absence of phone records is part of what is costing him 4 games (remember Favre withheld his phone records and was fined), he then turned over what was left - which were calling and texting records that would have required reconstruction from the other end.

So the destruction of the phone gains him little, except that, as part of the pissing match, neither side is willing to do the reconstruction.

The only scenario this doesn't possibly hold true for is the missing texts. PFT has detailed there are three texts on Brady's phone records that they are not in possession of from the Patriot phones.

[red]

this is a battle of 2 things i hate

i hate goodell and wish he would die in a fiery car crash because i think he's a douchebag and is trying his best to make the game look like a joke. plus he makes like twice as much as any of the guys, that you know, actually play the game and make it great.

on the other hand, i really hate brady and the patriots. they are IMO a bunch of cheats willing to do whatever it takes to win (even if it is cheating) plus brady seems like a massive frat boy dickhead.

best case for me, would be to have the two sides duel, with each, shooting the other in the stomach and suffering horrible deaths

[sharpe1027]

PB. Brady had no reason to destroy the phone unless he was guilty AND thought he would end up having to turn it over. So, why does he get a pass? Cause he thought the penalty would be less? I call bullshit to that. He knew damn well what he was doing. That they threw the book at him just means he miscalculated. No points for being a sleeze.

[pbmax]

PB. Brady had no reason to destroy the phone unless he was guilty AND thought he would end up having to turn it over. So, why does he get a pass? Cause he thought the penalty would be less? I call bullshit to that. He knew damn well what he was doing. That they threw the book at him just means he miscalculated. No points for being a sleeze.

You can charge him with the private contract version of obstruction of justice. You can't charge him with football deflation because you *think* the incriminating texts are in there. That is especially true for me because I do not believe they have the physical evidence at all on deflation.

Also remember, he has successfully recovered all the email.

[sharpe1027]

You can punish him for deflation based on the text messages they had plus the inference drawn against him for destroying his phone.

[pbmax]

I do not agree.

[Guiness]

PB. Brady had no reason to destroy the phone unless he was guilty AND thought he would end up having to turn it over. So, why does he get a pass? Cause he thought the penalty would be less? I call bullshit to that. He knew damn well what he was doing. That they threw the book at him just means he miscalculated. No points for being a sleeze.

You lost me with your first sentence. He destroyed the phone because that's what he does, and in his position, I can't say I blame him. Do you know what the tabloids would pay to get their hands on the messages between him and Gisele? He doesn't want to chance it falling into the wrong hands and having someone roll back a factory wipe?

Granted, having the phone from last fall makes the story a little shaky, but there could be a pile of reasons for that, like he gave it to one of his kids.

And sweet jesus, I agree with Red.

[red]

didn't he destoy the phone on the EXACT same day that they requested the phone?

thats a little sketchy IMO. even if he does destroy all his old phones

"league whats to see your phone"

brady- " i need to go buy a new phone ASAP"

[pbmax]

didn't he destoy the phone on the EXACT same day that they requested the phone?

thats a little sketchy IMO. even if he does destroy all his old phones

"league whats to see your phone"

brady- " i need to go buy a new phone ASAP"

They never requested the phone itself. Just a catalog of messages. They could have simply kept declining to provide them. The NFL doesn't have subpoena power. So he gains nothing but an excuse by destroying the phone if he truly never intended on turning over the messages.

Once he changed his mind, then he was up a creek on the 3 missing text messages.

[sharpe1027]

Guiness, he didn't destroy his other phone, so it is not his normal procedure. I can almost guarantee his kid has his own phone and it is the latest and greatest model. Regardless, he destroyed it the day of the interview. I think your really reaching for excuses here. If it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck, it probably is a duck.

So, absent an extraordinary set of coincidences, he destroyed the phone to keep it from the NFL. He would only do that if there were damning texts and he thought they might get their hands on it. And, I only mean the NFL gets the relevant texts through a third party examiner.

[sharpe1027]

Plus, the "give it too his kid" excuse doesn't seem likely since it wasn't being used once he got his new phone.

To be clear, I am not saying he did it beyond a reasonable doubt. However, simply coming up with plausible excuses is not enough. What is most likely? Is that more likely than not what happened? I think there is an enough to show that, and frankly so did a group of experts paid to form an opinion.

[smuggler]

Brady's looking guilty, but nothing that can be proven. That's why destroying the phone was s good call. Other than two singular lies in his interview, the NFL can't prove he's done anything to break any of their rules.

[ThunderDan]

Plus, the "give it too his kid" excuse doesn't seem likely since it wasn't being used once he got his new phone.

To be clear, I am not saying he did it beyond a reasonable doubt. However, simply coming up with plausible excuses is not enough. What is most likely? Is that more likely than not what happened? I think there is an enough to show that, and frankly so did a group of experts paid to form an opinion.

I agree with Mr. sharpe. This isn't a criminal case so you don't have to prove reasonable doubt to get a conviction all you need is the preponderance of the evidence(which essentially means that it was more likely than not that something occurred in a certain way).

[pbmax]

I agree with Mr. sharpe. This isn't a criminal case so you don't have to prove reasonable doubt to get a conviction all you need is the preponderance of the evidence(which essentially means that it was more likely than not that something occurred in a certain way).

What occurred that you have a preponderance of evidence about? Not what you can infer from each shaky detail, but what was the crime versus the Colts on Game Day?

[ThunderDan]

What occurred that you have a preponderance of evidence about? Not what you can infer from each shaky detail, but what was the crime versus the Colts on Game Day?

Deflating Footballs!?! Was that a trick question PB?

[Zool]

What occurred that you have a preponderance of evidence about? Not what you can infer from each shaky detail, but what was the crime versus the Colts on Game Day?

Tom Brady is an employee of the NFLPA which is governed by the NFL right? If they want to suspend him, they can. The NFLPA can appeal, which they did. They lost the appeal. The reasoning behind why they are suspending an employee is at the discretion of the NFL I assume?

[Guiness]

Tom Brady is an employee of the NFLPA which is governed by the NFL right? If they want to suspend him, they can. The NFLPA can appeal, which they did. They lost the appeal. The reasoning behind why they are suspending an employee is at the discretion of the NFL I assume?

I think the latest bit that I posted about is going to hold water, and it's something I'm sure the NFL would prefer not be looked at - the employee didn't have knowledge of the rule that he broke, and couldn't obtain it if he tried. That breaks some labour laws; I don't know if the anti-trust stuff will trump that.

[Rutnstrut]

I will once again go back to the point I always do in all of this, WHO CARES? Even had the footballs been fully inflated, assuming they weren't. the outcome would have been the same for Brady and the Pats. Would anyone give a shit, including the NFL had the Patriots went 2-14 last year?

[pbmax]

Deflating Footballs!?! Was that a trick question PB?

There is no evidence that they did. Even the Colts footballs that started the game at 13.x PSI were below tolerance at halftime (3 of 4 measured).

Two studies, Head Start Labs, an offshoot of Carnegie Mellon (video here (http://www.headsmartlabs.com), report here (https://uploads.strikinglycdn.com/files/131228/81e5b7f8-aec2-4c83-bb3e-ffcbe2a031ac/HeadSmart%20Labs%20DeflateGate%20Lab%20Report.pdf) ) and AEI (https://www.aei.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/On-the-Wells-report.pdf) found there to be NO PHYSICAL EVIDENCE FOR DEFLATION.

Smart Labs found that a wet ball plus colder conditions easily accommodate the pressure differential in the Patriots footballs. AEI found that tortured mathematics aside, the measurements taken at halftime (if you account for warming that occurred while they were measuring and re-inflating, 13 minutes in a room 20+ degrees warmer than outside) show that the Patriots and Colts balls experienced the same effects from the wet and cold conditions and that the loss of pressure, applied in reverse, was consistent with pregame measurements that showed the Pats footballs at 12.5 and the Colts at just over 13.0.

There is no physical evidence of a crime.

[Zool]

It's a rules violation, not a crime. The only crime is the time wasted talking about it.

[pbmax]

Tom Brady is an employee of the NFLPA which is governed by the NFL right? If they want to suspend him, they can. The NFLPA can appeal, which they did. They lost the appeal. The reasoning behind why they are suspending an employee is at the discretion of the NFL I assume?

In general, private employers don't need to follow exact strictures of the court system, but the spirit of the law. One example is deference to due process. The other is having an actual rule violation occur.

Since the only rule violation that has occurred has been the failure to turn over cell phone records, Roger has not made the case that Brady should be suspended when Brett "Houndley" Favre was fined for failing to comply with the Great Masseuse Investigation of 2013.

From earlier this thread:

Brady's case, as argued by the NFLPA, is being contested on five points:http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com...-in-minnesota/

1. Players advance notice of potential discipline. “Brady had no notice of the disciplinary standards that would be applied,” the petition says at page 3, “and no notice of the potential penalties.” Covers phone cooperation.

2. The league and the NFLPA collectively bargained the punishment for “alleged equipment tampering by players,” and that the NFL was not permitted to disregard those provisions without advance notice.

3. The petition likewise explains that the “Competitive Integrity Policy” was “never given” to players, and that it specifically applies only to teams, not to players.

4. A fine is the only penalty that has ever been upheld in such circumstances.” (In 2010, Brett Favre was fined $50,000 for failing to cooperate with an investigation regarding allegations that he texted inappropriate photos to a Jets employee.)

5. The petition claims that the discipline violates the “law of the shop” that requires fair and consistent treatment of players by basing Brady’s discipline on air-pressure tests that “did not generate reliable information,” and that the arbitrator (Commissioner Roger Goodell) was “evidently partial.”

Regarding #3, a Jets player, a kicker, was not subject to punishment despite being generally aware of tampering with the K balls by the Jets equipment staff in 2009.

[pbmax]

It's a rules violation, not a crime. The only crime is the time wasted talking about it.

You're just avoiding the question. What rule did Brady violate?

Wow, almost went full internet there, misspelling the contraction of you are. Might need to do some work now.

[pbmax]

BTW, even if you think I am off my rocker, remember this:

Ian Rapoport ‏@RapSheet 19m19 minutes ago
Interesting. @judybattista says the sides were moving close to a 1-game suspension settlement. But Brady wanted records sealed. NFL wouldn’t

Judy Battista is a stenographer for the NFL, as the transcripts indicate the NFL wanted the records sealed.

[mraynrand]

You're just avoiding the question. What rule did Brady violate?.

"Since the only rule violation that has occurred has been the failure to turn over cell phone records..."

[pbmax]

"Since the only rule violation that has occurred has been the failure to turn over cell phone records..."

Its like getting Capone over his tax records.

[pbmax]

Sometimes, Florio reminds me of why I read him in the first place:

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2015/08/11/judge-berman-tells-nfl-nflpa-to-keep-talking-about-a-potential-settlement/


A long time ago, when I was only practicing law and hadn’t practiced law for very long, a judge asked in a pretrial conference if my client would keep a settlement offer on the table for 24 hours, no matter how he ruled on a pending issue that could have delivered an outright victory to my client. I said, “But, Your Honor, if you rule in my favor, my client won’t want to settle at that point.”

The judge then shot me a glance that carried this message: Hey dumbass, that’s my message to the other guy that he’d better take the offer while he can.

So I agreed, and the other lawyer quickly took the offer.

[sharpe1027]

There is no evidence that they did. Even the Colts footballs that started the game at 13.x PSI were below tolerance at halftime (3 of 4 measured).

Two studies, Head Start Labs, an offshoot of Carnegie Mellon (video here (http://www.headsmartlabs.com), report here (https://uploads.strikinglycdn.com/files/131228/81e5b7f8-aec2-4c83-bb3e-ffcbe2a031ac/HeadSmart%20Labs%20DeflateGate%20Lab%20Report.pdf) ) and AEI (https://www.aei.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/On-the-Wells-report.pdf) found there to be NO PHYSICAL EVIDENCE FOR DEFLATION.

Smart Labs found that a wet ball plus colder conditions easily accommodate the pressure differential in the Patriots footballs. AEI found that tortured mathematics aside, the measurements taken at halftime (if you account for warming that occurred while they were measuring and re-inflating, 13 minutes in a room 20+ degrees warmer than outside) show that the Patriots and Colts balls experienced the same effects from the wet and cold conditions and that the loss of pressure, applied in reverse, was consistent with pregame measurements that showed the Pats footballs at 12.5 and the Colts at just over 13.0.

There is no physical evidence of a crime.

Those two studies do not prove or disprove anything. As I have said, natural reasons for the loss of pressure was within the realm of possibility, if you make some assumptions that line up for the Pats; however, the results are also consistent with deflation.

My point is not to say I am right 100%, but merely offer up that the evidence is sufficient for a reasonable person to conclude that they likely let air out of the balls. For the reasons I noted before, I think it is perfectly reasonable to come to that conclusion. Different people will place different weight on different evidence and reach different conclusions. That's the way this works.

[pbmax]

Those two studies are enough to conclude that the NFL has no idea if anyone tampered with the ball. Any evidence that the Patriots were prepared to do so, withers on the vine of uncertainty.

You cannot claim there has been a homicide, investigate, find many circumstantially interesting pieces of evidence (gun, missing gun, ammo, shells, opportunity, motive) and then convict for murder if the forensic examiners cannot prove the deceased died because of a bullet.

[sharpe1027]

For PB, the HSL report needed to wet the balls before getting in the realm of possibility; however, nothing in their report mentions the humidity of the rooms in question. It is likely that they completely over looked this aspect and that the balls were cooled below the desired temperature through evaporative cooling. Accordingly, it is quite possible that the HSL results support tampering.

The AEI report made a number of assumptions as to the order of the testing, the timing of the testing and the amount of warming up, but even then they could not rule out deflation. They were successful, to me, in refuting the strong inference in the Wells report, but not in establishing that there was NO PHYSICAL EVIDENCE FOR DEFLATION. They offered a plausible theory that was consistent with there being no deflation.

[sharpe1027]

Those two studies are enough to conclude that the NFL has no idea if anyone tampered with the ball. Any evidence that the Patriots were prepared to do so, withers on the vine of uncertainty.

You cannot claim there has been a homicide, investigate, find many circumstantially interesting pieces of evidence (gun, missing gun, ammo, shells, opportunity, motive) and then convict for murder if the forensic examiners cannot prove the deceased died because of a bullet.

This isn't a criminal proceeding.

[mraynrand]

Its like getting Capone over his tax records.

I agree. Because in both cases they know the party in question violated rules/laws.

[pbmax]

The burden of proof has to rest on the party making the charge, at least in regard to the nature of the crime. The lack of records (no numbering on balls, no pre-game inflation recorded), no record of the order in which the balls were measured and re-inflated at halftime, should reflect on the uncertainty of the underlying charge.

Not the weakness of the arguments mustered against it.

[sharpe1027]

The burden of proof has to rest on the party making the charge, at least in regard to the nature of the crime. The lack of records (no numbering on balls, no pre-game inflation recorded), no record of the order in which the balls were measured and re-inflated at halftime, should reflect on the uncertainty of the underlying charge.

Not the weakness of the arguments mustered against it.

I rest my case on the totality of the evidence, not the weakness of the arguments against it. That is a self-serving mischaracterization of what we have been discussing. The burden of proof is meaningless here because we are not parties free to enter additional evidence in rebuttal. We have the evidence and facts from which we can make an informed decision on the ultimate issue. Burden means little in this context.

I have acknowledged that others may reach a different conclusion, is it so hard for you to do the same?

[Zool]

You're just avoiding the question. What rule did Brady violate?

Wow, almost went full internet there, misspelling the contraction of you are. Might need to do some work now.

Was asked to turn over things, did not comply in full. Unless I am wrong about that. Frankly I'm just tired of hearing about the whole thing. I stopped watching any sort of sports news because this has sucked away a good deal of my interest in professional football.

[pbmax]

Was asked to turn over things, did not comply in full. Unless I am wrong about that. Frankly I'm just tired of hearing about the whole thing. I stopped watching any sort of sports news because this has sucked away a good deal of my interest in professional football.

That I agree with. But then it should be a fine. In Roger's appeal ruling, he now says Brady “‘knew about, approved of, consented to, and provided inducements’ in support of a scheme to tamper with the game balls used in the AFC Championship Game.”

So we are on the conspiracy phase of the charges, having let the physical evidence slide by.

[George Cumby]

Was asked to turn over things, did not comply in full. Unless I am wrong about that. Frankly I'm just tired of hearing about the whole thing. I stopped watching any sort of sports news because this has sucked away a good deal of my interest in professional football.

This.

As a sad commentary on the media and my own state of mental health, PR is my primary source of Packers and NFL news.

[sharpe1027]

That I agree with. But then it should be a fine. In Roger's appeal ruling, he now says Brady “‘knew about, approved of, consented to, and provided inducements’ in support of a scheme to tamper with the game balls used in the AFC Championship Game.”

So we are on the conspiracy phase of the charges, having let the physical evidence slide by.

There is evidence that Brady knew about it, approved of it, consented to it and provided inducements -- even if it didn't happen (which seems unlikely given mysterious disappearance of the balls and the trip off camera). Is it enough evidence? I think so.

If you read the texts in plain context, and avoid conjuring up strange hypotheticals about deflating a person by losing weight, etc., the most logical thing to me is that Brady was offering signed merchandise, if not cash, in exchange for the use of a needle to deflate balls in a manner that was not within the rules (hence the need to provide compensation at all and the reference about not going to ESPN, yet...). In that context, does it really matter if the balls were actually deflated by a meaningful amount on that day?

[Patler]

This is where the NFL gets tied up in its own laundry. Players are essentially employees at-will, albeit of the teams, not the league. But the teams have ceded certain disciplinary functions over to the league, and have complicated it further by addressing some disciplinary features in the CBA, which is league based and team applicable.

That said, this is not a criminal or civil action, and traditional burden of proof requirements should not be the standard. The league should be able to discipline without meeting prosecutorial standards for a criminal conviction. It happens all the time in the regular workplaces, or at least it did when I had reason to keep track of those types of situations.

I think the NFL was right to take a stance that if it looks like blatant cheating and smells like blatant cheating they will address it as blatant cheating; and anyone who does not cooperate completely will be caught up in it. The league has nothing if it loses it's integrity (not saying that they always address the issue correctly); so they had to take a stance that cheating will not be tolerated. In that regard, they win even if they lose the eventual lawsuit that comes from this. If a court decides there is insufficient evidence of cheating, the league has still stood tall in the eyes of those who think it was cheating, because the league tried. For those who think it wasn't cheating, what the league did might be an annoyance, but in the end it doesn't really matter.

[mraynrand]

https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/736x/8b/c0/f7/8bc0f7bafbdf820ac36fd246c6c6d9d8.jpg

[George Cumby]

I can't handle all of this.....

[pbmax]

The League has to have the CBA to avoid anti-monopoly regulations. In no sense are the players employed at-will. Other club employees, managers and administration are. Except for those high up who have individually negotiated contracts.

The League simply has to recognize when it doesn't have a case against the player. The fact that we are now on reason #3 for the player suspension tells you all you need to know about the strength of the case.

If Goodell had any idea how to do his job, he would have sanctioned player and team at the existing low end, thereby lowering the risk of the punishment being overturned or even appealed. He would them have the competition committee write up new rules regarding the balls. The League office would draw up new procedures over how to handle them on Game Day after they are inspected. He then issues an updated Policy on Game Integrity that includes the players and enhanced punishments for violations.

Problem solved. The game did not turn on ball inflation, punishments were applied, procedures and sanctions will be reviewed.

The only thing it doesn't do is let you look like a public Get Tough guy. It simply functions.

[Patler]

The players very much are employees at will. The team can fire a player at any time for any reason, or no reason. The player can quit at any time, even mid-season like the former Badger guard did a few years ago. Neither needs to develop justification. The players are more like employees at will than they are like any other employee type that I can think of.

[Patler]

The League simply has to recognize when it doesn't have a case against the player. The fact that we are now on reason #3 for the player suspension tells you all you need to know about the strength of the case.

If Goodell had any idea how to do his job, he would have sanctioned player and team at the existing low end, thereby lowering the risk of the punishment being overturned or even appealed. He would them have the competition committee write up new rules regarding the balls. The League office would draw up new procedures over how to handle them on Game Day after they are inspected. He then issues an updated Policy on Game Integrity that includes the players and enhanced punishments for violations.

Problem solved. The game did not turn on ball inflation, punishments were applied, procedures and sanctions will be reviewed.

The only thing it doesn't do is let you look like a public Get Tough guy. It simply functions.

Except I truly believe that would not have addressed the leagues goals in the situation.

[pbmax]

The players very much are employees at will. The team can fire a player at any time for any reason, or no reason. The player can quit at any time, even mid-season like the former Badger guard did a few years ago. Neither needs to develop justification. The players are more like employees at will than they are like any other employee type that I can think of.

Actually, the CBA speaks to each of these situations. That the owners value flexibility for controlling their roster is one of the negotiated areas in the CBA. The CBA speaks to discipline up to and including firing, retention of rights, bonus money owed and status on every team initiated waiver. Players who leave often are pressed to return bonus money, and that is governed by the contracts permissible under the CBA.

But even if the CBA said the players spot on team will be an at-will situation, the CBA still governs the entire process.

The League cannot avoid it. If they could, they would. But they need that exemption or, for instance, the League would lose the ability to control the TV contracts of teams. just as the SEC escaped out of the NCAA football contracts.

[Patler]

Actually, the CBA speaks to each of these situations. That the owners value flexibility for controlling their roster is one of the negotiated areas in the CBA. The CBA speaks to discipline up to and including firing, retention of rights, bonus money owed and status on every team initiated waiver. Players who leave often are pressed to return bonus money, and that is governed by the contracts permissible under the CBA.

But even if the CBA said the players spot on team will be an at-will situation, the CBA still governs the entire process.

The League cannot avoid it. If they could, they would. But they need that exemption or, for instance, the League would lose the ability to control the TV contracts of teams. just as the SEC escaped out of the NCAA football contracts.

Which is exactly why I wrote in my earlier post that the NFL gets tied up in its own laundry. The CBA is as much (or more) a laundry list of rules for the teams as it is rules for the relationship of players and teams.

[pbmax]

Which is exactly why I wrote in my earlier post that the NFL gets tied up in its own laundry. The CBA is as much (or more) a laundry list of rules for the teams as it is rules for the relationship of players and teams.

I just don't see the out strategy here for discipline. The League needs the CBA and collective bargaining to keep the limited exemption to anti-trust. The players aren't just going to agree to a CBA in name only that does not give them something in return. Or at least, they don't anymore, long ago, the PA and CBA were just a fig leaf.

The players want rules and for the rules to be uniformly enforced. That will impinge on the teams. The same teams that want the CBA to maintain the exemption.

I think you are saying the teams would be better off handling player discipline on their own, but the teams themselves have concluded its better to relinquish that control because negotiating as a League for business contracts is good for business.

[Patler]

I think you are saying the teams would be better off handling player discipline on their own, but the teams themselves have concluded its better to relinquish that control because negotiating as a League for business contracts is good for business.

No, that's not at all what I was saying. The players don't want that, the teams don't want that, the leagues doesn't want that. Player discipline in the hands of the league is fine. Shackling the league with the standards of the criminal justice system is ridiculous. But, that is likely what will result from this, when a player like Brady decides to fight.

[Guiness]

No, that's not at all what I was saying. The players don't want that, the teams don't want that, the leagues doesn't want that. Player discipline in the hands of the league is fine. Shackling the league with the standards of the criminal justice system is ridiculous. But, that is likely what will result from this, when a player like Brady decides to fight.

That's kind of what I've been driving at - regardless of Brady having done something or not, the league remotely prove it, even on the lower threshold of 'the preponderance of evidence'. They don't have one single shred of concrete evidence, everything is circumstantial and I don't see it holding water with a judge.

[mraynrand]

It gets kind of circular: Goodell should have had a toothless fine/punishment for Brady that Brady and team would accepts, so that he could retain the 'teeth' to fine in the future - but that teeth depends on being able to enact real fines and real punishments relying on less rigor than the criminal justice system which now looks to be less likely going forward. So, the league loses - if Brady is allowed to 'walk' in this case - even if, as PB argues, Brady is effectively 'totally clean' and nothing can be 'proven.'

[ThunderDan]

That's kind of what I've been driving at - regardless of Brady having done something or not, the league remotely prove it, even on the lower threshold of 'the preponderance of evidence'. They don't have one single shred of concrete evidence, everything is circumstantial and I don't see it holding water with a judge.

That is exactly how fraud cases in Wisconsin get tried. There is a statement made and then all of the horrible things that happened after the statement are piled on after the fact. Nothing is for sure or a fact. Both sides hire professionals to state how said "statement" caused damages or didn't. The judge rules on which side made the stronger argument.

[sharpe1027]

That's kind of what I've been driving at - regardless of Brady having done something or not, the league remotely prove it, even on the lower threshold of 'the preponderance of evidence'. They don't have one single shred of concrete evidence, everything is circumstantial and I don't see it holding water with a judge.

People have go to jail without any concrete evidence all the time. Saying that it is circumstantial does not prove your point.

[George Cumby]

It gets kind of circular.'

Soooooo...... Like PackerRats?

[pbmax]

The Judge in the case seems to accept at face value that the balls were deflated. So Narrative 1, Science 0 on that front. Has to help the NFL.

[pbmax]

It gets kind of circular: Goodell should have had a toothless fine/punishment for Brady that Brady and team would accepts, so that he could retain the 'teeth' to fine in the future - but that teeth depends on being able to enact real fines and real punishments relying on less rigor than the criminal justice system which now looks to be less likely going forward. So, the league loses - if Brady is allowed to 'walk' in this case - even if, as PB argues, Brady is effectively 'totally clean' and nothing can be 'proven.'

The League is bound up by rules in the CBA, but not bound by criminal or civil standards in the Courts for discipline. Smuggler had a fine point that Federal Judges have to give wide latitude to CBA policies and procedures. I think Patler is mistaking CBA involvement for the commish tripping over his own feet.

The Commish has a virtually free hand to increase penalties for infractions that fall under game integrity or Player Conduct or conduct detrimental to the game. He did this after the second Rice video leaked. He just couldn't use that standard in cases already before him, acts committed prior to the new policy.

He hands Brady the fine, the team still has the same penalty (there is no defense to removing the balls early from the refs) and then he convenes the competition committee to change the chain of custody policy on the stupid balls. Then he passes a new set of penalties for game equipment tampering AND he gives the players a copy of the Game Integrity policy.

Done. And done competently. Goodell just seems to prefer to have one press conference to announce he is eradicating a plague single-handedly. I also don't think he does well thinking long term about getting buy in from players and teams on this stuff. Tagliabue's excoriation of him when he overturned most of BountyGate still stands as the best indictment of Goodell's methods.

[mraynrand]

The Judge in the case seems to accept at face value that the balls were deflated. So Narrative 1, Science 0 on that front. Has to help the NFL.

The science only showed that they could possibly have naturally deflated. You know this right? Science doesn't disprove that there was an intentional effort on the part of Brady and NE to go outside the rules and change the inflation to suit them. And 'Narrative' is a nice euphemism for 'inculpatory evidence'

[sharpe1027]

The Judge in the case seems to accept at face value that the balls were deflated. So Narrative 1, Science 0 on that front. Has to help the NFL.

Defining one finding/view as "science" and the other as "narrative" doesn't make you more correct.

[pbmax]

The science only showed that they could possibly have naturally deflated. You know this right? Science doesn't disprove that there was an intentional effort on the part of Brady and NE to go outside the rules and change the inflation to suit them. And 'Narrative' is a nice euphemism for 'inculpatory evidence'

Yes I do. But since there is no direct evidence of deflation operations, the fact that science CAN explain the lower pressure places a greater burden on other evidence to show the crime.

And that evidence rests on the belief the conspiracy existed for one game. Its swiss cheese.

I agree that the Pats were up to something. But this was dumb hill to choose to die on.

[pbmax]

Defining one finding/view as "science" and the other as "narrative" doesn't make you more correct.

No, but the court should be concerned with the fact that most cold weather games are played with deflated balls and no one gets investigated. Until you run into an ex-Jet employee, acting on tips from the Ravens and Colts. And the evidence you use to initiate the investigation was in the hands of the Colts prior to halftime.

[mraynrand]

The League is bound up by rules in the CBA, but not bound by criminal or civil standards in the Courts for discipline. Smuggler had a fine point that Federal Judges have to give wide latitude to CBA policies and procedures. I think Patler is mistaking CBA involvement for the commish tripping over his own feet.

The Commish has a virtually free hand to increase penalties for infractions that fall under game integrity or Player Conduct or conduct detrimental to the game. He did this after the second Rice video leaked. He just couldn't use that standard in cases already before him, acts committed prior to the new policy.

He hands Brady the fine, the team still has the same penalty (there is no defense to removing the balls early from the refs) and then he convenes the competition committee to change the chain of custody policy on the stupid balls. Then he passes a new set of penalties for game equipment tampering AND he gives the players a copy of the Game Integrity policy.

Done. And done competently. Goodell just seems to prefer to have one press conference to announce he is eradicating a plague single-handedly. I also don't think he does well thinking long term about getting buy in from players and teams on this stuff. Tagliabue's excoriation of him when he overturned most of BountyGate still stands as the best indictment of Goodell's methods.

I certainly agree it could have been handled better.

[mraynrand]

Yes I do. But since there is no direct evidence of deflation operations, the fact that science CAN explain the lower pressure places a greater burden on other evidence to show the crime.

And that evidence rests on the belief the conspiracy existed for one game. Its swiss cheese.

I agree that the Pats were up to something. But this was dumb hill to choose to die on.

You make good points, but "the fact that science CAN explain the lower pressure places a greater burden on other evidence to show the crime." OK, I'll just look at the cell phone records...

Yes, science shows that the old man could have slipped down the stairs and died, but we're trying to find out whether he was pushed by his wife.

[Patler]

No, pb, I am not confusing things; however, I also am not interpreting everything in the same way that you are. I also believe your nice neat little package for letting Brady off virtually scot-free would not have accomplished in any way shape or form what the powers to be hoped to accomplish in this situation. However, it would have shown them to prostrate themselves belly-up in front of Brady, Belichick and the Patriots.

[sharpe1027]

No, but the court should be concerned with the fact that most cold weather games are played with deflated balls and no one gets investigated. Until you run into an ex-Jet employee, acting on tips from the Ravens and Colts. And the evidence you use to initiate the investigation was in the hands of the Colts prior to halftime.

Now you are telling us what the court should and shouldn't do? You seem very dismissive of anyone else's take on this, whether it be fellow posters or the court.

Perhaps, just perhaps, the "narrative" is far more compelling evidence than you are giving it credit and the "science" is also not what you make it out to be.

[Guiness]

The science only showed that they could possibly have naturally deflated. You know this right? Science doesn't disprove that there was an intentional effort on the part of Brady and NE to go outside the rules and change the inflation to suit them. And 'Narrative' is a nice euphemism for 'inculpatory evidence'

Huh? How could the gas law prove that the Pats didn't deflate them? It can't prove that negative, what it did was show there was a way other than actually letting the air out to get to a lower pressure than the refs set them to.


People have go to jail without any concrete evidence all the time. Saying that it is circumstantial does not prove your point.

There's something humorous (and correct) in the statement that my saying it's all circumstantial proves nothing :huh:

I think you misunderstand me in thinking that I'm defending Brady or making any judgment that he did or didn't do anything. What I think is that the NFL had a little kangaroo court, and now it's been exposed.

[pbmax]

No, pb, I am not confusing things; however, I also am not interpreting everything in the same way that you are. I also believe your nice neat little package for letting Brady off virtually scot-free would not have accomplished in any way shape or form what the powers to be hoped to accomplish in this situation. However, it would have shown them to prostrate themselves belly-up in front of Brady, Belichick and the Patriots.

That may be the case, that the League Office is under siege for a perceived pro-Pats bias (or just from anti-Pats sentiment of other clubs). But that should fall under the same consideration about how strong your case is. They obviously misjudged it as we are on version 3 of what Brady is being punished for. Even the judge today pointed out the lack of direct evidence for Brady and the paltry evidence on conspiracy.

If Goodell's standing is in bad enough shape (possible after Rice, Peterson and Hardy) that he cannot stand a revolt over Patriot related cheating allegations, the I guess dying on this hill could be viewed as expected. But Rogers' weakness isn't a reason to put the conduct policies in the shredder. The Commish needs to function better on a regular basis. Roger hit the franchise relatively hard, largest fine ever and two draft picks forfeited (one of them a #1). And he can still forestall future iterations of Patriots running over the edges of this rule.

But mainly he has to get better performance from himself and his staff. When they gave ball prep back to the QBs, they should have accounted for tampering by keeping records and locking the balls up with the refs, where only the refs can release them. Florio is right, the methods used by the League after they gave the balls back to the QBs showed the NFL did not take inflation seriously, and did not understand the science behind it. Indeed, the easiest solution to this situation would have been to put in better procedures after the report from the Ravens through the Colts prior to the game.

If their goal is to hurt the Patriots with a few losses to prevent future envelope pushing, they need to be much more careful. And Roger needs better tools to punish teams, because that is where his evidence is best in this case.

[pbmax]

Now you are telling us what the court should and shouldn't do? You seem very dismissive of anyone else's take on this, whether it be fellow posters or the court.

Perhaps, just perhaps, the "narrative" is far more compelling evidence than you are giving it credit and the "science" is also not what you make it out to be.

I do not mean to dismiss you arguments. I agree you an Patler could be right. When this all went down and the texts were first revealed, I thought Brady should be gone, so I understand your position.

But for the court to accept that deflation happened artificially is unfortunate*. Rand may be right that we cannot 100% rule out tampering, but there is still a good chance that environment played a large role in the halftime readings.


*The Court's hands are probably tied here, as this is an appeal and no new fact finding happens (or is not supposed to happen) at the appeal. So the other studies may not enter into it, unless the NFLPA included them in their filings.

[mraynrand]

Huh? How could the gas law prove that the Pats didn't deflate them? It can't prove that negative, what it did was show there was a way other than actually letting the air out to get to a lower pressure than the refs set them to.


My point only is that the science is limited to presenting the possibility that the deflation was natural. That's it. But I don't think that's all that important. Grampa died tumbling down the stairs. Science says he could have slipped (we measured the frictional shear force of his slippers on the carpet and it's weak enough not to hold his weight from a standard step too close to the top stair), but doesn't necessarily help us to determine whether he was pushed by Granny.

And now I'm done. I just don't care enough to haggle anymore! :)

[sharpe1027]

I do not mean to dismiss you arguments. I agree you an Patler could be right. When this all went down and the texts were first revealed, I thought Brady should be gone, so I understand your position.

But for the court to accept that deflation happened artificially is unfortunate*. Rand may be right that we cannot 100% rule out tampering, but there is still a good chance that environment played a large role in the halftime readings.


*The Court's hands are probably tied here, as this is an appeal and no new fact finding happens (or is not supposed to happen) at the appeal. So the other studies may not enter into it, unless the NFLPA included them in their filings.

OK, sorry if I misunderstood. This is the first time you have acknowledged the possibility that there might be sufficient evidence, at least from someone else's perspective. I think we all agree that environment played a large role in the halftime readings. This was in the Well's report as well. We just disagree on whether or not there is evidence to support that deflation likely played a role in addition to the environment.

I think there is evidence that McNally let air out of the balls and that the judge is reasonable in reaching the conclusion. It is based upon direct evidence of McNally's actions on that day, and indirect evidence of his motives and intent.

[MadtownPacker]

Damn, lots of interest in a thread about Brady's balls. How the fuck did he get suspended the same amount of games as rice and Ap?

Have you skanks already argued about how stupid it is that this shit is going to court, which unless I am mistaken means the public is paying for the NFL to save face?

[MadScientist]

Damn, lots of interest in a thread about Brady's balls. How the fuck did he get suspended the same amount of games as rice and Ap?

Have you skanks already argued about how stupid it is that this shit is going to court, which unless I am mistaken means the public is paying for the NFL to save face?

One side or the other, or both, will have to pay court costs, since this is not a criminal hearing. The costs may or may not be sufficient to cover actual costs, but it is no free ride.

[pbmax]

A rip job on Goodell and punishment. But a funny one. Stay tuned until you find out which actor is too interesting to play Goodell in the movie.

http://www.rollingstone.com/sports/features/roger-goodell-vs-tom-brady-the-ultimate-revenge-of-mediocrity-story-20150812?page=2

[Guiness]

Completions to 17 different players! That's spreading the ball around!

[smuggler]

Jimmy Garopolo looked like shit tonight, so for the Pats' sake, they'd better hope Brady can play in those first 4 games...

[Pugger]

Jimmy Garopolo looked like shit tonight, so for the Pats' sake, they'd better hope Brady can play in those first 4 games...

I thought it was rather telling that Jimmy G played as much as he did. Could it mean the Pats fear Brady is gonna miss at least one or 2 games? Jimmy might have looked a little better had Gronk played.

[pbmax]

Not Tom Brady, but an All-Pro Quarterback, who at the time, seemed slightly paranoid.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CMazrYxWoAAHwd1.jpg:large

[Guiness]

That's all kinds of creepy pb, deja vu all over again.

Can't get bigger than the league, right?

[smuggler]

Is that Brees? Speaking about the Bountygate stuff?

[pbmax]

Its Brees.

[pbmax]

ProFootballTalk ‏@ProFootballTalk 13m13 minutes ago
NFL has issued a memo to equipment managers apologizing for the fact that they still haven't gotten their new pressure gauges, per source.

Shoulda used Amazon Prime.

[pbmax]

Michael DeCourcy ‏@tsnmike 43m43 minutes ago
If the judge on DeflateGate case doesn't understand how deflating football can be similar to PED use, maybe he doesn't belong on case.

:D:

[smuggler]

Why would the judge care about the similarity of an unrelated infraction? Did I miss some comparison the league made?

[Cheesehead Craig]

The judge desperately wants there to be a settlement. However after that last hearing, Brady has the upper hand now with the judge seemingly more on his side. Brady is going to feel emboldened at this point to not admit any guilt and go for the judge to rule in his favor and get his suspension either eliminated or reduced without having to admit a thing.

I think the NFL is screwed and yet another black eye for Goodell.

[smuggler]

It's a black eye for Goodell one way or the other, because the facts show that they bungled the process. It's a black eye for the Pats and Brady because they were exposed as probable cheaters (I think most teams fudge the balls a little bit, but it looks like the Pats really took it to Mission Impossible levels to circumvent the league's controls.)

[Pugger]

The judge desperately wants there to be a settlement. However after that last hearing, Brady has the upper hand now with the judge seemingly more on his side. Brady is going to feel emboldened at this point to not admit any guilt and go for the judge to rule in his favor and get his suspension either eliminated or reduced without having to admit a thing.

I think the NFL is screwed and yet another black eye for Goodell.

I'm not going to put much weight on any of these leaks until we get a formal ruling by this judge.

[pbmax]

Why would the judge care about the similarity of an unrelated infraction? Did I miss some comparison the league made?

The Commish made the case (not sure if in original punishment, appeal declaration or submitted doc to Court) that like a PED suspension, playing with football inflation is an integrity of the sport issue.

The commenter is agreeing.

The Judge was unmoved, noting that ANY suspension, PED or Personal Conduct issue, could affect the integrity of the game. Seemed to suggest that you can't move equipment tampering to integrity of game simply by comparing it to a PED issue.

[pbmax]

Here is the section of the transcript, though I do not know where Roger made the PED comparison.

Chris B. Brown
‏@smartfootball
Brady/NFL case transcript - Judge Berman clearly getting annoyed. NFL's lawyer followed this with "That's not fair"

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CM9UGi-XAAAycMu.jpg:large

[pbmax]

I'm not going to put much weight on any of these leaks until we get a formal ruling by this judge.

There only leaks have been about supposed offers (Brady willing to do a 1 game suspension, NFL refusing to discuss lessening suspension unless Brady accepts Wells Report and culpability in scheme). The rest of the proceedings have all been made public. The Judge REALLY wants a settlement. This goes to Smuggler's point that Federal Courts are supposed to give wide latitude to CBA and arbitrators rulings.

[smuggler]

The courts are sort of screwed if they have to make a ruling. On the one hand, if they side with the league, they look heartless and perhaps in with the billion dollar baby that is the corporate NFL machine. On the other, if they side with Brady it's kind of wrong from a technical standpoint and creates mounds of headaches for courts at every level in the future.

Thing is, neither Brady nor Goodell have any incentive to really settle at this point. Any relenting from the league (allowing Brady to keep his charade about being ignorant to the whole plot) means all the shit they had to eat in the media was for naught. As for Brady, it's more about his legacy than the four games, so he can't admit to anything in any deal.

When you look at it, and knowing that mostly only Patriots fans will really be pissed if the courts side with the league, you kind of get a sense where this is headed. And again, Brady still wins by losing, because he gets to point to the vehemence of his defense (and not taking the deal) as proof that he's innocent. Even though everyone knows he was totally in on the whole thing, there's no hard proof.

[pbmax]

I dunno. Press coverage is very anti-deflation science, though now mad at Brady's disappearing phone. Fans outside of Pates fans obviously would love to see then slapped down, but I am not sure its universal. I was on that side, but have shifted over to "its a load of crap".

The NFL has somehow found a way to repeat the "success" of MLB. Always put yourself in a lose-lose scenario publicly. Never has a League made as many improvements as MLB did over the last 15 years and get exactly ZERO pubic credit.

I still maintain the NFL can get its suspension and advance stiffer penalties in one fell swoop even if it concedes some ground to Brady here. But they clearly are taking the maximal negotiation strategy, where they don't care if they lose (it will be ignored as precedent) and any win in court is an advantage perhaps not granted specifically in the CBA.

[smuggler]

I'm on the other side. I think the league is damning the process because Brady is crooked and Brady is full of shit. But I definitely agree with your last paragraph.

[pbmax]

Kraft the Younger has spoken about adjusting the Commish's power over certain types of player discipline.

Jed York then retweeted something that has convinced Peter King and Florio that he might also be behind that idea.

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2015/08/24/jed-york-seems-to-endorse-jonathan-krafts-message-on-player-discipline/

[sharpe1027]

Kraft the Younger has spoken about adjusting the Commish's power over certain types of player discipline.

Jed York then retweeted something that has convinced Peter King and Florio that he might also be behind that idea.

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2015/08/24/jed-york-seems-to-endorse-jonathan-krafts-message-on-player-discipline/

I don't know how universal the support would be. It has served the teams well in the past to have the commish be the one doling out the punishment. It lets the teams save face with both the public and the players. I suspect they might make minor adjustments.

[pbmax]

I don't know how universal the support would be. It has served the teams well in the past to have the commish be the one doling out the punishment. It lets the teams save face with both the public and the players. I suspect they might make minor adjustments.

There is no doubt that teams want the focus off them. And they want punishments to be uniform. But there is no doubt Roger isn't much into uniform and his plan seems to be to emphasize attention, not minimize it.

I wonder if some of Roger's pushback to hold the line on the Patriots is from Jones and Snyder, who took a big hit on cap penalties.

[sharpe1027]

There is no doubt that teams want the focus off them. And they want punishments to be uniform. But there is no doubt Roger isn't much into uniform and his plan seems to be to emphasize attention, not minimize it.

I wonder if some of Roger's pushback to hold the line on the Patriots is from Jones and Snyder, who took a big hit on cap penalties.

Could be. I imagine that there are plenty of behind the scenes discussions that we will never know about.

[pbmax]

Back in court today, no settlement happening. Decision coming before the Sept 4th cutoff.

Judy Battista ‏@judybattista 56m56 minutes ago
from court: no decision today, no settlement reached, decision could be Tuesday or Wednesday, definitely by Sept. 4.


Meanwhile, a take similar to my own about Roger's approach to player discipline: http://abovethelaw.com/2015/08/a-deflategate-email-exchange-part-ii/


Stephanie Stradley
If I were Commissioner Goodell, my clothes wouldn't fit right, that's for sure.

I think my hypothetical Goodell-Me time machine would have to go back further than the AFC Championship game. To the beginning of the time that Goodell became commissioner. And walking back his desire to make sports leagues into Nancy Gracey justice hammers: very reactive to initial leaks, mob anger, giving lip service to but not really interested in fair process or claims of innocence.

And go back to focusing more on the NFL's core business, which is football.

If you don't think that happened in this situation, check out the tone of this Peter King MMQB article after the initial VERY WRONG leaks happened.

"I am told reliably that...." NOPE!

By then it was already labelled a -Gate.

(King has apologized about that story now, and many others ran with stories that were similar, but millions of dollars later, here we are in federal court over a disputed equipment tampering claim).

The NFL under Roger Goodell has created an expectation of reactive, expensive -Gate investigations of high profile situations. As I predicted, multiple times, this sort of arbitrary, disproportionate response is what all fanbases should fear. Sometimes equipment tampering violations are small team fines, and sometimes they are multimillion-dollar investigations, suspensions, draft pick devastation, I guess.

Me as Goodell would not hand out suspensions like they were Halloween candy. Player careers are relatively short and can be over in a violent second, even when working out or practicing. Goodell's cavalier and overly-combative attitude towards giving suspensions out shows a fundamental disrespect for how difficult it is to become and stay a NFL player. You know, those best players in the world that the fans pay money to see play.

When Goodell hands out massive vengeance punishments, he is begging the player to contest them because they have no real choice.

We know that the NFL punishments are vengeance-based and not deterrent because often the thing punished is something that the NFL never made a big deal about before, and the players, if they knew about it was a big deal, wouldn't do.

The way Roger Goodell handles league discipline is disrespectful to the players and does not them like adults.

Maybe this is too harsh of an assessment but Goodell has only given fans the option to judge him by his actions. The words that come out of his mouth are too often incompatible with what the NFL actually does.

[sharpe1027]

NFL player's careers are short so they should be allowed more leniency. Goodell doesn't hand out punishment in a consistent manner. It's just not fair.

Let me be clear, Goodell is a moron. However, Brady is full of shit. The evidence is pretty clear that he openly lied about not knowing anything about the incident. It is also pretty clear that he destroyed relevant information and then lied about why he destroyed it.

We have direct evidence of the ball handlers talking about Brady pressuring them and offering bribes to use a needle, etc.. Brady denied any knowledge. We have direct evidence of Brady destroying the only phone he owned during the most relevant time period, and then using an argument that mirrors the exact phrasing he needs to avoid a serious legal problem. This argument is directly contradicted by the presence of another phone that was not destroyed.

What would each of us expect if we did something similar to our bosses? I think many of us would be worried about losing our jobs.

Boo hoo for Tom Brady. It is just not fair!

[pbmax]

We have direct evidence of the ball handlers talking about Brady pressuring them and offering bribes to use a needle, etc.


There is no indication that the pressure was about lowering the balls to below 12.5. All the same messages can be read as an insistence on every ball being as close to 12.5 as possible. And the 16.0 comment is easily read as the consequence of getting the target wrong and the refs being blasé about fixing it.

You have to assume malfeasance to _know_ there was a conspiracy to evade the rule. That's not how evidence works.

[sharpe1027]

There is no indication that the pressure was about lowering the balls to below 12.5. All the same messages can be read as an insistence on every ball being as close to 12.5 as possible. And the 16.0 comment is easily read as the consequence of getting the target wrong and the refs being blasé about fixing it.

You have to assume malfeasance to _know_ there was a conspiracy to evade the rule. That's not how evidence works.

Not true. The conspiracy usually occurs before any acts are performed.

Also "no indication" is giving a pretty favorable reading of the text messages. If all they had to do was set the ball to the minimum - per the rules- they could have done that without all the hoopla - or veiled threats (I mean jokes) about going to ESPN. Why the hell would ESPN care about setting ball pressure on the low end of the scale? Please explain how that is "no indication."

[pbmax]

Not true. The conspiracy usually occurs before any acts are performed.

Also "no indication" is giving a pretty favorable reading of the text messages. If all they had to do was set the ball to the minimum - per the rules- they could have done that without all the hoopla - or veiled threats (I mean jokes) about going to ESPN. Why the hell would ESPN care about setting ball pressure on the low end of the scale? Please explain how that is "no indication."

I have joked that I plan to report my employer for Geneva Convention violations for keeping me late for a useless meeting.

But more likely, Brady is being an asshole to underlings about 12.5. In fact, I find this the most likely scenario, that if they were planning something extra-legal (or even the legal version of this), they were looking to deflate balls that were adjusted by refs above 12.5. However, even with that reading, they have no evidence it actually happened. The physical evidence isn't compelling.

That is why Commish's appeal ruling letter specified a new cause for the suspension, the lack of cooperation on the cell phone. He broad brushed the Wells Report shortcomings and even went beyond them, stating the evidence there-in was clear and convincing. A level of certainty that even Wells wasn't comfortable with. And that does not begin to deal with the info presented after the decision, before the appeal, which compromised 99% of what Wells was asking for. Roger rejected it as not practical.

[sharpe1027]

I agree that they probably planned to deflate the balls after the refs inspected them, and that is exactly what they are being accused of doing. It violates the rules which require the referees to inspect the balls. Whether the balls got below 12.5 or not does not matter at that point, they already went outside the rules. They do have evidence, both the camera and the text messages are evidence.

As for Tom merely being an asshole, why was he offering a big signing day? You are being the reverse of a conspiracy theorist.

*edited for typo

[pbmax]

I agree that they probably planned to deflate the balls after the refs inspected them, and that is exactly what they are being accused of doing. It violates the rules which require the referees to inspect the balls. Whether the balls got below 12.5 or not does not matter at that point, they already went outside the rules. They do have evidence, both the camera and the text messages are evidence.

As for Tom merely being an asshole, why was he offering a big signing day? You are being the reverse of a conspiracy theorist.

*edited for typo

I like evidence for my conspiracies. Just because I believe that the Pats might have been prepared to deflate after inspection, it doesn't seem likely in this case (90 seconds is long enough to deflate, but not long enough to deflate and measure). And there is no physical evidence it occurred. Without that, the punishment for phone shenanigans (which is obviously not paramount or Goodell would have used the info eventually provided by Brady) is ludicrous.

[Guiness]

I like evidence for my conspiracies. Just because I believe that the Pats might have been prepared to deflate after inspection, it doesn't seem likely in this case (90 seconds is long enough to deflate, but not long enough to deflate and measure). And there is no physical evidence it occurred. Without that, the punishment for phone shenanigans (which is obviously not paramount or Goodell would have used the info eventually provided by Brady) is ludicrous.

The way things have gone, I wonder how Kraft feels about accepting the punishment of $1M (inconsequential to him, unless it counts against the cap) and the two draft picks?

[Bretsky]

My wife, who hates Tom Brady and the greatest coach in the NFL named Hoody Genius.....has a theory I had not thought of.

NFL apparently offered Bready one game but Brady insisted on locking down his cell phone texts and Brady said no way

My wife, the Brady hater, is convinced he's cheating on his hot model wife and cell phone texts would implicate him

Who knows anymore............hmmmmmmmmmmmm

[sharpe1027]

I like evidence for my conspiracies. Just because I believe that the Pats might have been prepared to deflate after inspection, it doesn't seem likely in this case (90 seconds is long enough to deflate, but not long enough to deflate and measure). And there is no physical evidence it occurred. Without that, the punishment for phone shenanigans (which is obviously not paramount or Goodell would have used the info eventually provided by Brady) is ludicrous.

You don't need physical evidence. Some guy stole the balls when the referees weren't looking and took them straight to an area without a camera. Under review they found really suspicious text messages implicating the player that stood to gain the most. Absent someone breaking down the bathroom door, you'll not get a much better case.

I submit that you are focused on the wrong facts. Just because the original evidence was suspect, that doesn't dimimsh what remains.

[pbmax]

The employee being released I understand. Connection with Brady is all inference. Which, as you say, is enough in some cases with other evidence. However, the two employees they interviewed denied a scheme under oath, despite losing their jobs. Brady has denied it under oath.

And they do not have compelling evidence of the underlying crime. Natural physical forces could produce the pressure drop they measured.

To draw any other conclusion would require far more stringent procedures that the NFL did not possess (including a log of the original inflation pressure) at the time. This process is ludicrous.

[sharpe1027]

Why release the employees if they have no evidence against them?

[sharpe1027]

Why was one employee threatening to go to ESPN?
Why was Brady giving perks to the employee for something related the the ball pressure?
Why did the employee speak about needles?
Why did the employee take the ball from the referees without them knowing?
Why did Brady destroy the relevant phone?
Ect.
The simplest answer answers all of these questions.

[Guiness]

Why was one employee threatening to go to ESPN?
Why was Brady giving perks to the employee for something related the the ball pressure?
Why did the employee speak about needles?
Why did the employee take the ball from the referees without them knowing?
Why did Brady destroy the relevant phone?
Ect.
The simplest answer answers all of these questions.

I'd think the first question is the most interesting of all. He was apparently threatening to go to ESPN, and they fired his ass. Why didn't he go to ESPN, and/or why aren't they running his story? I've heard nothing of him getting any hush money.

[pbmax]

I have not heard threatening to go to ESPN in anything except a joke format in one of the text messages.

Its a very good question why one of the employees was terminated. However the other, the one who absconded with the balls away from the ref, gave them cause to fire them. That is not supposed to happen for any reason.

But if you want to play the "what answers all the outstanding questions" you should add these two:

Why did the Patriots fire an employee who could blow the whistle on them?
Why does anyone believe any air was release from the balls after the ref inspection?

[Patler]

Why did the Patriots fire an employee who could blow the whistle on them?


Maybe they took care of that in his severance package.

[pbmax]

Speaking of being generally aware, PFT gives us Jay Feely:


On the surface, free-agent kicker Jay Feely attended Monday’s settlement conference in his capacity as a member of the NFL Players Association’s Executive Committee....

As noted last month, the NFLPA’s initial court filing challenging the Brady suspension pointed out that the NFL suspended a Jets equipment employee in 2009, after an attempt “to use unapproved equipment to prep the K[icking] Balls” in a game against (you guessed it) the Patriots. The NFL did not investigate or discipline the Jets kicker for “general awareness” or specific involvement in the attempted violation of the rules, even though the Jets kicker was the player most likely to benefit from the behavior and, in turn, the player most likely to be aware of the conduct.

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2015/08/31/feelys-presence-may-have-been-a-useful-coincidence-for-brady-nflpa/

[sharpe1027]

I'd think the first question is the most interesting of all. He was apparently threatening to go to ESPN, and they fired his ass. Why didn't he go to ESPN, and/or why aren't they running his story? I've heard nothing of him getting any hush money.

You will not hear about hush money unless they are extremely stupid about it.

[sharpe1027]

I have not heard threatening to go to ESPN in anything except a joke format in one of the text messages.

Its a very good question why one of the employees was terminated. However the other, the one who absconded with the balls away from the ref, gave them cause to fire them. That is not supposed to happen for any reason.

But if you want to play the "what answers all the outstanding questions" you should add these two:

Why did the Patriots fire an employee who could blow the whistle on them?
Why does anyone believe any air was release from the balls after the ref inspection?

If you believe Brady was willing to bribe the guy just to do his job, you must be willing to believe Brady would give his first born son to keep him quiet about something that would really put him in a bind.

[sharpe1027]

I have not heard threatening to go to ESPN in anything except a joke format in one of the text messages.
That's the one. Call it a joke, but the joke makes no sense unless there was a story for ESPN in the first place.

I haven't gone to ESPN to tell them I am doing a job that 32 other teams do and that nobody cares about. How hilarious!

No, the joke was about him threatening to go to ESPN with some story about inflation of the balls and Brady. Gee, if only we knew what that might be. Any thoughts?

[pbmax]

You can't reverse engineer a crime from a joke. Illegal ball tampering is only one of possibly dozens of explanations that would only make sense if you knew the participants and had the whole conversations. Despite that joke, both employees denied the suggestion that they were engaged in tampering after ref inspection. Under oath.

Weak sauce and all by inference.

[sharpe1027]

You can't reverse engineer a crime from a joke. Illegal ball tampering is only one of possibly dozens of explanations that would only make sense if you knew the participants and had the whole conversations. Despite that joke, both employees denied the suggestion that they were engaged in tampering after ref inspection. Under oath.

Weak sauce and all by inference.

PB, your not being honest about this. You can't pick one post and say that's all we have been discussing. I am not reverse engineering a crime from a joke, I am explaining how that threat-based joke supports all the other evidence. Of course it is by inference, they didn't break down the door to the bathroom because he stole the balls from the referees and they didn't have a chance. They botched the measurements by not taking more care in how they took them.

Your repeated inference that there is no evidence of a crime, is just flat wrong. Is it iron-clad, no, but there is plenty of evidence.

[sharpe1027]

Maybe they took care of that in his severance package.

He's under oath denying it, and he is the one responsible in the first place. It is not in his interest to blow the whistle, but yeah, they might have something in his package too.

[pbmax]

PB, your not being honest about this. You can't pick one post and say that's all we have been discussing. I am not reverse engineering a crime from a joke, I am explaining how that threat-based joke supports all the other evidence. Of course it is by inference, they didn't break down the door to the bathroom because he stole the balls from the referees and they didn't have a chance. They botched the measurements by not taking more care in how they took them.

Your repeated inference that there is no evidence of a crime, is just flat wrong. Is it iron-clad, no, but there is plenty of evidence.

There is no physical evidence that air was let out of the footballs. The underlying crime does not appear to have occurred. Do you have a murder conviction sustained when someone has not died?

There is a reason we are on charge #3 for Brady. Its because the first two charges had no basis in evidence. The originally reported PSI numbers were bogus. The science in the Wells report to support the charge in the face of more mundane PSI values uses tortured math like it was a budget projection in order to support the original assumption that the PSI values could only be obtained by manual deflation. Even the Wells report, bought and paid for by the NFL, cannot bring itself to call the evidence against Brady clear and convincing. But Goodell's ruling does.

Ask yourself this question:

If this was a game played in September at 75 degrees and dry, are we having this debate? The answer is obviously no.

This is Capone getting busted for tax evasion. Only this time, the judge is sentencing the perpetrator not according to tax evasion statutes, but by organized crime statutes.

And I don't think I am picking one point or post and objecting to the whole based on one contradiction or gap. There are problems with each piece of evidence which we have covered before, repeating them makes for very dull reading, if this is not already dull enough.

[pbmax]

Tea leaf reading. PFT notices that one of the NFL's PR guys is leaving. To go to a firm that has a contract to do PR for the NFL.

However, there is the matter of the leaked and incorrect PSI numbers to Chris Mortensen and Peter King. Coupled with the fact that Judge Berman could issue a ruling "as early as today" makes PFT go hmmm.

It is kinda strange that the NFL never made a statement about that leak. I don't think it clarifies Brady's situation, but it was never addressed even after the Wells Report was released, confirming that the first PSI numbers were bogus.

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2015/09/01/p-r-chief-paul-hicks-leaves-the-nfl/

[sharpe1027]

There is no physical evidence that air was let out of the footballs. The underlying crime does not appear to have occurred.

There is physical evidence, but subsequent reports suggest that the evidence is not 100% because there are possible ways it could have occurred without intentional deflation.


Do you have a murder conviction sustained when someone has not died?

You can have a murder conviction when the body can't be found, but the inference is that the person was killed.


There is a reason we are on charge #3 for Brady. Its because the first two charges had no basis in evidence.

It's because of what Brady did after-the-fact. Why push on the other points when you have an easier winner? It happens all the time in criminal proceedings (which this is not).


The originally reported PSI numbers were bogus. The science in the Wells report to support the charge in the face of more mundane PSI values uses tortured math like it was a budget projection in order to support the original assumption that the PSI values could only be obtained by manual deflation.

This is your opinionated generalization. The only basis for this opinion is two studies that provide alternative theories, that rely upon various assumptions that are not necessarily true.


Even the Wells report, bought and paid for by the NFL, cannot bring itself to call the evidence against Brady clear and convincing. But Goodell's ruling does.

The attorneys were only asked to satisfy one standard. I doubt they would stick there necks out and offer up another standard, even if they thought it was beyond reasonable doubt.


If this was a game played in September at 75 degrees and dry, are we having this debate? The answer is obviously no.

Yes.


And I don't think I am picking one point or post and objecting to the whole based on one contradiction or gap. There are problems with each piece of evidence which we have covered before, repeating them makes for very dull reading, if this is not already dull enough.

Not really. You basically offer generalizations about inferences and no physical evidence. Some of the individual points you made some comments about, but they were pretty weak arguments. You have admitted the evidence suggests they were trying to skirt the rules, but are hung up on the PSI evidence.

The guy stole the balls and took them directly into the bathroom. He talked about having a needle (not a pump, or a gauge, a needle). He called himself the deflator. He made a threat-based joke about going to ESPN if Brady didn't give him something. He was told he was getting things signed from Brady for something relating to game ball pressure. He got fired by the Pats for whatever it is he did or did not do. Brady destroyed his new phone presumably so that he didn't have to answer questions about the text messages.

What may have happened is he let out a little air from each ball, but not enough to make a huge difference that would be 100% provable absent very scientific measurements. Thus, any evidence they have would fall within the realm of "possible" natural deflation.

[Pugger]

I'd think the first question is the most interesting of all. He was apparently threatening to go to ESPN, and they fired his ass. Why didn't he go to ESPN, and/or why aren't they running his story? I've heard nothing of him getting any hush money.

I thought he was not fired but suspended indefinitely?

[Pugger]

There is physical evidence, but subsequent reports suggest that the evidence is not 100% because there are possible ways it could have occurred without intentional deflation.



You can have a murder conviction when the body can't be found, but the inference is that the person was killed.



It's because of what Brady did after-the-fact. Why push on the other points when you have an easier winner? It happens all the time in criminal proceedings (which this is not).



This is your opinionated generalization. The only basis for this opinion is two studies that provide alternative theories, that rely upon various assumptions that are not necessarily true.



The attorneys were only asked to satisfy one standard. I doubt they would stick there necks out and offer up another standard, even if they thought it was beyond reasonable doubt.



Yes.



Not really. You basically offer generalizations about inferences and no physical evidence. Some of the individual points you made some comments about, but they were pretty weak arguments. You have admitted the evidence suggests they were trying to skirt the rules, but are hung up on the PSI evidence.

The guy stole the balls and took them directly into the bathroom. He talked about having a needle (not a pump, or a gauge, a needle). He called himself the deflator. He made a threat-based joke about going to ESPN if Brady didn't give him something. He was told he was getting things signed from Brady for something relating to game ball pressure. He got fired by the Pats for whatever it is he did or did not do. Brady destroyed his new phone presumably so that he didn't have to answer questions about the text messages.

What may have happened is he let out a little air from each ball, but not enough to make a huge difference that would be 100% provable absent very scientific measurements. Thus, any evidence they have would fall within the realm of "possible" natural deflation.

I didn't realize he was fired.

[mraynrand]

There is no physical evidence that air was let out of the footballs. The underlying crime does not appear to have occurred. Do you have a murder conviction sustained when someone has not died?

WTF kind of bullshit question is this? This is perhaps the worst analogy I've ever seen you make. The 'body' here is a slightly deflated football. (like a subtle attempted murder, perhaps with maybe one very low dose of rat poison).

What kind of evidence do you want? There's plenty of circumstantial evidence for an effort to adjust the inflation of the footballs. It's not well supported (I guess there is a missing phone or something?) but it exists.

Ya know, there was nothing on those 18 minutes of White house tapes and nothing on that server either. "Absence of proof is proof of absence!" :)

[pbmax]

This is your opinionated generalization. The only basis for this opinion is two studies that provide alternative theories, no that rely upon various assumptions that are not necessarily true.

That is not the case. The NFLPA had convincing testimony that the statistical methods used to deduce the amount of pressure that would be lost under game conditions were flawed.

From Deadspin: http://deadspin.com/here-is-the-transcript-from-tom-bradys-appeal-hearing-1722113452

Update (9:20 p.m.): After a lunch break, the NFLPA questions one of their expert witnesses Edward Snyder, Dean of the Yale School of Management. His role was to evaluate the findings of Exponent, the company used by Ted Wells’s team for scientific and statistical analysis of the deflation of the footballs. Snyder gets straight to the point, and identifies a number of errors he says Exponent made:

Q. Okay. So let’s go, let’s start with your slide deck. The first slide shows your three key findings. And if you could just sort of walk the Commissioner through each of the three key findings that you made and that we will elaborate on.

A. So first finding is that their analysis of the difference in differences, the analysis of the pressure drops and the difference in the average pressure drops is wrong because Exponent did not include timing and the effects of timing in that analysis.

Secondly, Exponent looked at the variation and the measurements between the Patriots’ balls and the Colts’ balls at halftime. They compared the variances. And despite conceding that there was no statistically significant difference between the two, they went ahead and drew conclusions, but those conclusions are improper.

And, last, and this goes to the issue of alternative assumptions, as well as error, if the logo gauge was used to measure the Patriots’ balls before the game, then given what the framework that Exponent provides us with scientifically, and if the analysis is done correctly, eight of the eleven Patriots’ balls are above the relevant scientific threshold.


OK. So 8 out of 11 meet the expected threshold of pressure loss due to conditions as calculated by Exponent. That still leaves 3 balls were tampering must have occurred, right? Not really, their analysis failed to be internally consistent.

Update (9:30 p.m.): Man, Snyder absolutely lays waste to the report Exponent prepared for the Wells Report. For instance, here he is explaining how quickly the PSI of a football changes when being brought into a warm room after spending a few hours out in the cold, and how Exponent didn’t even bother to account for timing in their report:

Q. So let’s go to our Slide 12. And what is this showing?

A. This takes the earlier Figure 22, and I will refer to that again. It takes the top schedule, what Exponent calls their transient analysis, that’s their scientific framework.

It says, okay, you bring in a Colts’ ball. It was pre-game at 13. It’s brought right into the locker room. It’s going to be 11.87. This is, like, so 2:40 is, like, in locker room terms, it’s minute zero. And then 12 minutes later, it’s warmed up and it’s roughly 1.1 psi greater in 12 minutes.

Q. The same ball?

A. The same ball.

Q. What did Exponent do in its difference in difference analysis to account for time?

A. Nothing.

Q. How do you know?

A. Absolutely nothing. If you look at their difference in difference equation in their appendix and you look at Table A3, where they report their results, they have explanatory variables for their difference in difference analysis and time is not an explanatory variable.

You can read the Exponent report forwards, backwards, upside down. You see time referred to again and again and again and again. However, you have to look at what they actually did, the statistical analysis that they actually did. They left time out of the analysis that they said was the most important.

[mraynrand]

That is not the case. The NFLPA had convincing testimony that the statistical methods used to deduce the amount of pressure that would be lost under game conditions were flawed.

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???)

[pbmax]

Exponent, at this point getting very sloppy, used a master gauge adjustment to reconcile the two different readings the two gauges were giving, so that one set of numbers could be used to consider changes during the first half. Except that they used the adjustment for the halftime PSI readings and not for the pregame readings.

Update (9:45 p.m.): One of the issues in the halftime measurement of the footballs’s PSI is that two different pressure gauges were used, and one of them consistently came back with readings .3 to .4 PSI higher than the other. The Exponent report used a “master gauge adjustment” to be able to use readings from both gauges, and found that there was funny business going on with eight of the 11 balls. But Exponent made, according to Snyder, “a very basic mistake.” They used the master gauge adjustment for the halftime PSI readings, but not the pre-game PSI readings. If they had done so, they would’ve had very different findings:

Q. Let’s go to the next slide. And were you able to correct for that inconsistency that you described in Exponent’s master gauge conversion?

A. Yes. Now, the effective starting value is not 12.5, it’s 12.17.

Q. How do you get the 12.17?

A. You apply the master gauge conversion consistently to both halftime measurements, as well as the starting value.

Q. Okay. And let’s go to the next slide. And what is the impact of making that correction on the results?

A. Now eight of the Patriots’ balls are above the critical threshold predicted by Exponent, three are below.

So I have two studies that demonstrate that loss of pressure in this range is quite possible. In the study that purports to show that the loss cannot be due to natural processes, when errors are corrected, 8 of 11 balls meet the threshold.

And this does not account for the timing of measurement between the Patriots balls and the Colts, which might explain the other 3.

The evidence for deflation stinks and its not simply an opinion. If the NFL wants to rule on this matter, it needs better data and procedures.

[sharpe1027]

I didn't realize he was fired.

I read he was fired on the Internet, so it must be true. IDK.

[sharpe1027]

Exponent, at this point getting very sloppy, used a master gauge adjustment to reconcile the two different readings the two gauges were giving, so that one set of numbers could be used to consider changes during the first half. Except that they used the adjustment for the halftime PSI readings and not for the pregame readings.

Update (9:45 p.m.): One of the issues in the halftime measurement of the footballs’s PSI is that two different pressure gauges were used, and one of them consistently came back with readings .3 to .4 PSI higher than the other. The Exponent report used a “master gauge adjustment” to be able to use readings from both gauges, and found that there was funny business going on with eight of the 11 balls. But Exponent made, according to Snyder, “a very basic mistake.” They used the master gauge adjustment for the halftime PSI readings, but not the pre-game PSI readings. If they had done so, they would’ve had very different findings:

Q. Let’s go to the next slide. And were you able to correct for that inconsistency that you described in Exponent’s master gauge conversion?

A. Yes. Now, the effective starting value is not 12.5, it’s 12.17.

Q. How do you get the 12.17?

A. You apply the master gauge conversion consistently to both halftime measurements, as well as the starting value.

Q. Okay. And let’s go to the next slide. And what is the impact of making that correction on the results?

A. Now eight of the Patriots’ balls are above the critical threshold predicted by Exponent, three are below.

So I have two studies that demonstrate that loss of pressure in this range is quite possible. In the study that purports to show that the loss cannot be due to natural processes, when errors are corrected, 8 of 11 balls meet the threshold.

And this does not account for the timing of measurement between the Patriots balls and the Colts, which might explain the other 3.

The evidence for deflation stinks and its not simply an opinion. If the NFL wants to rule on this matter, it needs better data and procedures.

You keep coming back to the PSI data, but it doesn't really matter that much. They can't go back and re-measure the balls to clarify, but they can look at the totality of the evidence and make an informed conclusion.

[pbmax]

WTF kind of bullshit question is this? This is perhaps the worst analogy I've ever seen you make. The 'body' here is a slightly deflated football. (like a subtle attempted murder, perhaps with maybe one very low dose of rat poison).

What kind of evidence do you want? There's plenty of circumstantial evidence for an effort to adjust the inflation of the footballs. It's not well supported (I guess there is a missing phone or something?) but it exists.

Ya know, there was nothing on those 18 minutes of White house tapes and nothing on that server either. "Absence of proof is proof of absence!" :)

If you are going to punish someone for illegally tampering with football equipment, then evidence of that tampering would be useful.

The evidence, based on pre-game and halftime measurements, does nothing to bolster the case that the balls were tampered with. Without even accouningt for the time delay in measuring the Colts four balls at halftime, 8 of 11 of the Patriots balls were within suspected tolerances. And halftime is a natural experiment, because no one is accusing the Colts of tampering. Weather and use had the same effect on each team.

The League's own expert says the single most important factor here is time. And we do not have any records when the balls were measured, meaning the three remaining outside tolerance could be explained simply by the order in which each was examined.

They have the body. The medical examiner cannot determine cause of death.

[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]

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]

If you are going to punish someone for illegally tampering with football equipment, then evidence of that tampering would be useful.

The evidence, based on pre-game and halftime measurements, does nothing to bolster the case that the balls were tampered with. Without even accouningt for the time delay in measuring the Colts four balls at halftime, 8 of 11 of the Patriots balls were within suspected tolerances. And halftime is a natural experiment, because no one is accusing the Colts of tampering. Weather and use had the same effect on each team.

The League's own expert says the single most important factor here is time. And we do not have any records when the balls were measured, meaning the three remaining outside tolerance could be explained simply by the order in which each was examined.

They have the body. The medical examiner cannot determine cause of death.

No, no no. The "ME" knows the balls are deflated; he can't say how. For example, the old man died from injuries sustained tumbling down the stairs. The ME CANNOT determined whether his wife pushed him or he misstepped. So they have to look on the old bag's cell phone to see whether she texed someone that she can't stand the old bastard one more day. Ooops, the cell phone/server/tapes are missing! :)

[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.

[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.

[sharpe1027]

If you are going to punish someone for illegally tampering with football equipment, then evidence of that tampering would be useful.

The evidence, based on pre-game and halftime measurements, does nothing to bolster the case that the balls were tampered with. Without even accouningt for the time delay in measuring the Colts four balls at halftime, 8 of 11 of the Patriots balls were within suspected tolerances. And halftime is a natural experiment, because no one is accusing the Colts of tampering. Weather and use had the same effect on each team.

The League's own expert says the single most important factor here is time. And we do not have any records when the balls were measured, meaning the three remaining outside tolerance could be explained simply by the order in which each was examined.

They have the body. The medical examiner cannot determine cause of death.

PB, they have evidence of tampering. We've been through 100 times this but you keep going back to the well. Just assume the evidence on PSI is inconclusive so we can move on, and not have to rehash again.

The guy basically stole the balls from the refs and took them directly into the bathroom (and he is not even in charge of the balls). When they investigated his text messages, and they were ridiculously damning. Brady destroyed a phone that might have further damning text messages. I say hang 'em high.

[Fritz]

This whole thread is very deflating.

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

[pbmax]

No, no no. The "ME" knows the balls are deflated; he can't say how. For example, the old man died from injuries sustained tumbling down the stairs. The ME CANNOT determined whether his wife pushed him or he misstepped. So they have to look on the old bag's cell phone to see whether she texed someone that she can't stand the old bastard one more day. Ooops, the cell phone/server/tapes are missing! :)

No, that doesn't work either because we (in ME case) know the method of the injury. Better to say kidney failure? Maybe blunt force trauma that could have multiple causes?

And the texts are not all missing. They have the employees texts to Brady and the complete phone/text records from AT&T. If Roger wanted Brady's copies of those other messages, he could retrieve them from the 28 NFL related people he conversed with. The evidence did not disappear like Nixon on tape. No one has bothered to retrieve the backup copy in Haldeman's safe.

[sharpe1027]

No, that doesn't work either because we know the method of the injury. Better to say kidney failure? Maybe blunt force trauma that could have multiple causes?

And the texts are not all missing. They have the employees texts to Brady and the complete phone/text records from AT&T. If Roger wanted Brady's copies of those other messages, he could retrieve them from the 28 NFL related people he conversed with. The evidence did not disappear like Nixon on tape. No one has bothered to retrieve the backup copy in Haldeman's safe.

They don't need the texts to make a case. Is it a winner? IDK, but it is a hell of a lot more convincing that you are stating.

[mraynrand]

No, that doesn't work either because we know the method of the injury.

I don't follow you here at all. The balls were deflated. That's the result. That could have happened 'naturally/acidental' (cooling environment, old man loses equilibrium) or 'unnaturally/deliberately' (needle, old lady pushes)




And the texts are not all missing. They have the employees texts to Brady and the complete phone/text records from AT&T. If Roger wanted Brady's copies of those other messages, he could retrieve them from the 28 NFL related people he conversed with. The evidence did not disappear like Nixon on tape. No one has bothered to retrieve the backup copy in Haldeman's safe.

yes, not all the tapes were missing; not all the server contents are missing. Not all the cell phone chatter is missing. What remains isn't helpful to the argument that deflation wasn't deliberate. But your observation begs the question: what about the missing chatter?

Given my awful experiences with AT&T, would not be surprising if they couldn't retrieve a cold beer from a fridge, let alone 'missing' texts.

[pbmax]

They don't need the texts to make a case. Is it a winner? IDK, but it is a hell of a lot more convincing that you are stating.

Could be. But the lack of texts from Brady is now being cited as one of the two charges against him (the other being clear and convincing/more probable than not knowledge of a scheme).

Knowledge of the scheme, by the way, is a new rule. See Jay Feely.

[pbmax]

I don't follow you here at all. The balls were deflated. That's the result. That could have happened 'naturally/acidental' (cooling environment, old man loses equilibrium) or 'unnaturally/deliberately' (needle, old lady pushes)

You know the fall and the stairs (+ gravity) caused the injury. The method of football pressure loss is still being debated. In the former, the location and method of injury is known. In the latter both are unknown.

[sharpe1027]

Could be. But the lack of texts from Brady is now being cited as one of the two charges against him (the other being clear and convincing/more probable than not knowledge of a scheme).

Knowledge of the scheme, by the way, is a new rule. See Jay Feely.

What's wrong with that charge exactly? Is it the NFL's duty to seek out the data that Brady made difficult, if not impossible, to retrieve? Does it matter to the issue of what Brady did that there might be an alternative way of getting the data?

[mraynrand]

You know the fall and the stairs (+ gravity) caused the injury. The method of football pressure loss is still being debated. In the former, the location and method of injury is known. In the latter the method of pressure loss is unknown.

really PB?

loss of pressure = fall/injury. There are various possible explanations for the loss of pressure as for the fall. The point being that the result on it's own is insufficient to determine cause.

The point in this case is that the loss of pressure isn't definitive, so it can't rule in or out claims either way. Have to look elsewhere.

[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.

[pbmax]

What's wrong with that charge exactly? Is it the NFL's duty to seek out the data that Brady made difficult, if not impossible, to retrieve? Does it matter to the issue of what Brady did that there might be an alternative way of getting the data?

Previous instance of not supplying your phone to NFL investigation was a $25,000 fine. (see Favre v. Jet Masseuse, 2012)

And yes, if there is an alternative method to obtain data, then obstruction and lack of cooperation cease to be major issues.

[mraynrand]

And yes, if there is an alternative method to obtain data, then obstruction and lack of cooperation cease to be major issues.

this is what you believe? amazing

[sharpe1027]

You know the fall and the stairs (+ gravity) caused the injury. The method of football pressure loss is still being debated. In the former, the location and method of injury is known. In the latter both are unknown.

This seems to miss the point, but can we just end the analogy discussion? The scientific evidence for whether a needle was used is inconclusive either way. Agree to move on?

[pbmax]

really PB?

loss of pressure = fall/injury. There are various possible explanations for the loss of pressure as for the fall. The point being that the result on it's own is insufficient to determine cause.

The point in this case is that the loss of pressure isn't definitive, so it can't rule in or out claims either way. Have to look elsewhere.

That's fair. I was going to say the fall/injuries/stairs gives you location and time frame, but I guess that could fit as many scenarios as Gillette Stadium between pre-game and halftime.

[sharpe1027]

Previous instance of not supplying your phone to NFL investigation was a $25,000 fine. (see Favre v. Jet Masseuse, 2012)

And yes, if there is an alternative method to obtain data, then obstruction and lack of cooperation cease to be major issues.

Wow.

[pbmax]

This seems to miss the point, but can we just end the analogy discussion? The scientific evidence for whether a needle was used is inconclusive either way. Agree to move on?

I agree to move on if we change that to scientific evidence for whether anything was used is inconclusive.

[sharpe1027]

I agree to move on if we change that to scientific evidence for whether anything was used is inconclusive.

Agreed.

[pbmax]

this is what you believe? amazing


Wow.

Maybe I am missing something, but no its not a major issue in this case.

Wells asked for copies of any text messages or phone records to be supplied by Brady's side. He specifically said he did not need the phone. If Brady recovers them from AT&T's mail server and the recipients of text messages, what is the substantive difference?

[sharpe1027]

Maybe I am missing something, but no its not a major issue in this case.

Wells asked for copies of any text messages or phone records to be supplied by Brady's side. He specifically said he did not need the phone. If Brady recovers them from AT&T's mail server and the recipients of text messages, what is the substantive difference?

If Brady had recovered them from the AT&T mail server, we would not be having this discussion.