2015 NFL Season

[pilferk]

Whats amazing is...I apologize if one of you mentioned it... I admit i didn't read everything.

The reports states the Pats were cleared of any wrong doing... yet they HAMMER the team with the first round pick and the fourth... and truthfully the first rounder hurts the team more than the four games for Brady.

It's the organizational lack of cooperation that got 'em, combined with their status as repeat offenders in that area (re: Spygate).

So, as is the case in some previous instances, it's not the crime that got them the time, it's the attempted cover up/lying/lack of cooperation.

I STILL think it's too harsh.

[JAEBALL]

Whats amazing is...I apologize if one of you mentioned it... I admit i didn't read everything.

The reports states the Pats were cleared of any wrong doing... yet they HAMMER the team with the first round pick and the fourth... and truthfully the first rounder hurts the team more than the four games for Brady.

It's the organizational lack of cooperation that got 'em, combined with their status as repeat offenders in that area (re: Spygate).

So, as is the case in some previous instances, it's not the crime that got them the time, it's the attempted cover up/lying/lack of cooperation.

I STILL think it's too harsh.

This doesn't come to close to Spygate in my opinion. Just ask the players from that rams team... the venom they speak about it... tells you all you need to know.

As a Giant fan... I'm pissed because the Cowboys miss Brady...

I thought 2 games and a fine was appropriate.

[pilferk]

This doesn't come to close to Spygate in my opinion. Just ask the players from that rams team... the venom they speak about it... tells you all you need to know.

As a Giant fan... I'm pissed because the Cowboys miss Brady...

I thought 2 games and a fine was appropriate.

Oh, I agree. It's not close in terms of actual impact on the game or severity of violation.  The leagues issue is....Spygate happened.  So this is the Pats "2nd offense" of....in the eyes of the NFL...similar type.  With an institutional lack of cooperation/cover up with an AGGRESSIVE stance, screaming their innocence and demanding apologies.

I thought 2 games and a 500k fine against the pats....along with the indefinite suspension of the two chuckleheads who seem to be the main perpetrators...would have been the appropriate action at this point.

If there had been a half hearted, non-specific mea culpa, from those involved, directly after the Colts game (because, lets face it, this had ZERO impact on the outcome of that game)....it probably would have been either a 20k fine (for equipment tampering) OR a 220k fine (one fine for each ball). No fine, no suspension, probably not even an insistence that the "overzealous employees" be suspended or terminated.

[JAEBALL]

Brady telling the Ravens to read the rule book is just so rich too... lol

[faldor]

The texts are laid out in the report to be taken factual, word for word. As anyone knows, tone can be hard to interpret in a text. But they go ahead and do it for you in the report. An opposing view would be that the texts were sent in jest, with a humorous tone.

We're taking Walt Anderson's word that he measured the balls prior to the game and that he "recalled" the PSI's, but didn't record them. Then he's "pretty sure" he used the gauge that read on the higher side. But it's possible he used the gauge that registered lower, and if that's the case the natural gas law would apply and the balls would've falllen within range. Then there's the fact that only 4 of the Colts balls were measured. It's hard to have a 100% fair comparison if all the balls weren't tested.

As for Brady saying he didn't know who McNally was, when he clearly did. That's a tough one to explain. I haven't heard that part of the report explained in detail. Some have brought up the theory that maybe Brady knows the guy in passing and by a nickname. Maybe he's not sure of his real name.

As for Brady not handing over his phone, computers, etc. An obvious reason for this, aside from having something to hide, would be that he wouldn't want to let them have access to any non relevant personal information. I realize they offered him and his attorney approval, but from what I've heard they would've agreed to search his texts and emails by using key words. So it would be possible they could pop up in non relevant situations. You could argue that some of the texts they put in the report were more personal in nature and not relevant to the case. The 50k yard ball text from the ball boy to his mom for instance. Most likely had nothing to do with the case. But Wells makes the leap that Brady paid the guys off to deflate balls for him. It's possible they could've made that stretch into Brady's world too.

Brady's lawyer said a lot of what Tom said that would've given better context to certain things, was left out of the report. Again, supporting MY theory that the report was slanted. The goal was to find the Patriots guilty. Now, I will say, if they were completely innocent, they couldn't have done that. Where there's smoke there's fire. But I also don't find it hard to believe that the report may have omitted some information that may have been viewed as pro Patriot.

Again....thats an awful lot of stuff, in sum total, to have to explain away and come out the other side thinking everything smells fresh. No? I mean...one, even two, of those things.....ok. But you touched on 5. Theres at least 5 more (balls in the bathroom, mcnally talking about inflation when his job has nothing to do with equip management, the scientific analysis stating, regardless of colts psi, there was no way the balls could drop as far as they did by half time, given conditions, the text clearly saying mcnally was being given stuff because "brady didnt give him nothin/take care of him" (which isnt a tonal interpretation), and the fact  Mcnally handled the balls, at all, outside the officials view after testing) that i can think of off the top of my head.

 In every, single, case the answer has to be : i believe the pats, everyone else is biased and/or lying. I think thats tough to convince most people of, given just how much circumstantial evidence you have to explain away.


Couple things:
1) what motivation would Anderson have to lie? Same story since right after the incident, so.....i'm not sure why the recollection  of a senior league official, with no real horse in the race, is questioned.  Thats a big maybe, to say a guy would forget, an hour afterwards, what he'd done in the locker room.  I find that harder to believe than any of the "what ifs" to explain away the circumstantials.

2) yeah, i guess saying "oh, the deflator? Yeah, we tight!" Would be bad... :p

3) brady and his lawyers were given first crack. In other words, it wasnt just the search terms..lit was search terms AFTER approval by the legal team. Impossible to get stuff that didnt really pertain, in that circumstance.  They could just have pulled those during review.

4) He says....but we dont have that evidence, or proof it exists. We have his say so. Thats it. Why is the guy whose job it is to protect his client, any way possible, more believable? Again, not the same but...what was arods attorney saying during that process?  Did you believe him?

I'm not saying Walt Anderson lied. But he would have a reason to, if he in fact forgot to check the balls pre game or forgot what the exact PSI's were since he didn't record them. He could feel the need to cover his ass and say, "I'm pretty sure they were all at 12.5". Again, I'm willing to accept he did his job properly, but there is motivation. I was more talking about how it was "more probable than not" that he used the gauge that registered on the high end according to the report, even though he wasn't 100% sure. Again, IF he had used the other gauge, Exponent's scientific findings wouldn't hold any water. But since that doesn't fit their agenda, they'll make the pieces fit. If anyone on the Patriots side didn't remember something, the report spun that against them. When Walt Anderson doesn't remember something, they STILL spin it against the Patriots.

And I still don't blame Brady one bit for not handing over his cell phone. Whether it was approved by his legal team or not. The NFL is not to be trusted. They can, and did, take things out of context to make things look a certain way. To portray Brady in a negative light. It ended up costing him, but I can see his line of thinking on the matter.

I don't trust the NFL one bit. They've proven to be incompetent every step of the way through this process and countless others. So aside from my personal fandom, I feel I have every reason to question the validity of their findings and motives. I honestly don't remember following the A-Rod saga anywhere near as close as this, so I can't really comment on that.

I agree with the general consensus, that the loss of draft picks was really the only thing that surprised me. As much as I support and believe in Tom Brady, I was ready and willing to accept a 2-4 game suspension. 4 is a bit excessive, but I'm hoping it'll get knocked down to 2. The million dollar fine, while it's the largest fine ever imposed on a team, wasn't a big surprise. But a 1st and a 4th? That hurts the most in all of this, and I'm not clear as to if that can be appealed. But this story is far from over. It may drag on throughout the summer. At this point, the Patriots might as well keep fighting back, since the harsh penalties have already been imposed. I'm not sure what their exact legal options are going forward, but it shall be interesting to see.

[Sober_times]

Well, that is some bullshit. I didn't think denying a fifth interview to investigators, which is what the Patriots did with those two, was not cooperating. At what point does it get excessive?

It doesn't. Ever.  You are a team who exists in a league with broad, specific, investigative and disciplinary powers.  You cooperate fully.  Fully means fully.  It doesn't mean until you get bored.  It doesn't mean until you don't want to, or you feel like it's onerous.  In this context, there's no such thing as excessive. If you feel it's excessive, you comply, and file a notice with the NFLPA and the league that you feel it's excessive...and let them fight it out.  But, until someone external to your organization agrees, and tells you that you can "stop"...you cooperate, fully. 

When the investigator says, specifically, we have some inconsistencies we've found, in the course of interviewing other parties, pouring over the other evidence, and reviewing the science/statistical review...and we need a follow up...you can't say "No".  If you do, given that context...you're not cooperating.  It's that simple.

And....heh heh...you don't SAY you're cooperating fully when, in fact, you're not.  Not in the press, not loudly from every mountain top you can find, and certainly not while decrying your innocence and demanding an apology from anyone and everyone you can demand one from.

And after reading the texts from these guys, I certainly don't blame Brady for not turning over his phone. There were several in there that really didn't seem relevant to the investigation.

The investigators offered Brady and his legal team the opportunity to review the texts, first, and only turn over what was relevant and in context.  Every time someone makes the above point...they ignore that bit of the report.

The other people involved were not offered that "deal".  Brady was offered it in consideration of his celebrity, and the fact there could be discussions with other famous and noteable people that might contain more private information.

Brady, his legal team, and the Pats refused.

That's not full cooperation.

Anyways, I think its more probable than not that Brady is playing by Week 3 at the latest, will blow out the Colts again, will be in the Play-offs come January. Then again, based on years of playing, watching football, watching/reading interviews with former players, current players, coaches, personnel guys, media members and everyday joes; pretty much everyone thought it was more probable than not that Seattle would run.

Here's where we agree: I think 1 or 2 games would have been a much more reasonable punishment.  Maybe they went big so they could reduce on appeal...that's the old baseball move...I'm not sure.

What I find sort of amusing is: I think Goodell had the majority of people on the same page, believing the Pats/Brady "guilt", after the report.  I think he was totally tone deaf on the punishment, and now has very much divided his public support..because I think there are a LOT of people who feel the punishment is more than a little harsh.

But he certainly sent a message about cooperation with investigations and undermining NFL rules.

First off, we don't know the scope Ted Wells wanted to use with Brady and his electronic devices nor has he really elaborated specifically. We know the Patriots employees turned over their Cell Phones and we know there were texts with Tom Brady because they were part of the report. What other texts or electronic information could Wells have needed? Did he request every conversation that took place with teammates/coaches/ownership/family/friends on anything that could have related to the deflating of footballs or was it more broad than that? We don't know the specifics. Regardless of protections ensured, we still don't know what the scope was and exactly who Wells wanted to bring into this investigation. Is every single contact in Brady's cellphone potentially part of the Well's investigation? We already saw Well's bring in the mother and other family members of the two patriots employees for the purpose of what exactly? Seems like embarrassment and of course, fishing for something.


There is full cooperation and there is a fishing expedition which is what the NFL and Ted Wells were doing with this whole farce. The Patriots turned over every piece of electronic media requested and made every employee available for interview with both NFL security and the Ted Wells investigation. While you, Wells and the NFL may not agree, the Patriots obviously felt it was within their rights to ensure that employees weren't subjected to interview after interview. Once again, amounting to what they and I believe is nothing more than fishing expedition. I disagree with the notion the Patriots should only stand ideally by while the NFL and Ted Wells continue to fish. In the end, it might be something a court decides. 

We will see what happens on appeal with Brady's suspension. I don't think he should have been suspended at all. Yesterday I felt he will get 2 games, the more I look into this farce, the more I think he can win on appeal. Lets see how much Brady fights it and if it ends up in court like some have.

With regard to the Patriots, Kraft initially said he would accept punishment and move on, but made a very different statement following what the league did yesterday. We shall see if he plans recourse, some in media have said he has options. Including suing the NFL like Al Davis did.

[pilferk]

First off, we don't know the scope Ted Wells wanted to use with Brady and his electronic devices nor has he really elaborated specifically. We know the Patriots employees turned over their Cell Phones and we know there were texts with Tom Brady because they were part of the report. What other texts or electronic information could Wells have needed? Did he request every conversation that took place with teammates/coaches/ownership/family/friends on anything that could have related to the deflating of footballs or was it more broad than that? We don't know the specifics. Regardless of protections ensured, we still don't know what the scope was and exactly who Wells wanted to bring into this investigation. Is every single contact in Brady's cellphone potentially part of the Well's investigation? We already saw Well's bring in the mother and other family members of the two patriots employees for the purpose of what exactly? Seems like embarrassment and of course, fishing for something.

Yes, we do.  Wells talked about it yesterday, again, in fact. Extensively.

Wells was willing to NOT have the phones and computers, themselves, and JUST take printed copies of correspondence.  He was willing to let them review everything first and, at their word, only turn over the pertinent information.  He requested ONLY texts and communications that were relevant, and took place between a very specific group of people (the ones mentioned in the report, and some of the coaching staff) on VERY specific topics.  We DO know.

Essentially, Brady was given, after objections were raised, a very narrow definition of what they wanted, and a very LARGE number of potential ways to deliver it. AND his legal team and agent were given the right to review it all, and "remove" what they thought didn't fit, before hand.

And they still said no.

There is full cooperation and there is a fishing expedition which is what the NFL and Ted Wells were doing with this whole farce. The Patriots turned over every piece of electronic media requested and made every employee available for interview with both NFL security and the Ted Wells investigation. While you, Wells and the NFL may not agree, the Patriots obviously felt it was within their rights to ensure that employees weren't subjected to interview after interview. Once again, amounting to what they and I believe is nothing more than fishing expedition. I disagree with the notion the Patriots should only stand ideally by while the NFL and Ted Wells continue to fish. In the end, it might be something a court decides. 

A fishing expedition IN YOUR OPINION.
 
1) No, they didn't fully cooperate. Because Brady didn't turn over what was asked for (he's an employee of the organization). Because they wouldn't let Wells interview McNally again (Wells says that would have been only the SECOND time he talked to him...the previous interviews were with other parties/entities, almost immediately after the incident). For a couple other things (listen to Wells interview/statement from yesterday).  Full means Full.  It mean you don't get to pick and choose. 

2) What the Pats feel is withing their "rights" and what is very clearly layed out in the NFL rules and NFLPA are at odds.  Guess which side wins in that debate, until a grievance/objection is filed? Hint: It's not the Pats. How the Pats "feel" is irrelevant.  It is their MANDATE to FULLY COOPERATE. Full means everything that is asked of them, whether they like it or not. Whether they feel it's onerous or not. Whether the results potentially make them look bad, or not.  If they feel something is being done outside the NFL's purview...if they feel it's a fishing expedition...there is a process defined for them to contest that.

They decided not to do THAT.  Instead, they just said "No". 

And it's not like this independent investigation was "fast tracked".  It's been 4 freaking months.  If they felt the NFL was overstepping, they had MASSIVE amounts of time to start that process, file their objections, and get a ruling.  Hell, since that process is supposed to be anonymous, through an arbitrator, maybe it DID happen. I don't know.  But either it didn't, or the Pats "lost".

Either way....

We will see what happens on appeal with Brady's suspension. I don't think he should have been suspended at all. Yesterday I felt he will get 2 games, the more I look into this farce, the more I think he can win on appeal. Lets see how much Brady fights it and if it ends up in court like some have.

We'll see.  I HOPE it gets knocked down to 1 or 2 games.

With regard to the Patriots, Kraft initially said he would accept punishment and move on, but made a very different statement following what the league did yesterday. We shall see if he plans recourse, some in media have said he has options. Including suing the NFL like Al Davis did.

He can try.  Others have, with varying levels of success. 

I wonder...IF all the chips DO fall on the side of the NFL, would the Pats fans EVER be willing to accept the outcome, and potential "truth" of what happened.

[pilferk]

]I'm not saying Walt Anderson lied. But he would have a reason to, if he in fact forgot to check the balls pre game or forgot what the exact PSI's were since he didn't record them. He could feel the need to cover his ass and say, "I'm pretty sure they were all at 12.5". Again, I'm willing to accept he did his job properly, but there is motivation.

No, there isn't
There is no method, when checking the balls, to record the PSI inflation rate, under "normal" circumstances. So they didn't.  As an aside: This is one other thing, FYI, that kills the conspiracy theory I'm hearing from some Pats fans/homer media about a Colts/NFL "sting" operation going into the game.
They stick a gauge in, look at the number, compare, and say "OK".
Other officials in the locker room participated in that process.
Other people in, and around, the locker room witnessed the process (unless you think they're all lying, too).

We know it was done.

There is nothing in the above that could possibly result in any disciplinary event for Anderson.  We know it was done (because there were about a dozen, or more, witnesses to it being done). They aren't tasked with writing the measurements down.

So...what's the motivation for lying?

I was more talking about how it was "more probable than not" that he used the gauge that registered on the high end according to the report, even though he wasn't 100% sure. Again, IF he had used the other gauge, Exponent's scientific findings wouldn't hold any water. But since that doesn't fit their agenda, they'll make the pieces fit. If anyone on the Patriots side didn't remember something, the report spun that against them. When Walt Anderson doesn't remember something, they STILL spin it against the Patriots.

Because he didn't say "I don't remember".  He said, essentially, "I'm pretty damn sure".  Wells comments on the language, yesterday, as being the standard language used in these reports when someone that is even just "95% sure".  They still have to allow and phrase it as "more probable than not". That's the mandate.

As for the rest, I think it goes to credibility.

In Anderson's case: He's a highly respected senior official in the league, with no motivation to lie or "mis-remember".  He has no horse in the race, essentially. And evidence (in the form of witnesses in the area) to corroborate the majority of his recollections. A recollection of an event around an hour old.
 
In the case of the Pats employees who "Can't remember", there is evidence that call into question their memory.  They have potential motivation for lying (avoiding discipline).  They have EVERY horse in that race.  And there are witnesses (and evidence) that contradict, or at least call into question, the truthfulness of their testimony.

And I still don't blame Brady one bit for not handing over his cell phone. Whether it was approved by his legal team or not. The NFL is not to be trusted. They can, and did, take things out of context to make things look a certain way. To portray Brady in a negative light. It ended up costing him, but I can see his line of thinking on the matter.

They didn't want his actual phone. Or his actual computer.  They wanted PRINTED COPIES of correspondence between SPECIFIC people, on SPECIFIC topics...and his legal team/agent would get to review it all, and only turn over what was pertinent.

That was the concession/compromise Wells offered up.

They STILL said "No"..

I don't trust the NFL one bit. They've proven to be incompetent every step of the way through this process and countless others. So aside from my personal fandom, I feel I have every reason to question the validity of their findings and motives. I honestly don't remember following the A-Rod saga anywhere near as close as this, so I can't really comment on that.

We can head back to the baseball thread to refresh your memory Re: Arod, his screaming from the mountain top about his innocence, his penchant to sue everyone, and how believable he was vs MLB.  There were some longer conversations there, too.  You seemed to fall firmly on the side of MLB.  Again, apples vs oranges.

I'd offer you weren't following the A-rod saga "as closely" because he wasn't "your guy".  But maybe that's off base/unfair.

As for questioning the NFL.....have at it.  There is a process for the organization and player to do that to.  Both during the investigation (a process the Pats/Brady either didn't avail themselves of, or "lost) and after.  I have no problem if anyone wants to say "Lets see how it all plays out".  I think they have 14 days to contest?

But that's different than "The team should be able to decide what and how they cooperate during the investigation".  They don't.  They get to do what they're told, or contest what they're told and let the process play out.  The Pats chose option 3...say "No".  That option has consequences.  And in any process, going forward, that's going to be what the NFL says: "If they felt the investigation was overstepping it's mandate, they could file an objection/grievance, have it heard and ruled on during the process, and we could have moved forward. The Patriots organization, and Mr. Brady, chose not to do that.  The process is well defined, in particular the process for league investigations concerning members of the NFLPA, and the scope, manner, and material the NFL is able to request. If Mr. Brady felt the investigation was outside that scope, he had ample recourse, during the process, to object".

That's what they have to overcome during any appeal process.  Not "did they do it".  It's "Did they cooperate fully". Because, honestly, I think that's what the draft pick loss, half the fine, and suspension, is actually FOR.  NOT the tampering, itself.

I agree with the general consensus, that the loss of draft picks was really the only thing that surprised me. As much as I support and believe in Tom Brady, I was ready and willing to accept a 2-4 game suspension. 4 is a bit excessive, but I'm hoping it'll get knocked down to 2. The million dollar fine, while it's the largest fine ever imposed on a team, wasn't a big surprise. But a 1st and a 4th? That hurts the most in all of this, and I'm not clear as to if that can be appealed. But this story is far from over. It may drag on throughout the summer. At this point, the Patriots might as well keep fighting back, since the harsh penalties have already been imposed. I'm not sure what their exact legal options are going forward, but it shall be interesting to see.

That piece seems excessively punitive....the draft picks.  Granted, they are a year apart (1st rounder in 2016, 4th in 2017).  Maybe the NFL considers it a necessary escalation from the Spygate punishment...but I still think it's too harsh.  The fine, and a couple game for Brady, seems a lot more sensible.  MAYBE add in just the 4th rounder...but...I'm with you...ANY draft picks seem tough.

[Sober_times]

First off, we don't know the scope Ted Wells wanted to use with Brady and his electronic devices nor has he really elaborated specifically. We know the Patriots employees turned over their Cell Phones and we know there were texts with Tom Brady because they were part of the report. What other texts or electronic information could Wells have needed? Did he request every conversation that took place with teammates/coaches/ownership/family/friends on anything that could have related to the deflating of footballs or was it more broad than that? We don't know the specifics. Regardless of protections ensured, we still don't know what the scope was and exactly who Wells wanted to bring into this investigation. Is every single contact in Brady's cellphone potentially part of the Well's investigation? We already saw Well's bring in the mother and other family members of the two patriots employees for the purpose of what exactly? Seems like embarrassment and of course, fishing for something.

Yes, we do.  Wells talked about it yesterday, again, in fact. Extensively.

Wells was willing to NOT have the phones and computers, themselves, and JUST take printed copies of correspondence.  He was willing to let them review everything first and, at their word, only turn over the pertinent information.  He requested ONLY texts and communications that were relevant, and took place between a very specific group of people (the ones mentioned in the report, and some of the coaching staff) on VERY specific topics.  We DO know.

Essentially, Brady was given, after objections were raised, a very narrow definition of what they wanted, and a very LARGE number of potential ways to deliver it. AND his legal team and agent were given the right to review it all, and "remove" what they thought didn't fit, before hand.

And they still said no.

There is full cooperation and there is a fishing expedition which is what the NFL and Ted Wells were doing with this whole farce. The Patriots turned over every piece of electronic media requested and made every employee available for interview with both NFL security and the Ted Wells investigation. While you, Wells and the NFL may not agree, the Patriots obviously felt it was within their rights to ensure that employees weren't subjected to interview after interview. Once again, amounting to what they and I believe is nothing more than fishing expedition. I disagree with the notion the Patriots should only stand ideally by while the NFL and Ted Wells continue to fish. In the end, it might be something a court decides. 

A fishing expedition IN YOUR OPINION.
 
1) No, they didn't fully cooperate. Because Brady didn't turn over what was asked for (he's an employee of the organization). Because they wouldn't let Wells interview McNally again (Wells says that would have been only the SECOND time he talked to him...the previous interviews were with other parties/entities, almost immediately after the incident). For a couple other things (listen to Wells interview/statement from yesterday).  Full means Full.  It mean you don't get to pick and choose. 

2) What the Pats feel is withing their "rights" and what is very clearly layed out in the NFL rules and NFLPA are at odds.  Guess which side wins in that debate, until a grievance/objection is filed? Hint: It's not the Pats. How the Pats "feel" is irrelevant.  It is their MANDATE to FULLY COOPERATE. Full means everything that is asked of them, whether they like it or not. Whether they feel it's onerous or not. Whether the results potentially make them look bad, or not.  If they feel something is being done outside the NFL's purview...if they feel it's a fishing expedition...there is a process defined for them to contest that.

They decided not to do THAT.  Instead, they just said "No". 

And it's not like this independent investigation was "fast tracked".  It's been 4 freaking months.  If they felt the NFL was overstepping, they had MASSIVE amounts of time to start that process, file their objections, and get a ruling.  Hell, since that process is supposed to be anonymous, through an arbitrator, maybe it DID happen. I don't know.  But either it didn't, or the Pats "lost".

Either way....

We will see what happens on appeal with Brady's suspension. I don't think he should have been suspended at all. Yesterday I felt he will get 2 games, the more I look into this farce, the more I think he can win on appeal. Lets see how much Brady fights it and if it ends up in court like some have.

We'll see.  I HOPE it gets knocked down to 1 or 2 games.

With regard to the Patriots, Kraft initially said he would accept punishment and move on, but made a very different statement following what the league did yesterday. We shall see if he plans recourse, some in media have said he has options. Including suing the NFL like Al Davis did.

He can try.  Others have, with varying levels of success. 

I wonder...IF all the chips DO fall on the side of the NFL, would the Pats fans EVER be willing to accept the outcome, and potential "truth" of what happened.

I don't know where you get Wells elaborated extensively in the scope of the investigation, here is what he said in regards to that:

Mr. Brady, the report set forth, he came to the interview, he answered every question I put to him. He did not refuse to answer any questions in terms of the back and forth between Mr. Brady and my team. He was totally cooperative.

At the same time, he refused to submit us to review electronic data from his telephone or other instruments. Most of the key evidence in this case, as in most cases, comes from people's cell phones, and he refused to let us review the phones.

And I want to be crystal clear. I told Mr. Brady and his agents, I was willing not to take possession of the phone. I said, "I don't want to see any private information." I said, "Keep the phone. You and the agent, Mr. Yee, you can look at the phone. You give me documents that are responsive to this investigation and I will take your word that you have given me what's responsive." And they still refused.

What is the scope of the investigation? Who does he want electronic correspondence from? Wells doesn't say. So once again; We know the Patriots employees turned over their Cell Phones and we know there were texts with Tom Brady because they were part of the report. What other texts or electronic information could Wells have needed? Did he request every conversation that took place with teammates/coaches/ownership/family/friends on anything that could have related to the deflating of footballs or was it more broad than that? We don't know the specifics. Regardless of protections ensured, we still don't know what the scope was and exactly who Wells wanted to bring into this investigation. Is every single contact in Brady's cellphone potentially part of the Well's investigation? We already saw Well's bring in the mother and other family members of the two patriots employees for the purpose of what exactly? Seems like embarrassment and of course, fishing for something.


This is a prosecutor announcing his investigation prior to a trial, hired by the NFL, not to find out what happened but to find proof that the Patriots and Tom Brady were complacent. It cannot be shocking to anyone that he came to the conclusion of Brady and Pats being guilty. Now we wait to see how the defense responds. 

And yeah its a fishing expedition IN MY OPINION. I think that is quite evident in my post. It is not a fishing expedition IN YOUR OPINION.

We disagree on what constitutes full cooperation and the interpretation of NFL by-laws. I'll agree to disagree.

There is no direct evidence Brady did anything or the Patriots. Its the OPINION of Wells and his team that certain texts mean certain things and Brady is involved in a conspiracy to deflate anywhere within .3 to .5 PSI depending on the football(because PSI varies in these footballs). Or the gauge used prior to the game(2 gauges were used to test at halftime. One of them says it was tampering, one of them doesn't; can you guess which one Wells relied upon in the report?), . Or Anderson's best recollection of the PSI prior to the game(but not his recollection on the gauge used, with the gauges it was "certainly plausible" that Anderson used the gauge Wells said shows tampering even though Anderson said he most likely used the other one).


You wonder rather or not Patriots fan will ever accept the potential truth? Show me direct evidence. There is nothing. I wonder if non-Patriot fans and people who are so quick to question the character of Tom Brady, who has done nothing in his entire career to suggest he is liar or a cheat, will ever come around if he wins his appeal? I bet not.

[pilferk]

I don't know where you get Wells elaborated extensively in the scope of the investigation, here is what he said in regards to that:

Mr. Brady, the report set forth, he came to the interview, he answered every question I put to him. He did not refuse to answer any questions in terms of the back and forth between Mr. Brady and my team. He was totally cooperative.

At the same time, he refused to submit us to review electronic data from his telephone or other instruments. Most of the key evidence in this case, as in most cases, comes from people's cell phones, and he refused to let us review the phones.

And I want to be crystal clear. I told Mr. Brady and his agents, I was willing not to take possession of the phone. I said, "I don't want to see any private information." I said, "Keep the phone. You and the agent, Mr. Yee, you can look at the phone. You give me documents that are responsive to this investigation and I will take your word that you have given me what's responsive." And they still refused.

What is the scope of the investigation? Who does he want electronic correspondence from? Wells doesn't say.

I bolded it for you, above.

Since Yee and Brady get first crack....THEY would have gotten to decide what was responsive and what wasn't. Right? I mean...there's the logic.

And we know it's not "everything" because....then you wouldn't have the line in there about "documents that are responsive". Again, there's the logic.

They just said "No".

Now, if they'd turned ANYTHING over, and Wells second guessed their honesty...that's an entirely different debate.  We didn't get there.

Because they said "No".

That's not "full cooperation".

So once again; We know the Patriots employees turned over their Cell Phones and we know there were texts with Tom Brady because they were part of the report. What other texts or electronic information could Wells have needed? Did he request every conversation that took place with teammates/coaches/ownership/family/friends on anything that could have related to the deflating of footballs or was it more broad than that? We don't know the specifics.

We don't need to.

Because Brady, his legal team, and his agent, would have had the opportunity to discern, in their pass at selecting and turning over "something", what was relevant.

They chose to turn over NOTHING.

Which makes the rest of the above irrelevant.

Regardless of protections ensured, we still don't know what the scope was and exactly who Wells wanted to bring into this investigation. Is every single contact in Brady's cellphone potentially part of the Well's investigation? We already saw Well's bring in the mother and other family members of the two patriots employees for the purpose of what exactly? Seems like embarrassment and of course, fishing for something.

Sure if you like strawmen and slippery slopes. What's good for the goose is good for the gander, no?  You're willing to slide all the way down, that it was fishing and an embarrassment, without all the details.  But.....with a whole lot more supporting documentation and evidence (circumstantial or not), you're not willing to entertain the possiblity of guilt..that's sorta interesting. No?

This is a prosecutor announcing his investigation prior to a trial, hired by the NFL, not to find out what happened but to find proof that the Patriots and Tom Brady were complacent. It cannot be shocking to anyone that he came to the conclusion of Brady and Pats being guilty. Now we wait to see how the defense responds.

Sort of. But..not really.  This isn't a legal process. It doesn't bear the same rules of evidence, or the same processes.  But those rules and processes are laid out very clearly by the NFL.  If the Pats don't like them, they have 2 choices: Fight them and hope to win or leave the NFL.  Because thems the brakes. 

And yeah its a fishing expedition IN MY OPINION. I think that is quite evident in my post. It is not a fishing expedition IN YOUR OPINION.

I just wanted to clarify, since in the first sentence you stated it like it was a widely accepted fact.  That's all.  I'm not even so much against acknowledging it MIGHT have been a fishing expedition.  My point is that, until the Pats get a ruling on that, through the proper channels and processes, it doesn't much matter.  They are burdened, by their charter and membership in the NFL, to cooperate fully, whether they like it or not.  Right up until "someone", in an official capacity, tells them they are allowed to stop.

We disagree on what constitutes full cooperation and the interpretation of NFL by-laws. I'll agree to disagree.

Fair enough.  But....pretty much every expert NOT a fan of the Pats, or a member of the Boston media, is interpreting the rules/bylaws/process the same way I am.  Chapter and verse. So I just want to point out, I'm not unique in this interpretation (or even in the minority).

AND...it's the same interpretation that's been applied, and bourne out, in other cases. Spygate. Bountygate. Various PED investigations/appeals. Tampering/Collusion instances (meaning around player/personell aquisition, not necessarily equipment).  What constitutes "full cooperation", and how you go about complying....I haven't seen the NFL overruled on that very often, if ever.

There is no direct evidence Brady did anything or the Patriots. Its the OPINION of Wells and his team that certain texts mean certain things and Brady is involved in a conspiracy to deflate anywhere within .3 to .5 PSI depending on the football(because PSI varies in these footballs). Or the gauge used prior to the game(2 gauges were used to test at halftime. One of them says it was tampering, one of them doesn't; can you guess which one Wells relied upon in the report?), . Or Anderson's best recollection of the PSI prior to the game(but not his recollection on the gauge used, with the gauges it was "certainly plausible" that Anderson used the gauge Wells said shows tampering even though Anderson said he most likely used the other one).

Again, I don't think the majority of the punishment levied is for the "did he or didn't he".  I think it's for the lack of cooperation, and perceived dishonesty, in the investigation.

BUT, that being said, I think there's an awful lot you have to explain away...circumstantial evidence or not...to come around to "Brady is innocent".  This is not the legal process. It is not "beyond a reasonable doubt", because he's not on trial.  In addition, it means you have to believe an awful lot of other people were lying, mis remembering, and making horrificly inappropriate "jokes" about things they actually had no involvement in (MCNALLY DID NOT, OFFICALLY, HAVE ANY REASON TO BE TALKING ABOUT INFLATION RATES...HE DID NOT TOUCH BALLS IN HIS TEAM APPOINTED ROLE. EVER.) to come around to "There was no tampering", too.  I just can't do it.

You wonder rather or not Patriots fan will ever accept the potential truth? Show me direct evidence. There is nothing. I wonder if non-Patriot fans and people who are so quick to question the character of Tom Brady, who has done nothing in his entire career to suggest he is liar or a cheat, will ever come around if he wins his appeal? I bet not.

I will.  That's what the process is about.

It won't mean that I don't still think there was tampering.  But if an arbitrator says he think Brady meets the standard of "full cooperation", laid out in the NFL rule book....I'll buy that. And if that same arbitrator says he believes Brady didn't know anything about any tampering that did take place, I'll buy that too.  I will likewise buy, if an arbitrator says so, that Brady didn't, directly or indirectly (remember, indirectly would still count), influence members of the staff to tamper with equipment.

I don't think you could get me to a point, given the evidence, that no tampering occurred, though.  I've thought it from the get go. The math didn't work out then, and the circumstantial evidence, AND the math, work out even worse, now.


[/quote]

[faldor]

The fact that Wells felt the need to speak yesterday, to defend his character, is pretty telling. On the one hand, he spoke strongly and came off pretty well. But it points out that there are massive holes in the report. It was an unprecedented move by him.

It's tough to argue about certain things in this report because there's a lot that we don't know, especially on the Patriots side. The whole Brady not sharing texts and emails for instance. The way Wells describes it makes You wonder why he wouldn't comply. It sounds like, even if he had incriminating texts, he could've conveniently glossed over them and only shared texts he viewed as "safe". What did Wells expect to get out of that? Maybe that's why Brady's team was non compliant. Maybe they felt it was a no win situation for them. If they shared 20 texts and 5 emails, would the report read that "it is more probable than not that Mr. Brady withheld pertinent information"? If this goes to court, he has to hand over the phone and they lose the "control" offered by Wells. So apparently there was something there that didn't smell right to them.

I don't claim the Patriots are innocent in this. Taking the balls into the bathroom, the "deflator" text, etc. While there's no definitive proof, I do believe there's enough there to warrant some sort of punishment. Just not as harsh as was handed down. But that doesn't change my opinion that this was poorly handled from the get go. The NFL was out to get the Patriots, and they went to great lengths to do so. No one can say anything to convince me otherwise. And since this was the NFL vs. the Patriots, the millions of dollars the NFL spent on the Wells report were only going to end with a conviction. Despite anything that Ted might say. How about investigating the misinformation doled out by sources close to the league that cast the Patriots in a negative light every step of the way? How about the NFL's awful handling of this whole situation? Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain!

[pilferk]

The fact that Wells felt the need to speak yesterday, to defend his character, is pretty telling. On the one hand, he spoke strongly and came off pretty well. But it points out that there are massive holes in the report. It was an unprecedented move by him.

I disagree.  I think he felt the need to defend himself from wildly inappropriate, and public, accusations by various members of the Boston media, the Patriots, and Brady's legal team/agent.

If they get to speak...why doesn't he get to defend himself?

It's tough to argue about certain things in this report because there's a lot that we don't know, especially on the Patriots side. The whole Brady not sharing texts and emails for instance. The way Wells describes it makes You wonder why he wouldn't comply. It sounds like, even if he had incriminating texts, he could've conveniently glossed over them and only shared texts he viewed as "safe". What did Wells expect to get out of that? Maybe that's why Brady's team was non compliant. Maybe they felt it was a no win situation for them. If they shared 20 texts and 5 emails, would the report read that "it is more probable than not that Mr. Brady withheld pertinent information"? If this goes to court, he has to hand over the phone and they lose the "control" offered by Wells. So apparently there was something there that didn't smell right to them.

Because if you share "something", you can make the case to an arbitrator that you DID try to comply with the request, and you DID cooperate.

If you provide NOTHING, you can't.

And, again, they have no right to apply a "smell test" in an ongoing, authorized, NFL investigation.  Period.  They are expected to cooperate or face penalties for not doing so.  It's that simple.

If you don't like it, avail yourself to the proper channels, during the investigation, and get a ruling...or, give up your millions of dollars and go play in the CFL.  You are an employee of an NFL franchise.  You are a member of the NFLPA.  You HAVE to do things within those confines...or you get punished.

I don't claim the Patriots are innocent in this. Taking the balls into the bathroom, the "deflator" text, etc. While there's no definitive proof, I do believe there's enough there to warrant some sort of punishment. Just not as harsh as was handed down.

On that, we agree.

But that doesn't change my opinion that this was poorly handled from the get go. The NFL was out to get the Patriots, and they went to great lengths to do so. No one can say anything to convince me otherwise. And since this was the NFL vs. the Patriots, the millions of dollars the NFL spent on the Wells report were only going to end with a conviction. Despite anything that Ted might say. How about investigating the misinformation doled out by sources close to the league that cast the Patriots in a negative light every step of the way? How about the NFL's awful handling of this whole situation? Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain!

And there, we part company.  I don't think there was a witch hunt.  I don't think anyone was out to get anyone else.  I think that's fan fueled paranoia, akin to the yearly schedule rants ("the NFL HATES US").

And yes, the NFL handled this badly.  They should have just issued the fines in the week after the incident, for equip tampering, and moved on. Let the Pats appeal after the Superbowl, and see where everything falls out.  The NFL made a HUGE deal out of it, and that, likely, got peoples hackles up.

BUT, the Pats did themselves no favors with their RESPONSE to the charges of tampering, either.  They basically DARED the NFL to investigate, and DEMANDED apologies.  They took an aggressive stance, and I think that, to some extent, forced the NFL's hand into making this a bigger deal than it probably should have, or could have, been.

It takes two to tango...and the Pats hit the dance floor, hard.

[faldor]

A little more on Brady not sharing texts, etc. One thought is that he didn't want to set a precedent for the union to have to turn over electrical devices when under investigation. Something to the effect at least. Not sure I buy that, but that's one explanation some are going with.

As for, will Patriots fans ever to be able to accept guilt if they lose all appeals. I'm sure a lot already have and many more never will. Me personally, I'd accept it, if given enough reason to. I'd like to hear Tom Brady's side of things. He's been pretty quiet during the whole process. We really don't know much about his involvement and what he does or doesn't know. If it comes out that he told the ball boys to do "whatever" they could to get the balls on the lower psi threshold, especially for bad weather games. Then I'd have no choice but to view him as guilty. If it's more of him just telling the ball boys how he likes the balls, and they took it upon themselves to go above and beyond to get the balls at a certain level, then I'd give him a pass. Someone is probably guilty, I'm completely willing to accept that. Who, whether it's a group effort, in what respects, and to what degree is unknown.

Brady is going to fight this, so maybe we'll find some of the answers to these questions. This isn't anywhere close to being over.

[pilferk]

A little more on Brady not sharing texts, etc. One thought is that he didn't want to set a precedent for the union to have to turn over electrical devices when under investigation. Something to the effect at least. Not sure I buy that, but that's one explanation some are going with.

Again, then you go to the NFLPA, and have them fight that fight for you during the investigation...and get a ruling. That's what the union is there to do...advocate for the player, and get official rulings/stances.  Brady, the player, doesn't get to make that determination.  That's the rule, and it applies to everyone...even if you're a golden boy and one of the best QBs in the game (and maybe ever).

Because the NFL rules, and current player agreement, give the NFL broad ranges of powers in terms of investigation, and getting access to communciations (emails, texts, memos, etc) are all spelled out as being within their span of control.

And, again, Wells was willing to accept not taking possession of the actual device.

As for, will Patriots fans ever to be able to accept guilt if they lose all appeals. I'm sure a lot already have and many more never will. Me personally, I'd accept it, if given enough reason to. I'd like to hear Tom Brady's side of things. He's been pretty quiet during the whole process. We really don't know much about his involvement and what he does or doesn't know. If it comes out that he told the ball boys to do "whatever" they could to get the balls on the lower psi threshold, especially for bad weather games. Then I'd have no choice but to view him as guilty. If it's more of him just telling the ball boys how he likes the balls, and they took it upon themselves to go above and beyond to get the balls at a certain level, then I'd give him a pass. Someone is probably guilty, I'm completely willing to accept that. Who, whether it's a group effort, in what respects, and to what degree is unknown.

I doubt Brady came out and said "Hey, you, make sure the psi are under the legal limit".

It was probably a lot more innocuous like "Hey, these balls feel a little hard....I like 'em a little softer" and "Hey, can you make sure when you prep the gamies that they're on the low side"?  And maybe a couple "Yeah, I like this more than this" kinda conversations.  Nothing as overt as "Hey, 11.5 PSI or DIE, motherfucker"....

And, again, if Brady had come out the day after with something like "Yeah, I like the balls a little softer....and I've let the equipment guys know that.  You know, I've never asked them to do anything against the rules, but I do put a lot of pressure on those guys to get me a ball I'm comfortable with. Maybe they took that, got a little overzealous, and...well...if they did that, I'm sorry.  We'll make sure to let them know that's not what I want. I'd never want anyone to break the rules for me"....we'd likely not be discussing this in May.

Brady is going to fight this, so maybe we'll find some of the answers to these questions. This isn't anywhere close to being over.

Is he? I've been alternating between work and posting here...no access to sports media, really.  Has he filed the appeal yet?

[faldor]

The fact that Wells felt the need to speak yesterday, to defend his character, is pretty telling. On the one hand, he spoke strongly and came off pretty well. But it points out that there are massive holes in the report. It was an unprecedented move by him.

I disagree.  I think he felt the need to defend himself from wildly inappropriate, and public, accusations by various members of the Boston media, the Patriots, and Brady's legal team/agent.

If they get to speak...why doesn't he get to defend himself?

It's tough to argue about certain things in this report because there's a lot that we don't know, especially on the Patriots side. The whole Brady not sharing texts and emails for instance. The way Wells describes it makes You wonder why he wouldn't comply. It sounds like, even if he had incriminating texts, he could've conveniently glossed over them and only shared texts he viewed as "safe". What did Wells expect to get out of that? Maybe that's why Brady's team was non compliant. Maybe they felt it was a no win situation for them. If they shared 20 texts and 5 emails, would the report read that "it is more probable than not that Mr. Brady withheld pertinent information"? If this goes to court, he has to hand over the phone and they lose the "control" offered by Wells. So apparently there was something there that didn't smell right to them.

Because if you share "something", you can make the case to an arbitrator that you DID try to comply with the request, and you DID cooperate.

If you provide NOTHING, you can't.

And, again, they have no right to apply a "smell test" in an ongoing, authorized, NFL investigation.  Period.  They are expected to cooperate or face penalties for not doing so.  It's that simple.

If you don't like it, avail yourself to the proper channels, during the investigation, and get a ruling...or, give up your millions of dollars and go play in the CFL.  You are an employee of an NFL franchise.  You are a member of the NFLPA.  You HAVE to do things within those confines...or you get punished.

I don't claim the Patriots are innocent in this. Taking the balls into the bathroom, the "deflator" text, etc. While there's no definitive proof, I do believe there's enough there to warrant some sort of punishment. Just not as harsh as was handed down.

On that, we agree.

But that doesn't change my opinion that this was poorly handled from the get go. The NFL was out to get the Patriots, and they went to great lengths to do so. No one can say anything to convince me otherwise. And since this was the NFL vs. the Patriots, the millions of dollars the NFL spent on the Wells report were only going to end with a conviction. Despite anything that Ted might say. How about investigating the misinformation doled out by sources close to the league that cast the Patriots in a negative light every step of the way? How about the NFL's awful handling of this whole situation? Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain!

And there, we part company.  I don't think there was a witch hunt.  I don't think anyone was out to get anyone else.  I think that's fan fueled paranoia, akin to the yearly schedule rants ("the NFL HATES US").

And yes, the NFL handled this badly.  They should have just issued the fines in the week after the incident, for equip tampering, and moved on. Let the Pats appeal after the Superbowl, and see where everything falls out.  The NFL made a HUGE deal out of it, and that, likely, got peoples hackles up.

BUT, the Pats did themselves no favors with their RESPONSE to the charges of tampering, either.  They basically DARED the NFL to investigate, and DEMANDED apologies.  They took an aggressive stance, and I think that, to some extent, forced the NFL's hand into making this a bigger deal than it probably should have, or could have, been.

It takes two to tango...and the Pats hit the dance floor, hard.

I have no problem with Wells defending himself. I understand it. But he's never done it before. As a lawyer who's dealt with high profile cases plenty of times, I'm sure his integrity has been questioned. Does he routinely have conference calls? That's all I'm saying.

Also, it isn't only New England Patriots supporters and media who think this report is a joke. If it was, why would Wells feel the need to respond? Obviously those close to the situation are going to disagree with the findings when they don't fall in line with your beliefs. But there are plenty on non partisan people who find the report to be fraught with holes. Other legal experts, national media members, political figures. I'm guessing that's why Wells felt the need to speak. Although it was mainly in response to Brady's agent, Don Yee's strong statements. A lot of people hate Brady, but he also has a lot off support in this. And they don't all reside in the greater Boston area.

[Sober_times]

Since we are going back and forth on the Patriots and this whole thing, I thought I would post an article Sports Illustrated did to illustrate what options the Patriots and/or Brady have and the case they could potentially make;

http://www.si.com/nfl/2015/05/12/deflategate-tom-brady-new-england-patriots-legal-options

I think it raises some interesting points.

[pilferk]

I have no problem with Wells defending himself. I understand it. But he's never done it before. As a lawyer who's dealt with high profile cases plenty of times, I'm sure his integrity has been questioned. Does he routinely have conference calls? That's all I'm saying.

In the span of the actual legal process..you can't. So, in his duties as an actual prosecutor/litigator..you'd quickly find yourself in contempt of court. Post trial..I can't find a whole lot of evidence he's been called out by a defense attorney, the media, or a judge...so...no, likely he'd not been "called out", like this, before.

In terms of an NFL investigation...you can.  And I can't recall anyone attacking the guy, in the national spotlight, and questioning the investigators credibility, integrity, independance, conclusions, intelligence, and a whole host and manner of other things.  Or any other head of an NFL investigation, for that matter.  Even for high profile cases like Spygate and Bountygate.

Can you?

Also, it isn't only New England Patriots supporters and media who think this report is a joke. If it was, why would Wells feel the need to respond? Obviously those close to the situation are going to disagree with the findings when they don't fall in line with your beliefs. But there are plenty on non partisan people who find the report to be fraught with holes. Other legal experts, national media members, political figures. I'm guessing that's why Wells felt the need to speak. Although it was mainly in response to Brady's agent, Don Yee's strong statements. A lot of people hate Brady, but he also has a lot off support in this. And they don't all reside in the greater Boston area.

I don's see or hear a lot of people attacking the report, or Wells, in the national media. They might exist, but, from the national outlets I listen to/see/hear...I just don't see all that much dissent from those not under the patriots sphere.  I heard some, with the language, early..until it was pointed out that's the standard language of an NFL investigative report.  I'm sure there are a couple more dissenting voices, somewhere.  The bulk of them, though?

Wells is responding because, those small pool of voices are being trumpeted in the national media megaphone.

I see lots of people disagreeing with the harshness of the punishment, though.

[faldor]

A little more on Brady not sharing texts, etc. One thought is that he didn't want to set a precedent for the union to have to turn over electrical devices when under investigation. Something to the effect at least. Not sure I buy that, but that's one explanation some are going with.

Again, then you go to the NFLPA, and have them fight that fight for you during the investigation...and get a ruling. That's what the union is there to do...advocate for the player, and get official rulings/stances.  Brady, the player, doesn't get to make that determination.  That's the rule, and it applies to everyone...even if you're a golden boy and one of the best QBs in the game (and maybe ever).

Because the NFL rules, and current player agreement, give the NFL broad ranges of powers in terms of investigation, and getting access to communciations (emails, texts, memos, etc) are all spelled out as being within their span of control.

And, again, Wells was willing to accept not taking possession of the actual device.

As for, will Patriots fans ever to be able to accept guilt if they lose all appeals. I'm sure a lot already have and many more never will. Me personally, I'd accept it, if given enough reason to. I'd like to hear Tom Brady's side of things. He's been pretty quiet during the whole process. We really don't know much about his involvement and what he does or doesn't know. If it comes out that he told the ball boys to do "whatever" they could to get the balls on the lower psi threshold, especially for bad weather games. Then I'd have no choice but to view him as guilty. If it's more of him just telling the ball boys how he likes the balls, and they took it upon themselves to go above and beyond to get the balls at a certain level, then I'd give him a pass. Someone is probably guilty, I'm completely willing to accept that. Who, whether it's a group effort, in what respects, and to what degree is unknown.

I doubt Brady came out and said "Hey, you, make sure the psi are under the legal limit".

It was probably a lot more innocuous like "Hey, these balls feel a little hard....I like 'em a little softer" and "Hey, can you make sure when you prep the gamies that they're on the low side"?  And maybe a couple "Yeah, I like this more than this" kinda conversations.  Nothing as overt as "Hey, 11.5 PSI or DIE, motherfucker"....

And, again, if Brady had come out the day after with something like "Yeah, I like the balls a little softer....and I've let the equipment guys know that.  You know, I've never asked them to do anything against the rules, but I do put a lot of pressure on those guys to get me a ball I'm comfortable with. Maybe they took that, got a little overzealous, and...well...if they did that, I'm sorry.  We'll make sure to let them know that's not what I want. I'd never want anyone to break the rules for me"....we'd likely not be discussing this in May.

Brady is going to fight this, so maybe we'll find some of the answers to these questions. This isn't anywhere close to being over.

Is he? I've been alternating between work and posting here...no access to sports media, really.  Has he filed the appeal yet?

He hasn't filed the appeal yet, but he's built up quite a lethal legal team including Kessler who has taken on the NFL and won a number of times. One source told Adam Schefter that he expected the suspension to be overturned completely. And according to Schefter, the NFL didn't give out a 4 game suspension with the idea of it getting reduced. Not like the 6 game suspension the gave Roethlisberger that they "planned" to reduce to 4. So it could be an all or nothing situation. Although I still think it's more likely it gets knocked down to 2.

We're in agreement that Brady could've handled this better from the start and this all could've been avoided. But for whatever reason, they've chosen this path and it's too late to turn around now. If they feel they have a strong case, you might as well take it to the next level at this point.

Kraft could fight the fine and loss of draft picks too, but that seems more unlikely as I'm not sure he wants to take the NFL to court.

[pilferk]

Since we are going back and forth on the Patriots and this whole thing, I thought I would post an article Sports Illustrated did to illustrate what options the Patriots and/or Brady have and the case they could potentially make;

http://www.si.com/nfl/2015/05/12/deflategate-tom-brady-new-england-patriots-legal-options

I think it raises some interesting points.

There are good points in there, especially those concerning the penalties assessed.

I think it's especially interesting to look at the Favre fine (50k) for not turning over text messages.

[faldor]

I have no problem with Wells defending himself. I understand it. But he's never done it before. As a lawyer who's dealt with high profile cases plenty of times, I'm sure his integrity has been questioned. Does he routinely have conference calls? That's all I'm saying.

In the span of the actual legal process..you can't. So, in his duties as an actual prosecutor/litigator..you'd quickly find yourself in contempt of court. Post trial..I can't find a whole lot of evidence he's been called out by a defense attorney, the media, or a judge...so...no, likely he'd not been "called out", like this, before.

In terms of an NFL investigation...you can.  And I can't recall anyone attacking the guy, in the national spotlight, and questioning the investigators credibility, integrity, independance, conclusions, intelligence, and a whole host and manner of other things.  Or any other head of an NFL investigation, for that matter.  Even for high profile cases like Spygate and Bountygate.

Can you?

Also, it isn't only New England Patriots supporters and media who think this report is a joke. If it was, why would Wells feel the need to respond? Obviously those close to the situation are going to disagree with the findings when they don't fall in line with your beliefs. But there are plenty on non partisan people who find the report to be fraught with holes. Other legal experts, national media members, political figures. I'm guessing that's why Wells felt the need to speak. Although it was mainly in response to Brady's agent, Don Yee's strong statements. A lot of people hate Brady, but he also has a lot off support in this. And they don't all reside in the greater Boston area.

I don's see or hear a lot of people attacking the report, or Wells, in the national media. They might exist, but, from the national outlets I listen to/see/hear...I just don't see all that much dissent from those not under the patriots sphere.  I heard some, with the language, early..until it was pointed out that's the standard language of an NFL investigative report.  I'm sure there are a couple more dissenting voices, somewhere.  The bulk of them, though?

Wells is responding because, those small pool of voices are being trumpeted in the national media megaphone.

I see lots of people disagreeing with the harshness of the punishment, though.

Trust me, there are PLENTY of people in the Boston media alone who agree with the report and believe they are guilty. But I've also read more than a few articles nationally criticizing the report. Mike Florio of Pro Football Talk , who was very critical of the Pats through the whole process, brought up the fact that Anderson wasn't positive which gauge he used before the game. Michael McCann, from the article Sober Times posted. There was one on yahoo too, and others that I can't think of off the top of my head. They're out there.

I doubt Wells has ever gotten as much pushback in any other case, because I doubt he's ever dealt with a situation such as this. The Patriots were taking on fire from the start. Erroneous reports being leaked to the media. That is why they reacted so strongly. Looking back, that probably wasn't the best way to go. But when you feel you're innocent and your back is against the wall, that's not easy to do.