Pneumonic

4 Pats balls are not a large enough sample size either, especially when their are, apparently, no protocols followed wrt to taking said measurements. It's folly.

And this may be what it all boils down to in the end. An issue of the non submission of text messages rather than of actual ball pressure shenanigans, What a lovely world we now live in. 4 Colts balls isn't a large enough sample size to be valid. As for Pats balls. http://www.breitbart.com/sports/2015/05/06/probably-doesnt-cut-it-wells-report-damns-investigators-more-than-patriots/ I touch on a couple protocol concerns in my post #921 .

My math is fine. My English not so much which may be contributing to your not understanding my relevant points. Th eissue is not with the measurements nor the math but the protocol for taking said measurements. Namely, there apparently are no established protocols in place for the measurement process.

I did back in post 921 to which you already responded.

Sorta,kinda. Basically, the he Patriots’ reputation as the best cheaters in the league drew the focus of other teams in the NFL and eventually led to the Wells report. IOW, implied possible sting operation.

The issue isn't with the gas law (BTW weren't 8 of the 11 shown to be in proper levesl?) but rather questioning the competency of the measurements and/or those taking the measurements.

http://blog.masslive..._investiga.html "With the text messages, the scope that they asked for was actually very, very wide," Yee told CNN. "I probably should have made the letter public that we received from the NFL's lawyers, but in any event, if we would have provided the phone or text messages...Tom is also member of the union, the commissioner's office actually does not have any subpoena power. If a prominent player were to provide all of their private communications absent a subpoena, that sets a dangerous precedent for all players facing disciplinary measures." "Finally," Yee continued, "any information we would have provided -- and the Wells investigative team did ask us to go through Tom's phone on our own and provide them with information if we chose to go that route -- but as you might surmise, if we would have chose to go that route any information we would have given them they probably would have had skepticism about, anyway. When it came down to it, either way you turned, you're really not playing on a level playing field."

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2457244-sources-patriots-reputation-as-nfls-best-cheaters-made-them-a-target

Can you support his claim? I ask because Brady's agent says that one of the reasons why he advised against his client handing over the text messages is it might set a bad precedent for the players. I can't imagine this is something the NFLPA would want for its membership. http://blog.masslive.com/patriots/2015/05/tom_bradys_agent_nfl_investiga.html "With the text messages, the scope that they asked for was actually very, very wide," Yee told CNN. "I probably should have made the letter public that we received from the NFL's lawyers, but in any event, if we would have provided the phone or text messages...Tom is also member of the union, the commissioner's office actually does not have any subpoena power. If a prominent player were to provide all of their private communications absent a subpoena, that sets a dangerous precedent for all players facing disciplinary measures." "Finally," Yee continued, "any information we would have provided -- and the Wells investigative team did ask us to go through Tom's phone on our own and provide them with information if we chose to go that route -- but as you might surmise, if we would have chose to go that route any information we would have given them they probably would have had skepticism about, anyway. When it came down to it, either way you turned, you're really not playing on a level playing field."

Brady's agent speaks some on the matter. http://nesn.com/2015/05/agent-don-yee-malice-intended-toward-tom-brady-in-wells-report/ "YEE: I don’t accept that. I don’t even accept that because it’s very clear, the report actually lays out the absence of any league protocols on how to handle footballs. There are no protocols. For example, every referee can buy any gauge to use in measuring the footballs. Number two — no measurements are even written down or recorded. In fact, the Wells investigators simply had to rely on referee Walt Anderson’s memory." "YEE: I do think there was some malice intended toward Tom and the organization. I don’t know if the malice was intentional. They’ve been winning for a long time, as we know, and I’ve always told my friends who’ve inquired about the NFL — I tell them, there is no jealousy or envy like NFL jealousy or envy."

You are entitled to your opinion on whether clear evidence is required or not. I happen to think it is vitally important to have an established reference documented and not some presumption based on the recollection of an official who couldn't even recall whether he signed the kicking balls or even what gauge was used for crying out loud. The entire premise of the report is based on pre-game ball pressure totals that have no proof of being accurate. It's a sham. Did the report mention if a R&R study was done on the gauges? If not there is no guarantee of them working fine.

That was funny as hell. On Keith's pt that Brady ruined his rep .... that may be so but at least Brady has a rep to ruin. Unlike Keith.

The flaws are seemingly many but the (fatal) flaw is we have no clear evidence of the starting PSI points of the footballs. All we have is the recollection of a ref who, as I have pointed out, functioned with highly questionable competency in this matter. Since we have no clear evidence of the starting PSI's the final PSI's matter little without an established comparable reference. I would also be interested in knowing if proper measurement testing protocol was followed by the refs in question. In particular, if they performed a R&R and employed a capable measurement system that ensured the tolerance isn't consumed by the variability of the measurement itself. This information doesn't appear in the Well's report that I can see.

And, after all this time, energy and $ spent, what was the report summary given: “In sum, the data did not provide a basis for us to determine with absolute certainty whether there was or was not tampering as the analysis of such data ultimately is dependent upon assumptions and information that is not certain.” Lawyers and billable hours!

Ooops, sorry only that 1 sentence got posted. This is what I wrote wrt ref incompetancy That they were only capable of measuring 4 of the Colts balls means the results aren’t statistically relevant since the sample size is not large enough. Let’s consider that if you compare the Pats four highest PSI footballs to the four of the Colts, the drop in pressure as a percentage of original PSI is statistically insignificant. Further, the entire premise of using the Colts balls as the control group is folly unless the process is ….. “controlled”. There is no proof that this happened. I would question at least 2 things here relative to the competency of those involved: A) Did the Colts balls reach equilibrium temperature at the beginning of the game? B) Were the Colts balls measured at the same time as the Pats balls during 1/2time? Further incompetency is suggested as a result of the refs failing to use the same gauges on the same balls before/at half. Or, how about Anderson not being competent enough to recall if he initialized kicking balls (yet he’s fully competent enough to remember the PSI’s of 24 balls pre game) Maybe this memory block also helps explain why the balls disappeared for the first time in said ref's 19 year tenure …… Or, how about the refs not knowing that they, not the Colts, are the only ones allowed to test footballs during a game? I am at least open to the possibility that Yee's contention of sting could be in play. With this league's administration, I believe anything is possible.

I would agree with you if I was certain that the Wells report was in fact done without bias. Given many of the inconsistencies in this report, I wonder.

That they were only capable of measuring 4 of the Colts balls. The point of his lawyer is it wasn't an independent study

Playing along with the conspiracy theory .... If the league wanted to catch them in the act then it also would make sense that they would follow this up with a result-oriented work done by an advocate of the league. Remember, these are Yee's words not mine. As far as I what I believe. His opinion has equal weight to the opinions offered in Wells' report.

But, are these points not entirely meaningless because there is a question on the validity of the starting PSI's due to referee incompetence? I have no comment on the process; I was simply offering up an answer to a query as to why the league got what they wanted.

Not my explanation but Brady's agent/lawyer "One item alone taints this entire report. What does it say about the league office’s protocols and ethics when it allows one team to tip it off to an issue prior to a championship game, and no league officials or game officials notified the Patriots of the same issue prior to the game? This suggests it may be more probable than not that the league cooperated with the Colts in perpetrating a sting operation. The Wells report buries this issue in a footnote on page 46 without any further elaboration."

I hadn't heard the bit about the CBA. Good point about other text activity though.

Was he obligated to turn them over? Not that it matters as what would having Brady's text give them that they already didn't have with McNally and Jastremski's text histories; Brady's texts to them would show up, no?. That's the million $ question. I believe Yee is also one of the Brady's lawyers as well. My guess is there is more to come on this matter. Perhaps then we'll find out some answers to your questions.

I accept it as factual as the Wells report which, I have read BTW. One would think but, after reading Brady's lawyer's response, I am not so sure. According to his lawyer he did co-operate.

Thanks for clarifying the Lloyd matter. I actually have my suspicions that the investigation was conducted fairly and in an objective way. Not that that matters as the league got what they wanted in all of this.

Apparently Brady hasn't, at least according his lawyer who condemned the report as omitting key facts and lines of inquiry.