Pneumonic

http://mmqb.si.com/mmqb/2015/08/06/roger-goodell-nfl-deflategate-dez-bryant-fight-chip-kelly

While I do see Brady as more innocent than guilty (60-40 in favour of innocence based almost entirely on suspect science) the reference to innocence you speak of is how Brady, himself, views things, not I. I simply summarized how I see how things unfolded. Now, it's up to the judge to rule on pts 1 and 2.

How is this smearing? I simply summarized what my beliefs of what happened and drew no conclusions on guilt/innocence in either case. I will have to go back and see what ? you asked earlier. Edit: I grew up in Toronto amidst a family of Bills fans and so was a Bills fan for the better part of my life. After the OJ incident my NFL/Bills fandom wavered and I considered supporting an alternate team. I had a good friend (a Bills fan) whose nephew tried out for the Patriots, so he and I adopted the Pats as a 2nd team. I still root for both but it's been much easier to root for the Patriots of late.

Gathering up ALL of the evidence, it is pretty obvious to me what transpired here. Goodell took the gamble that he could: Disregard collectively bargained policies in issuing his initial discipline. Short circuit an independent appeals process in order to gain support for his discipline, despite it being handed out based on assumptions and non proven truths. Forever seal off evidence of this malfeasance from the public. Convince Brady to accept the punishment or win in court on a technicality focusing on the limited scope of appeals when it comes to arbitration awards. What Goodell didn’t anticipate was that Brady would be unwaveringly in his innocence and would not settle under the NFL’s pressure tactics. Nor did he expect that a federal judge would not obfuscate the truth to the public in order to fight the NFL's PR battle for them.

Now, now. The point of posting these other links is to offer up the other side of the media's perspective, now that people actually have access to more relevant documents that relate to the other side of the story. Up until a few days ago, it was all 1 sided information that the media, and viewers, were referencing to base their conclusions on. The reality is that now that these documents have been released, it seems much more "probable than not" that it is the "NFL" which has more guilt in all of this then does Brady.

http://www.msn.com/en-ca/sports/nfl/roger-goodell-blatantly-lied-to-make-tom-brady-look-dishonest/ar-BBlqeSi

http://sports.yahoo.com/news/roger-goodell-s-manipulation-of-tom-brady-s-testimony-leaves-nfl-on-slippery-slope-214409591-nfl.html

http://regressing.deadspin.com/the-nfls-dumbass-science-report-is-a-feature-not-a-bug-1722289874

OK, I do side with Brady.

I do side with Brady but it doesn't matter because this case's outcome doesn't rest on his innocence/guilt. It's not about Tom Brady; it's about the NFL vs the NFLPA.

As I said, it doesn't matter what anyone thinks about Brady's guilt or innocence. This is not about what's right or wrong; it's about application of procedure and policy wrt labor and CBA law. If it were about what;s right or wrong, that would clearly be shown via simple science before any of this other crap got blow out of proportion.

The whole mess is what lacks context, amongst other things.

I do but it doesn't really matter as this is not a civil suit issue. It's a CBA/labor law issue.

I didn't really follow the Hernandez situation enough to comment either way.

Well, I certainly don't see any evidence that proves he cheated. As for how I view his answers ..... can't say from simple text messages that lack context. I would probably rank it as 60:40 that he is not lying and telling the truth. I think this ends in a fine and no suspension but, realizing it's labor and CBA arbitration law, flip a coin.

Reading over this latest transcript ... what an embarrassment this league is.

“You can’t do anything with the footballs in terms of any artificial, whether you’re heating them up, whether it’s a regular game ball or kicking ball, you can’t do anything to the football,” NFL V.P. of officiating Dean Blandino said at the time. “So that was noticed during the game, both teams were made aware of it during the game and we will certainly remind the clubs as we get into more cold weather games that you can’t do anything with the football in terms of heating them up with those sideline heaters.”

Complicating matters is the video of the Vikes/Panthers game where footballs were being illegally doctored via some salamander heaters. All the league did with this cheating is warn the teams not to heat up footballs anymore. They certainly didn't set up a trap as they did with deflategate.

I think the confusion lies in your post, 1244, above where you ask if the judge told the TWO parties to cut it out. You then implied that Kraft was one of the parties (presumably on Brady's side) when in fact, he's on the owner side. At any rate, Brady's side (ie the NFLPA) hasn't said anything to upset the judge.

Kraft is an owner so, if anyone is going to get disciplined, it would have to be the NFL not the NFLPA.

It's now a labour law battle where I think it's a flip of the coin type outcome.

Keep in mind that I am not saying the science is now the fundamental issue. The NFLPA was clear in their petition to vacate based on the following issues: - Brady was not given advance notice - The punishment was without precedent in the context of the CBA - That "general awareness" is an insufficient/unknown standard for assigning responsibility for a deed - That the punishment is outside the range of the fines provided by the CBA - The arbitrator was ruling on authority that he had improperly delegated in the first place. As a science guy I could have saved them alot of time and trouble. But, not made them any $.

That may or may not be true. My pointing out the science was simply in response to a post on what a logical judge would see if he/she did a cursory look at this case. The fundamental issue at hand - whether or not the balls were deflated naturally or not, can be arrived at via objective means (ie science).

The ONLY reason anything matters (beyond the science) is because of the what if's that were assumed. Had the what if''s been exercised to make the other parties narrative work, then we wouldn't be having this discussion.

Not sure how else I can explain myself other than to say that the entirety of the Wells report - from the science onward - and which the league based their judgement on - is all predicated on assumptions and what if conditions.