NoSaint Posted May 13, 2015 Posted May 13, 2015 If you think about it the texts they showed in the actual report were not all of the texts talking about it. Just the relevant ones to what Wells was referring to specifically. Plus they could have deleted other texts between themselves and Brady. It doesn't seem like a forensic guy was asked to comb these phones for all evidence. More like show us the texts on your phone. I know I delete certain texts and I'm sure most do. It would be different if they actually did serious investigation like a trial. If it's that lax it makes no sense for either side to be dug in on it. At that point it's just a charade anyway, unless there's more to it.
Kelly the Dog Posted May 13, 2015 Posted May 13, 2015 If it's that lax it makes no sense for either side to be dug in on it. At that point it's just a charade anyway, unless there's more to it. Why? They don't really have authority to make demands. They are not cops. If you don't willingly turn over the materials it will look bad and that's that. But they can't force you like the law can.
NoSaint Posted May 13, 2015 Posted May 13, 2015 Why? They don't really have authority to make demands. They are not cops. If you don't willingly turn over the materials it will look bad and that's that. But they can't force you like the law can. If they can't make you do anything and there's no teeth to anything other than a "no" why would they expect to get anything meaningfully incriminating unless they already have you nailed up and you are begging for mercy or admitting to a lesser offense?
Mr. WEO Posted May 13, 2015 Posted May 13, 2015 If you think about it the texts they showed in the actual report were not all of the texts talking about it. Just the relevant ones to what Wells was referring to specifically. Plus they could have deleted other texts between themselves and Brady. It doesn't seem like a forensic guy was asked to comb these phones for all evidence. More like show us the texts on your phone. I know I delete certain texts and I'm sure most do. It would be different if they actually did serious investigation like a trial. Why would those two guys hand over incriminating texts? why wouldn't they have erased first?
Kelly the Dog Posted May 13, 2015 Posted May 13, 2015 Why would those two guys hand over incriminating texts? why wouldn't they have erased first? Don't know. Because they are morons? Because they were scared? Because they decided to do the right thing? Because they aren't azzholes?
Mr. WEO Posted May 13, 2015 Posted May 13, 2015 Don't know. Because they are morons? Because they were scared? Because they decided to do the right thing? Because they aren't azzholes? I doubt it was either of the last two!
Kelly the Dog Posted May 13, 2015 Posted May 13, 2015 If they can't make you do anything and there's no teeth to anything other than a "no" why would they expect to get anything meaningfully incriminating unless they already have you nailed up and you are begging for mercy or admitting to a lesser offense?What do you want them to do? They make demands. They ask questions. If you don't answer them you look bad. They tell you what other people said and ask you to explain it. Who knows. But they can't demand you do it because they aren't cops. Maybe they did have some possession of their phones but I haven't seen that. Remarkably, the incident that provoked the Patriots** to decline to allow Wells to interview McNally was when Wells and his team found out about a text that McNally sent to Jastremski at halftime of an away game in Green Bay that McNally was not at. The Pats were losing at halftime and McNally sent a text to Jastremski that said, "Deflate and give somebody that jkt." Wells wanted to know what that meant. The Pats wouldn't allow McNally to answer. That seems pretty suspicious if you ask me. I doubt it was either of the last two! Ha. Me too.
17 Josh Allen Posted May 13, 2015 Posted May 13, 2015 Here is some research of why the Pats win more games. They win the turnover battle and they do it by deflating the ball to make it easier to hold onto and to grip. This team is just the poster child for the biggest cheats in sports ever. The real deal on fumbles according to Sharp: The league average from 2010 to 2014 was 50 plays per fumble. For indoor teams, the average was 55 plays per fumble. For outdoor teams, excluding the Patriots, the average was 46 plays per fumble. The Patriots averaged 73 plays per fumble, almost 60 percent more than outdoor teams and almost 50 percent more than the league average the past five years. Maybe the Patriots just target players who are particularly good at holding onto the ball? Its easy to think that during the offseason and in the draft room, Belichick and friends are scouting players who have a knack for not fumbling. However, Michael Salfino of the Wall Street Journal looked at Patriots players who, since 2010, have logged significant minutes on other teams to compare fumbles rates. His findings: Additionally, according to Stats, LLC, the six players who have played extensively for the Patriots and other teams in this span all fumbled far less frequently wearing the New England uniform. Including recovered fumbles, Danny Amendola, BenJarvus Green-Ellis, Danny Woodhead, Wes Welker, Brandon LaFell and LeGarrette Blount have lost the ball eight times in 1,482 touches for the Patriots since 2010, or once every 185.3 times. For their other teams, they fumbled 22 times in 1,701 touches (once every 77.3). So it cant be merely personnel, right? For example, Green-Ellis didnt fumble once in 501 touches for the Patriots since 2010. However, during his next two years with the Cincinnati Bengals he fumbled five times in 524 touches. Likewise, Amendola hasnt fumbled once in 82 touches with the Patriots, yet had three fumbles in 162 touches with Ram since 2010. During the same time, Woodhead saw his plays-per-fumble decrease from 171 with the Patriots to just 86 with the Chargers. Blount fumbled every 51.8 plays with the Buccaneers and Steelers, but only every 73 plays with New England. Yet while Welker only lost the ball every 166 touches with the Patriots, he is still yet to fumble (in 122 touches so far) with the Broncos. And LaFell has actually seen his plays-per-fumble decrease to 76 with the Patriots, from 86.5 with the Panthers. While it isnt universal for every individual player, Salfinos larger finding still stands: in the past five years, players fumble significantly less on the Patriots than they do when playing for other teams. Since his initial report, Sharp wrote a supplemental post showing that from 2007-2014, individual Patriots players with more than 300 touches fumbled once every 107 touches, versus every 67 touches when playing for other teams. So it isnt strictly personnel. Could it be the coaching? Despite Stevan Ridley earning a reputation for being fumble-prone, the stats dont seem to show that he fumbles at a rate particularly higher than league averages. In fact, since 2010, only one team in the league had a better rate: The Atlanta Falcons, who play in a dome, fumbled only once every 80 plays. Besides the Patriots, no other team in the league broke 70 and no other outdoor team had a better rate than 55. Compared to the average fumble rate for the 31 other teams in the league, per touch Ridley actually has a better chance of holding on. That hasnt, however, stopped him from being benchedmultiple timesfor fumbling. Perhaps Belichick has particularly high standards for his players. And we know turnovers are a statistic that Belichick has focused on in the past. Its not very realistic that it is something he regularly drills in practice and emphasizes, even if it means benching his running back. Does this apparent strictness from the coach explain the Patriots collective tight grip on the football? Perhaps Belichick has just groomed his team into a statistical anomaly when it comes to fumble rate? Or perhaps something else has been in the works. As Sharp speculates, maybe theyve invented a revolutionary in-house way to protect the ball or they design plays that dont put players in the position to fumble. Or maybe its the ball. The Patriots have held the best plays per fumble rate since 2007. Sharp also points out this is the first year the Patriots started outperforming in wet weather games. After going 0-2 in 2006, New England has gone an unprecedented 14-1 in Tom Brady wet weather home games (compared to 51-9 in dry weather home games). According to ProFootballReference.com, from 2001 to 2006, Brady averaged 9.8 fumbles per season. From 2007 to 2014, his fumbles per season decreased to 5.3. Interestingly, one other thing changed the season prior to 2007: the rules. In 2006, Brady and Peyton Manning successfully lobbied the league to allow road team offenses to bring their own balls, breaking from the rule in which the home team provided all 24 balls. You may have heard of this rule change recently in the news again. Ultimately, the anomaly of the Patriots superior fumble avoidance doesnt prove anything, besides a distinct advantage on their opponents. But whether its coaching, play design or PSI, its certainly no coincidence.
NoSaint Posted May 13, 2015 Posted May 13, 2015 What do you want them to do? They make demands. They ask questions. If you don't answer them you look bad. They tell you what other people said and ask you to explain it. Who knows. But they can't demand you do it because they aren't cops. Maybe they did have some possession of their phones but I haven't seen that. Remarkably, the incident that provoked the Patriots** to decline to allow Wells to interview McNally was when Wells and his team found out about a text that McNally sent to Jastremski at halftime of an away game in Green Bay that McNally was not at. The Pats were losing at halftime and McNally sent a text to Jastremski that said, "Deflate and give somebody that jkt." Wells wanted to know what that meant. The Pats wouldn't allow McNally to answer. That seems pretty suspicious if you ask me. Ha. Me too. I guess my point is if you have no teeth with the process and it's all on the honor system then it's kind of silly to be outraged if someone declines to participate when they could submit whatever the hell they want so easily in the first place. I understand asking for the stuff but when Brady could've seemingly turned in a handwritten note saying "text to coach b on September 23 at night time- 'ball seemed soft today, let's tell numbskulls to pump them up to proper level" as his full log regarding the topic, it would strike me as odd to be outraged that a guy wouldn't take part at all. Kind of a "whatever, so be it," moment when you think about it
Kelly the Dog Posted May 13, 2015 Posted May 13, 2015 I guess my point is if you have no teeth with the process and it's all on the honor system then it's kind of silly to be outraged if someone declines to participate when they could submit whatever the hell they want so easily in the first place. I understand asking for the stuff but when Brady could've seemingly turned in a handwritten note saying "text to coach b on September 23 at night time- 'ball seemed soft today, let's tell numbskulls to pump them up to proper level" as his full log regarding the topic, it would strike me as odd to be outraged that a guy wouldn't take part at all. Kind of a "whatever, so be it," moment when you think about it Because you expect people to be forthcoming if they have nothing to hide, and you expect people to stonewall when they do have something to hide. It's not silly to be outraged at all. It's silly to be outraged that you got a big beat down when you didn't cooperate. That's another reason Wells came out swinging today. He said we caught you azzholes cheating and you are still bitching about unfairness. It's blatantly obvious what they did. It's only a matter of degree and how often it happened. Explain the "Deflate and give somebody the jkt." At halftime of an away game in November they were losing right in the middle of the games when we knew this was going on. There is a 99% chance they were cheating by the science and video and interviews. Not showing all of your texts makes it 99.99%
NoSaint Posted May 13, 2015 Posted May 13, 2015 Because you expect people to be forthcoming if they have nothing to hide, and you expect people to stonewall when they do have something to hide. It's not silly to be outraged at all. It's silly to be outraged that you got a big beat down when you didn't cooperate. That's another reason Wells came out swinging today. He said we caught you azzholes cheating and you are still bitching about unfairness. It's blatantly obvious what they did. It's only a matter of degree and how often it happened. Explain the "Deflate and give somebody the jkt." At halftime of an away game in November they were losing right in the middle of the games when we knew this was going on. There is a 99% chance they were cheating by the science and video and interviews. Not showing all of your texts makes it 99.99% Right but if there's no safeguard in place for gaming the system - you really don't see my point that it's a bit silly to act like nonparticipation is the height of absurdity? If the drug testing policy was "hey did you take drugs?" are you really offended by the guy that walks away as opposed to just saying no, if there's no actual test anyway? I'm getting outside Tom Brady making you angry and into nfl policy being silly here.
Kelly the Dog Posted May 13, 2015 Posted May 13, 2015 Right but if there's no safeguard in place for gaming the system - you really don't see my point that it's a bit silly to act like nonparticipation is the height of absurdity? If the drug testing policy was "hey did you take drugs?" are you really offended by the guy that walks away as opposed to just saying no, if there's no actual test anyway? I'm getting outside Tom Brady making you angry and into nfl policy being silly here. I guess I just don't see it that way because of the "what else can the NFL do" argument. They can't put a gun to these guys heads. They don't have subpoena power. All they can do is ask questions and gather information. To me it's people complaining about getting pulled over. 99% of people getting pulled over did something to get pulled over. Sure once in awhile it's a dick cop but the vast majority of times you did something wrong. They did a LOT wrong. They brought it on themselves. And then they spit in the face of it. The drug policy analogy doesn't really follow for me because there is testing. This I don't know what else they could do. The fact is they wouldn't cooperate because they cheated. Not because the NFL couldn't subpoena them and confiscate their phones.
TheFunPolice Posted May 13, 2015 Posted May 13, 2015 We'll see how much if anything actually sticks I would be shocked if Brady ever misses a game.
USABuffaloFan Posted May 13, 2015 Posted May 13, 2015 (edited) I am probably in the few, I believe it is the NFL who messed up here. Whoever gave up this information had an axe to grind with the Patriots. The whole 1 PSI below becoming almost a criminal trial in the Sports media is a huge joke. The NFL gives the refs a 1 PSI range, 12.5 to 13.5, then tag the balls to keep away from anyone till game time. How did these NFL people manage to mess this up. The Patriots sent in Oceans 14 for the greatest heist this Century!!! They pulled off the impossible and got by the NFL security and "changed the pressure of the footballs". Death Penalty to all found guilty. There is allot of information flying around. Why is no one calling out Indy, they had 4 out of 4 balls tested at end of game at 12.0 PSI. What is up with the refs calling out Brady for wanting the pressure at 12.5 PSI then telling him they will set them where they want at 16 PSI. Sounds like this whole situation was more than a bit unprofessional. Who is calling Brady the Deflator, the NFL refs. Why are they not investigated for hazing basically, these are the rules not to be played with RIGHT! What about Aaron Rodgers admitting he gets his footballs set to 16PSI. How about the admission of Jerry Rice using stickum. The drugs and alcohol used on game day by Lawrence Taylor. Give me a break on Deflate Gate, Hillary Clinton erased her server that held all her emails from being Secretary of State. We are getting outraged over 1 PSI in a football that amounts to less than a 10% change. Common sense is gone and we are becoming cry babies that get more enraged over rules than domestic violence, drug use and thieves in the NFL. Ouch 4 games for txting in the endzone! Beat your girl friend up and drag her out a elevator on video, ah two games, she forgave him. REALLY! If your employer accused you of doing something against their rules, would you give them anything that could prove anything about your character or what happened. They are accusing you, you never cooperate with the accuser or your feeding directly into what they want, YOU! You lawyer up and beat them down for accusing you, even if there's some truth. The question here is WHY the NFL is going after one of the top 3 QB's of all time? What is their real motive, Justice! For WHO, the fans. I could care less what air is in the football, at some point either way it doesn't help but hurt. Tom Brady had a better second half with new footballs. Brady will appeal and win or at least get two games back. NFL loses if they piss Brady off that he never shows up to any NFL functions ever again when he retires. If I was Brady and this sticks, I would retire from the NFL. Would serve them right because this offense, even if true, warrants a fine and nothing more. It is the fans that lose again here over HOT AIR from the NFL ASSES! Edited May 13, 2015 by USABuffaloFan
aristocrat Posted May 13, 2015 Posted May 13, 2015 I love how the Pats stated they only denied mcnally for his 5th interview...brady's agent all over the media talking about. Wells comes on today and says....nfl security interviewed him 3 times on the day of the game, after the game and the next day or something. This is before wells is hired.The pats insist on him taking a fresh approach to the investigation....he interviews him once and gets his phone thus finding the texts. He then would like to speak to mcnally again about the texts and the pats say no. Then the pats try to discredit him and owns them in the press conference. The pats are a friggin joke.
Kelly the Dog Posted May 13, 2015 Posted May 13, 2015 I love how the Pats stated they only denied mcnally for his 5th interview...brady's agent all over the media talking about. Wells comes on today and says....nfl security interviewed him 3 times on the day of the game, after the game and the next day or something. This is before wells is hired.The pats insist on him taking a fresh approach to the investigation....he interviews him once and gets his phone thus finding the texts. He then would like to speak to mcnally again about the texts and the pats say no. Then the pats try to discredit him and owns them in the press conference. The pats are a friggin joke.Knowing the real story makes it worse for the Pats not better. Today Wells said that they found a text that McNally sent to Jastremski at halftime of a game the Patriots were losing at Green Bay in November, and the text McNally sent was "Deflate and give somebody the jkt." McNally wanted to know what that meant and the Pats denied them to talk to McNally. They may not have even told McNally the NFL wanted to interview him again.
Kelly the Dog Posted May 13, 2015 Posted May 13, 2015 I just saw that Wells was not allowed to ask McNally about being nicknamed "The Deflator" or about the text that he intimated that he would go to ESPN about Brady. Those were found after the first time Wells interviewed McNally and he was only allowed to interview him once. http://www.newsday.com/sports/football/ted-wells-nfl-investigator-says-he-found-direct-evidence-against-tom-brady-1.10427019
TheFunPolice Posted May 13, 2015 Posted May 13, 2015 Brady will never miss a game when all is said and done... Just tie up the legal process for this entire season while the team does the "world against us" routine and push it into 2016.
Kelly the Dog Posted May 13, 2015 Posted May 13, 2015 Brady will never miss a game when all is said and done... Just tie up the legal process for this entire season while the team does the "world against us" routine and push it into 2016. Would you like to bet on that? Not a chance they let him go, not a chance Brady takes it to court, especially after the NFL let Wells out to refute the Pats** nonsense in a half hour conference call with reporters that made it look a lot worse for the Pats**.
aristocrat Posted May 13, 2015 Posted May 13, 2015 Brady will never miss a game when all is said and done... Just tie up the legal process for this entire season while the team does the "world against us" routine and push it into 2016. If Tom wants to play hardball they will put him on the exempt list so he gets paid but can't play.
Recommended Posts