NFL gives Brady/Pats an asterisk*

[dave mcbride]

I like the pic Greggy. Pretty compelling argument for Montana. I respect Brady's success, although I can't stand him. I really hope Goodell stands his ground and force Brady to take it to court, or he'll have to take his medicine. Man do I hope they go 1-3 in his absence. Pittsburgh, Buffalo, and Dallas are all tough teams to beat. I'm sure they will beat the Jags as they are developing their talent. It's too bad their GM is a Saint Francis graduate (my alma mater).

I'm not entering the debate about who is better - Brady or Montana - but I think it's pretty obvious that going 4-2 in Super bowls is more impressive than going 4-0. It's hard enough to simply get there, as we all know.

I re-read the NYT article and it is indeed ridiculous--they are basically saying that the Colts' balls were measured later indoors and therefore warmed up more than the Pats*' balls (measured probably only a few minutes before the Colts' balls, considering all of this was done in less than a 15 minute halftime time span) and that that explains the whole thing. I'd call it yet another attempt to obfuscate the issue by the Pats* and their fans by isolating one little thing out of the whole tableau trying to create reasonable doubt. On the physics involved, I'll stick with the results of the actual physicists hired by Wells, thank you very much. The two authors of the Times piece are economists and policy specialists, whose last physical science class, for all we know, was in high school. How and why anyone would care what they think about this issues is totally beyond me.

 

Also explains why they make no mention of the sch*t-ton of evidence that there's something rotten in Denmark (the damning texts, the needle, the gifts, the repeated calls from Brady after the incident broke, Brady's refusal to cooperate, the Pats* refusal to fully cooperate ,etc.) On that point that you raised about asking to speak to the Deflator twice--first, that happens all the time in investigations (I'm not a litigator, but am an attorney) and is not unusual. The part where you're calling Ted Wells (and Brad Karp and others at Paul Weiss) incompetent is a real hoot--those guys are all business and among the very best in the business. As a buyer of outside counsel/Big Firm services, trust me, I know. What is unusual (and dishonest, if you ask me) was the Pats* initial explanation of why they didn't make McNally available--remember how they put out a press release saying we weren't going to make him available to Wells for a 5th interview since he'd been interviewed 4 times already, making it look like it was more reasonable to turn down the request? Turns out that Wells himself only talked to McNally once (the other two discussions had been informal discussions with NFL officials, pre-Wells hiring). Go back and read the PR and it's pretty clear that it's the Pats* who were trying to spin that in a way that wasn't really true.

 

In terms of why the AEI is doing this, a little digging comes up with what I suspect is the answer--I'd wager that Kevin Hassett, who looks based on seniority to be the main author of the report, is a Pats* fan, considering where he was born and raised (Greenfield, Mass.) Wow--how convincing, a total fluff piece written by a Pats* fan lending his public policy think tank's name to a report on a matter that they really are in no way expert in. Bravo, sirs, bravo--nice try.

 

Even better is the fact that Hassett was a co-author of "Dow 36,000"--how that guy ever got another job or is listened to by anyone about ANYTHING after that is beyond me, but then again, he does work at a conservative think-tank where public policy ideas that have proven to be totally worthless (the Sam Brownback/Art Laffer Kansas supply side tax cut experiment gone horribly awry when it met the real world comes to mind) are still seen despite all evidence to the contrary as being absolutely true and trust worthy. Kind of like a Bizarro World, where the rules of the real world don't apply. Here's his Wikipedia entry and some great quotes from it:

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kevin_Hassett

 

"Hassett is coauthor with James K. Glassman of Dow 36,000: The New Strategy for Profiting from the Coming Rise in the Stock Market. It was published in 1999 before the dot-com bubble burst. The book's title was based on a calculation that, in the absence of the equity premium, stock prices would be approximately four times as high as they actually were. In its introduction, Glassman and Hassett wrote that the book "will convince you of the single most important fact about stocks at the dawn of the twenty-first century: They are cheap....If you are worried about missing the market's big move upward, you will discover that it is not too late. Stocks are now in the midst of a one-time-only rise to much higher ground–to the neighborhood of 36,000 on the Dow Jones industrial average."^[8] The Dow industrials index closed at 10,681.06 on the day of the book's publication^[9] but by the end of 2004 it remained at essentially the same level – 10,783.01, having dropped over 25% in the meantime but recovered. As of March 9, 2009, the trough of the 2008–9 bear market, the Dow Jones was at 6,547.05, 81% below his 36,000 prediction. As of January 17, 2014, the Dow Jones was at 16,476.73, 54% below his 36,000 prediction."

 

Good times, man, good times....

Excellent catch. Dow 36,000 is one of the dumber books ever published.

[MattM]

 

 

My, my---where to start?

 

First, these authors are mainly challenfging the way in which the measurements were made/data collected, not the "science" of gas laws. They are saying that the evidence can be challenged on this basis. I would assume any type of lawyer would have been able to recognize their point.

 

As for the hometown of one of the authors--why does it matter if he is a patriots fan--is he lying in the study? Is he fabricating? If not, why does it matter where he is from or what his motivation is? You either agree with his argument on how well he made it or not. Would you have believed his conclusion if he was from Buffalo, NY? I'm betting you would not, so why even mention where he is from?

 

Are the authors also Saints fans? DId they spend time in NO--or maybe he had a nice weekend there once? Were you able to search their credit card receipts to determine why they wrote a study of Saints related injuries inflicted on opposing teams that they present to thte NFL before the player suspensions were vacated? That sounds MIGHTY fishy too!! Better get on that.

 

And a guy wrote something that turned out toe be far-fetched after the fact, so now he can never have a valid opinion on other topics ever again? Solid argument there, counselor...

 

As for Wells, he stated the reason why he wanted to interview that guy was because the term "the Deflator" was new evidence. It clearly wasn't.

 

Also, you haven't answered why we should put such weight in a report purchased in full by the NFL (the second one for Wells) when you have already concluded any funded study cannot be independent.

 

 

As noted, I'll take the evidence and thoughts of real scientists trained in physics to explain the psi levels in the balls over the conjecture of a couple of public policy/tax wonks any day of the week, whether it's on the Ideal Gas Law or its application here (including how the evidence was gathered).

 

As for the AEI report, I also stand by the idea that one should know who paid for such report--the "beauty"/evil of organizations like AEI is that their tax status often shields their donors. Here, we have no idea if AEI was in fact paid to help write this report. Similarly, I'd love to find out if Hassett is indeed a Patriots* fan. Florio should ask him that before writing the fawning piece he did over the weekend.

 

Same pattern that we've already seen from the Pats* here over and over again--try to take one tiny little piece of a whole puzzle that overwhelmingly screams cheating and try to insert doubt on one little piece via sleight of hand in order to get people to focus on the sleight of hand rather than the screaming evidence of cheating.

 

For ex., how's this:

 

 

Here's a conversation about the guy who takes the balls to the field after the refs measure them and giving him a needle (what the heck for other than deflating footballs) with a reference to Brady's passer rating thrown in? Yeah, they're totally innocent. LMFAO. We're just supposed to ignore this? Plenty more, too, where those texts came from.

 

On your point about the Wells report being paid for by the League, you must be sniffing something if you think the League wanted to nail their Super Bowl championship team and SB MVP/Golden Boy. This is the biggest black eye that the League has suffered since...well... Spygate. See a pattern? What a ridiculous line of argument, especially considering that Kraft helped select Goodell, is one of three owners who determines his pay and has been nicknamed the "Deputy Commissioner" by others in the League. No way, Roger wanted to intentionally go after them. Remember, too, that he's also the guy who destroyed all the evidence last time they go caught--yeah, he's a real Patriot* hater.

 

Hey, speaking of Patriot* favoritism, that Alphonzo Dennard suspension for pleading out a DUI's coming any day now, right?

 

Finally, Hassett's record for being spectacularly wrong speaks for itself, from his place of employment to, more specifically, his own work, which would be considered comic gold were it not for the fact that many gullible folks acted on his ridiculous claims of a roaring market being nowhere near done. How many chances do some of these jokers get before people point out that the Emperor has no clothes?

[Mr. WEO]

As noted, I'll take the evidence and thoughts of real scientists trained in physics to explain the psi levels in the balls over the conjecture of a couple of public policy/tax wonks any day of the week, whether it's on the Ideal Gas Law or its application here (including how the evidence was gathered).

 

As for the AEI report, I also stand by the idea that one should know who paid for such report--the "beauty"/evil of organizations like AEI is that their tax status often shields their donors. Here, we have no idea if AEI was in fact paid to help write this report. Similarly, I'd love to find out if Hassett is indeed a Patriots* fan. Florio should ask him that before writing the fawning piece he did over the weekend.

 

Same pattern that we've already seen from the Pats* here over and over again--try to take one tiny little piece of a whole puzzle that overwhelmingly screams cheating and try to insert doubt on one little piece via sleight of hand in order to get people to focus on the sleight of hand rather than the screaming evidence of cheating.

 

For ex., how's this:

 

 

Here's a conversation about the guy who takes the balls to the field after the refs measure them and giving him a needle (what the heck for other than deflating footballs) with a reference to Brady's passer rating thrown in? Yeah, they're totally innocent. LMFAO. We're just supposed to ignore this? Plenty more, too, where those texts came from.

 

On your point about the Wells report being paid for by the League, you must be sniffing something if you think the League wanted to nail their Super Bowl championship team and SB MVP/Golden Boy. This is the biggest black eye that the League has suffered since...well... Spygate. See a pattern? What a ridiculous line of argument, especially considering that Kraft helped select Goodell, is one of three owners who determines his pay and has been nicknamed the "Deputy Commissioner" by others in the League. No way, Roger wanted to intentionally go after them. Remember, too, that he's also the guy who destroyed all the evidence last time they go caught--yeah, he's a real Patriot* hater.

 

Hey, speaking of Patriot* favoritism, that Alphonzo Dennard suspension for pleading out a DUI's coming any day now, right?

 

Finally, Hassett's record for being spectacularly wrong speaks for itself, from his place of employment to, more specifically, his own work, which would be considered comic gold were it not for the fact that many gullible folks acted on his ridiculous claims of a roaring market being nowhere near done. How many chances do some of these jokers get before people point out that the Emperor has no clothes?

 

 

I'll ask again: if the authors of the study were born and raised in Buffalo, what would you think of their study and conclusions? It's a simple question. Why does it matter? can't you evaluate their argument based on its own merits? That makes absolutely no sense, unless you are claiming they are fabricating facts. You have yet to claim that because you can't.

 

 

Also, you say you're a lawyer---what would a lawyer hired by Brady do as his method of defending him and seeking to reduce the suspension? Wouldn't he or she obviously attack the way the evidence was collected? Of course it is---it's the first mode of attack. So why would you question the conclusions of this study when it is exactly what your colleagues would do in coming at the NFL?

 

As for paying for "independent" studies--it's fine when the NFL pays for it, but it's completely suspect when someone seeking to defend a player might be paid to do so? I'm obviously setting aside that you completely made up the connection between the study authors and Brady and/or the pats.

[dave mcbride]

The baseball version of the Patriots: http://www.nytimes.com/2015/06/17/sports/baseball/st-louis-cardinals-hack-astros-fbi.html?hp&action=click&pgtype=Homepage&module=first-column-region&region=top-news&WT.nav=top-news&_r=0

[MattM]

 

 

I'll ask again: if the authors of the study were born and raised in Buffalo, what would you think of their study and conclusions? It's a simple question. Why does it matter? can't you evaluate their argument based on its own merits? That makes absolutely no sense, unless you are claiming they are fabricating facts. You have yet to claim that because you can't.

 

 

Also, you say you're a lawyer---what would a lawyer hired by Brady do as his method of defending him and seeking to reduce the suspension? Wouldn't he or she obviously attack the way the evidence was collected? Of course it is---it's the first mode of attack. So why would you question the conclusions of this study when it is exactly what your colleagues would do in coming at the NFL?

 

As for paying for "independent" studies--it's fine when the NFL pays for it, but it's completely suspect when someone seeking to defend a player might be paid to do so? I'm obviously setting aside that you completely made up the connection between the study authors and Brady and/or the pats.

First, if a study purports to be "independent" that should be tested--here either a rooting interest or money (or possibly both) could be behind the authors' efforts. Since the primary author grew up in MA, I think the rooting interest is a fair question. You don't--we'll agree to disagree on that--and we'll both never know if someone paid for that particular piece of "research".

 

On the independence of the NFL report, the only people who think the NFL League office (Kraft's lap dog lo all these years as evidenced by his nickname of the Deputy Commissioner around the League) are somehow out to get the Pats* and taint their own SB Champion and thereby their whole League/sport (one of the dumbest things ever if true) live in New England*.

 

I gave my opinion of their argument--that all of this is explained by the Colts' balls being tested a few minutes after the Pats* balls. No mention of how the texts fit in, or Tweedledum taking a bathroom break and then not correctly IDing the type of toilet he used, or Brady's mad dash of texts and calls to Jastremzski after the story broke (including my favorite "We good, buddy?"), someone he hadn't called or texted in the prior 6 months otherwise) or Brady's refusal to hand over his own messages on the topic (including possibly to others than Tweedledumb and Dumber).

 

What's your view of what happened--straight up, what's your view of what happened? If you think nothing happened, explain away the texts and all the other scummy looking behavior.

[Mr. WEO]

First, if a study purports to be "independent" that should be tested--here either a rooting interest or money (or possibly both) could be behind the authors' efforts. Since the primary author grew up in MA, I think the rooting interest is a fair question. You don't--we'll agree to disagree on that--and we'll both never know if someone paid for that particular piece of "research".

 

On the independence of the NFL report, the only people who think the NFL League office (Kraft's lap dog lo all these years as evidenced by his nickname of the Deputy Commissioner around the League) are somehow out to get the Pats* and taint their own SB Champion and thereby their whole League/sport (one of the dumbest things ever if true) live in New England*.

 

I gave my opinion of their argument--that all of this is explained by the Colts' balls being tested a few minutes after the Pats* balls. No mention of how the texts fit in, or Tweedledum taking a bathroom break and then not correctly IDing the type of toilet he used, or Brady's mad dash of texts and calls to Jastremzski after the story broke (including my favorite "We good, buddy?"), someone he hadn't called or texted in the prior 6 months otherwise) or Brady's refusal to hand over his own messages on the topic (including possibly to others than Tweedledumb and Dumber).

 

What's your view of what happened--straight up, what's your view of what happened? If you think nothing happened, explain away the texts and all the other scummy looking behavior.

 

 

Straight up I've already answered this. It's obvious Brady told these guys to deflate the balls. You don't pay attention tho things that go against your narrative. As for the Wells report, I don't think the NFL is "out to get" the pats, but it a completely bought and paid for report--you seem to be going out of your way to paint such reports as inherently unreliable.....except this one? You need to be more consistent.

 

Now you can answer my questions straight up:

 

First, why does it matter who wrote the study? Unless you think that, becasue they are partisan, they fabricated their facts and therefore their conclusion, it simply doesn't matter what their motivation is--you either agree with theor argument or you don't based on what they say, not who they root for. You also haven't answered whether you would be more inclined to believe them if they were Bills fans or from Buffalo.

 

Second, as a lawyer, how would you defend Brady in this appeal? Would you not go after the way the evidence was collected? Is that not the first thing any lawyer would do in this case? Of course you would, so stop denying it.

[BillsFan-4-Ever]

The baseball version of the Patriots: http://www.nytimes.com/2015/06/17/sports/baseball/st-louis-cardinals-hack-astros-fbi.html?hp&action=click&pgtype=Homepage&module=first-column-region&region=top-news&WT.nav=top-news&_r=0

who said the Cheaters haven't already done that?

like a gametime hack of those iPads changing images

or a simple WiFi outage

[BuffaloHokie13]

[Kelly the Dog]

The idea of saying the Wells report and its science is "unreliable" is really a misnomer. They are basically saying with their rebuttal that since only four balls of the Colts were measured, the absolute findings may not be absolute. But that is like saying that it's not 100% certain, it is only 95% certain. And that is also looking at it in a vacuum. Even if it is only 95% certain it becomes 99.99999% certain when all of the other 12 factors of this are looked at in totality. So it's really more of a disservice to call the science and report unreliable than it is to bring out the fact that the science is not 100% certain.

 

In order for the science to not be reliable, as I have said before, 12 100-1 shots would have to come in in a row. That, IMO, proves it to be 99.9999%, or 100% reliable.

[Deranged Rhino]

 

[MattM]

Straight up I've already answered this. It's obvious Brady told these guys to deflate the balls. You don't pay attention tho things that go against your narrative. As for the Wells report, I don't think the NFL is "out to get" the pats, but it a completely bought and paid for report--you seem to be going out of your way to paint such reports as inherently unreliable.....except this one? You need to be more consistent.

 

Now you can answer my questions straight up:

 

First, why does it matter who wrote the study? Unless you think that, becasue they are partisan, they fabricated their facts and therefore their conclusion, it simply doesn't matter what their motivation is--you either agree with theor argument or you don't based on what they say, not who they root for. You also haven't answered whether you would be more inclined to believe them if they were Bills fans or from Buffalo.

 

Second, as a lawyer, how would you defend Brady in this appeal? Would you not go after the way the evidence was collected? Is that not the first thing any lawyer would do in this case? Of course you would, so stop denying it.

 

First, for someone who believes Brady did it, you spend a lot of time defending the Pats*. As for Wells, it's kind of funny that Bob Kraft was for him before he was against him. The League hired an independent investigator (of course the League pays them, but they paid them the same regardless of the outcome) and this is what they got. No way in Hades would Goodell have "wanted" such a report as Pats* fans claim--one that has tarnished the League champion and marquee player.

 

Second, I care who wrote the study because if the person who wrote it is indeed a diehard Pats* fan, then to me at least, that's relevant. You've read the tripe put forth by the Pats* (BB's BS science presser and "we called him the Deflator because he was on a diet" come to mind) and their fans, so you must know what I mean. As noted above, I also think what they're peddling is bunk designed to obfuscate enough in the eyes of the casual follower to create wiggle room in public opinion.

 

As for defending Brady, that's why I'm not a litigator--you often have to make BS arguments on behalf of your client. I think this case (like Lance Armstrong, ARod and Bonds before it) show the death of shame in America. Instead of admitting a wrong when caught, this generation instead plays the "you can't prove it" and "I'll spin until I die" game. Kind of sickening really, if you ask me,

[Mr. WEO]

First, for someone who believes Brady did it, you spend a lot of time defending the Pats*. As for Wells, it's kind of funny that Bob Kraft was for him before he was against him. The League hired an independent investigator (of course the League pays them, but they paid them the same regardless of the outcome) and this is what they got. No way in Hades would Goodell have "wanted" such a report as Pats* fans claim--one that has tarnished the League champion and marquee player.

 

Second, I care who wrote the study because if the person who wrote it is indeed a diehard Pats* fan, then to me at least, that's relevant. You've read the tripe put forth by the Pats* (BB's BS science presser and "we called him the Deflator because he was on a diet" come to mind) and their fans, so you must know what I mean. As noted above, I also think what they're peddling is bunk designed to obfuscate enough in the eyes of the casual follower to create wiggle room in public opinion.

 

As for defending Brady, that's why I'm not a litigator--you often have to make BS arguments on behalf of your client. I think this case (like Lance Armstrong, ARod and Bonds before it) show the death of shame in America. Instead of admitting a wrong when caught, this generation instead plays the "you can't prove it" and "I'll spin until I die" game. Kind of sickening really, if you ask me,

 

 

What have I "defended"? You ignore what goes against your narrative.

 

I've posted extensively on my opinion regarding Goodell, deflate gate, public opinion, PR, showmanship, etc. I would tell you to look it up, but you would rather mischaracterize what I say regardless.

 

At least you have finally conceded that this is how anyone representing Brady would go about it.

[MattM]

 

 

What have I "defended"? You ignore what goes against your narrative.

 

I've posted extensively on my opinion regarding Goodell, deflate gate, public opinion, PR, showmanship, etc. I would tell you to look it up, but you would rather mischaracterize what I say regardless.

 

At least you have finally conceded that this is how anyone representing Brady would go about it.

And his "defense" clearly shows that Brady is firmly in the company of Messrs. Armstrong, Rodriguez and Bonds it sounds like you admit....

[BillsFan-4-Ever]

FOR SALE

Game issued Deflated Football for the low price (bidding starting at) of $25,000.00

 

http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/eye-on-football/25218819/look-you-can-own-a-patriots-deflategate-football-for-only-25000