BillsFan-4-Ever Posted June 6, 2015 Share Posted June 6, 2015 and Putz nation should be referenced as CBF's Cheating Brady* Fans Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Wiz Posted June 6, 2015 Share Posted June 6, 2015 (edited) Pats fans would just turn that(DQB) into a new stat to claim something else that they win at. DQB = Difference in Quality vs Brady. A metric system used to compare other quarterback in the league to Tom Brady. Wait, why did we make up a system for comparing TOM FRICKIN' BRADY to any other QB in the league when it's almost impossible to? CHOWDA!!!! Or something like that. Edited June 6, 2015 by The Wiz Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
26CornerBlitz Posted June 16, 2015 Share Posted June 16, 2015 @SNFonNBC Brady’s appeal calls Wells Report “dubious, contradictory” http://tw.nbcsports.com/faZ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PromoTheRobot Posted June 16, 2015 Share Posted June 16, 2015 (edited) @SNFonNBC Brady’s appeal calls Wells Report “dubious, contradictory” http://tw.nbcsports.com/faZ Mainly because Brady and the Pats** refused to cooperate. Edited June 16, 2015 by PromoTheRobot Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rocky Landing Posted June 16, 2015 Share Posted June 16, 2015 @SNFonNBC Brady’s appeal calls Wells Report “dubious, contradictory” http://tw.nbcsports.com/faZ I'm guessing it gets reduced to two games. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
26CornerBlitz Posted June 16, 2015 Share Posted June 16, 2015 Mainly because Brady and the Pats** refused to cooperate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WhitewalkerInPhilly Posted June 16, 2015 Share Posted June 16, 2015 @SNFonNBC Bradys appeal calls Wells Report dubious, contradictory http://tw.nbcsports.com/faZ "It's ridiculous! He didn't do anything! And besides it wasn't that bad!" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelly the Dog Posted June 16, 2015 Share Posted June 16, 2015 "It's ridiculous! He didn't do anything! And besides it wasn't that bad!" Lol. That is really what they are saying, isn't it. Which makes this more of a farce than it already is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PromoTheRobot Posted June 16, 2015 Share Posted June 16, 2015 "It's ridiculous! He didn't do anything! And besides it wasn't that bad!" ...and everyone cheats and Goodell is out to get us and you hate us 'cause you ain't us, yadda yadda. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt in KC Posted June 16, 2015 Share Posted June 16, 2015 "It's ridiculous! He didn't do anything! And besides it wasn't that bad!" ...and everyone cheats and Goodell is out to get us and you hate us 'cause you ain't us, yadda yadda. And we fired those guys who were involved, because we won't tolerate whatever it was that might have happened, but we're pretty sure didn't. . . . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelly the Dog Posted June 16, 2015 Share Posted June 16, 2015 And we fired those guys who were involved, because we won't tolerate whatever it was that might have happened, but we're pretty sure didn't. . . . But we fired the totally innocent guys that have worked with us for decades only because the NFL instructed us to, unless they didn't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
plenzmd1 Posted June 18, 2015 Share Posted June 18, 2015 (edited) Gents, I hate to say it but I am getting more and more into the belief that Brady is going to playing that first game in the NFL season. I have read enough that I really do doubt the veracity of the science in the Wells report this is another article that just points that out. I will be first to admit I did not read the report Jenkins links to, only the abstract as linked in the article. http://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/redskins/as-brady-appeal-nears-roger-goodell-is-stuck-in-a-corner-of-his-own-creation/2015/06/17/a5fcbaa6-1456-11e5-89f3-61410da94eb1_story.html I know I was as convinced as anybody, especially after Morts report right after the game about the balls being 2lbs under, they did something . The Wells report at first glance confirmed that. But there has just been too much doubt about the science of the Wells report being shoddy science for me to take it seriously anymore. Someone convince me I am wrong? As of now, I think this whole case rests on the " deflater " email, and Brady not handing over his phone. I get him not handing over his phone....but now we got that email.....help me here fellas Edited June 18, 2015 by plenzmd1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeGOATski Posted June 18, 2015 Share Posted June 18, 2015 Gents, I hate to say it but I am getting more and more into the belief that Brady is going to playing that first game in the NFL season. I have read enough that I really do doubt the veracity of the science in the Wells report this is another article that just points that out. I will be first to admit I did not read the report Jenkins links to, only the abstract as linked in the article. http://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/redskins/as-brady-appeal-nears-roger-goodell-is-stuck-in-a-corner-of-his-own-creation/2015/06/17/a5fcbaa6-1456-11e5-89f3-61410da94eb1_story.html I know I was as convinced as anybody, especially after Morts report right after the game about the balls being 2lbs under, they did something . The Wells report at first glance confirmed that. But there has just been too much doubt about the science of the Wells report being shoddy science for me to take it seriously anymore. Someone convince me I am wrong? As of now, I think this whole case rests on the " deflater " email, and Brady not handing over his phone. I get him not handing over his phone....but now we got that email.....help me here fellas (Equipment guys deflating balls + the Pats firing them for deflating balls) / actual deflated balls = they deflated balls The math can get a little complicated, but you can trust it. Science. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillsFan-4-Ever Posted June 18, 2015 Share Posted June 18, 2015 I still doubt Roger will want to look the fool (again) and let Brady** off the hook. If Brady** wants his day in court to prove his innocence let him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YoloinOhio Posted June 18, 2015 Author Share Posted June 18, 2015 Gents, I hate to say it but I am getting more and more into the belief that Brady is going to playing that first game in the NFL season. I have read enough that I really do doubt the veracity of the science in the Wells report this is another article that just points that out. I will be first to admit I did not read the report Jenkins links to, only the abstract as linked in the article. http://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/redskins/as-brady-appeal-nears-roger-goodell-is-stuck-in-a-corner-of-his-own-creation/2015/06/17/a5fcbaa6-1456-11e5-89f3-61410da94eb1_story.html I know I was as convinced as anybody, especially after Morts report right after the game about the balls being 2lbs under, they did something . The Wells report at first glance confirmed that. But there has just been too much doubt about the science of the Wells report being shoddy science for me to take it seriously anymore. Someone convince me I am wrong? As of now, I think this whole case rests on the " deflater " email, and Brady not handing over his phone. I get him not handing over his phone....but now we got that email.....help me here fellas i thought the suspension also incorporated his refusal to cooperate with the investigation. So, while it may be reduced if the wells report is incorrect, I do not think it will be erased. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WhitewalkerInPhilly Posted June 18, 2015 Share Posted June 18, 2015 Gents, I hate to say it but I am getting more and more into the belief that Brady is going to playing that first game in the NFL season. I have read enough that I really do doubt the veracity of the science in the Wells report this is another article that just points that out. I will be first to admit I did not read the report Jenkins links to, only the abstract as linked in the article. http://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/redskins/as-brady-appeal-nears-roger-goodell-is-stuck-in-a-corner-of-his-own-creation/2015/06/17/a5fcbaa6-1456-11e5-89f3-61410da94eb1_story.html I know I was as convinced as anybody, especially after Morts report right after the game about the balls being 2lbs under, they did something . The Wells report at first glance confirmed that. But there has just been too much doubt about the science of the Wells report being shoddy science for me to take it seriously anymore. Someone convince me I am wrong? As of now, I think this whole case rests on the " deflater " email, and Brady not handing over his phone. I get him not handing over his phone....but now we got that email.....help me here fellas One, I'm going to rely more on the science of an independent arbiter than an outside group to discredit it. There is something in the scientific community known as Confirmation Bias. Mainly that when you go in with a particular result in mind, you find it. Two, the circumstancial evidence is pretty damning. Remember, the standard of proof here is NOT beyond a reasonable doubt. It is "more likely than not". Three, a good chunk of the penalty was for lying and being uncooperative with the investigation even when extraordinary privacy allowances were made. Four, Goddell handed Wells a blank check. Throwing it out admits that he wasted millions of dollars of league money. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canadian Bills Fan Posted June 18, 2015 Share Posted June 18, 2015 If Goodell reverses his ruling, he will be finished as commissioner CBF Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WhitewalkerInPhilly Posted June 18, 2015 Share Posted June 18, 2015 If Goodell reverses his ruling, he will be finished as commissioner CBF I agree. I was reading an interview with a sports agent and he mentioned that the greatest threat to the sport is if the fan base feels that it's rigged, like in wrestling. Even if it is, and even if Goddell does play favorites and listens to some owners a lot, if public confidence wavers, people stop watching games. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ouijaman Posted June 18, 2015 Share Posted June 18, 2015 (edited) (Equipment guys deflating balls + the Pats firing them for deflating balls) / actual deflated balls = they deflated balls The math can get a little complicated, but you can trust it. Science. Feh, science. The media debunked that decades ago. Edited June 18, 2015 by Ouijaman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
plenzmd1 Posted June 18, 2015 Share Posted June 18, 2015 (edited) One, I'm going to rely more on the science of an independent arbiter than an outside group to discredit it. There is something in the scientific community known as Confirmation Bias. Mainly that when you go in with a particular result in mind, you find it. Two, the circumstancial evidence is pretty damning. Remember, the standard of proof here is NOT beyond a reasonable doubt. It is "more likely than not". Three, a good chunk of the penalty was for lying and being uncooperative with the investigation even when extraordinary privacy allowances were made. Four, Goddell handed Wells a blank check. Throwing it out admits that he wasted millions of dollars of league money. I get 2, 3, and 4. Don't agree with all of them, but get them. I do not want to see the Pats get drilled just cause Roger spent a bunch of money on the report . they already lost the draft picks, not matter what happens. But I refute # 1 if I am understanding your point correctly, which I may not be. But I think the science in the report is bad,mainly I think the firm they hired to run the "science" part of the report is , as they say, a " hired gun" to do exactly as you say. They went in with a conceived notion about the balls based on the NFL paying them....and that is what they found. I believe you are saying this latest group went in with the belief the science is bad, and found that. So maybe we agree both sides are biased! This Exponet company found not so long ago second hand smoke does not cause cancer...in studies paid for by ????? Edited June 18, 2015 by plenzmd1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts