PromoTheRobot Posted June 24, 2015 Posted June 24, 2015 I was asking why you think they are carrying water for Brady I think it's because they want to protect a superstar. That it's a better story to make Brady a victim than a cheater. The Espn article made it sound like Brady testified and gave stellar testimony. Edit: from the Espn article: No details of the hearing were immediately available but a source told ESPN's Adam Schefter that "Tom Brady's greatest ally today was Tom Brady." Sources also told Schefter that Brady came off as very genuine, earnest, and persuasive, addressing every issue raised in the league-sanctioned Wells report. One of the sources called it "an A+ performance." Brady reportedly just sat there and let his lawyer do all the talking. I guess he just glowed like his balls do in the movie Ted 2.
K-9 Posted June 24, 2015 Posted June 24, 2015 Has anyone else ever been suspended for this? I know the nfl tried to hit Hargrove for not participating in an investigation and it was overturned.... Anyone else? Gostkowski likewise didn't turn over requested records and got no punishment. Is this just the right punishment because you like Tom Brady getting hit or because it makes sense in the context of nfl history? I don't think precedent, in the form of a prior team or player being penalized like the Pats and Brady for a similar offense, matters here. Given this is punishment being applied to a repeat offender, I think the league is well within the boundaries. Like it or not, Pats fans have to accept the fact that they were previously found guilty in the Spygate affair. As for Gostwoski getting no punishment, there is no inculpable circumstantial evidence of him having knowledge of the rules violation like there is for Brady. So again, I think the league is well within its discretion to go easier on him as a result. I think it's the right punishment given the Patriots previous record and Brady's refusal to cooperate in the face of the evidence against him. Making sense in the context of NFL history just isn't applicable, except in the context of the Patriots' own previous history relative to breaking league rules. GO BILLS!!! I think it's because they want to protect a superstar. That it's a better story to make Brady a victim than a cheater. Brady reportedly just sat there and let his lawyer do all the talking. I guess he just glowed like his balls do in the movie Ted 2. I don't think Brady just sat there. Why take an oath to testify the truth is you don't intend to testify? Besides, I think the league absolutely needed to hear what Brady had to say in his own defense in order to justify the (in my opinion) pre-determined outcome of reducing his suspension to two games. GO BILLS!!!
Miyagi-Do Karate Posted June 24, 2015 Posted June 24, 2015 Has anyone else ever been suspended for this? I know the nfl tried to hit Hargrove for not participating in an investigation and it was overturned.... Anyone else? Gostkowski likewise didn't turn over requested records and got no punishment. Is this just the right punishment because you like Tom Brady getting hit or because it makes sense in the context of nfl history? I doubt there is any precedent for this, since no one of Brady's stature has done anything of this significance before. You have basically the face of the NFL not cooperating in an investigation involving rules violations arguably committed by him and occurring during a conference championship game. He provides no basis for not cooperating, but instead has the gall to mount a defense that is based on lack of evidence. His lack of cooperation--unlike Gostowski's--is then cited as a major problem by the independent investigator. Under all those circumstances, I think the right approach is to defer to the independent investigator.
KingRex Posted June 24, 2015 Posted June 24, 2015 I doubt there is any precedent for this, since no one of Brady's stature has done anything of this significance before. You have basically the face of the NFL not cooperating in an investigation involving rules violations arguably committed by him and occurring during a conference championship game. He provides no basis for not cooperating, but instead has the gall to mount a defense that is based on lack of evidence. His lack of cooperation--unlike Gostowski's--is then cited as a major problem by the independent investigator. Under all those circumstances, I think the right approach is to defer to the independent investigator. The precedent for this is that in most contentious cases, the default is no one takes a total bath getting blamed for all charges or gets a total walk. My sense is that simply upholding four games would be a total hit on Brady/Kraft and reducing the suspension to 0 games would be a total walk for Brady/Kraft. Neither is likely to happen. 3 games in reality for this situation will be interpreted as a pretty total slam on Brady/Kraft giving them a mere figleaf. Likewise 1 game ends up as a big hit for Goodell with the 1 game being a fig leaf. 2 games seems by far to meet the true past precedent that no one escapes this with everything (or near everything which 1 or 3 games would be interpreted as) but everone takes a little hit. The effect on the Bills will be a mere side-effect, but a 2 game compromise is a nice side-effect for us (actually perfect as a week of film on their back-up really plays to our ability to identify weaknesses in his play and their blocking schemes.
ALF Posted June 24, 2015 Posted June 24, 2015 Did the 2 NE** equipment guys testify at the hearing ? They would know what really happened.
MattM Posted June 24, 2015 Posted June 24, 2015 The precedent for this is that in most contentious cases, the default is no one takes a total bath getting blamed for all charges or gets a total walk. My sense is that simply upholding four games would be a total hit on Brady/Kraft and reducing the suspension to 0 games would be a total walk for Brady/Kraft. Neither is likely to happen. 3 games in reality for this situation will be interpreted as a pretty total slam on Brady/Kraft giving them a mere figleaf. Likewise 1 game ends up as a big hit for Goodell with the 1 game being a fig leaf. 2 games seems by far to meet the true past precedent that no one escapes this with everything (or near everything which 1 or 3 games would be interpreted as) but everone takes a little hit. The effect on the Bills will be a mere side-effect, but a 2 game compromise is a nice side-effect for us (actually perfect as a week of film on their back-up really plays to our ability to identify weaknesses in his play and their blocking schemes. Which is why it will be reduced down to 1 game, just in time to come back to play against us....
Best Player Available Posted June 24, 2015 Posted June 24, 2015 Which is why it will be reduced down to 1 game, just in time to come back to play against us.... IDK some networks said Brady sat there for ten hours and did not say a word. he could have implicated himself even further. Since Lawyers were questioning not Goodell although I forget is he a lawyer? When your lawyers tell you to keep your trap shut, that says something. So i will take a wild stab and say nothing was produced regarding his cell. In fact bothing new at all. Wells did testify and I would guess he backed up his conclusions. pretty darn well. In the end Brady** or the pats** attorneys made some decent money, and who knows what Goodell is thinking. but drop 75% of his suspension I think is unlikely.
Codyny13 Posted June 24, 2015 Posted June 24, 2015 If they eradicate his suspension I will be pissed and goodell would need to go. Too much up n down, they need to have a backbone for once. Set a precedence for violating integrity.
NoSaint Posted June 24, 2015 Posted June 24, 2015 I doubt there is any precedent for this, since no one of Brady's stature has done anything of this significance before. You have basically the face of the NFL not cooperating in an investigation involving rules violations arguably committed by him and occurring during a conference championship game. He provides no basis for not cooperating, but instead has the gall to mount a defense that is based on lack of evidence. His lack of cooperation--unlike Gostowski's--is then cited as a major problem by the independent investigator. Under all those circumstances, I think the right approach is to defer to the independent investigator. When it comes down to it why doesn't refusing to turn in texts have so many layers to it- why isn't that a simple "if requests are denied you receive X punishment" type of rule?
plenzmd1 Posted June 24, 2015 Posted June 24, 2015 The science doesn't suck at all. The proving of it is sausage making. None of the science is wrong. Nothing in the Wells report as far as I know has proven to be untrue. People question Exponent and they should. They have had some very questionable findings. Not all of their scientists and 30 years of findings are totally corrupt and false. Probably a small percentage is. I even spent an hour one day trying to find what they actually said about secondhand smoke, and found 100s of references to it and not one link to what they actually said. I assume they look to please their client. It would be hard not to. That doesn't in any way mean this science is wrong. In fact, everything they said makes perfect sense. The experiments they did were outrageously detailed. I haven't seen anyone anywhere refute anything they did specifically. I would ask you to read this report .....I think it absolutely calks into question the science of the Wells a Report. As I mentioned earlier, different gauges, different timing of measurements etc. I think Brady would have relied heavily on this type of evidence. https://www.aei.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/On-the-Wells-report.pdf
The Wiz Posted June 24, 2015 Posted June 24, 2015 (edited) When it comes down to it why doesn't refusing to turn in texts have so many layers to it- why isn't that a simple "if requests are denied you receive X punishment" type of rule? Because of lawyers. You can lay it out however you want to but they will attempt to discredit its meaning or something else. I would ask you to read this report .....I think it absolutely calks into question the science of the Wells a Report. As I mentioned earlier, different gauges, different timing of measurements etc. I think Brady would have relied heavily on this type of evidence. https://www.aei.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/On-the-Wells-report.pdf Wells reported on the numbers that were taken by the officials. Calling his science into question because the measurements weren't done simultaneously, while still outside and with the same needle doesn't make his science wrong. I'm sure there was also a tolerance of error for the PSI and possible change in atmospheric temp from outside to inside (although I would guess that 15 minutes inside would have very little change to a ball that had been in 40 degree weather for 2 hours). And even if you can debunk his science, they still need to explain the text messages from his two lackeys along with why he stole the footballs from the officials locker room. Edited June 24, 2015 by The Wiz
Miyagi-Do Karate Posted June 24, 2015 Posted June 24, 2015 When it comes down to it why doesn't refusing to turn in texts have so many layers to it- why isn't that a simple "if requests are denied you receive X punishment" type of rule? I would be all for more defined rules with specific consequences. If they had simple rules re personal conduct, for instance, then you wouldn't have a bunch of crazy decisions or controversies (eg, conviction of felony = 8 games). I think the failure to cooperate could be as simple as that. You don't cooperate in any investigation = 4 games. I am more outraged at the failure to cooperate in this case than in the underlying ball issue.
Matt in KC Posted June 24, 2015 Posted June 24, 2015 Here's a graph of the day that makes this as clear as I've seen. There is clearly something going on making the Pats balls A) so far below the initial measured value and B) so variable compared to each other. Note: the gauges are very likely reversed in the 3rd Colt's measurement as gauge A consistently measured as lower PSI.
Kelly the Dog Posted June 24, 2015 Posted June 24, 2015 I would ask you to read this report .....I think it absolutely calks into question the science of the Wells a Report. As I mentioned earlier, different gauges, different timing of measurements etc. I think Brady would have relied heavily on this type of evidence. https://www.aei.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/On-the-Wells-report.pdf I read it before. I cant say that I completely understand all of the science. But please point to me one thing that proves anything in the Wells report is wrong. A lot of times this implies there seems to be cheating, but if you look at it a different way and everything aligns perfectly they may not have been. There seems to be a few different instances of this. None of it seems to disprove anything. And they didnt do any of the kind of testing the Wells report did. For instance they bring up the different gauges a lot. It's almost impossible to believe that he used two different gauges before the game. He brought two with him, one as a back up. He didnt know they registered different PSI. But he took one out of his pocket and started measuring the balls. What are the chances that he took it out of his pocket, started measuring the Pats balls, put it back in his pocket before measuring the Colts balls which were in a bag right next to the Pats balls, then reached into a different pocket seconds later, and measured with the other one, which seems to be their argument, that if he did that, there may be a slight chance the balls weren't as different. There are several examples of this kind of stuff. They don't disprove anything as far as I can understand it. And they did 1/100th of the testing, and they are one group when Wells had two separate groups that came to the same conclusion. And even if the dozen 100-1 shots came in in a row, it still wouldnt explain the dozen things that imply guilt on the human side, which would be absolutely impossible to believe it was coincidence that all these texts and communication and ball stealing and bathrooms and conversations were about nothing but weight loss.
K-9 Posted June 24, 2015 Posted June 24, 2015 Here's a graph of the day that makes this as clear as I've seen. There is clearly something going on making the Pats balls A) so far below the initial measured value and B) so variable compared to each other. Note: the gauges are very likely reversed in the 3rd Colt's measurement as gauge A consistently measured as lower PSI. So what am I missing here? What about this graph suggest the "science" should be dismissed out of hand as faulty? GO BILLS!!!
BillsFan-4-Ever Posted June 24, 2015 Posted June 24, 2015 For the Good of the Shield Roger needs to keep more than a 1 game suspension Also what "oath" is given? He lied before, what makes you thion he hasn't had time to repeat the lie for over 6 months to make him believe it the truth?
Kelly the Dog Posted June 24, 2015 Posted June 24, 2015 Here's a graph of the day that makes this as clear as I've seen. There is clearly something going on making the Pats balls A) so far below the initial measured value and B) so variable compared to each other. Note: the gauges are very likely reversed in the 3rd Colt's measurement as gauge A consistently measured as lower PSI. Thanks for that. I had copied it before but couldnt get it to show on here. This is the kind of thing that is throughout the report. I don't think the gauges were reversed. I think they thought that whomever put those numbers in screwed up on the Colts third ball. The point is that 13 of 14 show a direct correlation. So what am I missing here? What about this graph suggest the "science" should be dismissed out of hand as faulty? GO BILLS!!! Nothing. He's showing why the Pats balls were deflated I think.
Kelly the Dog Posted June 24, 2015 Posted June 24, 2015 Furthermore, the entire argument of the AEI report seems to be that the Pats balls were measured first at halftime, and the Colts balls, measured immediately afterward, were sitting around in the warm inside air and so their PSI rose so it looked like theirs didnt change more. If you believe that to be true, than the last few balls of the Pats that were tested should have rose, too, sitting around in that warm air. But it seems to me looking at AEIs own data, that the last three balls check of the Pats were actually some of the very lowest, not higher, and ball 10 of 11 was the absolute lowest. So that makes no sense. Someone please explain why this is not true, it's possible I am overlooking something but that seems logical to me.
eball Posted June 24, 2015 Posted June 24, 2015 To me this comes down to a couple of very hard to overlook facts. Why did the Pats** fire Needledee and Needledum if nothing was done wrong, and why did Kraft collapse like a house of cards only days after declaring all out war on the investigation? It will be mildly absurd if Brady*'s suspension is reduced, and clinically insane if it is lifted.
Recommended Posts