Taro T Posted August 5, 2015 Posted August 5, 2015 The explanation of destroying the phone is priceless. http://www.foxsports.com/nfl/story/tom-brady-new-england-patriots-appeal-hearing-interesting-excerpts-deflategate-ted-wells-080415 That was a hysterical read. Brady wants the balls to feel exactly just so but really couldn't care about what pressure they're inflated to. He also chose 12.5 psi completely at random because they used to get inflated to 12.7-12.8 psi. This guy has been living in a bubble of sycophants for waaaaaay too long.
Kelly the Dog Posted August 5, 2015 Posted August 5, 2015 That was a hysterical read. Brady wants the balls to feel exactly just so but really couldn't care about what pressure they're inflated to. He also chose 12.5 psi completely at random because they used to get inflated to 12.7-12.8 psi. This guy has been living in a bubble of sycophants for waaaaaay too long. Not to mention that the two previous phones to that one in question, he didn't destroy. Those were the two the Pats and Brady gave to a forensics person and said we provided the NFL with lists. But of course, it didn't include any of the time in question--the last half of the season up until the appeal date.
26CornerBlitz Posted August 5, 2015 Posted August 5, 2015 (edited) Not to mention that the two previous phones to that one in question, he didn't destroy. Those were the two the Pats and Brady gave to a forensics person and said we provided the NFL with lists. But of course, it didn't include any of the time in question--the last half of the season up until the appeal date. New routine that just happened to coincide with the date of the Wells interview. Totally plausible. Edited August 5, 2015 by 26CornerBlitz
SRQ_BillsFan Posted August 5, 2015 Posted August 5, 2015 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. A big factor here was that these balls reportedly never made it into a game. But I'd be ok with suspending the ball boys for 4 games as well. :-)
Taro T Posted August 5, 2015 Posted August 5, 2015 Not to mention that the two previous phones to that one in question, he didn't destroy. Those were the two the Pats and Brady gave to a forensics person and said we provided the NFL with lists. But of course, it didn't include any of the time in question--the last half of the season up until the appeal date. The weird part of that one was Brady didn't even seem to realize he was contradicting himself. "Yep, those were the phones I gave the investigators." "I have my assistant destroy ALL my old phones and always have since I entered the NFL." Also kind of liked the "I've never even known what psi were until after the Jets game." But my favorite part might have been this ENTIRE controversy being due to the weather in Buffalo!
ExiledInIllinois Posted August 5, 2015 Posted August 5, 2015 Anybody post this yet? The internet is a cruel, cruel place... Sorry Cheatriot fans!
C.Biscuit97 Posted August 5, 2015 Posted August 5, 2015 Just have this go to court and hopefully everyone can STFU about it once and for all. So annoying. I really like Bill Simmons but he has become the biggest cry baby on his twitter over this.
Beerball Posted August 5, 2015 Posted August 5, 2015 The weird part of that one was Brady didn't even seem to realize he was contradicting himself. "Yep, those were the phones I gave the investigators." "I have my assistant destroy ALL my old phones and always have since I entered the NFL." Also kind of liked the "I've never even known what psi were until after the Jets game." But my favorite part might have been this ENTIRE controversy being due to the weather in Buffalo! I really enjoyed him talking about the ref squeezing extra air into the ball. He's a moron.
Kelly the Dog Posted August 5, 2015 Posted August 5, 2015 (edited) I really enjoyed him talking about the ref squeezing extra air into the ball. He's a moron. It really is funny, isn't it? Do they really think a normal person reading that testimony thinks it sounds like an innocent person. Edited August 5, 2015 by Kelly the Dog
eball Posted August 5, 2015 Posted August 5, 2015 The explanation of destroying the phone is priceless. http://www.foxsports.com/nfl/story/tom-brady-new-england-patriots-appeal-hearing-interesting-excerpts-deflategate-ted-wells-080415 I really don't see how anyone reading that transcript can come to any other conclusion than Brady is either a lying cheater or quite possibly the dumbest human being alive. And if it is the latter I feel even worse.
Nanker Posted August 5, 2015 Posted August 5, 2015 (edited) Brady was the head of a conspiracy to defraud the NFL by circumventing the rules by calculated measures and means in order to give himself and other players on his team an unfair advantage. Furthermore he engaged in a second conspiracy to cover up the cabal's cheating, systematically lied to League officials, and obstructed their investigation by destroying evidence that would exonerate him if he were innocent. He is a fraud and a cheat and belongs in the hall of shame right next to Lance Armstrong and Bill Bill-a-cheat. Edited August 5, 2015 by Nanker
SRQ_BillsFan Posted August 5, 2015 Posted August 5, 2015 (edited) but, but, he said he didn't do it. Now everyone will be jumping over each other to point this out. "Well he said under oath her didn't do it. So that means without a doubt he is innocent". I can hear the crap already from reporters to the Patriot sheep. Edited August 5, 2015 by SRQ_BillsFan
NoSaint Posted August 5, 2015 Posted August 5, 2015 but, but, he said he didn't do it. Now everyone will be jumping over each other to point this out. "Well he said under oath her didn't do it. So that means without a doubt he is innocent". I can hear the crap already from reporters to the Patriot sheep. If nothing else it's almost inevitable in response to the groundswell of people that said "he will never say it on the stand or under oath," not that I think it's some sort of proof it's true
thebandit27 Posted August 5, 2015 Posted August 5, 2015 Reading that transcript, I don't know how anyone could believe Brady at this point. His testimony reads like someone that simply has no clue how to talk his way out of the lie he's constructed.
PromoTheRobot Posted August 5, 2015 Posted August 5, 2015 (edited) And yet certain media still blow smoke for Brady. They do it two ways: 1)They focus on tiny parts of the controversy to discredit the report, when as a whole the cheating and coverup are plain as day. And 2) they cry about being sooo tired of this like it hurts their brains thinking about it for 2 seconds. It's another tactic to get this to blow over by convincing people they shouldn't care that a team in the top US sports league systematicly cheats, then obstructs attempts to investigate it. I'm not tired of it. Just the opposite. I want cheating exposed, even if it takes years. Edited August 5, 2015 by PromoTheRobot
JohnC Posted August 5, 2015 Posted August 5, 2015 If nothing else it's almost inevitable in response to the groundswell of people that said "he will never say it on the stand or under oath," not that I think it's some sort of proof it's true I previously commented that I would not comment on this topic unless there was something new shedding light on this interminable topic. So I am adding this link that indicates to me that there are substative grounds for getting an injunction based on a conflict of interest between Wells and his investigation and Goodell's hearing of the Brady appeal. I don't want to get on the never ending back and forth talking past one another here. I just want those in the Brady is the "devil" camp to consider how the disciplinary process is a very tainted process (blatant conflict of interest issues) that needs to be held accountable for its actions. It's not surprising to me that when Goodell's cases are brought to an aribitrator his decisions are frequently overturned or altered. There are many people who confidently claim that Brady lied in his testimony to Wells and to Goodell. Well he is challenging that assumption by giving his testimony under oath. It might not indicate much to people who are inclined not to believe him but it says a lot to me. http://www.si.com/nfl/2015/08/04/tom-brady-appeal-roger-goodell-ted-wells-transcript
PromoTheRobot Posted August 5, 2015 Posted August 5, 2015 I previously commented that I would not comment on this topic unless there was something new shedding light on this interminable topic. So I am adding this link that indicates to me that there are substative grounds for getting an injunction based on a conflict of interest between Wells and his investigation and Goodell's hearing of the Brady appeal. I don't want to get on the never ending back and forth talking past one another here. I just want those in the Brady is the "devil" camp to consider how the disciplinary process is a very tainted process (blatant conflict of interest issues) that needs to be held accountable for its actions. It's not surprising to me that when Goodell's cases are brought to an aribitrator his decisions are frequently overturned or altered. There are many people who confidently claim that Brady lied in his testimony to Wells and to Goodell. Well he is challenging that assumption by giving his testimony under oath. It might not indicate much to people who are inclined not to believe him but it says a lot to me. http://www.si.com/nfl/2015/08/04/tom-brady-appeal-roger-goodell-ted-wells-transcript People lie under oath all the time. Especially when they destroy the only evidence against them.
dave mcbride Posted August 5, 2015 Posted August 5, 2015 (edited) I previously commented that I would not comment on this topic unless there was something new shedding light on this interminable topic. So I am adding this link that indicates to me that there are substative grounds for getting an injunction based on a conflict of interest between Wells and his investigation and Goodell's hearing of the Brady appeal. I don't want to get on the never ending back and forth talking past one another here. I just want those in the Brady is the "devil" camp to consider how the disciplinary process is a very tainted process (blatant conflict of interest issues) that needs to be held accountable for its actions. It's not surprising to me that when Goodell's cases are brought to an aribitrator his decisions are frequently overturned or altered. There are many people who confidently claim that Brady lied in his testimony to Wells and to Goodell. Well he is challenging that assumption by giving his testimony under oath. It might not indicate much to people who are inclined not to believe him but it says a lot to me. http://www.si.com/nfl/2015/08/04/tom-brady-appeal-roger-goodell-ted-wells-transcript Also, this -- http://mmqb.si.com/mmqb/2015/08/05/tom-brady-deflategate-nfl-appeal-roger-goodell-richard-berman -- and this too are new: http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2015/08/04/ruling-mischaracterizes-bradys-testimony-about-communications-with-jastremski/ . As is this, I think, but I'm not really sure: http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2015/08/05/transcript-proves-nfl-didnt-know-air-pressure-could-drop-naturally/ . I expect the suspension to be vacated. God - so many unforced errors by the league. One can think that Brady has been nailed dead to rights and still think he'll get off because of inherent problems in the NFL's process and the overly punitive mentality of the league. Edited August 5, 2015 by dave mcbride
Wayne Cubed Posted August 5, 2015 Posted August 5, 2015 I previously commented that I would not comment on this topic unless there was something new shedding light on this interminable topic. So I am adding this link that indicates to me that there are substative grounds for getting an injunction based on a conflict of interest between Wells and his investigation and Goodell's hearing of the Brady appeal. I don't want to get on the never ending back and forth talking past one another here. I just want those in the Brady is the "devil" camp to consider how the disciplinary process is a very tainted process (blatant conflict of interest issues) that needs to be held accountable for its actions. It's not surprising to me that when Goodell's cases are brought to an aribitrator his decisions are frequently overturned or altered. There are many people who confidently claim that Brady lied in his testimony to Wells and to Goodell. Well he is challenging that assumption by giving his testimony under oath. It might not indicate much to people who are inclined not to believe him but it says a lot to me. http://www.si.com/nfl/2015/08/04/tom-brady-appeal-roger-goodell-ted-wells-transcript Under oath to who? He wasn't in a court room. He was under oath to the NFL. That means nothing. Absolutely nothing. If he lies and they find out, it isn't perjury, he won't go to jail. And at that point Goodell can't increase the suspension per the CBA.
dave mcbride Posted August 5, 2015 Posted August 5, 2015 Under oath to who? He wasn't in a court room. He was under oath to the NFL. That means nothing. Absolutely nothing. If he lies and they find out, it isn't perjury, he won't go to jail. And at that point Goodell can't increase the suspension per the CBA. I think you're misinterpreting McCann's point. "Second, do not overlook the significance of Brady’s testimony occurring under oath. By testifying under oath, Brady voluntarily assumed the risk that he could face criminal charges for perjury or "knowingly lying." The risk is minimal, as it is extremely unlikely that the NFL would refer Brady’s sworn statements to a prosecutor and equally unlikely that a prosecutor would find Brady’s testimony in an arbitration hearing to be worthy of substantial investigation. Still, there is some risk that Brady could face perjury charges if he knowingly lied. This voluntary acceptance of risk makes Brady’s statements seemingly more believable."
Recommended Posts