NoSaint Posted August 5, 2015 Posted August 5, 2015 It surprises me we don't see more talk about the Ravens not getting the right kicking balls, according to the email from them to the colts
26CornerBlitz Posted August 5, 2015 Posted August 5, 2015 @mikerodak Jim Kelly to Tom Brady: "If you don't have anything to hide, tell all." http://espn.go.com/video/clip?id=13381331
JohnC Posted August 5, 2015 Posted August 5, 2015 JohnC you can't possibly be this naive. This is laughable. Trust me, I deal with the "testimony under oath" stuff all the time. It doesn't prevent people -- even good people -- from lying. An arbitrator in the Ray Rice case made the determination that when Goodell raised the penalty on Ray Rice based on the fact hat he had new informatiion that it was a falsehood. Goodell has a habit of making disciplinary decisions not primarily based on the facts and on the guidelines but on how he will be perceived. I have said it many times (ad nauseum) that I don't give a dam about Brady and I don't give a dam about New England. With respect to this suspension issue my focus is on the process. It is a blatantly corrupt process led by an arrogant man who needs to be held accountable for his perverted disciplinary process. im not sure itll be vacated, as im not a legal expert that can truly sort out the finer points of some of this, but count me in the camp that they had plenty to punish him, but that their arrogance in handling it might blow that opportunity. If I had to guess I would say that if this gets to a court ruling that the judge will rule that the commissioner has the authority to rule on this matter based on the terms of the labor agreement. Although that doesn't change my contempt for Goodell and the process odds are not with the player. I hope that I am wrong!
Kelly the Dog Posted August 5, 2015 Posted August 5, 2015 It surprises me we don't see more talk about the Ravens not getting the right kicking balls, according to the email from them to the colts Or more talk about the ravens saying it's well known around the league that the Pats ball boys let air out of the balls on the sidelines with a needle, which they tried to avoid being caught by having McNally steal them and take them to the bathroom to do it.
WhitewalkerInPhilly Posted August 5, 2015 Posted August 5, 2015 What's laughable? Seriously. He says the chances of any perjury charges coming of it are minute. He simply says that it's theoretically possible that they could arise, and that Brady could be nailed for it. You are aware that, even if guilty, you'd need a DA (I believe the NYC one) or the state attorney general who wants to commit career suicide trying to prove it beyond a reasonable doubt. Even if the office does it, the blowback kills any political ambitions.
26CornerBlitz Posted August 5, 2015 Posted August 5, 2015 Hey Jimbo....That ain't the Patriot way! @mikerodak Jim Kelly: "Tom Brady needs to stand up and man up and say 'This is the way it is.’" http://es.pn/1gKCFiJ
dave mcbride Posted August 5, 2015 Posted August 5, 2015 (edited) You are aware that, even if guilty, you'd need a DA (I believe the NYC one) or the state attorney general who wants to commit career suicide trying to prove it beyond a reasonable doubt. Even if the office does it, the blowback kills any political ambitions.As I said, minute.I have followed this closer than anyone here. I know that. I was asking you a question that had nothing to do with that fact.Tell me what you think of this. On the surface, it makes Goodell look very disingenuous (i.e., a liar), but I know the original source is NE-based and possibly biased. I also don't know if this is an accurate interpretation of the situation, but on my reading the league comes off poorly. If you think it is reasonably accurate based on what you know, how do you think it reflects on the league's process and MO? http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2015/08/04/ruling-mischaracterizes-bradys-testimony-about-communications-with-jastremski/ Edited August 5, 2015 by dave mcbride
DC Tom Posted August 5, 2015 Posted August 5, 2015 Has anyone yet mentioned that Brady, in his testimony, testifies how the balls at the Jets' game were "overinflated," to the point where he provided the explicit rules to the officials afterwards...but then testifies later that he doesn't know how the balls are prepared and doesn't notice how they're inflated? How does that work again, Tahmmy?
Tuco Posted August 5, 2015 Posted August 5, 2015 Seems funny that if everybody was so innocent then the Brady camp should have had Jastremski and McNally come to the appeal and tell everybody how Tommy didn't do anything wrong, and how they got fired for acting completely on their own. Although I guess when asked the NFLPA said no, there was no reason for those two to appear. Sure seems like they could have cleared this whole mess up just by telling the truth. Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha!
Peter Posted August 5, 2015 Posted August 5, 2015 Do any of you guys know when Brad Maryman (Brady's computer forensics expert) was hired? Do any of you guys have copy of Maryman's expert report or know the date of the report? The reason why I ask is that Maryman was hired to search the phones for electronic information responsive to Wells' requests. As has been confirmed, Brady's phone was destroyed on March 6 (the day he was being interviewed by Wells). Wells' request had been propounded prior to then. Even though it was Brady's (supposed) practice to destroy his phones when he got a new one, the prior phone (the one used through November 2014 was available for the forensic expert. Interestingly, in part of his testimony, Brady testified: "So I have always old the guy who swaps them out for me, make sure you get rid of the phone." Transcript at 91 (emphasis added). Yet, when he had the subject phone destroyed on the day that he was being interviewed and after already receiving the document request, he had his "assistant" do it. Transcript at 105-06.
SRQ_BillsFan Posted August 5, 2015 Posted August 5, 2015 I could be wrong but would assume they were given a severance package not to talk. Which is why we haven't heard from them. Curious though, I know they won't be witnesses here but would think if they were they would be compelled to talk. Would that have been true at the appeal, couldn't the NFL have asked them to appear?
Kelly the Dog Posted August 5, 2015 Posted August 5, 2015 As I said, minute. Tell me what you think of this. On the surface, it makes Goodell look very disingenuous (i.e., a liar), but I know the original source is NE-based and possibly biased. I also don't know if this is an accurate interpretation of the situation, but on my reading the league comes off poorly. If you think it is reasonably accurate based on what you know, how do you think it reflects on the league's process and MO? http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2015/08/04/ruling-mischaracterizes-bradys-testimony-about-communications-with-jastremski/ I read that before. First of all, Florio says we now know that no one let much air out of the balls is TOTAL BULLSCHIT. Two of the balls had two full pounds out of them, including the ball in question. and now they know which gauge was used. The two balls two pounds under has always been the case and no Ideal Gas Law numbers can account for that. So i shouldnt even respond to his crap, but... Brady didnt only say what the NE guy used as an example of why Goodell said Brady's explanation of "awareness and consent" of the deflation was grounds for not believing him. The Jastremski conversations were just one of the things, and there were several, including Brady saying that he had never spoken to McNally about anything (even after acknowledging he'd seen him around) and McNally's own testimony in the investigation that Tom told me personally to do this. As well as Brady saying he never spoke to Jastremski about McNally when the texts clearly show that he most certainly did. And those were some of the communications between Jastremski and McNally. Furthermore, Goodell and Wells' conclusions of Brady's explanation of things like "Are we good, John?" was entirely implausible. And Goodell and Wells thought Brady's explanation of the conversation, even with mentioning the tampering, for the amount and timing of the calls and the asking of Jastremski into the QB room cannot be readily explained by Brady's answers. In other words, if Brady was actually asking about the allegations in the manner in which he described, there never would have been all those calls and that length of time. So Goodell didn't totally mischaracterize it. Not to mention that so what if he did, it didn't have any affect on anything.
quinnearlysghost88 Posted August 5, 2015 Posted August 5, 2015 I can't go back 75 pages to see if this was covered, but I just read this on another forum. Has this been discussed? Did you know the book The Physics of Football was written in 2005 by Dr Gay Timothy. It discusses the game from a scientific perspective.It clearly states that a football is easier to grasp, throw, carry and catch if deflated slightly, " like the difference of gripping foam rubber vs gripping a bowling ball. Especially in cold weather."Do you know who actually wrote the forward for the book in 2005.Bill Belichick.
Matt in KC Posted August 5, 2015 Posted August 5, 2015 I can't go back 75 pages to see if this was covered, but I just read this on another forum. Has this been discussed? Did you know the book The Physics of Football was written in 2005 by Dr Gay Timothy. It discusses the game from a scientific perspective. It clearly states that a football is easier to grasp, throw, carry and catch if deflated slightly, " like the difference of gripping foam rubber vs gripping a bowling ball. Especially in cold weather." Do you know who actually wrote the forward for the book in 2005. Bill Belichick. Not mentiobned previously. Here's the link at Amazon: http://www.amazon.com/The-Physics-Football-Bone-Crunching-Awe-Inspiring/dp/0060826347
quinnearlysghost88 Posted August 5, 2015 Posted August 5, 2015 Not mentiobned previously. Here's the link at Amazon: http://www.amazon.com/The-Physics-Football-Bone-Crunching-Awe-Inspiring/dp/0060826347 Yeah i saw that and flipped through to Bill's foreward. They have only the second page in the preview. I'm not a conspiracy nut, it's just interesting.
Peter Posted August 5, 2015 Posted August 5, 2015 I can't go back 75 pages to see if this was covered, but I just read this on another forum. Has this been discussed? Did you know the book The Physics of Football was written in 2005 by Dr Gay Timothy. It discusses the game from a scientific perspective. It clearly states that a football is easier to grasp, throw, carry and catch if deflated slightly, " like the difference of gripping foam rubber vs gripping a bowling ball. Especially in cold weather." Do you know who actually wrote the forward for the book in 2005. Bill Belichick. That is so funny - and not surprising.
Go Kiko go Posted August 5, 2015 Posted August 5, 2015 Do any of you guys know when Brad Maryman (Brady's computer forensics expert) was hired? Do any of you guys have copy of Maryman's expert report or know the date of the report? The reason why I ask is that Maryman was hired to search the phones for electronic information responsive to Wells' requests. As has been confirmed, Brady's phone was destroyed on March 6 (the day he was being interviewed by Wells). Wells' request had been propounded prior to then. Even though it was Brady's (supposed) practice to destroy his phones when he got a new one, the prior phone (the one used through November 2014 was available for the forensic expert. Interestingly, in part of his testimony, Brady testified: "So I have always old the guy who swaps them out for me, make sure you get rid of the phone." Transcript at 91 (emphasis added). Yet, when he had the subject phone destroyed on the day that he was being interviewed and after already receiving the document request, he had his "assistant" do it. Transcript at 105-06. Does any part of the record indicate that Maryman prepared an expert report that was filed in connection with the arbitration proceeding? If so, do you have an exhibit number? The NFLPA filed over two hundred exhibits with their answer to the NFL's complaint before the SDNY, and the numbering corresponds to the numbering of the exhibits at the arbitration hearing.
Kelly the Dog Posted August 5, 2015 Posted August 5, 2015 Does any part of the record indicate that Maryman prepared an expert report that was filed in connection with the arbitration proceeding? If so, do you have an exhibit number? The NFLPA filed over two hundred exhibits with their answer to the NFL's complaint before the SDNY, and the numbering corresponds to the numbering of the exhibits at the arbitration hearing. I assume it's in there. They distinctly brought up maryman's work in the appeal hearing. As to the earlier post you responded to, yes we brought that up a few times in the thread earlier. In fact BOTH of the last two phones Brady had were not destroyed and Maryman did work on both. But he just provided the NFL with numbers Brady called and texted in the months prior to all of this. Not the actual texts. Which is more garbage by Brady.
Peter Posted August 5, 2015 Posted August 5, 2015 Does any part of the record indicate that Maryman prepared an expert report that was filed in connection with the arbitration proceeding? If so, do you have an exhibit number? The NFLPA filed over two hundred exhibits with their answer to the NFL's complaint before the SDNY, and the numbering corresponds to the numbering of the exhibits at the arbitration hearing. Exhibit 6 is the supplemental declaration of Brad Maryman. With any luck, that attaches the report or sets forth the pertinent information. Presumably, there is an original declaration. I have not seen the exhibit number yet.
NoSaint Posted August 5, 2015 Posted August 5, 2015 Has anyone yet mentioned that Brady, in his testimony, testifies how the balls at the Jets' game were "overinflated," to the point where he provided the explicit rules to the officials afterwards...but then testifies later that he doesn't know how the balls are prepared and doesn't notice how they're inflated? How does that work again, Tahmmy? i think the reasoning there is that he didnt care 12.5 vs 12.7, but that 16 is very noticeable. which of his testimony on the topic is just about the least noteworthy thing.
Recommended Posts