Kelly the Dog Posted August 10, 2015 Posted August 10, 2015 They didn't agree with this because they have zero physical evidence. How do you possibly explain them using the Jastremki and McNally texts then, Dave? You just ignore what you want to. That was a HUGE part of their case against him. Few of them had anything to do with the Championship game. They were all concerning earlier times in the season.
Mr. WEO Posted August 10, 2015 Posted August 10, 2015 They didn't agree with this because they have zero physical evidence. The league didn't even care to investigate this well known issue of deflation until the Colts equipment manager instantly felt the softness of the ball that no ref could notice for nearly the entire first half....
dave mcbride Posted August 10, 2015 Posted August 10, 2015 They most certainly did. The four games was not for the Championship game deflation, it was for that plus other games. The total problem. Otherwise as I stated above, all of the Jastremki and McNally texts and The Deflator idea would be moot and have had no affect on their ruling, which is inarguably did. What would they have done if the balls turned out to be 12.5 in the championship game? would they have penalized the pats for their past actions centering around absconding with the balls based on those texts? No, they certainly wouldn't have. The issue was always the 12.5 limit.
Kelly the Dog Posted August 10, 2015 Posted August 10, 2015 No physical evidence. None. That's not at all what we are talking about.
Mr. WEO Posted August 10, 2015 Posted August 10, 2015 How do you possibly explain them using the Jastremki and McNally texts then, Dave? You just ignore what you want to. That was a HUGE part of their case against him. Few of them had anything to do with the Championship game. They were all concerning earlier times in the season. Nope. If they really were punishing them for earlier transgressions, they would have, you know, investigated them earlier..
Kelly the Dog Posted August 10, 2015 Posted August 10, 2015 What would they have done if the balls turned out to be 12.5 in the championship game? would they have penalized the pats for their past actions centering around absconding with the balls based on those texts? No, they certainly wouldn't have. The issue was always the 12.5 limit. They wouldn't have found out about it. Duh.
ExiledInIllinois Posted August 10, 2015 Posted August 10, 2015 That's a good point Kelly brought up. Would anything else besides air have an effect. Say nitrogen? Sounds crazy... A stretch. But almost pure N can be put into tires for better preformance. Then gove certain balls to certain teams or to the Cheatriots offense. Paging DCTom... Paging DCTom...
K-9 Posted August 10, 2015 Posted August 10, 2015 A) there was enough circumstantial proof to make everyone in the world excluding crazy people and intellectually dishonest people from believing 99% and above certainty that they were stolen and doctored. We know for a fact they were stolen, no one is even arguing that, so I don't really know why you included it. b) the person who stole the balls professed that he stole the balls. It's hard to know if the entity is professing, which I know you mean to imply Wells is trustworthy or not. There really has not been anything in this particular case so far that has shown him not to be. Why bother? It is all about "the science" with this guy. His ignorance about other types of evidence and how it applies to reconstructing events is astounding. I can't believe he chooses to be so willful about it, too. Then again, he's been trolling us the entire thread so perhaps he's just phucking with us in that regard as well. GO BILLS!!!
ExiledInIllinois Posted August 10, 2015 Posted August 10, 2015 Of course normal air is like 70% N anyway, right?
Kelly the Dog Posted August 10, 2015 Posted August 10, 2015 Nope. If they really were punishing them for earlier transgressions, they would have, you know, investigated them earlier.. That's just stupid. Sorry, bud. They got a report and complaint from another team about an indiscretion. They get all kinds of those things all the time and they don't investigate them.
Mr. WEO Posted August 10, 2015 Posted August 10, 2015 Brady did it for multiple games this year and probably last year at least as well. The texts mentioned several of them. So ten games for each time they did it is at least the equivalent of four games. Did you pay Exponenet for this scientific analysis? Holy cow...
dave mcbride Posted August 10, 2015 Posted August 10, 2015 (edited) How do you possibly explain them using the Jastremki and McNally texts then, Dave? You just ignore what you want to. That was a HUGE part of their case against him. Few of them had anything to do with the Championship game. They were all concerning earlier times in the season. I can ignore it because it is a BS thesis. Their evidence boils down to the championship game, which is good enough. The texts support the idea they did something in the Championship game, and they shouldn't have been used to presume guilt in previous games because -- again!! -- they have ZERO physical evidence of transgressions in those games. Don't be a shill for the league; the championship game is what they have to go on, and that's good enough for a one-game suspension (which is what it should have been). The penalty should never been based on unfounded suppositions about physical evidence in prior games. The texts support a pattern that led to a finding that the balls were deflated in that one game, not others -- because they have no evidence from those prior games! Those texts can be used for more than one thing, and they should have been used only as they shed light on the AFC championship game process. They wouldn't have found out about it. Duh. That's kinda my point. Think about it. Edited August 10, 2015 by dave mcbride
Mr. WEO Posted August 10, 2015 Posted August 10, 2015 (edited) That's just stupid. Sorry, bud. They got a report and complaint from another team about an indiscretion. They get all kinds of those things all the time and they don't investigate them. Yeah, really. Why would they even think to investigate a report about the patriots cheatiing---that would be..."stupid"! "another team"? "an indiscretion"?? Edited August 10, 2015 by Mr. WEO
section122 Posted August 10, 2015 Posted August 10, 2015 They are suspended for the football equivalent of less than one game. The 10 games they get are consecutive, not their own pitching games (maybe 2 out of the 10). This would be like Brady getting suspended for less than half a game. Your math is a bit off. If they get suspended for 10 games and miss 2 starts out of their approximately 30 it is about the equivalent of 1 game. Brady is only getting 2 games for the infraction itself the other 2 are for impeding the investigation. I don't care to draw a correlation to baseball for that but 1 game vs 2 for the infraction is not the egregious amount some are making it out to be. Also one has to wonder if punishment would be stiffer if it happened during the league championship series. The pitcher would likely be suspended for the world series not meaningless April games.
dave mcbride Posted August 10, 2015 Posted August 10, 2015 No, it's not. At all. I don't know how many times it needs to be said but it was CLEARLY the leagues position that this suspension was because of the total issue not just the Championship game, and was over several games, otherwise all of the texts from McNally and Jestremski would be moot. Another point: the league may have said that, but without any physical evidence, it's profoundly unfair to punish them for prior transgressions they aren't sure even happened. Again, it's all about the game they found evidence in.
Kelly the Dog Posted August 10, 2015 Posted August 10, 2015 I can ignore it because it is a BS thesis. Their evidence boils down to the championship game, which is good enough. The texts support the idea they did something in the Championship game, and they shouldn't have been used to presume guilt in previous games because -- again!! -- they have ZERO physical evidence of transgressions in those games. Don't be a shill for the league; the championship game is what they have to go on, and that's good enough for a one-game suspension (which is what it should have been). The penalty should never been based on unfounded suppositions about physical evidence in prior games. The texts support a pattern that led to a finding that the balls were deflated in that one game, not others -- because they have no evidence from those prior games! Those texts can be used for more than one thing, and they should have been used only as they shed light on the AFC championship game process. That's kinda my point. Think about it. They decided on the four game suspension for the overall deflation issue. That's what we are talking about, not whether or not they have evidence. It was NOT for just the championship game. Read the report.
Mr. WEO Posted August 10, 2015 Posted August 10, 2015 (edited) Your math is a bit off. If they get suspended for 10 games and miss 2 starts out of their approximately 30 it is about the equivalent of 1 game. Brady is only getting 2 games for the infraction itself the other 2 are for impeding the investigation. I don't care to draw a correlation to baseball for that but 1 game vs 2 for the infraction is not the egregious amount some are making it out to be. Also one has to wonder if punishment would be stiffer if it happened during the league championship series. The pitcher would likely be suspended for the world series not meaningless April games. Anyway, if a pitcher is suspended for ten games in the champioship series, he would obviously appeal and the suspension would go over to the next season, mos likely. Edited August 10, 2015 by Mr. WEO
Kelly the Dog Posted August 10, 2015 Posted August 10, 2015 Another point: the league may have said that, but without any physical evidence, it's profoundly unfair to punish them for prior transgressions they aren't sure even happened. Again, it's all about the game they found evidence in. No. Read the report. They did it because they know Brady lied. That is why.
dave mcbride Posted August 10, 2015 Posted August 10, 2015 Your math is a bit off. If they get suspended for 10 games and miss 2 starts out of their approximately 30 it is about the equivalent of 1 game. Brady is only getting 2 games for the infraction itself the other 2 are for impeding the investigation. I don't care to draw a correlation to baseball for that but 1 game vs 2 for the infraction is not the egregious amount some are making it out to be. Also one has to wonder if punishment would be stiffer if it happened during the league championship series. The pitcher would likely be suspended for the world series not meaningless April games. you're right - it's one 16th of the MLB season (assuming a standard 32-33 start season for a healthy starting pitcher).
Recommended Posts