Deflategate results and outrage here

[Troublemaker]

Agreed, but looks like he won't be taking that path. I'm assuming Brady's agent spoke to Brady before releasing this statement: http://www.twitlonger.com/show/n_1sm3i1u

From the statement by Brady's agent:

One item alone taints this entire report. What does it say about the league office’s protocols and ethics when it allows one team to tip it off to an issue prior to a championship game, and no league officials or game officials notified the Patriots of the same issue prior to the game? This suggests it may be more probable than not that the league cooperated with the Colts in perpetrating a sting operation. The Wells report buries this issue in a footnote on page 46 without any further elaboration. The league is a significant client of the investigators' law firm; it appears to be a rich source of billings and media exposure based on content in the law firm's website. This was not an independent investigation and the contents of the report bear that out – all one has to do is read closely and critically, as opposed to simply reading headlines.

It's not just Brady and his agent. Patriots / Brady supporters (not you, BostonDevil) seem to have latched onto this idea that the league is out to get them. Why? What's the NFL's motivation to embarrass one of its premier franchises and star QBs?

[TampaDuke]

Evidence?

No, complaints from the guys writing the report are not enough. What did they ask for and not get? What was the defined scope of their investigation? Were they going on a fishing expedition? If we're going to get all legal - there is such a thing as due process. Also - the NFL does not have enough evidence for a conviction. If they did, Kraft would respond differently. May I refer you to Spygate? The report states the (appalling) legal standard of "more likely than not", which is enough in a civil suit. So no, not similar in my mind.

BD, I'm not sure what you're wanting as far as proof. It really doesn't matter whether there is enough evidence that we as fans believe Brady or anyone else actually committed the offense here. All that really matters is whether there is sufficient evidence for the NFL to take action based on the standards they apply, which in this case is a preponderance of the evidence (more likely than not) standard. Satisfying that standard doesn't conclusively prove you've committed the offense, but it is sufficient for the NFL to take action against those involved and the team.

By way of example (which I hate raising BTW), OJ Simpson was found not guilty of murder using the criminal standard (beyond a reasonable doubt) but found culpable of those same deaths in a civil wrongful death suit using the more likely than not standard. So, did he in fact commit the killings? I guess we don't know. But for purposes of criminal incarceration, he did not. For purposes of civil penalties, he did.

Taking it back to this situation, the investigation found that for purposes of the NFL's rules, they committed the offense. If you're wanting to establish, in actual fact, that Brady committed the offense, there is no forum will that will be raised and decided and, as such, the answer will probably never be answered absent an admission.

All that said, it does seem established that Brady chose not to fully cooperate. He was asked for specific text and phone records and would not provide them, per the report. He was offered the opportunity to have them first reviewed and vetted by his attorneys to ensure that only relevant material would be produced, but he still refused. He also apparently stated he did not know the equipment guy, but then is phoning him multiple times immediately after the story broke. Admittedly there's no admission, but that's pretty damning circumstantial evidence (and I like Brady, though not a Pats fan).

Also, I guess it remains to be seen if the NFL sanctions Brady, as the report from my perspective appears to make an attempt to go easy on him while finding that he engaged in a violation. If the NFL disciplines Brady, he may well have a more formal avenue to challenge the matter. I haven't seen the NFL's collective bargaining agreement, but most CBAs have an arbitration provision allowing an employee to contest discipline before a third party arbitrator. I seem to remember a dispute between the NFL and the NFLPA about whether players can use arbitration to challenge discipline (and a vague recollection that it might depend on whether it's characterized as "on field" or "off field" behavior), but if he has this avenue, then he'll have his "day in 'court.'" It will be interesting to see if he elects to pursue that, though, as most arbitration statutes provide subpoena authority to the parties and the NFL may well be able to then compel Brady to produce texts and phone records.

[JasonEvans]

Not that it is scientific or anything, but ESPN has a poll up asking what Brady's punishment should be: Nothing, a fine, one-game suspension, multi-game suspension. As you might imagine, multi-game suspension is the overwhelming pick.

What should Tom Brady's punishment be?

27% No punishment
14% A fine
6% One-game suspension
53% Multiple-game suspension

I am sorta disappointed ESPN didn't to a bigger extreme just to see where the public's feeling is on this. If there had been a "season-long suspension" option, how many would have one for it? I also think multi-game is too vague. That could be anything from 2 games to career ending. I would have liked to see options for 2-4 game suspension, 4-8 game suspension, and season long suspension. Ahh well.

Having read the portion of the report talking about the text messages that go back many months and also read about how Brady refused to provide his electronic communications (texts/emails), I have a really hard time understanding how anyone can defend him at this point. The notion that there is not enough evidence or that Brady was wronged by the report's findings seems to come from such strong loyalty and faith that it can only be described as "blind" because anyone with their eyes open has to reach a conclusion of guilt.

-Jason "I say all this as someone who is not a Pats hater. I have rooted for them a lot over the years, especially when they were going for the perfect season. I'm neutral on them... or at least I was until this all happened" Evans

[JasonEvans]

From the statement by Brady's agent:

One item alone taints this entire report. What does it say about the league office’s protocols and ethics when it allows one team to tip it off to an issue prior to a championship game, and no league officials or game officials notified the Patriots of the same issue prior to the game? This suggests it may be more probable than not that the league cooperated with the Colts in perpetrating a sting operation.

I looooove this defense! He is saying that Brady is not guilty because the NFL failed to warn Brady that it was looking into whether he was deflating footballs. He calls it a "sting"operation. Ummmm, the only way a "sting" catches you is if you are doing something wrong in the first place. It is as if a police officer got a tip that a suspected mobster would be robbing a local business. According to Brady's agent, the police should tell the mobster they suspect he will be robbing the business and then see if he actually does it. Yeah, that makes a lot of sense!

-Jason "I hate to make the comparison, but so much of this feels like the UNC defense... deflect, deny, dodge, and refuse to admit ANYTHING!" Evans

[Troublemaker]

I looooove this defense! He is saying that Brady is not guilty because the NFL failed to warn Brady that it was looking into whether he was deflating footballs. He calls it a "sting"operation. Ummmm, the only way a "sting" catches you is if you are doing something wrong in the first place. It is as if a police officer got a tip that a suspected mobster would be robbing a local business. According to Brady's agent, the police should tell the mobster they suspect he will be robbing the business and then see if he actually does it. Yeah, that makes a lot of sense!

-Jason "I hate to make the comparison, but so much of this feels like the UNC defense... deflect, deny, dodge, and refuse to admit ANYTHING!" Evans

I can't wait for Brady to publicly comment.

Prediction: He's going to lay it all at the feet of Needle-dum and Needle-dee. Something about them misunderstanding him.

[SoCalDukeFan]

A Patriot employees deflated footballs after the footballs were checked by officials. Another was fully aware as to what was going on.

They did so because thats what Tom Brady wanted. The footballs were deflated below the league minimum standard.

Brady compensated the employees with signed footballs, etc.

Brady refused to cooperate fully in the investigation.

Brady lied about his involvement.

I agree with others that the appropriate punishment should be severe. Fire the employees, suspend Brady at least 4 games, fine the Pats big time, and take away a first round draft pick.

Accusations of a sting operation or pointing out that Vince Wilfork was a hero are just a smokescreen.

Brady is damaged goods as a spokesperson or pitchman. Who wants a cheater promoting their product?

Pats won the game because Seahawks screwed up at the end not because of the footballs but thats not the point either.

SoCal

[sagegrouse]

Re: "Deflategate:" A really big deal. Re: Wells report -- not impressed with the conclusion, "more probable than not." Seems weaker than the civil law standard, "the preponderance of the evidence," but I'll let our Legal Eagles weigh in.

My action going forward: Let the teams adjust the inflation of the ball within any reasonable range. Aaron Rodgers says he wants a really hard ball because he has a large hand and can grip it really well. Brady, on the evidence, wants a softer ball, especially on cold days because, well, "he wants a softer ball." OK, good enough. We need need a little study and survey to find out what are the desired ranges of pressure for QBs (and maybe receivers and DBs).

[nmduke2001]

A Patriot employees deflated footballs after the footballs were checked by officials. Another was fully aware as to what was going on.

They did so because thats what Tom Brady wanted. The footballs were deflated below the league minimum standard.

Brady compensated the employees with signed footballs, etc.

Brady refused to cooperate fully in the investigation.

Brady lied about his involvement.

I agree with others that the appropriate punishment should be severe. Fire the employees, suspend Brady at least 4 games, fine the Pats big time, and take away a first round draft pick.

Accusations of a sting operation or pointing out that Vince Wilfork was a hero are just a smokescreen.

Brady is damaged goods as a spokesperson or pitchman. Who wants a cheater promoting their product?

Pats won the game because Seahawks screwed up at the end not because of the footballs but thats not the point either.

SoCal

I think that it is terrible that the employees are the fall guys. They would have been fired had they not complied. Now, they're going to get fired and will likely need to leave the New England area for good due to the backlash from Pats fans that think they ruined it for Brady.

[Reilly]

... You're assuming he has something to come clean about. You do not know that.

I strongly, strongly, strongly believe Tom Brady has something to come clean about. I base my belief on watching his press conference at the time -- with many (to me) very clear signs that he was lying. I base my belief on reading the Wells report -- the 240-page .pdf version. Have you read it, Bostondevil?

[El_Diablo]

Re: "Deflategate:" A really big deal. Re: Wells report -- not impressed with the conclusion, "more probable than not." Seems weaker than the civil law standard, "the preponderance of the evidence," but I'll let our Legal Eagles weigh in.

It's the same standard. Preponderance of the evidence = more probable than not.

[Reilly]

... If you're wanting to establish, in actual fact, that Brady committed the offense, there is no forum will that will be raised and decided and, as such, the answer will probably never be answered absent an admission ...

No, TampaDuke. If Tom Brady admits he knew about this, we will not know for a fact that he knew, we will only know for a fact that he *said* he knew. And even then, you might only know that you *think* you *heard* him *say* he knew. We will never know anything for a fact. E-v-e-r. So, quit hasslin' the man, and please ignore that the equipment guy calls himself the deflator, gets swag, discusses Brady's desires about the pressure of the footballs in texts, and that Brady refuses to cooperate and looks like a liar when he tries to speak to the subject. We, and you, will never know anything, y'know?

[Mal]

My action going forward: Let the teams adjust the inflation of the ball within any reasonable range. Aaron Rodgers says he wants a really hard ball because he has a large hand and can grip it really well. Brady, on the evidence, wants a softer ball, especially on cold days because, well, "he wants a softer ball." OK, good enough. We need need a little study and survey to find out what are the desired ranges of pressure for QBs (and maybe receivers and DBs).

I really, really dislike this idea. Do we let baseball pitchers bring slightly heavier or lighter balls to the game and pitch with them? Do we let hockey teams choose the puck they play with on their home ice? Should we let teams adjust the laces to suit their quarterback's specifications, too? How about allowing them to file down the little dimples all over it? IMHO, a football is supposed to be a standardized piece of equipment. The preferences of individual quarterbacks shouldn't even come into the picture. The balls should have a uniform feel and size and pressure. I don't even like the idea of separate balls for kickers and punters. I think there should be one set of league provided footballs, attended to by a league employed officials crew member, used for both teams' offensive possessions. All the balls should be gathered up by the league official at halftime, the pressure in them checked, and then returned to a sideline location attended to by a league person.

Back to the topic, TampaDuke's knocking it out of the park in this thread. It's not a criminal matter - there's no due process here, and the standard is whatever the heck the NFL decides it to be. Bostondevil, sorry, but the Pats and everyone around them look pathetic in their response to the report. Kraft's losing everyone's respect with his theatrics. The primary responses from the organization and fans has been the loser's defense of "everyone's cheating" combined with "the Colts are the real bad guy here!" And, sorry to say, as I'm sure this is all bothersome, but I find it hard to swallow your assertion upthread that Tom Brady (Tom Brady! Literally, the biggest star in the entire league; a man who brings in countless millions to the entire ownership group) had "no way to defend himself" in this episode. He chose not to defend himself. Most likely because he either knew he didn't have much of a defense, he figured that no smoking gun could really ever be found (especially without his help) in this sort of investigation, or he assumed that the worst possible result would be exactly where we are now: reputational hit, possible fine and miss a couple games.

The Pats would have been much better off if they'd just owned up to this, placed the blame on a sometimes overzealous striving to find any and all ways to win and noting that in this instance they went a little too far, and then focused on minimizing the actual transgression (which is, in the grand scheme of things, not that big of a deal, and they probably would have clobbered the Colts even if their footballs had been filled with lead). Instead they've (a) allowed a fairly trivial transgression to grow and grow in the minds of the broader public, to the point it's become just a step down from Chick Gandil or something, and (b) let the classic "it's not the crime, it's the coverup" storyline build and then fester. So their entire offseason has been spent feeding the impression of everyone outside of New England that they're arrogant and think they're above the law of the league.

[killerleft]

I really, really dislike this idea. Do we let baseball pitchers bring slightly heavier or lighter balls to the game and pitch with them? Do we let hockey teams choose the puck they play with on their home ice? Should we let teams adjust the laces to suit their quarterback's specifications, too? How about allowing them to file down the little dimples all over it? IMHO, a football is supposed to be a standardized piece of equipment. The preferences of individual quarterbacks shouldn't even come into the picture. The balls should have a uniform feel and size and pressure. I don't even like the idea of separate balls for kickers and punters. I think there should be one set of league provided footballs, attended to by a league employed officials crew member, used for both teams' offensive possessions. All the balls should be gathered up by the league official at halftime, the pressure in them checked, and then returned to a sideline location attended to by a league person.

Back to the topic, TampaDuke's knocking it out of the park in this thread. It's not a criminal matter - there's no due process here, and the standard is whatever the heck the NFL decides it to be. Bostondevil, sorry, but the Pats and everyone around them look pathetic in their response to the report. Kraft's losing everyone's respect with his theatrics. The primary responses from the organization and fans has been the loser's defense of "everyone's cheating" combined with "the Colts are the real bad guy here!" And, sorry to say, as I'm sure this is all bothersome, but I find it hard to swallow your assertion upthread that Tom Brady (Tom Brady! Literally, the biggest star in the entire league; a man who brings in countless millions to the entire ownership group) had "no way to defend himself" in this episode. He chose not to defend himself. Most likely because he either knew he didn't have much of a defense, he figured that no smoking gun could really ever be found (especially without his help) in this sort of investigation, or he assumed that the worst possible result would be exactly where we are now: reputational hit, possible fine and miss a couple games.

The Pats would have been much better off if they'd just owned up to this, placed the blame on a sometimes overzealous striving to find any and all ways to win and noting that in this instance they went a little too far, and then focused on minimizing the actual transgression (which is, in the grand scheme of things, not that big of a deal, and they probably would have clobbered the Colts even if their footballs had been filled with lead). Instead they've (a) allowed a fairly trivial transgression to grow and grow in the minds of the broader public, to the point it's become just a step down from Chick Gandil or something, and (b) let the classic "it's not the crime, it's the coverup" storyline build and then fester. So their entire offseason has been spent feeding the impression of everyone outside of New England that they're arrogant and think they're above the law of the league.

How about the baseball bat? The tennis racquet? The bowling ball? Changeable by the user, according to need and/or whim. Many other examples, I'm sure, where the equipment is tailored to suit the individual user. If everybody has a chance to change the hardness of the ball, then the weather and other factors could make choosing correctly very important, like snow skiers and their ski waxes. Depending on what the kicker/punter needs from a particular punt, add or remove air. Runnig the ball? Take all the air out, make it virtually impossible to fumble!!! On second thought, maybe this isn't a good idea.

[BD80]

Agreed, but looks like he won't be taking that path. I'm assuming Brady's agent spoke to Brady before releasing this statement: http://www.twitlonger.com/show/n_1sm3i1u

I love this part: "Tom made himself available for nearly an entire day and patiently answered every question. It was clear to me the investigators had limited understanding of professional football."

In other words, the investigators didn't ask the exact right questions, and Tom was able to avoid revealing the truth all day long.

... It's not just Brady and his agent. Patriots / Brady supporters (not you, BostonDevil) seem to have latched onto this idea that the league is out to get them. Why? What's the NFL's motivation to embarrass one of its premier franchises and star QBs?

Actually, the league did kind of screw the pats with the timing. If the pats knew before the draft that brady was going to be suspended, they might have secured an experienced back-up QB. Who is the pats back up QB? One roster only lists Garret Gilbert a 1 yr vet out of SMU.

Of course, if the pats and brady had cooperated with the investigation, the report would have issued long ago, and brady's involvement would be fully known.

[Bostondevil]

I strongly, strongly, strongly believe Tom Brady has something to come clean about. I base my belief on watching his press conference at the time -- with many (to me) very clear signs that he was lying. I base my belief on reading the Wells report -- the 240-page .pdf version. Have you read it, Bostondevil?

The only text messages I really send are to my son telling him its time to phone home. You are still not getting my phone without a warrant. Brady didn't give him his phone? So what. He is not obligated to give them his phone.

Brady did not co-operate? Yes he did. Did he give the NFL's law firm everything they asked for? No. He still co-operated.

The investigation was handled by the NFL's main law firm. Whoever said earlier that it was an independent investigation is mistaken.

What was the time frame of the text messages they wanted to look at? That matters a lot. The investigation was supposed to be about the footballs at the AFC Championship Game. Anything else was a fishing expedition. Brady was right not to give them his phone.

I believe that you believe that Brady was lying. I do not believe that you are good at telling when people are lying. I do not believe that anybody is. Psychological tests do not support that belief. People who do the best at sorting liar from truth tellers aren't actually thinking about making that distinction when they witness the storyteller. We are subconsciously better at the sorting but it is too late for you to do that in regards to Brady. And even when we let the decision happen subconsciously, we are wrong 1/3 of the time. Overall though, when someone says they can tell when someone is lying, more likely than not, they are wrong.

Your other evidence is the Wells Report. I find the Wells report to be a biased, one-sided, NFL sponsored investigation designed to make the league look good, so, what else you got? A truly independent investigation would have followed up on comments made by the Colts like that it was common knowledge that the Patriots were doing things to their footballs. Was it? Where's the evidence for that?

My real beef with the Wells Report though is that the language damns Tom Brady in the court of public opinion without doing a thorough investigation of other possibilities AND without providing the opportunity to answer the allegations. And you are proving my point.

I strongly, strongly believe that this was a witch hunt and that the NFL has something to come clean about. I won't go so far to claim I know when Roger Goodell is lying but I do have my suspicions.

[Pacer]

The investigation was handled by the NFL's main law firm. Whoever said earlier that it was an independent investigation is mistaken.

What about that makes it not independent? Do you believe "the NFL" has a desired outcome that the law firm was urged to adopt?

Anyone who is going to do an investigation is going send their bill to the NFL. So, someone isn't independent/non-independent solely based upon who pays the bill. Why is that firm not independent in your eye? What result do you believe "the NFL" wanted that compromised the independence? In this context, independence is a proxy for stating unbiased. If you want to discredit the report via who did it, what bias do you believe they bring to the table?

In fact, I'd propose that "the NFL" is best served by a competent finding of a game on the level.

Repeated events have clearly established a culture of playing fast and loose with the rules, and that's putting it graciously.

[tbyers11]

I strongly, strongly believe that this was a witch hunt and that the NFL has something to come clean about. I won't go so far to claim I know when Roger Goodell is lying but I do have my suspicions.

What does the NFL gain from conducting a witch hunt against one of its most successful franchises? My opinion is that an NFL-run investigation on an issue that pales in comparison to the other problems the NFL is facing (child and wife/girlfriend abuse, PEDs, concussions) would be more likely to go soft on an NFL team than an independent investigation would.

Why do you strongly (2x) feel that the NFL is on a witch hunt after Kraft, Belichick, Brady, et al.?

[JasonEvans]

The only text messages I really send are to my son telling him its time to phone home. You are still not getting my phone without a warrant. Brady didn't give him his phone? So what. He is not obligated to give them his phone.

Brady did not co-operate? Yes he did. Did he give the NFL's law firm everything they asked for? No. He still co-operated.

The investigation was handled by the NFL's main law firm. Whoever said earlier that it was an independent investigation is mistaken.

What was the time frame of the text messages they wanted to look at? That matters a lot. The investigation was supposed to be about the footballs at the AFC Championship Game. Anything else was a fishing expedition. Brady was right not to give them his phone.

I believe that you believe that Brady was lying. I do not believe that you are good at telling when people are lying. I do not believe that anybody is. Psychological tests do not support that belief. People who do the best at sorting liar from truth tellers aren't actually thinking about making that distinction when they witness the storyteller. We are subconsciously better at the sorting but it is too late for you to do that in regards to Brady. And even when we let the decision happen subconsciously, we are wrong 1/3 of the time. Overall though, when someone says they can tell when someone is lying, more likely than not, they are wrong.

Your other evidence is the Wells Report. I find the Wells report to be a biased, one-sided, NFL sponsored investigation designed to make the league look good, so, what else you got? A truly independent investigation would have followed up on comments made by the Colts like that it was common knowledge that the Patriots were doing things to their footballs. Was it? Where's the evidence for that?

My real beef with the Wells Report though is that the language damns Tom Brady in the court of public opinion without doing a thorough investigation of other possibilities AND without providing the opportunity to answer the allegations. And you are proving my point.

I strongly, strongly believe that this was a witch hunt and that the NFL has something to come clean about. I won't go so far to claim I know when Roger Goodell is lying but I do have my suspicions.

I love ya, BD. I consider you a cyber friend and a great poster. I was all ready to urge you to bow out of this thread, for your own good. But the more I think about it the more I think you are doing a great service to show us how something so completely obvious to us can be seen so differently by "the other side." I don't mean to dredge up the Carolina analogy again, and I know you justifiably take offense to it, but I do think there is a lesson here for all of us that can help us to understand the Carolina mentality. I am not saying these situations are exactly the same, but (for me) watching you come up with explanations and rationalizations for all this really shows me how some Carolina fans can feel so strongly that their school has been wronged and is just being misunderstood.

-Jason "one note-- the part about Brady not giving up his phone records is a pretty weak argument when you consider that the NFL offered to let Brady's own lawyers determine which messages would be given to the investigators" Evans

[Bostondevil]

Do you believe "the NFL" has a desired outcome that the law firm was urged to adopt?

Yes.

Repeated events have clearly established a culture of playing fast and loose with the rules, and that's putting it graciously.

Graciously? No. I wouldn't call it that. What repeated events? Spygate was 8 years ago. How many New England players have been suspended for rules violations since 2007? OK, I looked it up. It's zero. Have the Patriots paid any fines for cheating since Spygate? I can't find that they did.

I did, however, find that the $500,000 fine for Spygate was not the largest ever levied by the NFL. I had forgotten that the Denver Broncos paid $950,000 in the late '90s for rules violations.

[Bostondevil]

I love ya, BD. I consider you a cyber friend and a great poster. I was all ready to urge you to bow out of this thread, for your own good. But the more I think about it the more I think you are doing a great service to show us how something so completely obvious to us can be seen so differently by "the other side." I don't mean to dredge up the Carolina analogy again, and I know you justifiably take offense to it, but I do think there is a lesson here for all of us that can help us to understand the Carolina mentality. I am not saying these situations are exactly the same, but (for me) watching you come up with explanations and rationalizations for all this really shows me how some Carolina fans can feel so strongly that their school has been wronged and is just being misunderstood.

-Jason "one note-- the part about Brady not giving up his phone records is a pretty weak argument when you consider that the NFL offered to let Brady's own lawyers determine which messages would be given to the investigators" Evans

Thank you.

As I've said many times, I hate the NFL. I only defend Tom Brady because he has never been involved in anything untoward off the field. I defend the Patriots because they don't have wife beaters on their team. My standards are greatly different from yours. That does not make them wrong. (I acknowledge that the Patriots at one time had a murderer on the team. When the something I can't day on the DBR came down about Hernandez though, they released him immediately.