Patriots being investigated after Colts game (3 Viewers)

[Kool-Aid Larry]

I love this, dare to suggest the punishment shouldnt be a lifetime ban on Brady and the record book changed and you don't care about the rules.

Brady will get about 4 games, knocked back to 2, and this will be over. The upside is all the Pats haters can settle in and believe it was 2psi of air pressure that seperated the Jets from a decade of domination. Im cool with all of that.

You know what happens when someone rapes more than one person?

he gets drafted by tampa bay?

 

[massraider]

OK, that was a good one.

 

[12punch]

Still curious to where on the scale of cheating this falls on. Yes, they did it and it seems to potentially have given NE an advantage. But didn't they say at the start of this it only changed the weight of the ball by the weight of a dollar bill?

The other two questions I had were about the investigation. If this were a court case, a defendant would not have to testify and self incriminate himself. But in a private investigation you have no choice?

Also, if it is found on appeal or in court that the report did not prove Brady deflated a football or they have nothing that can directly tie him to telling someone else to deflate a ball, theoretically would everything after that get wiped out (not fully cooperating with the investigation, not giving cell phone, lying, etc. ).

I am not trying to make things so Brady skates. Just wondering from a procedural perspective if they haven't directly proven his involvement does that make the rest of the mess after go away.

Scuffing a baseball. The real crime was the coverup.

Joe Niekro got 10 games for his infamous emery board thing. So one game sounds about right for Brady

There's a big difference between all of these supposed analogues. There is NO proven competitive advantage to underinflated footballs. This is all and only about what the finicky quarterback prefers. The number is in the rule book because it's a manufacturer's recommendation. No other reason.

Somebody (can't remember the name -- uses Magnum P.I. as his avatar) said way up thread that it's more like the "Do Not Remove This Tag" tag on a mattress.

As usual, our brain-dead league let a bunch of pearl-clutching moralizing click-hunters completely run away with the narrative, and now the league is responding to that runaway, horse dung narrative.

yeah, that pretty much sums it up.

this has been going on supposedly forever

entire league supposedly knows about it

supposedly yields some great advantage

this is the first time anybody's said a peep about it

still waiting to get that explained

 

[jonessed]

My point in bringing up the court thing was, in court they wouldn't make Brady self-incriminate himself. But the leage would levy a suspension for not cooperating with the investigation . . . which would be one reason why it would go to court.

In court they could subpoena communications, unlike in this case.

The Pats will never fight the punishment outside of the standard NFL channels. They have way too much to lose.

 

[mbuehner]

I love this, dare to suggest the punishment shouldnt be a lifetime ban on Brady and the record book changed and you don't care about the rules.

Brady will get about 4 games, knocked back to 2, and this will be over. The upside is all the Pats haters can settle in and believe it was 2psi of air pressure that seperated the Jets from a decade of domination. Im cool with all of that.

You know what happens when someone rapes more than one person?

he gets drafted by tampa bay?

He wins two superbowl quarterbacking the Steelers?Hogan with the big boot! :highfive

 

[rockaction]

My point in bringing up the court thing was, in court they wouldn't make Brady self-incriminate himself. But the leage would levy a suspension for not cooperating with the investigation . . . which would be one reason why it would go to court.

In court they could subpoena communications, unlike in this case.

The Pats will never fight the punishment outside of the standard NFL channels. They have way too much to lose.

I just listened to Michael McCann on the Rich Eisen show talking about the possibility of Brady suing for defamation of character. He said it is unlikely given that Brady is a public figure and the NFL report would have had to have been "knowingly false" or the NFL would have to have acted with "reckless disregard" for the truth. Any other claim would go through NFL channels and would be done on the behalf of Brady by the NFLPA.

 

[Bayhawks]

Still curious to where on the scale of cheating this falls on. Yes, they did it and it seems to potentially have given NE an advantage. But didn't they say at the start of this it only changed the weight of the ball by the weight of a dollar bill?

The other two questions I had were about the investigation. If this were a court case, a defendant would not have to testify and self incriminate himself. But in a private investigation you have no choice?

Also, if it is found on appeal or in court that the report did not prove Brady deflated a football or they have nothing that can directly tie him to telling someone else to deflate a ball, theoretically would everything after that get wiped out (not fully cooperating with the investigation, not giving cell phone, lying, etc. ).

I am not trying to make things so Brady skates. Just wondering from a procedural perspective if they haven't directly proven his involvement does that make the rest of the mess after go away.

Scuffing a baseball. The real crime was the coverup.

Joe Niekro got 10 games for his infamous emery board thing. So one game sounds about right for Brady

There's a big difference between all of these supposed analogues. There is NO proven competitive advantage to underinflated footballs. This is all and only about what the finicky quarterback prefers. The number is in the rule book because it's a manufacturer's recommendation. No other reason.

Somebody (can't remember the name -- uses Magnum P.I. as his avatar) said way up thread that it's more like the "Do Not Remove This Tag" tag on a mattress.

As usual, our brain-dead league let a bunch of pearl-clutching moralizing click-hunters completely run away with the narrative, and now the league is responding to that runaway, horse dung narrative.

yeah, that pretty much sums it up.

this has been going on supposedly forever

entire league supposedly knows about it

supposedly yields some great advantage

this is the first time anybody's said a peep about it

still waiting to get that explained

It's a rule. He broke it, probably multiple times. When he got caught, he lied, lied, refused to cooperate, pointed blame elsewhere, and lied some more. He's probably going to get punished. If he had fessed up from the beginning, he'd probably be getting little (if any) punishment. He brought it on himself.

Since this thread seems to love analogies: If you drive 50 in a 45 mph zone, you're breaking the law, even though most people do that (and more). If you drive the same stretch of road for 14 years, and never got stopped for driving 5 miles over the speed limit, it doesn't change the fact that you are breaking the law. If, one day, you do get pulled over, and instead of saying "my bad, officer, I was driving over the speed limit," you say "I wasn't speeding," "everyone else is speeding," and "those extra 5 miles per hour aren't hurting anybody," that officer is far less likely to let you off with a warning.

 

[Faust]

Report: Goodell considers Brady's Deflategate role a serious violation

 

[Run It Up]

Still curious to where on the scale of cheating this falls on. Yes, they did it and it seems to potentially have given NE an advantage. But didn't they say at the start of this it only changed the weight of the ball by the weight of a dollar bill?

The other two questions I had were about the investigation. If this were a court case, a defendant would not have to testify and self incriminate himself. But in a private investigation you have no choice?

Also, if it is found on appeal or in court that the report did not prove Brady deflated a football or they have nothing that can directly tie him to telling someone else to deflate a ball, theoretically would everything after that get wiped out (not fully cooperating with the investigation, not giving cell phone, lying, etc. ).

I am not trying to make things so Brady skates. Just wondering from a procedural perspective if they haven't directly proven his involvement does that make the rest of the mess after go away.

Scuffing a baseball. The real crime was the coverup.

Joe Niekro got 10 games for his infamous emery board thing. So one game sounds about right for Brady

There's a big difference between all of these supposed analogues. There is NO proven competitive advantage to underinflated footballs. This is all and only about what the finicky quarterback prefers. The number is in the rule book because it's a manufacturer's recommendation. No other reason.

Somebody (can't remember the name -- uses Magnum P.I. as his avatar) said way up thread that it's more like the "Do Not Remove This Tag" tag on a mattress.

As usual, our brain-dead league let a bunch of pearl-clutching moralizing click-hunters completely run away with the narrative, and now the league is responding to that runaway, horse dung narrative.

yeah, that pretty much sums it up.

this has been going on supposedly forever

entire league supposedly knows about it

supposedly yields some great advantage

this is the first time anybody's said a peep about it

still waiting to get that explained

It's a rule. He broke it, probably multiple times. When he got caught, he lied, lied, refused to cooperate, pointed blame elsewhere, and lied some more. He's probably going to get punished. If he had fessed up from the beginning, he'd probably be getting little (if any) punishment. He brought it on himself.

Since this thread seems to love analogies: If you drive 50 in a 45 mph zone, you're breaking the law, even though most people do that (and more). If you drive the same stretch of road for 14 years, and never got stopped for driving 5 miles over the speed limit, it doesn't change the fact that you are breaking the law. If, one day, you do get pulled over, and instead of saying "my bad, officer, I was driving over the speed limit," you say "I wasn't speeding," "everyone else is speeding," and "those extra 5 miles per hour aren't hurting anybody," that officer is far less likely to let you off with a warning.

Sweet analogy except the part where you just proclaim to know that he cheated, was caught, lied, lied again, refused to cooperated, deflected blame, then lied some more.

Literally nothing shows that. It is your opinion, of someone elses opinion.

 

[IvanKaramazov]

Report: Goodell considers Brady's Deflategate role a serious violation

I argued earlier for a season-long suspension, but realistically I don't expect the NFL to do that. 6-8 games is reasonable too, and I wouldn't have a problem with that.

I'm interested in seeing if the league does anything with Belichick. I actually believe the guy when he says he didn't know anything about this situation, but others have pointed out the "institutional control" issue.

 

[12punch]

Still curious to where on the scale of cheating this falls on. Yes, they did it and it seems to potentially have given NE an advantage. But didn't they say at the start of this it only changed the weight of the ball by the weight of a dollar bill?

The other two questions I had were about the investigation. If this were a court case, a defendant would not have to testify and self incriminate himself. But in a private investigation you have no choice?

Also, if it is found on appeal or in court that the report did not prove Brady deflated a football or they have nothing that can directly tie him to telling someone else to deflate a ball, theoretically would everything after that get wiped out (not fully cooperating with the investigation, not giving cell phone, lying, etc. ).

I am not trying to make things so Brady skates. Just wondering from a procedural perspective if they haven't directly proven his involvement does that make the rest of the mess after go away.

Scuffing a baseball. The real crime was the coverup.

Joe Niekro got 10 games for his infamous emery board thing. So one game sounds about right for Brady

There's a big difference between all of these supposed analogues. There is NO proven competitive advantage to underinflated footballs. This is all and only about what the finicky quarterback prefers. The number is in the rule book because it's a manufacturer's recommendation. No other reason.

Somebody (can't remember the name -- uses Magnum P.I. as his avatar) said way up thread that it's more like the "Do Not Remove This Tag" tag on a mattress.

As usual, our brain-dead league let a bunch of pearl-clutching moralizing click-hunters completely run away with the narrative, and now the league is responding to that runaway, horse dung narrative.

yeah, that pretty much sums it up.

this has been going on supposedly forever

entire league supposedly knows about it

supposedly yields some great advantage

this is the first time anybody's said a peep about it

still waiting to get that explained

It's a rule. He broke it, probably multiple times. When he got caught, he lied, lied, refused to cooperate, pointed blame elsewhere, and lied some more. He's probably going to get punished. If he had fessed up from the beginning, he'd probably be getting little (if any) punishment. He brought it on himself.

Since this thread seems to love analogies: If you drive 50 in a 45 mph zone, you're breaking the law, even though most people do that (and more). If you drive the same stretch of road for 14 years, and never got stopped for driving 5 miles over the speed limit, it doesn't change the fact that you are breaking the law. If, one day, you do get pulled over, and instead of saying "my bad, officer, I was driving over the speed limit," you say "I wasn't speeding," "everyone else is speeding," and "those extra 5 miles per hour aren't hurting anybody," that officer is far less likely to let you off with a warning.

so, what you're saying is that a good portion of this thread has dedicated their lives to whining about some guy going 5 mph over the limit.

 

[12punch]

Still curious to where on the scale of cheating this falls on. Yes, they did it and it seems to potentially have given NE an advantage. But didn't they say at the start of this it only changed the weight of the ball by the weight of a dollar bill?

The other two questions I had were about the investigation. If this were a court case, a defendant would not have to testify and self incriminate himself. But in a private investigation you have no choice?

Also, if it is found on appeal or in court that the report did not prove Brady deflated a football or they have nothing that can directly tie him to telling someone else to deflate a ball, theoretically would everything after that get wiped out (not fully cooperating with the investigation, not giving cell phone, lying, etc. ).

I am not trying to make things so Brady skates. Just wondering from a procedural perspective if they haven't directly proven his involvement does that make the rest of the mess after go away.

Scuffing a baseball. The real crime was the coverup.

Joe Niekro got 10 games for his infamous emery board thing. So one game sounds about right for Brady

There's a big difference between all of these supposed analogues. There is NO proven competitive advantage to underinflated footballs. This is all and only about what the finicky quarterback prefers. The number is in the rule book because it's a manufacturer's recommendation. No other reason.

Somebody (can't remember the name -- uses Magnum P.I. as his avatar) said way up thread that it's more like the "Do Not Remove This Tag" tag on a mattress.

As usual, our brain-dead league let a bunch of pearl-clutching moralizing click-hunters completely run away with the narrative, and now the league is responding to that runaway, horse dung narrative.

yeah, that pretty much sums it up.

this has been going on supposedly forever

entire league supposedly knows about it

supposedly yields some great advantage

this is the first time anybody's said a peep about it

still waiting to get that explained

It's a rule. He broke it, probably multiple times. When he got caught, he lied, lied, refused to cooperate, pointed blame elsewhere, and lied some more. He's probably going to get punished. If he had fessed up from the beginning, he'd probably be getting little (if any) punishment. He brought it on himself.

Since this thread seems to love analogies: If you drive 50 in a 45 mph zone, you're breaking the law, even though most people do that (and more). If you drive the same stretch of road for 14 years, and never got stopped for driving 5 miles over the speed limit, it doesn't change the fact that you are breaking the law. If, one day, you do get pulled over, and instead of saying "my bad, officer, I was driving over the speed limit," you say "I wasn't speeding," "everyone else is speeding," and "those extra 5 miles per hour aren't hurting anybody," that officer is far less likely to let you off with a warning.

Sweet analogy except the part where you just proclaim to know that he cheated, was caught, lied, lied again, refused to cooperated, deflected blame, then lied some more.

Literally nothing shows that. It is your opinion, of someone elses opinion.

I think you must have failed to read the fairly lengthy and completely objective investigation which determined that all that stuff probably happened, and anybody who says different is most likely lying.

 

[mbuehner]

Report: Goodell considers Brady's Deflategate role a serious violation

I argued earlier for a season-long suspension, but realistically I don't expect the NFL to do that. 6-8 games is reasonable too, and I wouldn't have a problem with that.

I'm interested in seeing if the league does anything with Belichick. I actually believe the guy when he says he didn't know anything about this situation, but others have pointed out the "institutional control" issue.

This is one of the reasons i doubt the 'fumbling advantage' idea. If that was the intent, Belichick would be deeply involved, and I tend to think he wouldnt leave it to Brady and his two dolts to get done. Just a thought.

 

[rockaction]

Report: Goodell considers Brady's Deflategate role a serious violation

I argued earlier for a season-long suspension, but realistically I don't expect the NFL to do that. 6-8 games is reasonable too, and I wouldn't have a problem with that.

I'm interested in seeing if the league does anything with Belichick. I actually believe the guy when he says he didn't know anything about this situation, but others have pointed out the "institutional control" issue.

When I was listening to CSN and WEEI out of Boston, they did point out that Kraft refused to let McNally come back and interview with the NFL after the NFL got his text messages. I wouldn't be surprised if they not only suspended Brady for some length of time, but also docked the organization in some way, e.g., a draft pick or two, a fine, a brief suspension of Belichick, etc.

The thing that leads me to be skeptical of Belichick getting suspended is that the report specifically exonerates him, which I find odd.

 

[12punch]

Report: Goodell considers Brady's Deflategate role a serious violation

I argued earlier for a season-long suspension, but realistically I don't expect the NFL to do that. 6-8 games is reasonable too, and I wouldn't have a problem with that.

I'm interested in seeing if the league does anything with Belichick. I actually believe the guy when he says he didn't know anything about this situation, but others have pointed out the "institutional control" issue.

This is one of the reasons i doubt the 'fumbling advantage' idea. If that was the intent, Belichick would be deeply involved, and I tend to think he wouldnt leave it to Brady and his two dolts to get done. Just a thought.

frankly, I'm a little amazed a a ron has such little regard for his team that he'd encourage them to fumble more with those overinflated balls he sneaks in.

what a stat whore

 

[12punch]

The thing that leads me to be skeptical of Belichick getting suspended is that the report specifically exonerates him, which I find odd.
.

odd or crushingly disappointing?

 

[rockaction]

The thing that leads me to be skeptical of Belichick getting suspended is that the report specifically exonerates him, which I find odd.
.

odd or crushingly disappointing?

Odd, considering CSN was pointing out that two of his public statements directly contradict things spelled out in the report that were simple facts. Like, were the Patriots aware of the investigation, etc. CSN found it "odd" also.

 

[Run It Up]

Still curious to where on the scale of cheating this falls on. Yes, they did it and it seems to potentially have given NE an advantage. But didn't they say at the start of this it only changed the weight of the ball by the weight of a dollar bill?

The other two questions I had were about the investigation. If this were a court case, a defendant would not have to testify and self incriminate himself. But in a private investigation you have no choice?

Also, if it is found on appeal or in court that the report did not prove Brady deflated a football or they have nothing that can directly tie him to telling someone else to deflate a ball, theoretically would everything after that get wiped out (not fully cooperating with the investigation, not giving cell phone, lying, etc. ).

I am not trying to make things so Brady skates. Just wondering from a procedural perspective if they haven't directly proven his involvement does that make the rest of the mess after go away.

Scuffing a baseball. The real crime was the coverup.

Joe Niekro got 10 games for his infamous emery board thing. So one game sounds about right for Brady

There's a big difference between all of these supposed analogues. There is NO proven competitive advantage to underinflated footballs. This is all and only about what the finicky quarterback prefers. The number is in the rule book because it's a manufacturer's recommendation. No other reason.

Somebody (can't remember the name -- uses Magnum P.I. as his avatar) said way up thread that it's more like the "Do Not Remove This Tag" tag on a mattress.

As usual, our brain-dead league let a bunch of pearl-clutching moralizing click-hunters completely run away with the narrative, and now the league is responding to that runaway, horse dung narrative.

yeah, that pretty much sums it up.

this has been going on supposedly forever

entire league supposedly knows about it

supposedly yields some great advantage

this is the first time anybody's said a peep about it

still waiting to get that explained

It's a rule. He broke it, probably multiple times. When he got caught, he lied, lied, refused to cooperate, pointed blame elsewhere, and lied some more. He's probably going to get punished. If he had fessed up from the beginning, he'd probably be getting little (if any) punishment. He brought it on himself.

Since this thread seems to love analogies: If you drive 50 in a 45 mph zone, you're breaking the law, even though most people do that (and more). If you drive the same stretch of road for 14 years, and never got stopped for driving 5 miles over the speed limit, it doesn't change the fact that you are breaking the law. If, one day, you do get pulled over, and instead of saying "my bad, officer, I was driving over the speed limit," you say "I wasn't speeding," "everyone else is speeding," and "those extra 5 miles per hour aren't hurting anybody," that officer is far less likely to let you off with a warning.

Sweet analogy except the part where you just proclaim to know that he cheated, was caught, lied, lied again, refused to cooperated, deflected blame, then lied some more.

Literally nothing shows that. It is your opinion, of someone elses opinion.

I think you must have failed to read the fairly lengthy and completely objective investigation which determined that all that stuff probably happened, and anybody who says different is most likely lying.

I actually read it in its entirety the morning it came out.

It hinges off of Walt Andersons testimony that he knew that all the balls were in the ~12.5 area before the game, yet didn't record - this being after the Colts had warned the league and the league warned the officials before the game, including a two hour meeting. What reason would Walt Anderson have to lie? Because he was personally responsible for the balls and not only are they suspected to have been tampered with, he lost them.

You say its completely objective, yet the entire ####### report is slanted. Its an investigation, they are supposed to report their findings, yet you can't find consecutive paragraphs in the Wells report where they don't chime in with their personal opinion of the information, that they cherry picked. They completely dismiss the science based off of their outsourced experiments, which all have glaring holes in them - ignoring completely the terrible history of the firm they chose.

They wrote the thing as investigator, judge and jury. That flys in the ####### face of objectivity.

 

[rockaction]

^

Keep yelling, somebody will believe you somewhere.

 

[Bayhawks]

Still curious to where on the scale of cheating this falls on. Yes, they did it and it seems to potentially have given NE an advantage. But didn't they say at the start of this it only changed the weight of the ball by the weight of a dollar bill?

The other two questions I had were about the investigation. If this were a court case, a defendant would not have to testify and self incriminate himself. But in a private investigation you have no choice?

Also, if it is found on appeal or in court that the report did not prove Brady deflated a football or they have nothing that can directly tie him to telling someone else to deflate a ball, theoretically would everything after that get wiped out (not fully cooperating with the investigation, not giving cell phone, lying, etc. ).

I am not trying to make things so Brady skates. Just wondering from a procedural perspective if they haven't directly proven his involvement does that make the rest of the mess after go away.

Scuffing a baseball. The real crime was the coverup.

Joe Niekro got 10 games for his infamous emery board thing. So one game sounds about right for Brady

There's a big difference between all of these supposed analogues. There is NO proven competitive advantage to underinflated footballs. This is all and only about what the finicky quarterback prefers. The number is in the rule book because it's a manufacturer's recommendation. No other reason.

Somebody (can't remember the name -- uses Magnum P.I. as his avatar) said way up thread that it's more like the "Do Not Remove This Tag" tag on a mattress.

As usual, our brain-dead league let a bunch of pearl-clutching moralizing click-hunters completely run away with the narrative, and now the league is responding to that runaway, horse dung narrative.

yeah, that pretty much sums it up.

this has been going on supposedly forever

entire league supposedly knows about it

supposedly yields some great advantage

this is the first time anybody's said a peep about it

still waiting to get that explained

It's a rule. He broke it, probably multiple times. When he got caught, he lied, lied, refused to cooperate, pointed blame elsewhere, and lied some more. He's probably going to get punished. If he had fessed up from the beginning, he'd probably be getting little (if any) punishment. He brought it on himself.

Since this thread seems to love analogies: If you drive 50 in a 45 mph zone, you're breaking the law, even though most people do that (and more). If you drive the same stretch of road for 14 years, and never got stopped for driving 5 miles over the speed limit, it doesn't change the fact that you are breaking the law. If, one day, you do get pulled over, and instead of saying "my bad, officer, I was driving over the speed limit," you say "I wasn't speeding," "everyone else is speeding," and "those extra 5 miles per hour aren't hurting anybody," that officer is far less likely to let you off with a warning.

Sweet analogy except the part where you just proclaim to know that he cheated, was caught, lied, lied again, refused to cooperated, deflected blame, then lied some more.

Literally nothing shows that. It is your opinion, of someone elses opinion.

I think you must have failed to read the fairly lengthy and completely objective investigation which determined that all that stuff probably happened, and anybody who says different is most likely lying.

I actually read it in its entirety the morning it came out.

It hinges off of Walt Andersons testimony that he knew that all the balls were in the ~12.5 area before the game, yet didn't record - this being after the Colts had warned the league and the league warned the officials before the game, including a two hour meeting. What reason would Walt Anderson have to lie? Because he was personally responsible for the balls and not only are they suspected to have been tampered with, he lost them.

You say its completely objective, yet the entire ####### report is slanted. Its an investigation, they are supposed to report their findings, yet you can't find consecutive paragraphs in the Wells report where they don't chime in with their personal opinion of the information, that they cherry picked. They completely dismiss the science based off of their outsourced experiments, which all have glaring holes in them - ignoring completely the terrible history of the firm they chose.

They wrote the thing as investigator, judge and jury. That flys in the ####### face of objectivity.

It's an analogy. If you weren't at the traffic stop, you don't know the guy was speeding, you have to rely on the officer's report which says he was going 50 in a 45. We have to rely on the Wells report for our information about this since neither of us was in that bathroom with the self-proclaimed "deflator."

If you are choosing to ignore the Wells report, than (to carry out the analogy), you're that guy that says "of course the officer is going to say he was speeding, he is biased because he needs to hit his quota of tickets for the month. There's no real proof he was speeding."

 

[Run It Up]

^

Keep yelling, somebody will believe you somewhere.

I'm not the one masquerading around in here claiming to know what happened, and I'm certainly not ####ting out of my mouth by suggesting this investigation was in any way objective.

 

[12punch]

Still curious to where on the scale of cheating this falls on. Yes, they did it and it seems to potentially have given NE an advantage. But didn't they say at the start of this it only changed the weight of the ball by the weight of a dollar bill?

The other two questions I had were about the investigation. If this were a court case, a defendant would not have to testify and self incriminate himself. But in a private investigation you have no choice?

Also, if it is found on appeal or in court that the report did not prove Brady deflated a football or they have nothing that can directly tie him to telling someone else to deflate a ball, theoretically would everything after that get wiped out (not fully cooperating with the investigation, not giving cell phone, lying, etc. ).

I am not trying to make things so Brady skates. Just wondering from a procedural perspective if they haven't directly proven his involvement does that make the rest of the mess after go away.

Scuffing a baseball. The real crime was the coverup.

Joe Niekro got 10 games for his infamous emery board thing. So one game sounds about right for Brady

There's a big difference between all of these supposed analogues. There is NO proven competitive advantage to underinflated footballs. This is all and only about what the finicky quarterback prefers. The number is in the rule book because it's a manufacturer's recommendation. No other reason.

Somebody (can't remember the name -- uses Magnum P.I. as his avatar) said way up thread that it's more like the "Do Not Remove This Tag" tag on a mattress.

As usual, our brain-dead league let a bunch of pearl-clutching moralizing click-hunters completely run away with the narrative, and now the league is responding to that runaway, horse dung narrative.

yeah, that pretty much sums it up.

this has been going on supposedly forever

entire league supposedly knows about it

supposedly yields some great advantage

this is the first time anybody's said a peep about it

still waiting to get that explained

It's a rule. He broke it, probably multiple times. When he got caught, he lied, lied, refused to cooperate, pointed blame elsewhere, and lied some more. He's probably going to get punished. If he had fessed up from the beginning, he'd probably be getting little (if any) punishment. He brought it on himself.

Since this thread seems to love analogies: If you drive 50 in a 45 mph zone, you're breaking the law, even though most people do that (and more). If you drive the same stretch of road for 14 years, and never got stopped for driving 5 miles over the speed limit, it doesn't change the fact that you are breaking the law. If, one day, you do get pulled over, and instead of saying "my bad, officer, I was driving over the speed limit," you say "I wasn't speeding," "everyone else is speeding," and "those extra 5 miles per hour aren't hurting anybody," that officer is far less likely to let you off with a warning.

Sweet analogy except the part where you just proclaim to know that he cheated, was caught, lied, lied again, refused to cooperated, deflected blame, then lied some more.

Literally nothing shows that. It is your opinion, of someone elses opinion.

I think you must have failed to read the fairly lengthy and completely objective investigation which determined that all that stuff probably happened, and anybody who says different is most likely lying.

I actually read it in its entirety the morning it came out.

It hinges off of Walt Andersons testimony that he knew that all the balls were in the ~12.5 area before the game, yet didn't record - this being after the Colts had warned the league and the league warned the officials before the game, including a two hour meeting. What reason would Walt Anderson have to lie? Because he was personally responsible for the balls and not only are they suspected to have been tampered with, he lost them.

You say its completely objective, yet the entire ####### report is slanted. Its an investigation, they are supposed to report their findings, yet you can't find consecutive paragraphs in the Wells report where they don't chime in with their personal opinion of the information, that they cherry picked. They completely dismiss the science based off of their outsourced experiments, which all have glaring holes in them - ignoring completely the terrible history of the firm they chose.

They wrote the thing as investigator, judge and jury. That flys in the ####### face of objectivity.

well, I was being sarcastic

ps

more of the media weigh in against defamegate

 

[AB in DC]

OK, everyone here who wants Brady suspended for lying. How many of you believe that Roger Goodell told the truth during the Ray Rice investigation? Like, saying he didn't know what was on those tapes?

And how many of you think that it was "more probable than not" that Goodell was lying?

Now, tell me what punishment Goodell received for lying during an investigation.

 

[rockaction]

well, I was being sarcastic

ps

more of the media weigh in against defamegate

Tedy Bruschi??

That's the most misleading link I've ever seen in these forums.

If anybody ever took these posts seriously, it's now impossible to do so.

eta* Wait, wait. Do you have a link to what Willie McGinest thinks? TIA

 

[Bayhawks]

Still curious to where on the scale of cheating this falls on. Yes, they did it and it seems to potentially have given NE an advantage. But didn't they say at the start of this it only changed the weight of the ball by the weight of a dollar bill?

The other two questions I had were about the investigation. If this were a court case, a defendant would not have to testify and self incriminate himself. But in a private investigation you have no choice?

Also, if it is found on appeal or in court that the report did not prove Brady deflated a football or they have nothing that can directly tie him to telling someone else to deflate a ball, theoretically would everything after that get wiped out (not fully cooperating with the investigation, not giving cell phone, lying, etc. ).

I am not trying to make things so Brady skates. Just wondering from a procedural perspective if they haven't directly proven his involvement does that make the rest of the mess after go away.

Scuffing a baseball. The real crime was the coverup.

Joe Niekro got 10 games for his infamous emery board thing. So one game sounds about right for Brady

There's a big difference between all of these supposed analogues. There is NO proven competitive advantage to underinflated footballs. This is all and only about what the finicky quarterback prefers. The number is in the rule book because it's a manufacturer's recommendation. No other reason.

Somebody (can't remember the name -- uses Magnum P.I. as his avatar) said way up thread that it's more like the "Do Not Remove This Tag" tag on a mattress.

As usual, our brain-dead league let a bunch of pearl-clutching moralizing click-hunters completely run away with the narrative, and now the league is responding to that runaway, horse dung narrative.

yeah, that pretty much sums it up.

this has been going on supposedly forever

entire league supposedly knows about it

supposedly yields some great advantage

this is the first time anybody's said a peep about it

still waiting to get that explained

It's a rule. He broke it, probably multiple times. When he got caught, he lied, lied, refused to cooperate, pointed blame elsewhere, and lied some more. He's probably going to get punished. If he had fessed up from the beginning, he'd probably be getting little (if any) punishment. He brought it on himself.

Since this thread seems to love analogies: If you drive 50 in a 45 mph zone, you're breaking the law, even though most people do that (and more). If you drive the same stretch of road for 14 years, and never got stopped for driving 5 miles over the speed limit, it doesn't change the fact that you are breaking the law. If, one day, you do get pulled over, and instead of saying "my bad, officer, I was driving over the speed limit," you say "I wasn't speeding," "everyone else is speeding," and "those extra 5 miles per hour aren't hurting anybody," that officer is far less likely to let you off with a warning.

Sweet analogy except the part where you just proclaim to know that he cheated, was caught, lied, lied again, refused to cooperated, deflected blame, then lied some more.

Literally nothing shows that. It is your opinion, of someone elses opinion.

I think you must have failed to read the fairly lengthy and completely objective investigation which determined that all that stuff probably happened, and anybody who says different is most likely lying.

I actually read it in its entirety the morning it came out.

It hinges off of Walt Andersons testimony that he knew that all the balls were in the ~12.5 area before the game, yet didn't record - this being after the Colts had warned the league and the league warned the officials before the game, including a two hour meeting. What reason would Walt Anderson have to lie? Because he was personally responsible for the balls and not only are they suspected to have been tampered with, he lost them.

You say its completely objective, yet the entire ####### report is slanted. Its an investigation, they are supposed to report their findings, yet you can't find consecutive paragraphs in the Wells report where they don't chime in with their personal opinion of the information, that they cherry picked. They completely dismiss the science based off of their outsourced experiments, which all have glaring holes in them - ignoring completely the terrible history of the firm they chose.

They wrote the thing as investigator, judge and jury. That flys in the ####### face of objectivity.

What reason would Brady have to lie? Because he was caught breaking a rule.

It's been established (in the report and in this thread) that it was not the practice of the NFL officials to record the measurements. So Anderson not recording the measurements wasn't a mistake on his part. It's also not the officials responsibility to "guard" the footballs, so the fact that a Pats employee stole the balls to deflate them is not his mistake either. Therefore, your argument that Anderson lied to save himself from his mistakes is without merit. Furthermore, your inability to acknowledge the definite motive Brady had to lie (and refuse to share information with the investigators) speaks volumes as to your inability to be unbiased and logical with regards to this subject.

 

[Run It Up]

It's an analogy. If you weren't at the traffic stop, you don't know the guy was speeding, you have to rely on the officer's report which says he was going 50 in a 45. We have to rely on the Wells report for our information about this since neither of us was in that bathroom with the self-proclaimed "deflator."

He called himself the deflator in October, following a game where McNally exclaimed to Jestrimski that the officials had ####ed the Pats by inflating a ball to upwards of 16 psi.

To me this reads like Mcnally submitted the balls to the officials in the ~12.5 area and the official responsible overinflated them for some reason. Obviously if Mcnally was in the business of deflating footballs this wouldn't have happened, as he would have just deflated the footballs afterwards. Absolutely plausible.

Unless of course this was the beginning of the deflate scheme in which case, the theory that Mcnally acted on his own accord after being chewed out by Brady through Jestrimski becomes more plausible.

Either way, its not hard at all to look at this objectively and not come to the same conclusion.

What reason would Brady have to lie? Because he was caught breaking a rule.

It's been established (in the report and in this thread) that it was not the practice of the NFL officials to record the measurements. So Anderson not recording the measurements wasn't a mistake on his part. It's also not the officials responsibility to "guard" the footballs, so the fact that a Pats employee stole the balls to deflate them is not his mistake either. Therefore, your argument that Anderson lied to save himself from his mistakes is without merit. Furthermore, your inability to acknowledge the definite motive Brady had to lie (and refuse to share information with the investigators) speaks volumes as to your inability to be unbiased and logical with regards to this subject.

You're right, we've known for months officials don't record the measurements, nor do they take it all that seriously - because it isn't serious, and never has been.

The point was, that the league went to lengths to make sure the officials knew they wanted this taken seriously. The league didn't tell Anderson to record his pregame measurements, which was a failure on their part and it was a failure in Anderson's part to not recognize it either.

 

[JohnnyU]

OK, everyone here who wants Brady suspended for lying. How many of you believe that Roger Goodell told the truth during the Ray Rice investigation? Like, saying he didn't know what was on those tapes?

And how many of you think that it was "more probable than not" that Goodell was lying?

Now, tell me what punishment Goodell received for lying during an investigation.

You are barking at the moon.

 

[Bayhawks]

I'm not the one masquerading around in here claiming to know what happened,

You're not?

the link to Brady is almost non-existent.

He asks them to prepare balls a certain way, when they aren't he gets upset.

I must have missed the part where Brady, or either of the 2 Pats ball-boys/equipment guys said this happened. Because since you aren't "masquerading around in her claiming to know what happens," you must KNOW this was what happened

Quit being such a tool. I'm basing what I post on the Wells report. The report (coupled with Brady's interviews at the time) indicate that he lied, repeatedly. If the Wells report is wrong, then I'm wrong. I'm not trying to pretend I know what happened, I'm posting based on what is in the report.

 

[AB in DC]

And taking that "driving 60 in a 55 zone" analogy further -- if you get caught speeding, you pay a fine. You don't get thrown in jail, and you don't get suspended from your job.

 

[12punch]

well, I was being sarcastic

ps

more of the media weigh in against defamegate

Tedy Bruschi??

That's the most misleading link I've ever seen in these forums.

If anybody ever took these posts seriously, it's now impossible to do so.

eta* Wait, wait. Do you have a link to what Willie McGinest thinks? TIA

and also some fat guys weighs in

 

[AB in DC]

Just out of curiosity, I looked up the number of NFL players who were punished for breaking a rule this year. It's 235.

http://www.spotrac.com/nfl/fines-suspensions/2014/

Brady will be #236.

 

[AB in DC]

(actually, it should be more than 235 -- they don't list Adrian Peterson, for example. Unless that's because his suspension was overturned on appeal.)

 

[IvanKaramazov]

^

Keep yelling, somebody will believe you somewhere.

I'm not the one masquerading around in here claiming to know what happened, and I'm certainly not ####ting out of my mouth by suggesting this investigation was in any way objective.

The text messages speak for themselves.

 

[12punch]

It's an analogy. If you weren't at the traffic stop, you don't know the guy was speeding, you have to rely on the officer's report which says he was going 50 in a 45. We have to rely on the Wells report for our information about this since neither of us was in that bathroom with the self-proclaimed "deflator."

He called himself the deflator in October, following a game where McNally exclaimed to Jestrimski that the officials had ####ed the Pats by inflating a ball to upwards of 16 psi.

yeah, I find it a little odd that this single magic psi below the arbitrary line is such a huge difference, but apparently 4 pounds over is so trivial they don't even notice doing it.

 

[rockaction]

well, I was being sarcastic

ps

more of the media weigh in against defamegate

Tedy Bruschi??

That's the most misleading link I've ever seen in these forums.

If anybody ever took these posts seriously, it's now impossible to do so.

eta* Wait, wait. Do you have a link to what Willie McGinest thinks? TIA

and also some fat guys weighs in

Thank you!

 

[moleculo]

Still curious to where on the scale of cheating this falls on. Yes, they did it and it seems to potentially have given NE an advantage. But didn't they say at the start of this it only changed the weight of the ball by the weight of a dollar bill?

The other two questions I had were about the investigation. If this were a court case, a defendant would not have to testify and self incriminate himself. But in a private investigation you have no choice?

Also, if it is found on appeal or in court that the report did not prove Brady deflated a football or they have nothing that can directly tie him to telling someone else to deflate a ball, theoretically would everything after that get wiped out (not fully cooperating with the investigation, not giving cell phone, lying, etc. ).

I am not trying to make things so Brady skates. Just wondering from a procedural perspective if they haven't directly proven his involvement does that make the rest of the mess after go away.

Scuffing a baseball. The real crime was the coverup.

Joe Niekro got 10 games for his infamous emery board thing. So one game sounds about right for Brady

There's a big difference between all of these supposed analogues. There is NO proven competitive advantage to underinflated footballs. This is all and only about what the finicky quarterback prefers. The number is in the rule book because it's a manufacturer's recommendation. No other reason.

Somebody (can't remember the name -- uses Magnum P.I. as his avatar) said way up thread that it's more like the "Do Not Remove This Tag" tag on a mattress.

As usual, our brain-dead league let a bunch of pearl-clutching moralizing click-hunters completely run away with the narrative, and now the league is responding to that runaway, horse dung narrative.

yeah, that pretty much sums it up.

this has been going on supposedly forever

entire league supposedly knows about it

supposedly yields some great advantage

this is the first time anybody's said a peep about it

still waiting to get that explained

It's a rule. He broke it, probably multiple times. When he got caught, he lied, lied, refused to cooperate, pointed blame elsewhere, and lied some more. He's probably going to get punished. If he had fessed up from the beginning, he'd probably be getting little (if any) punishment. He brought it on himself.

Since this thread seems to love analogies: If you drive 50 in a 45 mph zone, you're breaking the law, even though most people do that (and more). If you drive the same stretch of road for 14 years, and never got stopped for driving 5 miles over the speed limit, it doesn't change the fact that you are breaking the law. If, one day, you do get pulled over, and instead of saying "my bad, officer, I was driving over the speed limit," you say "I wasn't speeding," "everyone else is speeding," and "those extra 5 miles per hour aren't hurting anybody," that officer is far less likely to let you off with a warning.

Sweet analogy except the part where you just proclaim to know that he cheated, was caught, lied, lied again, refused to cooperated, deflected blame, then lied some more.

Literally nothing shows that. It is your opinion, of someone elses opinion.

I think you must have failed to read the fairly lengthy and completely objective investigation which determined that all that stuff probably happened, and anybody who says different is most likely lying.

I actually read it in its entirety the morning it came out.

It hinges off of Walt Andersons testimony that he knew that all the balls were in the ~12.5 area before the game, yet didn't record - this being after the Colts had warned the league and the league warned the officials before the game, including a two hour meeting. What reason would Walt Anderson have to lie? Because he was personally responsible for the balls and not only are they suspected to have been tampered with, he lost them.

You say its completely objective, yet the entire ####### report is slanted. Its an investigation, they are supposed to report their findings, yet you can't find consecutive paragraphs in the Wells report where they don't chime in with their personal opinion of the information, that they cherry picked. They completely dismiss the science based off of their outsourced experiments, which all have glaring holes in them - ignoring completely the terrible history of the firm they chose.

They wrote the thing as investigator, judge and jury. That flys in the ####### face of objectivity.

What are the glaring holes? I'd like to see this backed up.

 

[IvanKaramazov]

And taking that "driving 60 in a 55 zone" analogy further -- if you get caught speeding, you pay a fine. You don't get thrown in jail, and you don't get suspended from your job.

And every time you get one of those tickets, points go on your license. Rack up enough points, and your license gets revoked.

This isn't the Patriots' first speeding ticket.

 

[moleculo]

since we are going with the speeding analogy, the speeder also has lots of points on his license (i.e. prior offenses), is driving a red Corvette (super bowl champs), and did so specifically while Johnny Law was on alert to watch out for speeding red Corvettes.

 

[12punch]

since we are going with the speeding analogy, the speeder also has lots of points on his license (i.e. prior offenses), is driving a red Corvette (super bowl champs), and did so specifically while Johnny Law was on alert to watch out for speeding red Corvettes.

and everybody hates this guy cuz he's got that red corvette while they're in their beat up corolla.

I think you might be on the right track with this

also, the guy driving the corvette is black, and we're in alabama......

 

[cstu]

^

Keep yelling, somebody will believe you somewhere.

I'm not the one masquerading around in here claiming to know what happened, and I'm certainly not ####ting out of my mouth by suggesting this investigation was in any way objective.

The text messages speak for themselves.

Why is this so complicated for people to understand?

 

[massraider]

FWIW, McCann is the same guy who thought Hernandez had a pretty good chance to avoid conviction.

 

[rockaction]

Yeah, I was never sold on McCann as a neutral observer, so his point about Brady being unlikely to obtain outside counsel and then proceed to sue in a court of law is even more relevant than otherwise would be. A UNH guy that suddenly announces he's going to teach a course on Deflategate and the NFL because he sees problem with the Wells report…well, I'll leave it for others to judge, as I've already stated my opinion on that.

 

[massraider]

There really needs to be a book deal in the works for the deflators/memorabilia dealers the P*ts were employing.

I mean, why wouldn't they?

 

[JIslander]

since we are going with the speeding analogy, the speeder also has lots of points on his license (i.e. prior offenses), is driving a red Corvette (super bowl champs), and did so specifically while Johnny Law was on alert to watch out for speeding red Corvettes.

and everybody hates this guy cuz he's got that red corvette while they're in their beat up corolla.

I think you might be on the right track with this

also, the guy driving the corvette is black, and we're in alabama......

No way BB springs for a red corvette -- he'd opt for the beat up Corolla... with illegal parts to make it go faster.

 

[Run It Up]

Still curious to where on the scale of cheating this falls on. Yes, they did it and it seems to potentially have given NE an advantage. But didn't they say at the start of this it only changed the weight of the ball by the weight of a dollar bill?

The other two questions I had were about the investigation. If this were a court case, a defendant would not have to testify and self incriminate himself. But in a private investigation you have no choice?

Also, if it is found on appeal or in court that the report did not prove Brady deflated a football or they have nothing that can directly tie him to telling someone else to deflate a ball, theoretically would everything after that get wiped out (not fully cooperating with the investigation, not giving cell phone, lying, etc. ).

I am not trying to make things so Brady skates. Just wondering from a procedural perspective if they haven't directly proven his involvement does that make the rest of the mess after go away.

Scuffing a baseball. The real crime was the coverup.

Joe Niekro got 10 games for his infamous emery board thing. So one game sounds about right for Brady

There's a big difference between all of these supposed analogues. There is NO proven competitive advantage to underinflated footballs. This is all and only about what the finicky quarterback prefers. The number is in the rule book because it's a manufacturer's recommendation. No other reason.Somebody (can't remember the name -- uses Magnum P.I. as his avatar) said way up thread that it's more like the "Do Not Remove This Tag" tag on a mattress.

As usual, our brain-dead league let a bunch of pearl-clutching moralizing click-hunters completely run away with the narrative, and now the league is responding to that runaway, horse dung narrative.

yeah, that pretty much sums it up.

this has been going on supposedly forever

entire league supposedly knows about it

supposedly yields some great advantage

this is the first time anybody's said a peep about it

still waiting to get that explained

It's a rule. He broke it, probably multiple times. When he got caught, he lied, lied, refused to cooperate, pointed blame elsewhere, and lied some more. He's probably going to get punished. If he had fessed up from the beginning, he'd probably be getting little (if any) punishment. He brought it on himself.Since this thread seems to love analogies: If you drive 50 in a 45 mph zone, you're breaking the law, even though most people do that (and more). If you drive the same stretch of road for 14 years, and never got stopped for driving 5 miles over the speed limit, it doesn't change the fact that you are breaking the law. If, one day, you do get pulled over, and instead of saying "my bad, officer, I was driving over the speed limit," you say "I wasn't speeding," "everyone else is speeding," and "those extra 5 miles per hour aren't hurting anybody," that officer is far less likely to let you off with a warning.

Sweet analogy except the part where you just proclaim to know that he cheated, was caught, lied, lied again, refused to cooperated, deflected blame, then lied some more.Literally nothing shows that. It is your opinion, of someone elses opinion.

I think you must have failed to read the fairly lengthy and completely objective investigation which determined that all that stuff probably happened, and anybody who says different is most likely lying.

I actually read it in its entirety the morning it came out.It hinges off of Walt Andersons testimony that he knew that all the balls were in the ~12.5 area before the game, yet didn't record - this being after the Colts had warned the league and the league warned the officials before the game, including a two hour meeting. What reason would Walt Anderson have to lie? Because he was personally responsible for the balls and not only are they suspected to have been tampered with, he lost them.

You say its completely objective, yet the entire ####### report is slanted. Its an investigation, they are supposed to report their findings, yet you can't find consecutive paragraphs in the Wells report where they don't chime in with their personal opinion of the information, that they cherry picked. They completely dismiss the science based off of their outsourced experiments, which all have glaring holes in them - ignoring completely the terrible history of the firm they chose.

They wrote the thing as investigator, judge and jury. That flys in the ####### face of objectivity.

What are the glaring holes? I'd like to see this backed up.

Read any of the subtext of the individual experiments for the details. For example, for the atmospheric conditions test they wanted to replicate game time conditions. 48-50 degrees, pouring rain, windy. So they thought spritzing a football every 15 minutes with a spray bottle was comparable to cold weather (compared to the locker rooms), even colder rain and for the entire duration of the game.

It's just lazy and looks intentionally poor.

 

[IvanKaramazov]

There really needs to be a book deal in the works for the deflators/memorabilia dealers the P*ts were employing.

I mean, why wouldn't they?

I've thought about this too, and it's basically the only reason I can come up with for thinking that maybe Brady is telling the truth or has somehow convinced himself that he's not culpable.

McNally and the other guy are never going to be employed in the NFL ever again. Their careers are over. But they're going to have 15 minutes in which to cash in with exclusive interviews and the like. They'd be fools not to do so, and Brady and his agent surely realize that. If you're Brady, and you know that McNally is about to spill the beans to ESPN, would you really dig in like he's currently doing?

Obviously I think Brady is guilty as charged, and he's doing a Roger Clemons. This one little nugget still seems a little weird is all.

 

[rockaction]

There really needs to be a book deal in the works for the deflators/memorabilia dealers the P*ts were employing.

I mean, why wouldn't they?

I've thought about this too, and it's basically the only reason I can come up with for thinking that maybe Brady is telling the truth or has somehow convinced himself that he's not culpable.

McNally and the other guy are never going to be employed in the NFL ever again. Their careers are over. But they're going to have 15 minutes in which to cash in with exclusive interviews and the like. They'd be fools not to do so, and Brady and his agent surely realize that. If you're Brady, and you know that McNally is about to spill the beans to ESPN, would you really dig in like he's currently doing?

Obviously I think Brady is guilty as charged, and he's doing a Roger Clemons. This one little nugget still seems a little weird is all.

They could be being promised recommendations from their previous employer which would obviously carry a lot of weight in the region. Also, under the table payoffs in the forms of money, job promises, or gifts aren't out of the question. Not much seems to stop the Pats and their players when it comes to skirting ethical codes of conduct.

 

[Dinsy Ejotuz]

FWIW, McCann is the same guy who thought Hernandez had a pretty good chance to avoid conviction.

Should have said conviction "on first degree murder."

And, FWIW, he seems like a good reporter. My characterization was a little unfair.

 

[the moops]

And taking that "driving 60 in a 55 zone" analogy further -- if you get caught speeding, you pay a fine. You don't get thrown in jail, and you don't get suspended from your job.

And every time you get one of those tickets, points go on your license. Rack up enough points, and your license gets revoked.

This isn't the Patriots' first speeding ticket.

Think it would be that it was your dad's car, which has over violations for illegally parking or expired registration, and you get stopped for speeding, and because of your dad's history, they assume you have been speeding for years and issue a ridiculous ticket

 

[T J]

Still curious to where on the scale of cheating this falls on. Yes, they did it and it seems to potentially have given NE an advantage. But didn't they say at the start of this it only changed the weight of the ball by the weight of a dollar bill?

The other two questions I had were about the investigation. If this were a court case, a defendant would not have to testify and self incriminate himself. But in a private investigation you have no choice?

Also, if it is found on appeal or in court that the report did not prove Brady deflated a football or they have nothing that can directly tie him to telling someone else to deflate a ball, theoretically would everything after that get wiped out (not fully cooperating with the investigation, not giving cell phone, lying, etc. ).

I am not trying to make things so Brady skates. Just wondering from a procedural perspective if they haven't directly proven his involvement does that make the rest of the mess after go away.

Scuffing a baseball. The real crime was the coverup.

Joe Niekro got 10 games for his infamous emery board thing. So one game sounds about right for Brady

There's a big difference between all of these supposed analogues. There is NO proven competitive advantage to underinflated footballs. This is all and only about what the finicky quarterback prefers. The number is in the rule book because it's a manufacturer's recommendation. No other reason.

Somebody (can't remember the name -- uses Magnum P.I. as his avatar) said way up thread that it's more like the "Do Not Remove This Tag" tag on a mattress.

As usual, our brain-dead league let a bunch of pearl-clutching moralizing click-hunters completely run away with the narrative, and now the league is responding to that runaway, horse dung narrative.

yeah, that pretty much sums it up.

this has been going on supposedly forever

entire league supposedly knows about it

supposedly yields some great advantage

this is the first time anybody's said a peep about it

still waiting to get that explained

It's a rule. He broke it, probably multiple times. When he got caught, he lied, lied, refused to cooperate, pointed blame elsewhere, and lied some more. He's probably going to get punished. If he had fessed up from the beginning, he'd probably be getting little (if any) punishment. He brought it on himself.

Since this thread seems to love analogies: If you drive 50 in a 45 mph zone, you're breaking the law, even though most people do that (and more). If you drive the same stretch of road for 14 years, and never got stopped for driving 5 miles over the speed limit, it doesn't change the fact that you are breaking the law. If, one day, you do get pulled over, and instead of saying "my bad, officer, I was driving over the speed limit," you say "I wasn't speeding," "everyone else is speeding," and "those extra 5 miles per hour aren't hurting anybody," that officer is far less likely to let you off with a warning.

Sweet analogy except the part where you just proclaim to know that he cheated, was caught, lied, lied again, refused to cooperated, deflected blame, then lied some more.

Literally nothing shows that. It is your opinion, of someone elses opinion.

I think you must have failed to read the fairly lengthy and completely objective investigation which determined that all that stuff probably happened, and anybody who says different is most likely lying.

I actually read it in its entirety the morning it came out.

It hinges off of Walt Andersons testimony that he knew that all the balls were in the ~12.5 area before the game, yet didn't record - this being after the Colts had warned the league and the league warned the officials before the game, including a two hour meeting. What reason would Walt Anderson have to lie? Because he was personally responsible for the balls and not only are they suspected to have been tampered with, he lost them.

You say its completely objective, yet the entire ####### report is slanted. Its an investigation, they are supposed to report their findings, yet you can't find consecutive paragraphs in the Wells report where they don't chime in with their personal opinion of the information, that they cherry picked. They completely dismiss the science based off of their outsourced experiments, which all have glaring holes in them - ignoring completely the terrible history of the firm they chose.

They wrote the thing as investigator, judge and jury. That flys in the ####### face of objectivity.

What are the glaring holes? I'd like to see this backed up.

Read any of the subtext of the individual experiments for the details. For example, for the atmospheric conditions test they wanted to replicate game time conditions. 48-50 degrees, pouring rain, windy. So they thought spritzing a football every 15 minutes with a spray bottle was comparable to cold weather (compared to the locker rooms), even colder rain and for the entire duration of the game.

It's just lazy and looks intentionally poor.

Are you seriously still on this? They intentionally deflated the balls. Period. End of sentence. It happened so deal with it and quit making excuses. You're really sounding pathetic in this thread.