2015 New England Patriots Thread

Well, I agree with you here if there was no evidence that the balls had been tampered with. But wasn't that fact the progenitor? I am not absolutely sure what the deflated (under-inflated) ball evidence was. Was it one ball, more than one? By how much?

The text messages, the refusal to allow a second interview with the attendants after the messages were uncovered, taking the game balls after testing them into a private room, the cell phone destruction, Patriot management accession to a huge fine and loss of two draft picks (which will stand if I am correct), Brady's initial statement that he 'didn't think that he had cheated'...were factors for me. There was also some talk (whether true or not) that Brady would agree to a fine or a one or two game suspension as long as he did not have to validate the Wells report. I don't know what the standard of "proof" required is. The important note of the Judge's decision was that the NFL overreached and had violated fair process which I certainly agree with as more info came out. At the same time the judge did not vindicate Brady or find him innocent. There was no ruling on that.

Both parties did not offer up the most complete rendition of or access to the evidence that they could have and should have....and that sullied the process for me.

I would take the same tack were it a Big Papi, Sox thing or the Celtics. I want fairness and openness b/t Commissioners and the players/management and fairness across all sports on the field. We know the athletic human nature with such pressure, is to find an edge wherever, whenever it can and strict rules/penalties need be put in place to curb that desire before it crosses the line.

As for categorizing Patriot fans in the Michael Holley 'being objective' que, wouldn't they reflect what the fans across the country might feel? If so, I wonder what opinion that grouping might reflect? They can't all be biased against the Patriots.

General Question: To what extent, if any, does NFL team management or the player involved have to comply with league investigations?

As everyone knows, Judge Berman could not rule on the facts of the case, only the law. But that doesn't mean he didn't comment on it — from open court transcripts: 

Berman: "What is the evidence of a scheme or conspiracy that covers the Jan. 15 game? I’m having trouble finding it."

In his 40 page opinion he referred to the "incident" as "alleged," itself notable. He also five times referred to the "independent investigation" — veiled but clear disgust with the NFL's deceit.

It seems to me you are giving more weight to the unanswered questions you may have than they deserve. While totally ignoring some of the facts — first, and foremost, that the NFL office disseminated knowingly false information about the "incident," withheld facts of the investigation from both the public and the accused and his counsel, and then lied about Brady's testimony in the appeal hearing. Plus, the red herring of the phone. Those are FACTS, and require little conjecture. Why would the NFL lie about the facts of the case on multiple occasions? Simple enough — they don't have enough (any) real evidence. 

Why do you suppose Roger Goodell lied on multiple occasions, sarasoxer? Why did his office try to paint their investigation as "independent" when it was not? (Fun note: former federal prosecutor and special investigator for MLB (Pete Rose/Gambling) John Dowd equated the investigation to an "ambush." He started a website to log his thoughts on the proceedings: www.deflategatefacts.com/blog/).

Are you so troubled by a part-time employee referring to himself a "the deflator" (once, by the way, from May of 2014 — the offseason — even though that singular )quote was referenced ad nauseum in the Wells Report) that you would give short shrift to the abundance of evidence on the other side of the ledger? Aside: I don't know if this is true or not, but I heard an ex NFL player say that body builders on steroids call deflating coming off cycle. I think that's how he put it. It was back in May, when the Wells Report came out. Could any of this be a reason for why the direct testimony of the fellow accused of deflating the footballs isn't actually entered as evidence anywhere (at least not where we, or TB, can see)? Don't you wonder about that? Where is their testimony? Isn't there only one likely answer to that question: it might just be believable?

I wait anxiously for the defamation suit. Let's see what's on Roger's cell phone, in his emails. 

p.s., Thanks sarasoxer — I've been meaning to collect my thoughts on DeflateGate in one place for a while — son-in-law is a Chiefs fan and the sort not beyond reaching into The Cheatriots grab bag ("Umm, didn't you mean Champriots?"). You've covered most of the talking points I think. Much appreciated.

No cynicism is required. The Facts say the NFL fed misinformation and later lied. It is documented. BTW, Brady is the only one who has given testimony under oath. Why didn't Nash or Wells or Goodell testify under oath? Oh, wait, Nash wouldn't testify.

Open your eyes, man. 

p.s., We can't go "round and round" if you never address any of the points I make and instead re-parrot what you said originally. 

p.p.s., I don't read the Globe. Only Speier and Finn, and I doubt that's who you're linking.

p.p.p.s., Quick, what's the first thought when you hear this was said in an athletic facility,"I'm gonna give you the needle." and later, "A big needle." C'mon, be honest. 

OK man have it your way.

Your assertion that the Patriot ball attendant who grabbed the balls without authority after those were initially cleared, took them alone into a private bathroom because he was 'embarrassed about the strength of his stream' undermines (for me) the credibility of your statements and underscores their bias.

You have consistently dismissed the texts b/t the attendants, the ball attendant reports that Brady liked to have a lower inflated ball, Patriot management willing to accept a 1 MM fine and two lost draft choices, the refusal of the Patriots to allow a second interview with those attendants after the text messages were discovered, and the cell phone destruction on order of Brady the day after his appearance at a hearing etc.

I gave you a number of articles to read including a Boston Globe piece that summarized the Wells report showing many balls were below the legal limit at half-time. You casually dismissed all that as being beneath you to read. You are smarter and you know better apparently. Honestly if you are introspective at all, isn't this a bit weak?

I hope that I am as big a Patriots fan as anyone but I can't let my loyalty cloud my vision.

Again...the NFL overreached in Judge Berman's opinion. I feel that decision was correct given the 'crime' despite the negotiated CBA....The power given to the Commissioner appears extreme. And I don't like the fact that the NFL refused to allow a meeting with one of its attorneys....It is on the same level of the Brady team consistently hiding the pea. Berman's argument that Brady was not apprised of possible suspension is a little weaker IMO.

The matter is not yet done so we will have to wait for that outcome.

I am glad benogliviesbrother for your contributions so that I could coalesce my views which I have long wanted to. Thank you.

Using the Patriots willingness to take the penalty as evidence of guilt really undermines your opinion. They had almost no recourse. Kraft made the calculated decision that accepting the penalty was better for the long term interest of the team than not accepting the penalty. He weighed the fact that he was extremely unlikely to get Goodell to overturn it, almost as unlikely to get a judge to overturn it, the negative consequences of suing the league, and the chances backing down might help Brady's case. After weighing all these things the team accepted the penalty, which - begrudgingly - was the right thing to do because suing would have only made things worse.

And you also have sited Brady's press conference from the week after the AFC title game as evidence. That is not evidence! Were you paying attention at all when that happened? Mort had just reported that 11 of 12 balls were 2 PSI under inflated. There was a legitimate wave of people calling for the Patriots to be removed from the Super Bowl. The NFL never corrected the false reports, so Brady had to assume they were accurate. He was nervous. His coach had just basically pinned the preparation of the balls on him and he had no explanation for how they could be 2 PSI under. Of course he stuttered! Did you hear his nervous laugh? That doesn't mean or in anyway insinuate guilt and the fact that you would use it to tells me you're more interested in finding guilt than you are of finding truth.

Edit add:
And the "Destroying the cell phone" meme is not evidence either. If I'm Brady and there are people interested in my phone (to any extent) and my lawyer tells me I have no obligation to give it up, and I have a bunch of nudes of Giselle on there (or other private stuff that I don't want to get out), I'm destroying my phone. Whether there is anything on there about deflating footballs or not.

Remember, the league had all of Brady's written communication with Patriots personnel. What exactly else did they need? Did he text Giselle telling her about how he hired a couple fat dudes to take the air out of the balls? And when it went to appeal he offered to recover any text that Goodell wanted from his phone records. Goodell said don't bother.

Also, the Tom "Destroyed" his phone thing came out AFTER he had already been given a four game suspension. That came out in Goodell's arbitration ruling - the same ruling that we now know he blatantly lied and misrepresented Brady's testimony.

Edit add #2:

Sorry - you got me going! The refusal to allow McNally to do a fourth interview (second with Wells, but as we now know there was no difference) is also not evidence. Again, put this moment in context: The Patriots had been emailing the league begging them to correct the misinformation out there. The league completely blew them off. It was obvious at this point that the league had made this an adversarial investigation. They had it in writing that they were not obligated to produce McNally again. Given the context of stuff we now know was going on in the background, it makes total sense that they wouldn't allow them to interview McNally again. And yet still, they offered to have him available for a phone interview. If Goodell an the league were seeking truth and not guilt, they would have at least talked to McNally on they phone. They weren't. They wanted to be able to say the Patriots did not cooperate.

There is evidence. You can have a different interpretation of it and weigh different parts differently, but I'm not going to call you unreasonable for that. Putting much more than zero weight on the fact that Brady was unwilling to state publicly that he likes the rules bent, on the other hand...

Oh, come on. Start with the text messages from "The Deflator" and go from there. If you've not seen any evidence you've been sticking your head in the sand for quite a while now.

Again, we can reasonably disagree on the interpretation and the weight of this evidence, but it is there.

You do realize that every email and text sent by Brady would have also been possessed by the person he sent them to, right?  They didn't find anything on the other end that was incriminating.

espn.go.com/espn/otl/story/_/id/13533995/split-nfl-new-england-patriots-apart

Woof.

ESPN is to sports what MTV is to music.

Used to LOVE ESPN but I'm starting to develop my own conspiracty theories about them.

Why is it that they continue to dig and do stories on this but easily got trumped/outbid (did they even try???) by a gossip/celebrity site for the Ray Rice video? Did they really not know of it's possible existance or maybe, just maybe, they decided not to dig?