Florio: Source Says that Wells Report takings so long because investigation turned to the NFL

This is a third recent Wells investigation story. Breer's stated that he thought the key to the investigation was what happened the week leading up to the game, just based on his opinion, and that the delay was that lawyers are slow. Curran reporter that sources told him there have been many visits to Foxboro and they are asking many questions of many people.
Now Florio adds that he has a source in the league that says the investigation is focussed on the league now.
All probably have some sort of truth. Breer's guess is as good as anyones I suppose. Curran's source about how much time was spent in Foxboro seems reasonable, and Florio has no credibility but a source with specific info.
In the end, we arent really any further than what we speculated before these stories.

Wells SHOULD have looked for tampering in any case just to be thorough and because I'll wager there were not any real #s on the psi. But there is no need to keep on going UNLESS the league office and other teams are involved.

Agree that it is a mystery why long ago Pats QBs would be investigated.

AndyJohnson said:

In the end, we arent really any further than what we speculated before these stories.

Click to expand...

Sadly, very true.

I find the story interesting not from just a Patriots angle, but from a science angle - yet I'm reaching the point of diminishing returns in terms of my investment. Probably well past the point where I should've taken @KontradictioN 's approach.

BradyManny said:

I agree with that, but at the same time, Curran's report is disconcerting and odd as well. And I trust Curran, as he seems very connected on this (to the Pats side of things at least). If the PSI #s are what we think they are, and if Columbia exonerated the Pats as we assume they did, why is the NFL ****ing around talking to our backup QBs from years ago? They are still looking for a human tampering explanation for something that is explained scientifically?

It's rather confusing.

I agree with the larger point though, the league's involvement, Grigson, Kensil, whoever leaked BS to Mort, that all needs to be in the report.

Q: Do "journalists" as hysterically trivial as sports reporters get to protect their sources as actual journalists do? I wonder if they've talked directly to Mort at this point.

Click to expand...

But Curran's report is taken out of context. If you look at his Q&A he specifically states he wants to see the part of the report that deals with the League and the Colts and their actions.

Curran's report doesn't say anything I didn't already know. We knew that the Wells investigation was going to be this thorough based on the Jonathan Martin investigation. In fact, if they are digging this deep it probably is good for the Pats because if they found a smoking gun, there would be no need to go this deep. Only if you are on a fishing expedition do you go this deep.

Rob0729 said:

Only if you are on a fishing expedition do you go this deep.

Click to expand...

Sure, but again - there was no need to fish that deep for an explanation. PV = nRT is the explanation. It doesn't leave the door open for interpretation on what happened. It's not just a wishy-washy possible explanation, it doesn't just say "well, maybe the Pats didn't do anything, it's possible." It definitively says: the Patriots balls behaved as one would expect they would, they were not tampered with. Period.

AndyJohnson said:

This is a third recent Wells investigation story. Breer's stated that he thought the key to the investigation was what happened the week leading up to the game, just based on his opinion, and that the delay was that lawyers are slow. Curran reporter that sources told him there have been many visits to Foxboro and they are asking many questions of many people.
Now Florio adds that he has a source in the league that says the investigation is focussed on the league now.
All probably have some sort of truth. Breer's guess is as good as anyones I suppose. Curran's source about how much time was spent in Foxboro seems reasonable, and Florio has no credibility but a source with specific info.
In the end, we arent really any further than what we speculated before these stories.

Click to expand...

In other words, anyone who agrees with your opinion isn't credible.

And why discuss Curran's sources anyway? Curran's own admission in the article states that he isn't sure if his source is credible or not. So you have far more faith in Curran's source than Curran does. And Curran neither confirms or contradicts Florio in any way.

Until we see otherwise, we don't know who sources are legit and whos aren't. That includes Curran's source and Florio's source.

But of course you think Curran's source is impeachable (even though Curran isn't so sure) and Florio's source is bogus. Predictable. Bizzarro Deus has spoken.

Florio is no Pats fan so I am very encouraged by his report here. And this in no way contradicts Currans report because Curran openly said that he was writing about how he felt and what he wanted answered. He didn't claim to have information.

If the Wells Report does indeed find that employees of the NFL did something wrong, whether it's the attempted sting operation by a certain jilted ex-jets member or the leaking of misinformation in an attempt to smear the Patriots, and the NFL actually allows this report to go public, it will restore some of my faith in the clowns running this league

BradyManny said:

However, you'd think Wells is a smart, educated person - maybe not in science, but in his own field, and presumably has a respect for others that are experts in their field. If Columbia comes back and gives him the same results HeadSmart has, doesn't he accept it and move on from trying to find deliberate tampering??

Click to expand...

Yes but it is even better when he can say spoken to Pats personal past and present and no one ever tampered.

1) Pats play Ravens in very cold day which would have made a 12.5PSI ball in a 75 degree locker room only 9.6 PSI at 18 degrees.
2) Brady throws interception, Raven measure balls, see it is 9.6 PSI. They don't measure their own balls because they know they did not deflate and don't understand science
3) Ravens tell Pagano/Grigson who tells NFL/Kinsel?
4) Sting set up
5) Brady tosses INT which would be at 11.17 PSI at 49 degrees (Possibly less from cold rain). This is almost 2 PSI less than 13 PSI which is mid point. Perhaps Colts take a bit out for emphasis
6) Kinsel pounces, Colts and NFl release leaks to media and the rest is a run away train from media and folks who know nothing about science.

Patriots were caught flat footed because they had no idea what was going on since they had nothing to do with it.

BradyManny said:

Sure, but again - there was no need to fish that deep for an explanation. PV = nRT is the explanation. It doesn't leave the door open for interpretation on what happened. It's not just a wishy-washy possible explanation, it doesn't just say "well, maybe the Pats didn't do anything, it's possible." It definitively says: the Patriots balls behaved as one would expect they would, they were not tampered with. Period.

Click to expand...

The thing even if science supports that the air temperature could or even most likely caused the PSI differation, there is no record of what the PSIs were for each ball was when they were first checked and then checked at halftime. Because of that, no matter what Columbia University said, they have to treat that as a theory and not facts. If they had recorded PSIs, then they might have drawn that conclusion without further investigation. But we have no clue how much PSI was lost in each ball.

I never expected science alone to exonerate the Pats. It can't. If science says that it is conceivable for the balls to lose 1 PSI in that time, how do we know that is how much was lost? We have no idea how much each ball lost. Could be more. Could be less.

There is no conceivable way they could have ended the investigation on science saying that the cold caused the loss in air pressure when we don't have the key pieces of evidences of the before and after air pressure.

Rob0729 said:

In other words, anyone who agrees with your opinion isn't credible.

Click to expand...

No. Florio isn't credible. I thought that was understood by everyone on this board.

And why discuss Curran's sources anyway? Curran's own admission in the article states that he isn't sure if his source is credible or not.

Click to expand...

Not sure what you mean here. Curran cited a source he trusts. He never said anything like what you say here

So you have far more faith in Curran's source than Curran does.

Click to expand...

Actually I have less, which is sort of the point.

And Curran neither confirms or contradicts Florio in any way.

Click to expand...

None of the stories are intended to confirm or deny the other, they are independent.
Breer gave a guess, Curran cited a source. Florio cited a source.
All could be right or wrong and there are varying degrees of confidence in each.

Until we see otherwise, we don't know who sources are legit and whos aren't. That includes Curran's source and Florio's source.

Click to expand...

Agreed, with the exception of track record, which gives Curran more credibility. I know you want Florio to have more because you like his story better but it doesn't work that way for me.

But of course you think Curran's source is impeachable (even though Curran isn't so sure) and Florio's source is bogus. Predictable. Bizzarro Deus has spoken.

Click to expand...

So your answer is to put words in my mouth, lie about what Curran said, and insult me?
That is the type of discussion you wish to have?

VectorPrime said:

Florio is no Pats fan so I am very encouraged by his report here. And this in no way contradicts Currans report because Curran openly said that he was writing about how he felt and what he wanted answered. He didn't claim to have information.

Click to expand...

Curran never actually addresses whether the league and/or Colts are being investigated. And he wrote of his source in the article:

I don’t know if that was apocryphal or not, but I’ve heard the investigators have been through Foxboro more than once.

Click to expand...

That means he isn't sure his source is even speaking facts or rumors.

Rob0729 said:

The thing even if science supports that the air temperature could or even most likely caused the PSI differation, there is no record of what the PSIs were for each ball was when they were first checked and then checked at halftime. Because of that, no matter what Columbia University said, they have to treat that as a theory and not facts. If they had recorded PSIs, then they might have drawn that conclusion without further investigation. But we have no clue how much PSI was lost in each ball.

Click to expand...

I don't think that has ever been confirmed. I know it has been rumored, but we do not know this is the case.

BradyManny said:

Q: Do "journalists" as hysterically trivial as sports reporters get to protect their sources as actual journalists do? I wonder if they've talked directly to Mort at this point.

Click to expand...

"Protect your sources" only comes up when a journalist (and yes, it can be a sports journalist) is subpoenaed to testify about something. And even then, the journalist can be (temporarily) jailed for contempt of court if they fail to obey the subpoena.

When it's a private party asking you something you (not just journalists, but anyone) are free to tell them to go pound sand.

Now, it's certainly possible that if you work for private party AAA, and private party ZZZ is doing an internal investigation and wants to know what you know and AAA wants to suck up to ZZZ that AAA will order you to spill the beans. Then you'll have to decide whether to do as your boss says or shield your source and possibly get fired (unless your employment contract, if any, gives you protection in this case). But there's no magic law that says your boss can't fire you over something like that.

Dr Pain said:

Yes but it is even better when he can say spoken to Pats personal past and present and no one ever tampered.

1) Pats play Ravens in very cold day which would have made a 12.5PSI ball in a 75 degree locker room only 9.6 PSI at 18 degrees.
2) Brady throws interception, Raven measure balls, see it is 9.6 PSI. They don't measure their own balls because they know they did not deflate and don't understand science
3) Ravens tell Pagano/Grigson who tells NFL/Kinsel?
4) Sting set up
5) Brady tosses INT which would be at 11.17 PSI at 49 degrees (Possibly less from cold rain). This is almost 2 PSI less than 13 PSI which is mid point. Perhaps Colts take a bit out for emphasis
6) Kinsel pounces, Colts and NFl release leaks to media and the rest is a run away train from media and folks who know nothing about science.

Patriots were caught flat footed because they had no idea what was going on since they had nothing to do with it.

Click to expand...

This is a very reasonable chain of events. I'd propose my own theory is that the beginnings of it were actually more innocuous and more stupid, at the same time. I don't imagine the Ravens checked the PSI of the intercepted ball. We heard there was complaints about the kicking ball. My guess is that is where it started.

FWIW - out of curiosity, the only connection I can find between Grigson and a Ravens coaching staff is that the kicking coach for the Ravens, Randy Brown, worked for the Eagles in 2004-2005. At that time, Grigson was on staff as a scout. Sort of doubt they'd cross paths much, but I don't know anything about how coaching staff or scouts interact.

BradyManny said:

And Belichick, being the smartest guy involved in the whole thing, was the only person with the smarts to run an experiment, and see what happened.

Click to expand...

I bet Patricia and Cam Fleming (aero/astro, Stanford) said something to BB.

AndyJohnson said:

No. Florio isn't credible. I thought that was understood by everyone on this board.

Click to expand...

He is sometimes right. Sometimes not even in the ball park.

Not sure what you mean here. Curran cited a source he trusts. He never said anything like what you say here

Click to expand...

I am saying he explicitly states that he doesn't know if his source is telling him facts or rumors being spread as facts. He writes it right in the article.

Again here is the quote from Curran:

They’ve talked to enough people. At the owner’s meetings, I asked someone who would know what the holdup was. They said, “You figure they’d talk to the backup quarterback, right? Well, they’re talking to the backup quarterbacks from years ago too.” I don’t know if that was apocryphal or not, but I’ve heard the investigators have been through Foxboro more than once. Anybody who touched the footballs or knows the people who touched the footballs has been subjected to metal chair under a single naked lightbulb-type questioning.

Click to expand...

Look up the meaning apocryphal.

And Wells being to Foxboro multiple times means nothing. They had problems scheduling interviews with Belichick and Brady. If they were interviewed on different days, that could account for multiple Foxboro visits.

Actually I have less, which is sort of the point.

Click to expand...

Not in the slightest. Curran isn't sure if he source is right or just spreading rumors that may considered facts.

None of the stories are intended to confirm or deny the other, they are independent.
Breer gave a guess, Curran cited a source. Florio cited a source.
All could be right or wrong and there are varying degrees of confidence in each.

Click to expand...

I trust Florio's source more than Curran's just because Curran states that he doesn't know if his source is right in the article.

Agreed, with the exception of track record, which gives Curran more credibility. I know you want Florio to have more because you like his story better but it doesn't work that way for me.

Click to expand...

Again Curran states in the article that he doesn't know if his sources is telling him facts. Big difference.

So your answer is to put words in my mouth, lie about what Curran said, and insult me?
That is the type of discussion you wish to have?

Click to expand...

I am just beating you to the punch considering any "discussion" with you goes this way.

AndyJohnson said:

I don't think that has ever been confirmed. I know it has been rumored, but we do not know this is the case.

Click to expand...

It has been as close to confirmed as anything. But it really doesn't matter, Wells was never going to end his investigation on science alone no matter what.

BradyManny said:

This is a very reasonable chain of events. I'd propose my own theory is that the beginnings of it were actually more innocuous and more stupid, at the same time. I don't imagine the Ravens checked the PSI of the intercepted ball. We heard there was complaints about the kicking ball. My guess is that is where it started.

FWIW - out of curiosity, the only connection I can find between Grigson and a Ravens coaching staff is that the kicking coach for the Ravens, Randy Brown, worked for the Eagles in 2004-2005. At that time, Grigson was on staff as a scout. Sort of doubt they'd cross paths much, but I don't know anything about how coaching staff or scouts interact.

Click to expand...

Harbaugh was also at Philly during that time period. Pagano was DC for Harbaugh in BAL. The ties run deep between those two orgs.

robertweathers said:

Harbaugh was also at Philly during that time period. Pagano was DC for Harbaugh in BAL. The ties run deep between those two orgs.

Click to expand...

Fair, but I'm looking for a connection to Grigson. Harbaugh says he wasn't involved specifically. Pagano claims the same. I sort of want to take both at their face value, at least Pagano, b/c he had bigger fish to try that week than some ball ********.

Harbaugh I can see stirring the pot. But again, this started with Grigson. Very curious to see where his impetus came from.