The Published Wells Report.

Deus Irae said:

For those of you talking about the evidence, one way or another, Jeff Howe sums up the entirety of the report:

Click to expand...

Deus, do you think the Pats or Brady get any punishement?

patsinthesnow said:

Gronk's response:

https://vine.co/v/eZUhquu19Oa

Click to expand...

Interception said:

McNally:**** tom ...16 is nothing...wait till next sunday

It's obvious from these texts Tom was giving McNally things in exchange for lowering the pressure.

Click to expand...

Grizzafted said:

unbelievable the lengths some of you will go to deny the obvious.

brady lied, he deflated footballs, probably for years, and he's going to get suspended a few games. my guess is 4.

f* it, it happened. it's annoying that he didn't come right out and admit it when the story broke, but the guy has 4 rings, millions of dollars, and a supermodel wife. he will be fine, and so will all of us. deal with the burn and move on.

Click to expand...

From what I am reading it sounds like Brady wanted the psi to be deflated from 16 (which is not within the NFL's acceptable limits) to 12.5 psi (which is within the legal limits).

So yes, Brady was giving instructions to the equipment personnel to deflate the footballs.

However, I don't yet see anything (I have not yet read the full 350-page report) that Brady was ordering the equipment personnel to do anything against NFL rules.

A (not so) minor but incredibly important detail that the talking heads at espn are completely overlooking. Instead the four letter networks and sports talk radio stations across the country are talking non-stop about how Brady and the Patriots are cheaters, convincing their audiences that this must be an indisputable truth.

Yet another myth (like how these same people saying Kraft and Goodell are good friends) that is being repeated so often that it is being accepted as an irrefutable fact.

Grizzafted said:

unbelievable the lengths some of you will go to deny the obvious.

Click to expand...

If it's so obvious, why did Well's (who was CLEARLY trying to implicate the patriots) simply state "more probable than not"? If it was obvious wouldn't he stand behind his findings with more conviction (Most likely, almost certainly, Beyond a reasonable doubt, there's no doubt in my mind, etc etc). No, he said "more probable than not", which means 50.1/49.9 It's as week of a stance as you can make without saying "I don't know" or "They are innocent".

The report was as inconclusive as it gets. The fact that he tries desperately to associate guilt with the Patriots is telling. An unbiased conclusion would report the investigation inconclusive. I read through just about the entire report and there is nothing conclusive ANYWHERE in the report and even the most "damning" evidence (text messages) is still a matter of what context YOU wish to view it in. Again, completely inconclusive.

Well's might as well have just said "I think they violated rules and Brady knew, but there's no actual proof of any wrong doing". And that shouldn't NOT be enough to levy punishment or you open pandora's box and any unproven accusation becomes fair game. It's just not acceptable and i doubt the players association would let it happen.

ashley1992 said:

Deus, do you think the Pats or Brady get any punishement?

Click to expand...

Goodell/Vincent may toss something at the Patriots over the follow up interview. Brady may initially face a fine or suspension, which he'll appeal and, at least in the case of suspension, probably win. It's the other two I'm worried for. Goodell's not above demanding that they be fired, even with this level of evidence.

Ross12 said:

Exactly. Wells insinuates that in early 2014 McNally is already known as the "deflator", implying this is a long-running conspiracy, yet here is evidence showing "Tom was right" about the balls in the Jets game being way over-inflated, lending credence to the fact that he was just then learning about the rules of acceptable PSI and where it should be at.

I don't see how you can say McNally is deflating balls before 2014 but then provide evidence that Brady is just learning about PSI in October.

Click to expand...

Exactly - I said the same thing earlier. Those quotes, if anything, EXONERATE all three, at least from any conspiracy that they were purposely putting the pressure below 12.5.

ashley1992 said:

From what i heard and read, no evidence against Belichick and Kraft but the text messages between McNally and Jastremski clearly implicate that they knew Brady and were acting on his behalf. Doesn't look good that Brady refused to cooperate with the investigation either.
The USA Today also reported that "The report also details scientific evidence supporting a conclusion the balls were deliberately deflated".
Keeping my fingers crossed!!!!!!!

Click to expand...

The texts are nonsense. It's clear Jastremski knew Brady, but there's no evidence that McNally did. The only thing evident to me is that the two men worked to make sure the footballs were inflated where Brady wanted them, there's no evidence that they ever set them below the allowed threshold or tampered with them after check-in.

Also, the "scientific evidence" is not so scientific and is also wrong, and further does not address the fact that the Colts' balls do not support their own conclusions.

I don't know what happened and neither does wells.

What I do know is this is equivalent to a civil suit loss (preponderance of evidence) not a criminal loss (beyond a reasonable doubt). I know the NFL does what it likes but civil suit loss = loss of money as opposed to a criminal court loss. The NFL equivalent should be a fine for preponderance of evidence not draft picks or suspensions as there's no evidence beyond a reasonable doubt.

Deus Irae said:

Goodell/Vincent may toss something at the Patriots over the follow up interview. Brady may initially face a fine or suspension, which he'll appeal and, at least in the case of suspension, probably win. It's the other two I'm worried for. Goodell's not above demanding that they be fired, even with this level of evidence.

Click to expand...

Given that McNally is a part-timer, and the two of them did help give the Pats a black eye, whether they intended to or not, I wouldn't be surprised if they were fired even without such a demand.

The only scientifically verifiable conclusion you can draw from this report is that Wells is a low grade idiot.

ctpatsfan77 said:

Given that McNally is a part-timer, and the two of them did help give the Pats a black eye, whether they intended to or not, I wouldn't be surprised if they were fired even without such a demand.

Click to expand...

I'd be shocked if they were back although their potential "run to ESPN" could be problematic.

ctpatsfan77 said:

Given that McNally is a part-timer, and the two of them did help give the Pats a black eye, whether they intended to or not, I wouldn't be surprised if they were fired.

Click to expand...

I don't believe Kraft would, on his own, fire two innocent employees over this.

I'm embarrassed for this country. All the **** happening in this country and deflate gate opens all 3 major network broadcast

Deus Irae said:

I don't believe Kraft would, on his own, fire two innocent employees over this.

Click to expand...

And they are innocent? Right

Has there ever been a significant penalty for "more probable than not" ? Spygate, TextGate, NoiseGate, SaintsGate, whatever that was called, we knew they happened. This one, we don't.

ctpatsfan77 said:

Given that McNally is a part-timer, and the two of them did help give the Pats a black eye, whether they intended to or not, I wouldn't be surprised if they were fired even without such a demand.

Click to expand...

I wonder if the Pat's are a little nervous firing them now fearing they could go to ESPN or any other new outlet with more incriminating evidence against either Tom or us. If I were the Pat's I'd keep them close to me right now, just in case

This report is vague enough that people seem to be reading alot into many vague facts and statements. People can get out of it whatever fits their agenda and personal view. This is what is so dangerous about these kinds of investigations.

ashley1992 said:

From what i heard and read, no evidence against Belichick and Kraft but the text messages between McNally and Jastremski clearly implicate that they knew Brady and were acting on his behalf.

Click to expand...

Jastermski said after the jests game that the balls were close to 16 lbs but were suppose to be 13 lbs. If they are treating the text messages as evidence how come they seem to ignore that Jastermski saying they needed to be 13 "more probable than not" meant that Brady wanted them at 13?

festy1986 said:

And they are innocent?

Click to expand...

I don't know. You don't know. Ted Wells doesn't know. Kraft's statement implies no belief in anyone's guilt:

I stated that I unconditionally believed that the New England Patriots had done nothing inappropriate in this process or in violation of the NFL rules and that I was disappointed in the way the league handled the initial investigation. That sentiment has not changed.

Click to expand...

http://www.patriots.com/news/2015/0...ts-chairman-and-ceo-robert-kraft-wells-report

How is it incriminating to talk to the a guy you haven't talked to in 6 months after it looks like there is going to be a huge investigation about something that will center around you two? Being non-lawyers, they are not going to think that it looks fishy. Brady is going to call the guy and say "tell me exactly what happened. You weren't doing anything beyond keeping them at 12.5 psi were you?" The fact that they hadn't texted each other in the 6 months previously leads me to believe there was no big conspiracy between Brady and the equipment guy...