Jastremski and McNally will testify at Brady appeal

Ring 6 · May 15, 2015

varjao said:
Well I don't know if they were called by the league or Brady's team but I see this with different eyes than most of you, I think it's a good thing. It's in the best interest of them to clear all this mess, they are going to stand by the Patriots version. They are not going through a lie detector test.

I think there's a chance Goodell is throw Wells and his report under the bus, say this whole text messages was a misunderstanding and reduce the penalties to avoid court.

There is no "Patriots version".
The Patriot response was The Deflator and Dorito Dink's answer to what the texts meant.

I swear people are acting like the Patriots sat down and tried to create an explanation that was plausible. Thats what Wells does. The Patriots asked the question and wrote down the answer.

BSR · May 15, 2015

AndyJohnson said:
Goodell's smartest play is to read the Patriots response, do some investigation and judge that the Wells report is flawed, jumps to conclusions, does not meet the more probably than not standard because the science is wrong,and to many assumptions are made, and the the league after reviewing Wells work and the Patriots response find no reasonable means to consider the Patriots or Tom Brady guilty of any wrongdoing.

That is what will happen. It's just a matter of whether Goodell does it or the court does.

Actually his smartest play would be to interview McNally and Jastremski, claim that the two were able to supply evidence that Wells didn't have and reduce all penalties accordingly. This gives him a way to reduce the penalties without making Wells look bad.

Lets see if he is smart enough to do it.

Rob0729 · May 15, 2015

AndyJohnson said:
Goodell may in fact be a moron. I do assume he has intelligent people advising him.
One thing that is blatantly obvious is that the Patriots win in court. There is no judge in America that would uphold taking away a union members right to work based upon the Wells report and the evidence vs Brady. A court could easily rule that even if Wells met the 'more probably than not' burden, that this burden is unacceptable with respect to denying employment (through suspension) of a unionized employee. Lets remember the court isn't ruling for Tom Brady and his 20 mill a year salary, they are ruling for Joe Lunchbucket working his $14 an hour union job as well.
Goodell also has to know that aside from Brady's suspension, the other things on trial will be:

His authority to discipline
The standard as mentioned above
The Personal Conduct policy and its constitutionality
The CBA itself by virute of a ruling that negates pieces of it
The anti-trust exemption if necessary.

In court, there is no way Brady loses. In court there is a good chance Goodell loses more than just Brady's suspension.

Goodell's smartest play is to read the Patriots response, do some investigation and judge that the Wells report is flawed, jumps to conclusions, does not meet the more probably than not standard because the science is wrong,and to many assumptions are made, and the the league after reviewing Wells work and the Patriots response find no reasonable means to consider the Patriots or Tom Brady guilty of any wrongdoing.

That is what will happen. It's just a matter of whether Goodell does it or the court does.

Right now, I don't know if it is Goodell's smartest play is to admit Wells' report is flawed. That ship has sailed. He would be better off getting smacked down in court and try to spin it as he did his best to punish the Patriots and Brady got off on a technicality.

For him to admit that the Wells report is wrong now will only turn people against him. It won't win back Kraft. It would be a huge black mark for him and the League.

Now he isn't doing himself any favors for appointing himself to the case, but he is all in on the Wells report and will defend it any way possible. And that is his best move at this point.

Sfpat · May 15, 2015

AndyJohnson said:
Goodell may in fact be a moron. I do assume he has intelligent people advising him.
One thing that is blatantly obvious is that the Patriots win in court. There is no judge in America that would uphold taking away a union members right to work based upon the Wells report and the evidence vs Brady. A court could easily rule that even if Wells met the 'more probably than not' burden, that this burden is unacceptable with respect to denying employment (through suspension) of a unionized employee. Lets remember the court isn't ruling for Tom Brady and his 20 mill a year salary, they are ruling for Joe Lunchbucket working his $14 an hour union job as well.
Goodell also has to know that aside from Brady's suspension, the other things on trial will be:

His authority to discipline
The standard as mentioned above
The Personal Conduct policy and its constitutionality
The CBA itself by virute of a ruling that negates pieces of it
The anti-trust exemption if necessary.

In court, there is no way Brady loses. In court there is a good chance Goodell loses more than just Brady's suspension.

Goodell's smartest play is to read the Patriots response, do some investigation and judge that the Wells report is flawed, jumps to conclusions, does not meet the more probably than not standard because the science is wrong,and to many assumptions are made, and the the league after reviewing Wells work and the Patriots response find no reasonable means to consider the Patriots or Tom Brady guilty of any wrongdoing.

That is what will happen. It's just a matter of whether Goodell does it or the court does.

And let me tell you the story of the Easter Bunny. While this is what Goodell should do, there is no chance he will as this is an admission of his incompetence which would require his resignation as a result. Nice to dream about though.

upstater1 · May 15, 2015

Let's face it, it could go either way and we just don't know.

The one thing that makes me think they never did anything is that the Wells people were thorough with Jastremski, and he was on the up and up, and they never wanted to interview him again. The Patriots not offering McNally for a 5th time seems questionable, until you realize that there is no such issue with Jastremski. I just tend to believe that if McNally was doing it, both of them were in on it. And this bodes well for further interrogation.

On the other hand, now that the two of them realize they may eventually have to swear to everything under oat, the situation becomes more complicated.

I can't see how anyone could be anything but 50/50 on this.

upstater1 · May 15, 2015

Rob0729 said:
Right now, I don't know if it is Goodell's smartest play is to admit Wells' report is flawed. That ship has sailed. He would be better off getting smacked down in court and try to spin it as he did his best to punish the Patriots and Brady got off on a technicality.

For him to admit that the Wells report is wrong now will only turn people against him. It won't win back Kraft. It would be a huge black mark for him and the League.

Now he isn't doing himself any favors for appointing himself to the case, but he is all in on the Wells report and will defend it any way possible. And that is his best move at this point.

He doesn't have to admit the report is flawed.

He can blame the Patriots for not offering up McNally earlier.

JJC · May 15, 2015

AndyJohnson said:
Goodell's smartest play is to read the Patriots response, do some investigation and judge that the Wells report is flawed, jumps to conclusions, does not meet the more probably than not standard because the science is wrong,and to many assumptions are made, and the the league after reviewing Wells work and the Patriots response find no reasonable means to consider the Patriots or Tom Brady guilty of any wrongdoing.

That is what will happen. It's just a matter of whether Goodell does it or the court does.

That is what Goodell SHOULD have done after receiving the Wells report, but he (and his office) did not do so. I can't see how he could do so now, he is vested in that report. The NFL office (through Vincent) accepted the findings as stated and piled on with the '07 issues - which were not even relevant! They now own this and are digging their hole deeper.

A court must be the venue for restitution now.

Ring 6 · May 15, 2015

Rob0729 said:
Right now, I don't know if it is Goodell's smartest play is to admit Wells' report is flawed. That ship has sailed. He would be better off getting smacked down in court and try to spin it as he did his best to punish the Patriots and Brady got off on a technicality.

For him to admit that the Wells report is wrong now will only turn people against him. It won't win back Kraft. It would be a huge black mark for him and the League.

Now he isn't doing himself any favors for appointing himself to the case, but he is all in on the Wells report and will defend it any way possible. And that is his best move at this point.

I disagree. Why would people turn against him if he compares the Wells report and the Goldberg response and says that the Patriots brought to light many issues that Wells left out of his report and upon review he finds that Wells loses credibility in his science, assumptions, and conclusions. There are a dozen points in the Patriot response that he can claim he was unaware of or that Wells put in a different light that what he found when interviewing those involved.
Throwing Wells under the bus is not a stain on Goodell, and lets not forget its the truth and the right thing to do. Being the voice of reason and a fair arbiter is much better than going to court and getting chastised as an idiot (again) by the judge and losing even more than just this decision.

BSR · May 15, 2015

AndyJohnson said:
Lets not forget a reduction will not be acceptable. Accepting a reduction is essentially an admission of guilt, and the Patriots and Tom Brady are very clear that this is about character assassination as much as penalties.

Unless its something negotiated where they are penalized for non-full compliance and are exonerated on the actual act. That would be one way they could both save some face.

Jimke · May 15, 2015

AndyJohnson said:
Lets not forget a reduction will not be acceptable. Accepting a reduction is essentially an admission of guilt, and the Patriots and Tom Brady are very clear that this is about character assassination as much as penalties.

If the sentence is reduced, there is always the old standby to plead no contest.

varjao · May 15, 2015

AndyJohnson said:
There is no "Patriots version".
The Patriot response was The Deflator and Dorito Dink's answer to what the texts meant.

I swear people are acting like the Patriots sat down and tried to create an explanation that was plausible. Thats what Wells does. The Patriots asked the question and wrote down the answer.

Unfortunately I believe there is, the Patriots are going to present their version of the facts that even true at this point it's still their version to be confronted with Wells ridiculous version.

Ring 6 · May 15, 2015

upstater1 said:
He doesn't have to admit the report is flawed.

He can blame the Patriots for not offering up McNally earlier.

How? They have it in writing that they offered the Deflator up, but only if Wells could supply a reason, which he refused to do. They also offered to present questions to the Deflator and offered a different means than face to face. They offered face to face if Wells could show why he needed to do it, with respect to his initial set of rules that said he would only need to interview anyone more than once if new information was presented. In fact, he was interviewed for 7 hours, and it ended with Wells saying 'we have no more questions' and not only was there no new information, which is proven by the fact that the Pats asked if there was new information and wells gave them none.
The team is on extremely solid ground here.

Ring 6 · May 15, 2015

Jimke said:
If the sentence is reduced, there is always the old standby to plead no contest.

No. If the sentence is reduced and they accept it without going to court, they admit guilt.

carpetbagger1 · May 15, 2015

There is no way to tell how it will turn out until it happens. Hurry up and wait.

What is most interesting is Wells wanted to interview McNally a second time, and was unable to. The reports claim part of the reason for requesting that second interview was to discuss the "Deflator" text. Wells was never able to ask questions.

Calling McNally as a witness will now allow the league to ask him, point blank, what did you mean when you used the term "deflator." This could get hairy...

The Gr8est · May 15, 2015

varjao said:
Well I don't know if they were called by the league or Brady's team but I see this with different eyes than most of you, I think it's a good thing. It's in the best interest of them to clear all this mess, they are going to stand by the Patriots version. They are not going through a lie detector test.

I think there's a chance Goodell is throw Wells and his report under the bus, say this whole text messages was a misunderstanding and reduce the penalties to avoid court.

Then he needs to cancel all punishments and start an investigation into the Colts and the people who instigated this witch hunt. Pats should be receiving significant compensation from the perpetrators.

Rob0729 · May 15, 2015

AndyJohnson said:
I disagree. Why would people turn against him if he compares the Wells report and the Goldberg response and says that the Patriots brought to light many issues that Wells left out of his report and upon review he finds that Wells loses credibility in his science, assumptions, and conclusions. There are a dozen points in the Patriot response that he can claim he was unaware of or that Wells put in a different light that what he found when interviewing those involved.
Throwing Wells under the bus is not a stain on Goodell, and lets not forget its the truth and the right thing to do. Being the voice of reason and a fair arbiter is much better than going to court and getting chastised as an idiot (again) by the judge and losing even more than just this decision.

I am sorry but you are being naive. If Goodell said the Wells report is crap outright or by his actions, people would just argue he is in the bag for Kraft.

Most of this country feels that if arbitrator who hears this case (Goodell or someone else) is truly fair, he/she would uphold the decision.

Sfpat · May 15, 2015

AndyJohnson said:
How? They have it in writing that they offered the Deflator up, but only if Wells could supply a reason, which he refused to do. They also offered to present questions to the Deflator and offered a different means than face to face. They offered face to face if Wells could show why he needed to do it, with respect to his initial set of rules that said he would only need to interview anyone more than once if new information was presented. In fact, he was interviewed for 7 hours, and it ended with Wells saying 'we have no more questions' and not only was there no new information, which is proven by the fact that the Pats asked if there was new information and wells gave them none.
The team is on extremely solid ground here.

Well put. The league can't even defend the assertion that the Pats didn't cooperate. Goodell is playing a losing hand and the longer he stays in, the more he loses.

Ring 6 · May 15, 2015

varjao said:
Unfortunately I believe there is, the Patriots are going to present their version of the facts that even true at this point it's still their version to be confronted with Wells ridiculous version.

Not true.

2 people exchanged texts.
The 2 people will say what they meant with those words.
Ted Wells will say what he thinks they meant with those words.
No witness or evidence will be presented to dispute what the 2 texters say they meant or to prove that Wells guess is right.

This is not a matter of 'versions' it is the word of the source vs someone, without a scintilla of evidence to back it up saying that's a lie. You cannot prove someone lied by saying you don't believe them without proving why they are unreliable.
Shockingly, other that Ted Wells opinion there is nothing in the entire wells report that makes either the Deflator or Jastremski unreliable.
If you think there is please show me one piece of evidence that proves anything they said is false.

PatriotsReign · May 15, 2015

Sfpat said:
I didn't think the league could introduce new evidence in the appeal. The trial is over and the league had their shot. They have to stand on their case. More screups by Goodell.
TB will be a very rich man when this is over

This is true...Jastremski and McNally can not asked additional questions outside was has already been asked.

varjao · May 15, 2015

The Gr8est said:
Then he needs to cancel all punishments and start an investigation into the Colts and the people who instigated this witch hunt. Pats should be receiving significant compensation from the perpetrators.

This is never going to happen. Best possible outcome is to drop the charges, say everybody to shut the f up and move on...they had a sting operation going on, it's a fact, but it went bad and questions are starting to being raised, at this point it's got to be in Goodell interests to drop off this whole mess, the longer this goes it's going to look worse for him.

Jastremski and McNally will testify at Brady appeal

PatsFans.com Supporter

In the Starting Line-Up

PatsFans.com Supporter

In the Starting Line-Up

Hall of Fame Poster

Hall of Fame Poster

I didn't order assholes with my whiskey.

PatsFans.com Supporter

In the Starting Line-Up

Experienced Starter w/First Big Contract

Experienced Starter w/First Big Contract

PatsFans.com Supporter

PatsFans.com Supporter

Rookie

Veteran Starter w/Big Long Term Deal

PatsFans.com Supporter

In the Starting Line-Up

PatsFans.com Supporter

PatsFans.com Supporter

Experienced Starter w/First Big Contract

Similar threads