A review of the Wells Report

To start I am a long time reader and not a poster. I enjoy reading this forum. I have been a union rep, management rep and a 3rd party reviewer, typically as an arbiter. Long time Pats fan (saw Plunkett play, Neil Graff too).

This report was written entirely from a management position. I will list the flaws as I see them and refer to the Wells report as management.

1. The Deflator and ESPN text messages take place in the off season (May 2014). Unlikely there is discussion with or about Brady at this time.

2. The next exchange referenced is after the Jets game and prior to the next game. Clearly there was a discussion which referred to PSI.

3. Management refers to substantial and credible evidence that Brady was involved. No information is provided.

4. Management consistently uses opinion as evidence despite conflicting information.

5. In all aspects of the report except one, (Goskowski), management takes the anti Patriot position.

6. The ball intercepted by the Colts is gauged by the Colts in violation of league rules.

7. The Patriot balls are inflated at halftime without notification. If you use the after game measurements of the four ball tested and work backward using the natural gas law, the balls were inflated in excess of 13.50 which is in violation of league rules.

8. You have to take all of Walt Anderson's memory or none of it.

9. Management states there was no sting, yet Gardi, Kensil, Daniel, Blandino, Riveron, Anderson, Sullivan and Gregson are documented as have a general awareness of the deflating suspicion. In a third party review, they will want answers to this issue.

10. Only one Patriot Coach (BB) and two Raven coaches were interviewed. Why no Colt of any former PATS QBs?

I think management wrote the report from a prosecutors perspective. As such, when you write to a conclusion, you have a bad product. I've written a few at management's request. Never ends well. I found it more curious as to what was not in the report vs what was there. There were 66 interviews, without those transcripts there is no context. In the Patriot rebuttal, they provided limited context when they participated. Otherwise there is nothing. If this ended up in my lap, I would view the report as incomplete and retract the penalties until I got questions answered. If your control group of balls is only four, and they were tested last, the reports of management's own scientific review does not support tampering. This doesn't mean it didn't happened. It just means you don't know. However, anyone driving in New England know your tires are flat on one side until warm.

Folk here have been referring to a law suit. The hurdle to overcome, which has been stated is malice vs ignorance. Management can claim ignorance as it related to Gardi, but would not likely prevail when the actual psi was provided to the Patriots with the directive not to share.

Prediction, Brady fails with Goodell (if he hears the case), wins with a true independent review, the Pats teams penalty stands unless they sue the league. Brady likely has a stronger case against the ESPN, etc than the league until a reporter gives up their source.

Comment, support or rip to your hearts content. At least this relocated New Englander has this off his chest.

Bad Company said:

8. You have to take all of Walt Anderson's memory or none of it.

Click to expand...

I think it's a little more nuanced than that, but it doesn't put Wells in a better spot.

As I see it, there are three viable options:
(1) Accept all of Anderson's recollections, as is, without question.
(2) Reject all of Anderson's recollections as unreliable.
(3) Accept only justifiable recollections, explaining in each instance why they are acceptable or unacceptable.

Wells decided to take door #4, and accept everything Anderson said that is either neutral or damaging to the Patriots, but to reject the one key thing that would actually help them.

Folk here have been referring to a law suit. The hurdle to overcome, which has been stated is malice vs ignorance. Management can claim ignorance as it related to Gardi, but would not likely prevail when the actual psi was provided to the Patriots with the directive not to share.

Click to expand...

Again, the key is that it is not "malice," but the poorly-named actual malice.

One thing not taken into consideration is our preparation of the ball. It makes temperature transfer different from the Colts balls. This Exponent group hired by Wells, did they just use new balls for their experiment? I hear Brady likes his footballs completely stripped and worn out. Did they consider that effect on the ball?

I personally think TMZ could have done a better investigation than Well's!

As we've learned over the past year plus.. TMZ is more reputable than most sports media outlets.

vuudu said:

One thing not taken into consideration is our preparation of the ball. It makes temperature transfer different from the Colts balls. This Exponent group hired by Wells, did they just use new balls for their experiment? I hear Brady likes his footballs completely stripped and worn out. Did they consider that effect on the ball?

Click to expand...

Exponent actually did some experiments re: ball preparation. However, they didn't consult the Pats on particulars with ball prep so their experiments can't be verified as to how the balls are actually prepped. Exponent misses on two key points:
1. Game-time conditions and effects on footballs. This relates to the cold rain that was coming down that day. They spritzed footballs every fifteen minutes with room temp water...that is not good science, and conclusions were drawn based on this spritzing.
2. Halftime measurement timeline. The Colts balls were measured after the Pats balls. How long after? If you consider that the refs didn't have time to measure all 12 Colts footballs you can infer that they took those measurements at the end of the half, about 8-11 minutes after they had been inside. This additional time inside allowed those balls to get closer to their room temp state than the Pats balls. Exponent, and Wells, rejected Anderson best recollection of the gauge he used because the Colts footballs, as the 'control', didn't line up with expected measurements. But they didn't account for all the additional time those footballs spent inside.

Those two facts alone make it very likely that Anderson DID use the non-logo gauge, and despite what Wells's lackey says that does make a huge difference. If Anderson used the non-logo gauge then the science lines up perfect. No deflation, no cheating.

Anyway, good synopsis OP, always nice to get a well-reasoned opinion from someone who deals with these sorts of things.

Many thanks for posting, good to hear this kind of analysis.

One question--if you feel that Brady would win under an independent review, wouldn't the team penalties be reversed as well?

So - from the Wells Report:

Page 40 of Exponent Report
For example, using the most likely pressure and temperature values for the Patriots game balls on the day of the AFC Championship Game (i.e., a starting pressure of 12.5 psig, a starting temperature of between 67 and 71°F and a final temperature of 48°F prior to the balls being taken back into the Officials Locker Room), these equations predict that the Patriots balls should have measured between 11.52 and 11.32 psig at the end of the first half, just before they were brought back into the Officials Locker Room.

Page 70 of Wells Report
The pressure of the Patriots ball that had been intercepted by the Colts was separately tested three times and the measurements—11.45, 11.35 and 11.75 psi, respectively— were written on athletic tape that had been placed on the ball for identification. League personnel retained possession of the intercepted ball and it was not reintroduced to the game after halftime. The football intercepted by Jackson was provided to Paul, Weiss for examination in connection with the investigation

This shows that the most accurate recording of the psi of a Pats ball in 100% in line with what Wells says it should be.

If it didn't deflate you must exonerate!

aluminum seats said:

Many thanks for posting, good to hear this kind of analysis.

One question--if you feel that Brady would win under an independent review, wouldn't the team penalties be reversed as well?

Click to expand...

I'm just a simple Patriots homer, but that would make sense to me.

If the team was penalized because Brady was penalized and Brady's penalty is tossed, why would the team still get punished?

The cooperation issue I think. NFL is getting desperate.

Goodell has already said he had meetings with Vincent and discussed what punishment the Patriots should get. How can he be an unbiased arbitrator if he had a hand in the punishment!
This appeal is doomed to failure. The sting was, is and shall be in place to harm the Patriots. They are not getting out of it without a lawsuit!
The league and everything about it reeks of lies, stupidity and hubris.

The good news (for the Patriots): the Wells report is absolutely implausible and would collapse under competent, impartial scrutiny. The bad news: there does not seem to be a forum in which it will receive that.

aluminum seats said:

Many thanks for posting, good to hear this kind of analysis.

One question--if you feel that Brady would win under an independent review, wouldn't the team penalties be reversed as well?

Click to expand...

I would expect that the Patriots wait until Brady completes his process. The Brady appeal looks like it is three pronged.

1. Didn't do it. No evidence supports anything other than wanting balls at the lowest allowable level.

2. Even if it is more likely than less likely, the penalty is excessive.

3. If 1 and 2 fail, then the league created a harmful error by not following the CBA.

As to whether Brady participated in any deflation, unless the transcripts are released for ALL 66 interviews, it is impossible to know the facts. Although if there was anything in the interviews, I suspect it would have been leaked by the league office. The Patriots, by releasing edited emails does not help the cause. Knowing what the Wells emails were in response provides context.

In Vincent's letter to Brady, he implies this occurred in more than one game without supporting information. This probably inflames Brady even more. Also, the NFLPA needs the league to spell out what the punishment is for. Is it two games for deflating and two for not cooperating? The NFLPA will need to fight both paths.

Is the penalty excessive? Similar infractions in the past resulted in fines only (see SD sticky towel). As for not turning over the phone, Farve received a fine. If you read the report, not sharing the phone is the only area where cooperation was questioned. Remember, Gostkowski refused to turn over his phone with zero penalty. This by itself likely vacates this part of the penalty. Same investigation, two separate decisions.

Lastly, the NFL violated the CBA by having Vincent rule. As long as Goodell does not rule at the end, this is likely a reach, but you never know.

I suspect Brady fights unless an independent third party rules.

As for Kraft, if he does not appeal through the NFL a court may say he has no standing to sue for relief. However, I suspect if Brady's penalty is vacated, the league should vacate the teams penalties. But since when does the NFL do the right thing unless directed by the courts.

Koma said:

I'm just a simple Patriots homer, but that would make sense to me.

If the team was penalized because Brady was penalized and Brady's penalty is tossed, why would the team still get punished?

Click to expand...

Because Brady's appeal is a separate issue and has no bearing/authority over the team punishment. Of course, if Brady is exonerated, the league would look foolish with the extremely harsh team punishment, but then, looking foolish is the league's default position.