Poll: Predictions for outcome of Brady's appeal to Goodell

YOUGOTMOSSED · Jun 22, 2015

RIP#40 said:
I keep getting blasted for it but I don't think Brady is taking it to court. Blast away but I don't think TB12 wants to be put under oath. I admit scientifically the Wells report proves nothing, I just can't get past the texts. Deflator because he is trying to lose weight, please. If Brady doesn't watch it I'm going to go to ESPN and Brady denying he knew McNally. Hard to explain away.

Deflator? That's easy.
Brady, "yeah, I told them to keep the balls on the lower end of what's permitted under the rule. I never told them to deliberately go below that and I certainly didn't tell them to tamper with the balls after the refs' final inspection."

The weight loss thing sounds silly but it might be true and the term 'deflator', in and of itself, doesn't really prove anything. It just sounds worse than it is because they dubbed this nontrovery 'deflategate'.

I blast at thee!!!

lurker1965 · Jun 22, 2015

This is just the Goodell thing, right? I say 0 but after court.

Deus Irae · Jun 22, 2015

Question: How often has Goodell willingly eliminated a suspension completely?

BradyFTW! · Jun 22, 2015

YOUGOTMOSSED said:
Deflator? That's easy.
Brady, "yeah, I told them to keep the balls on the lower end of what's permitted under the rule. I never told them to deliberately go below that and I certainly didn't tell them to tamper with the balls after the refs' final inspection."

The weight loss thing sounds silly but it might be true and the term 'deflator', in and of itself, doesn't really prove anything. It just sounds worse than it is because they dubbed this nontrovery 'deflategate'.

I blast at thee!!!

That's what gets me about the whole deflator thing. There are a bunch of different perfectly plausible explanations that would be totally legal. He could have told Jastremski to have all balls deflated to the lower end of the legal limit. He could have told Jastremski to have them deflated below the legal limit pre-check, and if the refs don't catch it that's their problem (like Aaron Rodgers, on the other end of the pressure spectrum). He could have said "have our guy get on the refs' cases and make sure that they understand how deflated balls can legally be". He already outright stated that #3 is the case.

Once Wells felt he had clearly demonstrated that the balls were illegally deflated, he figured that he could then take the leap that the deflator text inferred that it was by design. But once your initial evidence is blown out of the water, and you're back at square one of even demonstrating if deflation occurred, there's no reasonable way that anyone can make that inference. If you can infer that there was a deflation scheme that Brady was probably aware of--all based on one text from months before where a guy called himself the deflator without any kind of context--then you should be executed on the grounds that you're just too stupid to live.

Deus Irae · Jun 22, 2015

BradyFTW! said:
Once Wells felt he had clearly demonstrated that the balls were illegally deflated, he figured that he could then take the leap that the deflator text inferred that it was by design. But once your initial evidence is blown out of the water, and you're back at square one of even demonstrating if deflation occurred, there's no reasonable way that anyone can make that inference. If you can infer that there was a deflation scheme that Brady was probably aware of--all based on one text from months before where a guy called himself the deflator without any kind of context--then you should be executed on the grounds that you're just too stupid to live.

Pretty much this. I suggest people try being as objective as possible while doing the following:

Take all the science out of the report, and accept that balls were within range for the AFCCG, but the NFL is investigating a possible pattern of deflations (in other words, the AFCCG not being included in the pattern could be because of lack of opportunity, or something).

Now, looking at the rest of the evidence, find what ties Brady into any scheme to deflate footballs illegally, and find what would actively refute such a scheme. Then line them up side by side.

MitchKumstein · Jun 22, 2015

I agree with those that predict that goodell doesn't budge and keeps it at 4 games. He already knows that this is going to court unless he removes the suspension completely, and I doubt he'd do that. Right now he's the hero to the fans of 31 other teams for standing up to the evil-doers in New England, removing the suspension would once again turn the world against him.

Besides, removing the suspension would mean that he wasted $5 million on a report that he doesn't believe.

He keeps it at 4 games and gets pummeled in court.

Mr. Objective · Jun 22, 2015

RIP#40 said:
I admit scientifically the Wells report proves nothing, I just can't get past the texts. Deflator because he is trying to lose weight, please.

Why is that so difficult to believe? You are aware, aren’t you, of a video from the NFL Network, linked on this message board, in which losing weight is referred to as getting “deflated”? It seems to me that you are a victim of confirmation bias: you are first introduced to an unusual subject—the illegal deflation of footballs—as a result of a major scandal and then read every text message sent in the past in light of that scandal. According to McNally, he referred to himself as the “Deflator” and to Jastremski as the “Inflator” because he was trying to lose weight and Jastremski was trying to gain it. Suppose the scandal that had erupted this past January was that Jastremski had been accused of dispensing illegal steroids to Patriots players. Suppose Jastremski denied this and said that the “Inflator” moniker referred to his inflation of footballs. You probably would be similarly incredulous.

Moreover, the following post-Jets game texts between Jastremksi and McNally strongly suggests that the Patriots did not have a practice of illegally deflating footballs prior to the Jets game:

Jastremski: I checked some of the balls this morn... The refs ****ed
us...a few of then were at almost 16
Jastremski: They didnt recheck then after they put air in them
McNally: **** tom ...16 is nothing...wait till next sunday
Jastremski: Omg! Spaz

If in prior games McNally had been deflating footballs after they were inspected by the referee, one would expect some reference, however cryptic, to some omission on the part of McNally by Jastremski. There should be some message from Jastremski like, “What happened?” But there is none of that.

If McNally was not engaged in the post-inspection deflation of footballs prior to the Jets game, as this text message exchange suggests, then it follows that the “Deflator” moniker that McNally gave himself in May 2014—upon which the Wells Report and the mediots place so much weight—cannot refer to the post-inspection deflation of footballs. And, if that is the case, then McNally’s explanation that it refers to weight loss is as plausible as any other innocent explanation.

DaBronxPats14 · Jun 22, 2015

BradyFTW! said:
"Where's the smoking gun?" doesn't even do it justice. It's more like "where's the evidence--any evidence at all--that a bullet was even fired in the first place? Who got shot?

Looking for a smoking gun implies that something happened worth investigating.

Exactly! Smoking Gun IS Evidence or lack there of I'm referring to. So what does Well's Report find, indicate that Brady ABSOLUTELY ordered 'Code Red' ......NO WHERE in report. Brady is being made an example and excuse to Slam him and all they have is Brady refusing to give up his Texts & E-Mails. That does not warrant a four game suspension determined by 'More Probable Than Not'

RIP#40 · Jun 22, 2015

Mr. Objective said:
Why is that so difficult to believe? You are aware, aren’t you, of a video from the NFL Network, linked on this message board, in which losing weight is referred to as getting “deflated”? It seems to me that you are a victim of confirmation bias: you are first introduced to an unusual subject—the illegal deflation of footballs—as a result of a major scandal and then read every text message sent in the past in light of that scandal. According to McNally, he referred to himself as the “Deflator” and to Jastremski as the “Inflator” because he was trying to lose weight and Jastremski was trying to gain it. Suppose the scandal that had erupted this past January was that Jastremski had been accused of dispensing illegal steroids to Patriots players. Suppose Jastremski denied this and said that the “Inflator” moniker referred to his inflation of footballs. You probably would be similarly incredulous.

Moreover, the following post-Jets game texts between Jastremksi and McNally strongly suggests that the Patriots did not have a practice of illegally deflating footballs prior to the Jets game:

Jastremski: I checked some of the balls this morn... The refs ****ed
us...a few of then were at almost 16
Jastremski: They didnt recheck then after they put air in them
McNally: **** tom ...16 is nothing...wait till next sunday
Jastremski: Omg! Spaz

If in prior games McNally had been deflating footballs after they were inspected by the referee, one would expect some reference, however cryptic, to some omission on the part of McNally by Jastremski. There should be some message from Jastremski like, “What happened?” But there is none of that.

If McNally was not engaged in the post-inspection deflation of footballs prior to the Jets game, as this text message exchange suggests, then it follows that the “Deflator” moniker that McNally gave himself in May 2014—upon which the Wells Report and the mediots place so much weight—cannot refer to the post-inspection deflation of footballs. And, if that is the case, then McNally’s explanation that it refers to weight loss is as plausible as any other innocent explanation.

Why did Brady lie about knowing McNally and why did one of them threaten to go to ESPN? In my opinion, they knew they were doing something wrong.

Deus Irae · Jun 22, 2015

RIP#40 said:
Why did Brady lie about knowing McNally

You're making an assumption there.

RIP#40 said:
and why did one of them threaten to go to ESPN? In my opinion, they knew they were doing something wrong.

Nobody threatened to go to ESPN

RIP#40 · Jun 22, 2015

YOUGOTMOSSED said:
Deflator? That's easy.
Brady, "yeah, I told them to keep the balls on the lower end of what's permitted under the rule. I never told them to deliberately go below that and I certainly didn't tell them to tamper with the balls after the refs' final inspection."

The weight loss thing sounds silly but it might be true and the term 'deflator', in and of itself, doesn't really prove anything. It just sounds worse than it is because they dubbed this nontrovery 'deflategate'.

I blast at thee!!!

Noticed how you didn't try to answer the other 2. Might be true? Really? I'm not that much of a homer.

RIP#40 · Jun 22, 2015

Deus Irae said:
You're making an assumption there.

Nobody threatened to go to ESPN

Something to the effect of I haven't gone to ESPN yet. We'll see this summer, I contend Brady will never take it to court due to the potential penalties of perjury. I hope I'm wrong, but I think Brady takes whatever RG hands down to him after the appeal. If Brady doesn't go to court would that tell you he's been less than truthful when not under oath?

BradyFTW! · Jun 22, 2015

RIP#40 said:
Noticed how you didn't try to answer the other 2. Might be true? Really? I'm not that much of a homer.

He answered your question, no need to be snippy about it. To answer the other 2:

What makes you think Brady did lie about knowing McNally? There's no evidence that they know each other at all, let alone that Brady knows him well enough to know his name as one of many, many dozens of random gameday folks that are around. Do you think Brady knows the name of everyone who comes to Gillette a few times per year like McNally does? He isn't even a part-time employee. He's at the stadium for a few hours the 8-10 times per year that the Pats have home games.

And for the ESPN text, I'll just refer you back to the Wells Report in Context, which you apparently didn't read given how ignorant you are to all of this stuff that's already been answered:

The “espn” reference in this string of jocular texts was part of their banter and related to the “new kicks.” Mr. Jastremski had made it clear to Mr. McNally over time that his (Jastremski’s) boss would not be happy with him were he to give away sneakers to Mr. McNally. That fact is quite explicit in a number of their texts. (p. 82 — after texting about possibly getting Mr. McNally sneakers and apparel, Mr. Jastremski writes: “unless Dave [his boss, Dave Schoenfeld] leaves the room tomorrow then it’ll wait till next week”). Getting sneakers or apparel for his friend Mr. McNally, in short, meant Mr. Jastremski would have to do so behind his boss’s back. They teased each other about whether Mr. Jastremski would get in trouble for giving him sneakers. The May 2014 McNally text reference to “not going to espn” follows his request for “new kicks,” and was Mr. McNally’s way of saying, in substance: “Hey, don’t worry about whether giving me those sneakers will get you in trouble — I’ll never tell.” The Wells investigators had this text long before their interviews with Mr. McNally and Mr. Jastremski. Had they asked Mr. McNally or Mr. Jastremski about this text when they interviewed each for a full day using four lawyers, they would have learned this.

Certainly there is no way one could reasonably base conclusions that a scheme existed and was implemented to improperly deflate footballs based on these texts, particularly where ball tampering at the AFC Championship Game is belied by science, would have been illogical in concept and improbable in practice, and where it would, if anything, had disserved the quarterback.

RIP#40 · Jun 22, 2015

BradyFTW! said:
That's what gets me about the whole deflator thing. There are a bunch of different perfectly plausible explanations that would be totally legal. He could have told Jastremski to have all balls deflated to the lower end of the legal limit. He could have told Jastremski to have them deflated below the legal limit pre-check, and if the refs don't catch it that's their problem (like Aaron Rodgers, on the other end of the pressure spectrum). He could have said "have our guy get on the refs' cases and make sure that they understand how deflated balls can legally be". He already outright stated that #3 is the case.

Once Wells felt he had clearly demonstrated that the balls were illegally deflated, he figured that he could then take the leap that the deflator text inferred that it was by design. But once your initial evidence is blown out of the water, and you're back at square one of even demonstrating if deflation occurred, there's no reasonable way that anyone can make that inference. If you can infer that there was a deflation scheme that Brady was probably aware of--all based on one text from months before where a guy called himself the deflator without any kind of context--then you should be executed on the grounds that you're just too stupid to live.

Based on the Patriots rebuttal to the Wells report, there is only one explanation, they called him the deflator because he was trying to lose weight.

Ivan · Jun 22, 2015

RIP#40 said:
Noticed how you didn't try to answer the other 2. Might be true? Really? I'm not that much of a homer.

Which must be easy since you aren't a Patriots fan.

Deus Irae · Jun 22, 2015

RIP#40 said:
Something to the effect of I haven't gone to ESPN yet.

You should learn the case before making comments about specifics. Nobody threatened to go to ESPN.

RIP#40 said:
We'll see this summer, I contend Brady will never take it to court due to the potential penalties of perjury.

We're not talking about a de novo hearing here. What, exactly, do you think Brady would perjure himself about?

RIP#40 said:
I hope I'm wrong, but I think Brady takes whatever RG hands down to him after the appeal. If Brady doesn't go to court would that tell you he's been less than truthful when not under oath?

No, it would tell me that he didn't go to court. The 'why' would require more information.

RIP#40 · Jun 22, 2015

BradyFTW! said:
He answered your question, no need to be snippy about it. To answer the other 2:

What makes you think Brady did lie about knowing McNally? There's no evidence that they know each other at all, let alone that Brady knows him well enough to know his name as one of many, many dozens of random gameday folks that are around. Do you think Brady knows the name of everyone who comes to Gillette a few times per year like McNally does? He isn't even a part-time employee. He's at the stadium for a few hours the 8-10 times per year that the Pats have home games.

And for the ESPN text, I'll just refer you back to the Wells Report in Context, which you apparently didn't read given how ignorant you are to all of this stuff that's already been answered:

The “espn” reference in this string of jocular texts was part of their banter and related to the “new kicks.” Mr. Jastremski had made it clear to Mr. McNally over time that his (Jastremski’s) boss would not be happy with him were he to give away sneakers to Mr. McNally. That fact is quite explicit in a number of their texts. (p. 82 — after texting about possibly getting Mr. McNally sneakers and apparel, Mr. Jastremski writes: “unless Dave [his boss, Dave Schoenfeld] leaves the room tomorrow then it’ll wait till next week”). Getting sneakers or apparel for his friend Mr. McNally, in short, meant Mr. Jastremski would have to do so behind his boss’s back. They teased each other about whether Mr. Jastremski would get in trouble for giving him sneakers. The May 2014 McNally text reference to “not going to espn” follows his request for “new kicks,” and was Mr. McNally’s way of saying, in substance: “Hey, don’t worry about whether giving me those sneakers will get you in trouble — I’ll never tell.” The Wells investigators had this text long before their interviews with Mr. McNally and Mr. Jastremski. Had they asked Mr. McNally or Mr. Jastremski about this text when they interviewed each for a full day using four lawyers, they would have learned this.

Certainly there is no way one could reasonably base conclusions that a scheme existed and was implemented to improperly deflate footballs based on these texts, particularly where ball tampering at the AFC Championship Game is belied by science, would have been illogical in concept and improbable in practice, and where it would, if anything, had disserved the quarterback.

Right, and Brady denied knowing McNally why? Sure you can spin plausible stories about all the evidence but that doesn't make the pats and Brady innocent. I fall in the unpopular camp that the Patriots were f'ing around with the balls and got caught. Minor IMO and they should have admitted it and moved on. The coverup is always worse than the crime.

BradyFTW! · Jun 22, 2015

RIP#40 said:
Right, and Brady denied knowing McNally why? Sure you can spin plausible stories about all the evidence but that doesn't make the pats and Brady innocent. I fall in the unpopular camp that the Patriots were f'ing around with the balls and got caught. Minor IMO and they should have admitted it and moved on. The coverup is always worse than the crime.

Probably because he doesn't know McNally? Seriously, how is this so hard for you to understand?

You keep insisting that Brady must have known McNally, but there's literally zero evidence that he did. Even Wells himself acknowledges that he couldn't find any: he just decided that he found that claim implausible, for reasons that he was unwilling to give.

RIP#40 · Jun 22, 2015

Deus Irae said:
You should learn the case before making comments about specifics. Nobody threatened to go to ESPN.

We're not talking about a de novo hearing here. What, exactly, do you think Brady would perjure himself about?

No, it would tell me that he didn't go to court. The 'why' would require more information.

BradyFTW! · Jun 22, 2015

RIP#40 said:
Based on the Patriots rebuttal to the Wells report, there is only one explanation, they called him the deflator because he was trying to lose weight.

Again, did you even read the report? I'm pretty sure you didn't and are basically just trolling here, but for other people's benefit, here is what the rebuttal actually says:

They simply assumed, with no basis or investigation whatsoever, what “deflator” must mean, and then relied on their assumption to filter all the other evidence they received. What they did know, but chose to ignore, is that “deflate” is often used in contexts having nothing to do with taking air out of footballs – and that even these two men used the term in their texts in various ways having nothing to do with footballs. The word “deflate” simply means to reduce, and has many possible meanings and applications. A simple Internet search reveals a frequent use of the word “deflate” in the context of weight loss. Despite many other possibilities, the report concludes that the only possible meaning of this single word in a string of texts having nothing to do with footballs was that it referred to footballs, and to taking air out of game footballs, to doing so only after the referee had inspected them, and to getting the balls to a level below regulation (although no evidence at all supported that anyone had a goal to have balls below regulation). There is simply no way that the unsupported assumption about this text provides any basis on which to draw the conclusions reached in the Wells Report. [END OF 6/18/15 9:45AM UPDATE]

The rebuttal clearly points out that there are many possible meanings of "deflator", one of which relates to weight loss. Either your reading comprehension sucks, your memory sucks, or you're trolling. Which is it?

Poll: Predictions for outcome of Brady's appeal to Goodell

What do you think the outcome of Brady's appeal to Goodell will be?

Stays 4 games

Cut to 2 games - Goodell says suspension is for non-cooperation

Cut to 2 games - Goodell says Brady cooperated on appeal, suspension is for deflating

Cut to 1 game - Goodell says suspension is for non-cooperation

Cut to 1 games - Goodell says Brady cooperated on appeal, suspension is for deflating

Suspension completely lifted

In the Starting Line-Up

In the Starting Line-Up

PatsFans.com Retired Jersey Club

Goodell sucks

PatsFans.com Retired Jersey Club

Rotational Player and Threatening Starter's Job

On the Roster

In the Starting Line-Up

Third String But Playing on Special Teams

PatsFans.com Retired Jersey Club

Third String But Playing on Special Teams

Third String But Playing on Special Teams

Goodell sucks

Third String But Playing on Special Teams

Hall of Fame Poster

PatsFans.com Retired Jersey Club

Third String But Playing on Special Teams

Goodell sucks

Third String But Playing on Special Teams

Goodell sucks

Similar threads